Americans Now More Politically Polarized On Climate Change Than Ever Before, Analysis Finds

authordefault
on

American voters and politicians are now more polarized than ever before across allย aspects of climate change ย โ€”ย from the cause, to the science and the impacts โ€”ย a major new analysis hasย found.

Campaigns funded by vested fossil fuel interests and pushed by a network of ideologicalย think tanks, many linked to the oil billionaire Koch brothers, have helped to widen the gap, pushing Republican politicians, elites and voters away from action on greenhouse gasย emissions.

Trackingย Gallup opinion poll surveys going back to 2001 and congress voting patterns from 1970 onwards, the analysis authors warn thatย as the November election approaches, Americans are faced with a stark politicalย choice.

The analysis is published in the respected journal Environment and comes from sociologists Associate Professor Aaron McCrightย of Michigan State University, Professor Riley Dunlapย of Oklahoma State University, and PhD researcher Jerrod Yaroshย also atย Oklahoma.

The researchers found the widest gaps between Democrats and Republicans come when they are asked about the causes of climate change and if the media exaggerates the seriousness of theย issue.

While virtually all climate scientists and the world’s leading scientific academies have long agreed that the burning ofย fossil fuelsย isย causing climate change, only about half Republicans accept theย science.

A Republican controlled Congress, the article says, would be a โ€œhuge step backward in our nationโ€™s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissionsโ€ and could also undermine international cooperation, especially if Republican nominee Donald Trump won theย Presidency.

โ€œWhether, and how, individual Americans vote this November may well be the most consequential climate-related decision most of them will have ever taken,โ€ the authorsย conclude.

Starkย Choices

Dunlap told DeSmog the choice facing US voters wasย glaring.

โ€œLooking back, Gore versus Bush was stark, although Bush hid his denial for a bit. ย But now the partisan differences on climate change are out in the open, and the choices from the top down areย stark.โ€

The Koch brothers had led a network of โ€œconservative mega-donorsโ€ that had created a โ€œshadow GOPโ€ that had managed to reduce the influence of the Republican National Committee, the analysisย argues.

These efforts, the article explains, haveย blocked legislation, limited international negotiations and made rejection of climate scienceย  โ€œnormativeโ€ among Republican elites andย activists.

Wideningย Gaps

Dunlap, McCright and Yarosh looked at how elected Democrats and Republicans had voted on environment and climate bills in both houses of Congress since 1970, using data from the League of Conservation Voters.ย  The researchersย found:

What was once a modest tendency for Congressional Republicans to be less pro-environmental than their Democratic counterparts has become a chasmโ€”with Republicans taking near-unanimous anti-environmental stances on relevant legislation in recent years, especiallyย 2015.

Since 2001 polling company Gallup has been asking US voters for their views on aspects of climate change, such as if they think itโ€™s happening, if itโ€™s caused by humans and if they are concerned aboutย it.

In 2001, 53 percent of Republican voters agreed that global warming was caused by humans, compared with 70 percent of Democrats โ€”ย a gap of 17 percentage points.ย But by 2016, this gap had blown out to 41 percentage points, with only 43 percent of Republican votersย accepting climate change isย human-caused.

These โ€œpartisan gapsโ€ had widened across all areas since 2008, except when voters were asked if they thought global warming had already started, where the gap remained at 34 percentageย points.

Bridgingย theย Gap?

Alongside the analysis, the authors look at various attempts to bring Republicans closer to accepting the realities of climate change, such as changing communication strategies. The writersย claim:

Does any persuasive framing strategy hold special promise for penetrating Republicansโ€™ partisan/ideological identities? The evidence so far gives little basis forย optimism.

The sociologistsย say one major reason why attempts to better communicate the realities of climate change to conservatives have failedย is down to โ€œmotivated cognitionโ€ โ€”ย described as the tendency for people to only accept information that reinforces their existing political beliefs and their views on theย world.

Even when Republicans experience extreme weather events, there was little evidence that this was enough for those voters to change their views.ย Dunlap toldย DeSmog:

โ€œI fear polarization will be difficult to overcome because Republican reluctance to accept the reality and seriousness of human-caused climate change is in a self-reinforcing loop.ย ย 

There are top-down cues from Republican political elites and their supporters from conservative think tanks to conservative media โ€” especially the Murdoch mediaโ€” that influence voters, as well as bottom-up pressure from party activists such as Tea Party supporters who act as โ€˜enforcersโ€™ of party principles, especially in primary elections to select Republicanย candidates.

The result is that global warming has joined God, guns, gays, and abortion as core elements of Republican identity, and this will be hard to change.โ€
ย 

Main Image: Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Credit: Flickr/GageSkidmore and HillaryforAmerica

Related Posts

on

Canadian environmentalist Tzeporah Berman makes the case for a "bold idea" to end the era of coal, oil and gas.

Canadian environmentalist Tzeporah Berman makes the case for a "bold idea" to end the era of coal, oil and gas.
on

High demand for wild-caught species to feed farmed salmon and other fish is taking nutritious food away from low-income communities in the Global South.

High demand for wild-caught species to feed farmed salmon and other fish is taking nutritious food away from low-income communities in the Global South.
Analysis
on

Premier Danielle Smith can expect new tariffs, fewer revenue streams, and a provincial deficit brought on by lowered oil prices.

Premier Danielle Smith can expect new tariffs, fewer revenue streams, and a provincial deficit brought on by lowered oil prices.
on

Jeremy Clarkson spreads well-worn conspiracy theory that casts inheritance farm tax policy as plot to โ€œreplace farmers with migrantsโ€.

Jeremy Clarkson spreads well-worn conspiracy theory that casts inheritance farm tax policy as plot to โ€œreplace farmers with migrantsโ€.