(bright upbeat music) - [Announcer] And now, Crosscut Festival Main Stage, featuring a selection of curated sessions from this year's Crosscut Festival.

Thank you for joining us for How to Get Red America to Go Green, with Jon Tester moderated by Mark Baumgarten.

Thank you to our science in the environment, track sponsor, UBS.

We'd also like to thank our founding sponsor, the Kerry & Linda Killinger Foundation.

- Hello and welcome to the Crosscut Festival, I'm Mark Baumgarten, and I'm excited to be sharing a screen today with Jon Tester, the senior senator from the great State of Montana.

The topic of our conversation, How to Get Red America to Go Green.

Senator Tester is currently in his third term, which is remarkable for a couple of reasons.

First, because he's a Democrat in what is otherwise a pretty red state, and then there's the fact that Tester is a working farmer who has continued to plant and harvest wheat, even as he legislates, and he does legislate.

In the midst of the Trump presidency, Senator Tester managed to get a lot of bills passed and signed.

He was recognized as one of the most effective Democrats in the Senate, even as president Trump was calling for his resignation.

Now, with Joe Biden in office, the terrain has shifted, but Senator Tester remains firmly planted at a crucial intersection where Democratic priorities meet a rural electorate that some Democrats have written off in the past, but who are now viewed as critical to the success of an ambitious plan to rebuild the nation's economy in a manner that Democrats say will create jobs and improve infrastructure while staving off the worst effects of climate change.

Senator Tester, welcome to the Festival.

- It's great to be with you Mark, thank you very, very much for having me.

- So we're gonna get to climate policy, but I'd like to start with this $2 trillion infrastructure plan.

The Biden administration released this plan about a month ago, Senator Tester, how's it going over with Montanans?

- Well, I don't think they know enough about it yet to be honest with you, we're just in the beginning phases of this from a Washington, DC standpoint, and so I think what's gonna be critical with this plan is going out and telling people what we hope to accomplish with it.

You know, this plan is a little different than other infrastructure plans because the definition of infrastructure is a little broader than normally thought of, not only does this take in roads, and bridges, and broadband, but it also deals with things that I hear a lot about in Montana, and that is housing, and childcare and issues that revolve around those kinds of things that impact the economy greatly.

So, you know, I think it's too early to tell what Montanans are thinking about this infrastructure plan, but as time moves forward, they will develop an opinion, and it'll depend a lot on how it's messaged by both sides.

- Hm, I know that you've, you know, you've really pushed the housing and the broadband aspects of the infrastructure plan, clearly those are things that you feel your constituents are interested in, but you know, there are aspects of this plan that are clearly focused on climate change on environmental policy, it's a big part of what the sales pitch is at the national level, but I do have to wonder, is that the right first step forward while pitching the plan in rural areas and specifically in rural Montana?

- I think that most people in rural areas would expect that we're talking about roads and bridges, you know, 30 years ago, broadband wasn't a part of it, but if this pandemic has taught us anything, is that broadband cell service really important, both of those, and there's far too many areas of Montana and rural America in general that either are unserved or underserved.

So I think that when we're talking about what we're gonna do to try to, you know, address climate change, and the Biden administration has put some money towards charging stations, I think that's a reasonable thing to do.

I also think that we need to take into consideration, however, what the private sector is gonna do normally, would a gas station normally put up charging stations if there becomes enough demand, so, but it isn't just about charging stations either Mark, I mean, the truth is our grid needs to be updated to make sure it can handle increased charging stations 'cause these charging stations are gonna be very, very intense, people don't wanna spend two, three hours getting their car charged up, so they're gonna suck a lot of energy, a lot of electricity, and so making sure that our grid meets the standards is also part of that infrastructure bill.

