MoJo Author Feeds: Jeremy Schulman | Mother Jones Mother Jones logo en Will Donald Trump Gut Science at NASA? <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" ""> <html><body><p>The threat of climate change was thrust into the public consciousness in June 1988, when NASA scientist James Hansen <a href="">told a congressional committee</a> that researchers were now 99 percent certain that humans were warming the planet. "The greenhouse effect has been detected, and it is changing our climate now," <a href="">he said</a>.</p> <p>In the three decades since Hansen's dramatic testimony, NASA has played a leading role in researching climate change and educating the public about it. The space agency's satellites track melting ice sheets and rising seas, and its scientists crunch the data showing how quickly the Earth is warming.</p> <div class="inline inline-left" style="display: table; width: 1%"><img alt="James Hansen" class="image" src="/files/hansen_senate630_0.jpg"><div class="caption"><strong>James Hansen, then a top NASA scientist, testifying about the links between global warming and drought at a 1989 Senate hearing </strong>Dennis Cook/AP</div> </div> <p>But if Donald Trump's advisers get their way, NASA won't be studying the Earth as much as it has in the past. Bob Walker, a former GOP congressman from Pennsylvania who counseled Trump on space policy during the campaign, has referred to the agency's climate research as "politically correct environmental monitoring" that has been "heavily politicized." Walker (inaccurately) <a href="">told the <em>Guardian</em></a> in November that "half" the world's climate scientists doubt that humans are warming the planet.</p> <p>Walker wants to shift new climate research from NASA to other government agencies, such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "My guess is that it would be difficult to stop all ongoing NASA programs," he told the <em>Guardian</em>, "but future programs should definitely be placed with other agencies." NASA, he says, should focus on deep space exploration. (<a href="">As my colleague Pat Caldwell points out</a>, "Since Trump isn't promising any additional funds to NOAA for these new responsibilities, the result could be pressure to cut back on climate change research.")</p> <p>Trump hasn't actually endorsed Walker's proposal, and some experts doubt that such a transition could ever be implemented<strong>.</strong> But his comments have garnered plenty of backlash from the scientific community. "We're not going to stand for that," said astrobiologist David Grinspoon in a recent interview with Indre Viskontas on our <em><a href="">Inquiring Minds </a></em><a href="">podcast</a>. "We're going to keep doing Earth science and make the case for it. We'll get scientists to march on Washington if we have to. There's going to be a lot of resistance."</p> <p><iframe scrolling="no" src="" style="width: 100%; height: 200px; border: 0 none;"></iframe></p> <p>Grinspoon, a researcher at the Planetary Sciences Institute, receives NASA funding for his work. But he's quick to point out that he doesn't do Earth science. During a follow-up interview, he told me that even though he and his space science colleagues could personally benefit if funding were shifted away from Earth research, he would still staunchly oppose such a move. "I will defend the NASA Earth science division with everything I've got," he said, adding that Walker's proposal "would be disastrous to our overall efforts to understand the Earth and the other planets, which is really the same effort."</p> <p>Grinspoon's argument that Earth science and space science are inseparable might sound odd to someone who has been listening to Walker or some Republicans currently in Congress. "I would suggest that almost any American would agree that the core function of NASA is to explore space," Ted Cruz, whose Senate subcommittee oversees NASA, <a href="">said in 2015</a> while complaining that Earth science used too much of the agency's budget. "I am concerned that NASA in the current environment has lost its full focus on that core mission."</p> <p>Grinspoon says the view espoused by Walker and Cruz is based on a "misconception" that Earth science is somehow "frivolous" or not really "key to NASA's main mission." That's simply wrong. "You cannot study other planets without referring to Earth and without applying the techniques and the insights of Earth science," he argues. "And you cannot really do a good job understanding the Earth without the insights from planetary exploration."</p> <p>Grinspoon points to the "great revelation that started the Scientific Revolution 400 years ago": Galileo's telescope research demonstrating that the Earth is a planet orbiting the sun and that other, similar planets are doing the same thing.</p> <p>In the modern era, Grinspoon is particularly interested in his colleagues' research demonstrating the impact people are having on our planet&mdash;he's the author of <em><a href="">Earth in Human Hands</a></em>, a recent book exploring the role man has played in altering our world. But he points out that NASA's Earth science program goes far beyond climate change. "It's a broad-based effort to understand the Earth system," he says. "And out of that [research] has come a realization that climate is changing&mdash;a wide range of indicators: from changes in sea ice to droughts and changes to the hydrological cycle and movement of species and the documentation of urbanization and deforestation."