We have lost confidence in ourselves as America. Our collective expression is no longer government; it is politics—often hard-edged. We are too often marginalized as a national expression by a collection of very well organized and clever single interest groups. Life is simple for them; complex for us.

John F. Kennedy’s rallying cry — “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country” is only faintly remembered. President Reagan’s call for the Soviets to “tear down this wall” (separating East and West Berlin) might well apply to today’s politics. 

America ended the 20th Century prosperous. We had built and built and built, but too often we had taken the path of least resistance. And then twenty-one months into the new century we were attacked.

I remember, several hours after the twin towers fell to exploding planes, walking into Mt. Sinai hospital to give blood. There were so many of us wanting to give that the only type they would take was type O negative which is universally accepted.

America then fought two wars; well a few of us did. And to fight the wars we borrowed money. America was poised to sacrifice. Our political leadership decided to delegate our response to a few brave young men and women and bankers.

America has extraordinary strength; our political leadership is weak. And nowhere is this more apparent than in our response to the environmental threat of climate change—politics has overthrown science. 

In recent decades Americans have led in virtually every expression of personal industry and resolve, but have rarely come together to lead as a nation. Recall an earlier time.

On July 20, 1969, American astronauts Neil Armstrong and Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin became the first humans ever to land on the moon. As he took his first step, Armstrong famously said, “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.” Armstrong’s expression became inspirational; when we faced challenges it was often said “if we can land on the moon we can ___________”.

It is increasingly clear, in small and large ways that our collective attention and strength need to focus on the space between the moon and earth – specifically the atmosphere. And, if you just dropped into this series on environmental damage, I would invite you to read the columns beginning with “The Issue of Our Times.”

To begin, America needs a President who believes the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). We have expended a sizable amount of our national treasure on understanding space – to reject its clear findings on climate change is, to say the least, irresponsible.

Our national leadership, understanding the enormous power of economic incentives, needs to focus a part of our capitalist mind on reducing C02 in the atmosphere. There is a coherent set of options that will in the long run strengthen us both environmentally and economically. If we lead the world, our enterprise and technology will create vast new opportunities. Efficacy of response is the overarching question; it will be determined if we can generate the same resolve that led us to the moon. 

And our leadership, with the diplomatic respect demanded of international engagement, must help lead globally. I am all in favor of fair trade with China and India, but we also need to work toward environmental reciprocity. If improving the air and water and climate globally is too big a challenge for a would-be President, he or she shouldn’t occupy the White House. And, to risk the obvious, we can’t lead internationally if we don’t understand what we need to do in our backyard.

I was struck by the author, Sebastian Junger’s lament in his book, Tribe: “How do you become an adult in a society that doesn’t ask for sacrifice?” We, Americans, need to comprehend our role and lead. What we buy, what we drive, how we produce and so much more impinge on nature’s infrastructure. Tens of millions of small steps day-by-day can make an extraordinary difference.

Let me end by drawing on the universal language, music. Tempo, rhythm and harmony are essential elements. Yet, it is often said that the lyrics make the song. In truth the music and lyrics must work together. And so it is with concerted action. Are there any good songwriters working the political beat? 

Even the phrase “climate change” sends a variety of verbal warriors to their respective corners. Interests and conflicts swirl, producing very disagreeable music. We need outreach. We need a leader and then leaders who can inspire while working the halls of opinion – domestically and internationally – for end results. And, we need an upbeat tempo.

Will we be called on to sacrifice? Sure. Indeed one very understandable and public test will hinge on the word sacrifice. If none is called for, the plan will not work.

Now a final word; the politics of environmental stewardship is changing. The online publication Grist reports: “A new poll suggests that Republicans and Democrats between 18 and 38 might as well be in the same party. Any red-vs-blue difference between them “virtually disappears,” according to the survey from Ipsos and Newsy.”

Before this series of columns comes to a close, I will share some thoughts about how we, on a more individual level, can do more. But, unifying leadership will be crucially important – without it the weather’s temperature will inexorably increase and the political temperature will reach boiling.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al recently published Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

Human re-shaping of our natural infrastructure has confronted us with existential issues. This column is one in a series that began with, The Issue of Our Time.