So it's, I don't know, that it's the right way to address it in rural America, but I know it's an issue that has to be addressed, and once again, I would say, you've gotta go out and sell it in rural America, rural America just aren't gonna read one statement by Jon Tester or anybody else and say, well, this is really a good idea, you've gotta go out and tell them what the advantages are, tell them the kind of job it's gonna create, tell them what it's gonna do for the economy, and how it's gonna impact rural America, and then I think you can get their support.

- Hm, well, you know that your colleagues from the other side of the aisle are going to be out there with their own messaging on it, do you, and I'm sure, and I mean, I assume that in rural areas that they will key in on it's focus on, you know, a number of different things, but they have called it, you know, a Democratic wishlist, and I think that they view the climate policy aspects, the environmental policy aspects of the infrastructure package as being unnecessary, and I just wonder if you feel that, you know, when your constituents are hearing that argument, does the environmental aspect of this giant package become a liability?

- Well, I will tell you that until we do a better job, we the folks who are concerned about the change in climate, until we do a better job talking to rural America, about what climate change costs us in jobs, in treasure because of the kind of disasters that are occurring with more regularity and the kind of money it takes to fix these disasters, then I think we're playing from behind when it comes to climate.

And so what I would say to you Mark, what I would say to the folks who are out there talking about climate, what I said to the folks today I met with that are concerned about climate change, is we have to do a better job telling Americans what's at risk here.

I farm, I've been on our family farm since the late 1970s, this is the farm that my grandfather and grandmother patented over a hundred years ago, I can tell you that I have seen things, and I think if I've seen, and every farmer has seen things, over the last 25, 30 years, it simply didn't happen before that.

And they're not necessarily good things, they're things that put production agriculture more at risk of potential crop failure or disastrous events taking your crop before you get a chance to harvest it and get it in the bin.

So, you know, leading with charging stations, I don't necessarily think that's the best way to lead, I'm not sure this package does lead with them, but if I was gonna talk in rural America, I would talk the fact that electric cars are common, we need to get ready for them, we need to make sure that not only do we have charging stations, but a grid to support those because remember, rural America was not electrified until FDR came in with the new deal and set up electric co-ops.

So that's only been a generation or two away, we can still remember that, and so I would suggest we talk about it and those kinds of terms, if we just say, hey, we're gonna put electric charging stations on and then some Republicans would say, we'll just push these electric vehicles on you whether you like them or not, I don't think that's fair, and I don't think it's real, I think electric vehicles are coming and we need to be prepared for it, and I think if we talk about it in those terms, I think rural America would be more receptive to it.

- Hmm, so, you know, I wanted to ask you about this, you know, you are and kind of moving maybe off the infrastructure plan, just talking about environmental policy in general, you know, you are skeptical of government overreach, you know, at least for a Democrat, and you wrote about it quite a bit in your book, and I'm just curious how you square, you know, introducing environmental policy or backing environmental policy that may have these impacts on private citizens and private businesses as far as requiring compliance with a new way of doing things, you know, an elimination of fossil fuels and an adoption of new technologies, you know, you've said that government regulation cannot be one size fits all, but how do we make the scale of change required to tackle climate change without there being across the board regulation?

- Well, I think it can be done better with the carrot than the stick, in other words, I think it could be done better with tax incentives, money put into research and development, figuring out how to commercialize that research quickly, than it can be by saying, you know, you're gonna do it this way, or you're gonna be penalized.

I believe strongly that that's the best way to move if you wanna move forward in a way that makes sense.

I will tell you that, and I've told this story many, many times Mark, but when I get it up at harvest time, the first thing I do in the morning is fuel up our combines, it takes diesel fuel to do that right now, you know, 20 years from now that combine might be all electric and you'll plug it in and quit at night and you'll run it all day long based on electricity and battery power.

But right now we need diesel fuel, and so until we get the research to be able to replace that in an economical way, I don't think you can put the kind of regulations down that someone want and just say, hey, you're gonna do this by 2025 otherwise forget it, it's gonna put a lot of people out of business.