</p> <p>"We're going to stop looking at Earth from orbit because we don't like what we are seeing and the conclusions that leads us to?" he adds, incredulously. "That's nonsense."</p> <div class="inline inline-left" style="display: table; width: 1%"><img alt="Galieo trial" class="image" src="/files/Galileo_Galilei_at_his_trial_Wellcome_V0018717.jpg"><div class="caption"><strong>Galileo Galilei got in trouble for mixing Earth science and space science. </strong><a href="" target="_blank">Wellcome Images</a></div> </div> <p>But what about Walker's proposal to shift NASA's climate work to NOAA? That, too, is nonsense, Grinspoon says. "NOAA is tiny compared to NASA."<strong> </strong>The move would require a massive expansion of NOAA's capabilities that would set American research back 20 years. "If we gutted NASA Earth science, it wouldn't be NOAA or some other agency that would take the lead," he says. "It would be the Chinese and the Europeans and the Japanese."&shy;</p> <p>Fortunately, Grinspoon is pretty convinced that the threats to Earth science are mostly "loose talk." While he's worried that NASA research programs could lose some funding, he doesn't think Trump or Congress would really try to stop it altogether.</p> <p>Other experts I talked to agree. "It's not at all clear that they are even going to propose this," says Josh Shiode, a senior government relations officer at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He points to a recent <a href="" target="_blank"><em>Science</em> magazine</a> interview with Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas), who chairs the House subcommittee in charge of the budgets for NASA, NOAA, and the National Science Foundation. While Culberson wouldn't promise that Earth science programs would continue to be housed in NASA, he didn't endorse Walker's proposals either. "Nobody in the Earth sciences community should be concerned in the least," he said. "All of us in Congress are strong supporters of keeping a close eye on planet Earth." Shiode says the idea<strong> </strong>would face even longer odds in the Senate, where a number of mainstream Republicans would likely oppose it.</p> <p>Andrew Rosenberg, who heads the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, also doubts that Congress would attempt to eliminate NASA's Earth science budget. A bigger concern, he says, is that Trump&mdash;an <a href="" target="_blank">infamous global warming denier</a>&mdash;could appoint officials who would interfere with the ability of climate scientists at the agency to publicize their research.</p> <p>The key, says Rosenberg, will be for the public&mdash;scientists, politicians, and concerned citizens&mdash;to hold the Trump administration accountable. NASA's researchers will continue doing groundbreaking climate change work, and Americans, he says, "need to let the government know that they demand this information."</p> <p><a href="" target="_blank">Inquiring Minds</a><em> is a podcast hosted by neuroscientist and musician Indre Viskontas and Kishore Hari, the director of the Bay Area Science Festival. To catch future shows right when they are released, subscribe to </em>Inquiring Minds<em> via <a href="" target="_blank">iTunes</a> or <a href="" target="_blank">RSS</a>. You can follow the show on Twitter at <a href="" target="_blank">@inquiringshow</a> and like us on <a href="" target="_blank">Facebook</a>.</em></p></body></html> Environment Interview Podcasts Climate Change Climate Desk Donald Trump Science Inquiring Minds Tue, 03 Jan 2017 11:00:12 +0000 Jeremy Schulman 322326 at Here Is the Worst Anti-Science BS of 2016 <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" ""> <html><body><p>2016 was a year of remarkable scientific breakthroughs. A century after Albert Einstein proposed his general theory of relativity, researchers proved him right when, for the first time ever, they were able to <a href="">observe gravitational waves</a> produced by two black holes that collided 1.3 billion years ago. Astronomers discovered a <a href="">potentially habitable planet</a> just 4.3 light-years from Earth. And scientists even came up with a good reason to put <a href="">a bunch of adorable dogs</a> in an MRI machine.</p> <p>Unfortunately, there was a lot of anti-science nonsense this year, too&mdash;much of it from our political leaders. On issues ranging from climate change to criminal justice, our president-elect was a notable offender. But some of his rivals joined in as well. So did his nominees. And Congress. And members of the media. Here, in no particular order, are some of the most appalling examples. You can let us know in the comments which one you think is the worst.</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Hurricane Matthew Truthers</strong></h3> <p>In early October, as Hurricane Matthew approached the southeastern United States and officials ordered mass evacuations, a group of right-wing commentators alleged that the Obama administration was conspiring to exaggerate hurricane forecasts in order to scare the public about climate change. On October 5, <a href="">Rush Limbaugh said</a> hurricane forecasting often involved "politics" because "the National Hurricane Center is part of the National Weather Service, which is part of the Commerce Department, which is part of the Obama administration, which by definition has been tainted." He added, however, that Matthew itself was "a serious bad storm" and hadn't been politicized.