September 11, 2001, remains a searing event in my memory. My wife and I were living in Manhattan on that day and were intensely interested in investigations that followed. Who knew what? When? And, how diligent were the authorities in investigative follow-through?

An informal view that resonated with me concluded that it is hard, if not impossible; to prevent what cannot be imagined. Commandeering passenger planes and flying them into buildings seemed the stuff of movies. Intelligence officials and their elected bosses failed to process evidence of a potential attack to a timely and logical conclusion and preventive actions. 

The threats as a consequence of climate change face a similar obstacle. The threat is even more troubling as the attackers are us, 7.5 billions of us. Generations of actions have created the risks; yet, we are told that society must be reordered, now!

And, we all know the overriding incentive that leads to self-denial. We continue behaviors that are proven to be harmful because they give us pleasure.

I grew up several miles from a farm my grandparents owned. I know what “hoeing cotton” means. Farmhands, using hoes, chopped the weeds that were competing with the cotton plants. As I would ride with my Grandfather to the farm, rows of workers were evident as they, to use another long gone phrase, were “chopping cotton”. Given the time and costs associated with this labor intensive effort, “poor land” was not planted.

The unplanted spaces were in tree rows with grasses and bushy plant life on either side. Today it might be called a pollinator or wildlife corridor.

What displaced these labor intensive practices in agricultural were chemicals that kill plants, generational improvements in farm machinery and government subsidies; they combined to eliminate wildlife corridors. There was certainly not a plan of action to eliminate the bees and butterflies or to release more CO2 in the atmosphere, but there was a plan of action to scale-up to maximize profit. Scaling up is capital intensive and turned into an invitation for intense commercialization. Return on investment is the dominant principle.

As the farmers, now mostly corporate, were maximizing profit, so too were the chemical and machinery industries. Reshaping nature was not explicit and that is a part of the problem—the formula: all reward no risks. Commodity production was the goal—traditional farm economics and environmental risks were overwhelmed. 

Damming rivers also became an aggressive intrusion on nature’s balance during my lifetime. A cluster of special interests began an insistent campaign for more lakes. While flood control of river basins was said to be the reason, recreation was often the motivating force.  My Dad’s business had several hundred square feet devoted to fishing and hunting equipment. Bass Pro Shop’s retail stores today are thousands of square feet and its catalog is thicker than many dictionaries. 

Technology helped serve our pleasure with lower commodity prices and new ways to spend our discretionary dollars. We went along for the ride—only our out-of-pocket costs were influential. Environmental costs were mostly not considered. 

As earlier noted my wife and I live on a farm called Nature’s Reach and over several years we have given nature some help by re-creating wetlands, meadows and a tree grove. 

We also started beekeeping with several colonies of honey bees and have become fascinated by their activities. But, more important than our honey bees, are the thousands of pollinators that now make Nature’s Reach their home. I should add: our garden flourishes.

My point is not to extoll obsolete and labor-intensive farming or what we have done at Nature’s Reach, but simply to point out what big feet humans have and how nature responds. Unfortunately we, for our own comfort, have often chosen to be imperious Kings and Queens of nature, not stewards. 

Much of what we value we count. We know about our own dollars and cents and the news media tell us each day whether the stock market is up or down. But, if I asked about the comparative population of pollinators in say 1960 and 2018, a satisfactory answer could not be found. Indeed only scientists would even attempt an answer. Fortunately I do not need to rely on computer models; I can see the dramatic changes on my farm.

I use pollinators illustratively, because of my personal experiences. Much more importantly, pollinators are as essential as clean water and air. They are keystones of nature’s balance. Our failure to protect them is a systemic failure—likewise climate change.

As I wrap this up, let me return to the central narrative—humans make a huge difference and those who have an intense interest in continuing to do things without due regard for the environmental consequences are quite good as my Dad would say, at “selling us a bill of goods.”

We need to comprehend our role in damaging nature’s profound balance and take the lead both at home and globally to reverse damaging trends. 

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al recently published Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books.