And by the way, that's not the talking point we should be using, that's the talking point, the folks who don't wanna do anything against climate change are using, so what we need to talk about is what kind of incentives can we give to help push along fuels that don't put CO2 into the atmosphere, and if we do it from that perspective, I think you'll get a lot more people embracing it.

Because look, I'm in production agriculture, and I'm an independent guy, all right, 40% of people's income in production agriculture last year came from the federal government, that's not all due to climate change, there were some pretty crappy trade policies that were put into effect that impacted production agriculture very negatively, but the truth is is that, those dollars from the federal government, my folks always said are not sustainable, so we've got to figure out ways to make the transition so that there's more competition in the marketplace, I'm off topic here a little bit, but the bottom line is this, if you're gonna walk in and say, we're gonna regulate it, that's not the right way to go, we ought to be talking about incentives and putting money into R&D, commercialize that research and development, and then I think people will come along, when they see the opportunity, they will grasp it.

- Hm, how do your colleagues who are on your side of the aisle, but maybe a bit more to the left of you, what's their response when you talk about addressing climate in that way?

- What they'll say is you have to push people if you're gonna get them to change, you have to make them uncomfortable if you're gonna get them to change, there's some truth to that by the way, but there's also a truth that the margins in production agriculture because of competition in the marketplace mainly are pretty thin, and that if you push them too hard you're gonna get unintended consequences of putting people out of business, and so I would prefer and I would make the case to them that this is a much better way to go with it.

- Senator Tester, you of course, are somebody who believes or acknowledges climate change is a problem working to fight it, but I wonder where did your awakening occur, you know, you've talked about your experiences with climate change as a farmer, is that where you really became aware that this is a problem that we need to tackle?

- Yeah, I will tell you Mark after being on the farm for over 40 years, you'll see a lot of things that mother nature is trying to tell you, and you need to pay attention to those things.

I mean, I could talk about a little bug called restem soft line that we never used to have when I was a kid that showed up sometime in the 90s, and the reason it's around is because our winters don't get cold enough to kill them anymore, and consequently, they wait till the plant gets almost ripe and then they cut it off, and you can't harvest it, you can't get the seeds in the bin, but probably, the most sentimental moment that I've had when it comes to climate change happened in about 2000.

My father in the late 40s dug a reservoir, this is a hole in the ground basically to water cattle, and he hired a man that brought the can out, and they dug a hole about 35 feet in the ground, and as soon as they got that reservoir dug, it started filling up with water, and there had been water in it ever since for over 50 years until right around 2000, and in 2000, it dried up not for one year, but for two.

First time in my lifetime that that reservoir run, and that's when you start putting two and two together because there were a lot of other things too but this was something that had never happened in my lifetime, and said, hey, this is serious business, we better pay attention what mother nature is trying to teach us and work with mother nature to fix this problem.

- And what are the conversations that you have with your constituents who are skeptical of climate change, and they are maybe having similar experiences as you're having, do you have those conversations a lot or is environmental policy, is climate change sort of a third rail in your retail politics?

- I don't have those conversations near enough, I think we need it, it's very, very serious business so we need to talk about it, and it depends on what occupation you're in, but generally, Montana is a pretty fiscally conservative state.

Democrats are fiscally conservative, Republicans are fiscally conservative, and if you start talking about the billions, the hundreds of billions of dollars that we're shipping out the door every year at the federal level to take care of disasters that our climate costs, it tends to get people to start thinking, and I think that's really important.

The other thing is is that, I'm in production agriculture, and one of the necessary programs that we have is tax supported crop insurance, that crop insurance is meant to take some of the risks out of farming, and it does, so that if you have a drought and you don't cut a very good crop or no crop at all, you get reimbursed through crop insurance.

And I talk about that too, I would say, you know, what would happen if we didn't have crop insurance, then would that change your opinion?

But the truth is Mark, we don't talk about climate change near enough, it's not an easy thing to talk about because whatever we do today, maybe 20, 30 years down the line before we see any benefits from it, and in the society we live today, people like to see immediate benefits for anything we do, so that's a challenge that we have in addressing climate change.