</p> <p>The next day, Matt Drudge took the theory a step further, <a href="">tweeting</a>, "The deplorables are starting to wonder if govt has been lying to them about Hurricane Matthew intensity to make exaggerated point on climate." He added, "Hurricane center has monopoly on data. No way of verifying claims." Drudge's tweets were <a href="">widely condemned</a> as dangerous and irresponsible. They also caught the attention of conspiracy kingpin Alex Jones:</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">.<a href="">@DRUDGE</a> This is exactly why they want to eradicate free speech... so you can't question official <a href="">#globalwarming</a> narrative. <a href="">#altright</a> <a href="">#Trump</a> <a href=""></a></p> &mdash; Alex Jones (@RealAlexJones) <a href="">October 6, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><p>A day later, <a href="">Limbaugh also went full Matthew Truther</a>, declaring it "inarguable" that the government is "hyping Hurricane Matthew to sell climate change." Matthew would ultimately kill more than 40 people in the United States and hundreds in Haiti. It caused billions of dollars' worth of damage.</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="video-embed" frameborder="0" height="360" scrolling="no" src="" width="480"></iframe></p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Congress Won't Lift the Gun Research Ban</strong></h3> <p>Gun violence is a public health crisis that kills 33,000 people in the United States each year, injures another 80,000, and, according to an award-winning <a href=""><em>Mother Jones </em>investigation</a>, costs $229 billion annually. But as the <em>Annals of Internal Medicine</em> explained in a 2015 editorial, Congress&mdash;under pressure from the National Rifle Association&mdash;has for years <a href="">essentially banned</a> federal dollars from being used to study the causes of, and possible solutions to, this epidemic:</p> <blockquote>Two years ago, we called on physicians to focus on the public health threat of guns. The profession's relative silence was disturbing but in part explicable by our inability to study the problem. Political forces had effectively banned the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other scientific agencies from funding research on gun-related injury and death. The ban worked: A recent systematic review of studies evaluating access to guns and its association with suicide and homicide identified no relevant studies published since 2005.</blockquote> <p>Following the June 12 terrorist shootings that killed 49 people at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Democrats tried once again to lift the research ban. But as the <em>Hill </em><a href="">reported</a>, "Republicans blocked two amendments that would have allowed the [CDC] to study gun-related deaths. Neither had a recorded vote."</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Officials Face Charges in Flint Water Crisis</strong></h3> <p>Perhaps the biggest scientific scandal in recent memory was the revelation that residents of Flint, Michigan&mdash;an impoverished, majority-black city&mdash;were exposed to dangerous levels of lead after government officials switched their drinking water source. <a href="">Lead poisoning</a> can cause learning disabilities and behavioral problems, along with a variety of other serious health issues. Officials ignored&mdash;and then publicly disputed&mdash;<a href="" target="_blank">repeated warnings</a> that Flint's water was unsafe to drink. <a href="">According to one study</a>, the percentage of Flint children with elevated lead levels doubled following the switchover. The water crisis may also be to blame for a <a href="">deadly outbreak of Legionnaires' disease</a>.</p> <p>Since April 2016, Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette has filed charges against 13 current and former government officials for their alleged role in the crisis. On December 19, Schuette <a href=",4534,7-164-46849-400211--,00.html">accused</a> two former emergency managers&mdash;officials who had been appointed by the governor to oversee Flint's finances with minimal input from local elected officials&mdash;of moving forward with the switchover<strong> </strong>despite knowing the situation was unsafe. <a href="">According to the charging document</a>, Darnell Earley conspired with Gerald Ambrose and others to "enter into a contract based upon false pretenses [that required] Flint to utilize the Flint River as its drinking water source knowing that the Flint Water Treatment Plant&hellip;was unable to produce safe water." The document says that Earley and Ambrose were "advised to switch back to treated water" from Detroit's water department (which had previously supplied Flint's water) but that they failed to do so, "which caused the Flint citizens' prolonged exposure to lead and Legionella bacteria." The attorney general also alleged that Ambrose "breached his duties by obstructing and hindering" a health department investigation into the&nbsp;Legionnaires' outbreak. Earley and Ambrose have pleaded not guilty.