- Hmm, when you think about how, you know, the future of your political career, how prominent is this issue in that career?

I mean, you say, we should talk about climate change more, you should talk about it more, do you see yourself taking the steps to talk about it more, I mean, it's gotta be a difficult issue for you, I mean, it's something that, as you said, I mean, you know, you have very fiscally conservative constituents and if they feel like you're not being responsible with their tax dollars, they're gonna vote you out, so how do you gauge whether or not you can actually have that conversation?

- Well, I think you've gotta use your instinct and jump when there's an opportunity to jump at, but I will tell you it's probably not the first thing on people's minds in my great State, I mean, I think jobs are always the number one issue, how are you gonna feed the family?

Do you have a job?

Do you have a job that pays a livable wage, and how's a small business climate doing?

How's it working?

Are we able to have a vibrant main street in our towns, and in Montana?

That's usually on their minds too, and then a post production agriculture number one industry in the State is on their minds, and quite frankly, the tourism industry which is right behind it is on their minds, so, you know, climate change is down the line a little bit, but make no mistake about it, climate change impacts every one of those issues that I just talked about.

And so figuring out a way to weave in climate action is really important, but you need to have a plan at the federal level at least that makes sense to people and is not punitive, and if you're able to do that, then it's much easier to talk about.

- So speaking to your constituents is one thing, but speaking to your colleagues across the aisle, of course, is another, you know, to get things done whether it's climate policy, or this infrastructure bill, it takes, well, I mean, it looks like it's going to take working with Republicans.

Now, you said that you believe the filibuster should be in place, but you have also opened the door that there may be an option to not have it in place, that may be a moot point since Senator Manchin seems pretty steadfast in his opposition to getting rid of the filibuster, but I also know that you are a person who really, you know, enjoys sort of the gamesmanship of legislation, I mean, you know you have some great tales of your time in the State Senate, you know, sparring with the folks across the aisle, how can Democrats get big things done with the filibuster in place?

Do you have a sense of whether that's possible and how that would be done?

- I don't know if it's possible, Mark, and that's a pretty pitiful statement in and of itself, when Byron Dorgan was a Senator from North Dakota, my first four years here, Byron made the statement to me one time we were walking down the hall, he said, I don't even know if we can pass a bill to fund the interstate system like they did in the 50s, we tend not to be able to get big things done anymore, that was his perception and in that case, that perception truly is reality.

And so, I don't know if we can get big things done, I think we have to try, I think bipartisan legislation is much more likely to stand the test of time, but as I've said many times, and I'll say it to you, I didn't come to Washington, DC to watch people obstruct and get nothing done.

This country has some big challenges, we've been talking about climate change, that's a worldwide challenge, infrastructure, that's another thing we've been talking about.

Look, if we're gonna compete in this world with China and others, we have to have good infrastructure, and it's gonna take Democrats and Republicans working together to do that.

The key is, is people have to be willing to compromise, if people are willing to compromise, I think you can get to a point to get things passed in a bipartisan way.

If you're locked in on a certain policy and it can't change, this is just the way it's gonna be, then that idealism comes into place and makes it very difficult to get anything done, but I think if people are willing to compromise, there's some obstructionists in the United States Senate, and there will probably always be obstructionists, but if we can get 60 votes, we can take on the floor and override that obstruction, and I think there's more than 10 Republicans that are willing to work.

Now, the question is, are there values in these bills that we are not willing to compromise on as Democrats, or are there things as Republicans they're not willing to compromise on?

And if that's the case, that makes it much more difficult to get a bipartisan result.

- All right, well, that brings us to the end of the conversation.

Senator Tester, thank you so much for joining us at the Crosscut Festival, really appreciate the conversation.

Thank you all for joining us today, hope you enjoy the rest of the Festival, good night.

(upbeat music)