</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Trump's Budget Director Isn't Sure the Government Should Fund Zika Research</strong></h3> <p>Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), Donald Trump's choice to head the White House Office of Management and Budget, isn't just a <a href="">global warming denier</a>. As <a href=""><em>Mother Jones </em>reported</a>, he recently questioned whether the government should even fund scientific research. In September, Mulvaney took to Facebook to discuss the <a href="">congressional showdown</a> over urgently needed funding for the Zika epidemic&mdash;money that would pay for mosquito control, vaccine studies, and research into the effects of the virus. (Among other disputes, Republicans sought to prevent Planned Parenthood from receiving Zika funds.)</p> <p>"[D]o we need government-funded research at all[?]" wrote Mulvaney in his since-deleted post. Even more remarkably, he went on to raise doubts about whether Zika really causes microcephaly in babies. As <a href=""><em>Slate's </em>Phil Plait</a> noted, "<a href="">There is wide scientific consensus</a> that zika and microcephaly are linked, and <a href="">had been for some time</a> before Mulvaney wrote that."</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>The House "Science" Committee</strong></h3> <p>The House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology is quickly becoming one of the most inaccurately named entities in Washington. <a href="">For the past</a> <a href="">several years</a>, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) has <a href="">used his position</a> as chairman of the committee to <a href="">harass scientists</a> through congressional investigations. He's even accused researchers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of having "altered historic climate data to get politically correct results" about global warming. As <a href="">we explained in February</a>, "Smith is determined to get to the bottom of what he sees as an insidious plot by NOAA to falsify research. His original subpoena for internal communications, issued last October, has been followed by a <a href="">series of letters</a> to Obama administration officials in NOAA and other agencies demanding information and expressing frustration that NOAA has not been sufficiently forthcoming."</p> <p>Fast-forward to December 2016, when someone working for Smith decided to use the committee Twitter account to promote an article from <em>Breitbart News </em>titled "<a href="">Global Temperatures Plunge. Icy Silence from Climate Alarmists.</a>" (<em>Breitbart </em>is the far-right website that was formerly run by chief Trump strategist Steve Bannon. In addition to climate denial, <a href="">Bannon has said</a> the site is "the platform for the alt-right," a movement that is <a href="" target="_blank">closely tied</a> to white nationalism.)</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">.<a href="">@BreitbartNews</a>: Global Temperatures Plunge. Icy Silence from Climate Alarmists <a href=""></a></p> &mdash; Sci,Space,&amp;Tech Cmte (@HouseScience) <a href="">December 1, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><p>Unsurprisingly, <a href="">actual scientists</a> weren't pleased.</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>GOP Platform Declares Coal Is "Clean"</strong></h3> <p>Republicans' devotion to coal was one of the defining environmental issues of the 2016 campaign. Trump promised to revive the struggling industry and put miners back to work by <a href="">repealing</a> "all the job-destroying Obama executive actions." Those commitments were reflected in an early version of the <a href="">GOP platform</a>, which listed coal's many wonderful qualities and said that Republicans would dismantle Obama's Clean Power Plan, which limits emissions from coal-fired power plants. That didn't go far enough for GOP activist David Barton, who convinced delegates at the party's convention to add one additional word to the text. "I would insert the adjective 'clean,'" said Barton. "So: 'The Democratic Party does not understand that coal is an abundant, <em>clean</em>, affordable, reliable domestic energy resource.'" Barton's wording change was approved unanimously. As <a href=""><em>Grist </em>noted at the time</a>, "For years the coal industry&mdash;and at one point, even President Obama&mdash;promoted the idea of 'clean coal,' that expensive and imperfect carbon-capture-and-storage technology could someday make coal less terrible. But there's no way it is clean."</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="354" src="" width="630"></iframe></p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Global Warming Deniers in the GOP Primaries</strong></h3> <p>As 2016 kicked off, there were still 12 candidates competing for the Republican presidential nomination. <a href="">Nearly all of them rejected</a> the overwhelming scientific consensus that humans are the main cause of global warming. (The GOP contenders who <a href="">spoke most forcefully</a> in favor of the science&mdash;Lindsey Graham and George Pataki&mdash;both dropped out of the race in late 2015.)</p> <p>As recently as December 2015, Trump <a href="">declared</a> that "a lot of" the global warming issue is "a hoax." His chief rival, Ted Cruz, <a href="">said in February</a> that climate change is "the perfect pseudoscientific theory" to justify liberal politicians' efforts to expand "government power over the American citizenry." In a debate in March, Marco Rubio <a href="">drew loud applause</a> when he said, "Well, sure, the climate is changing, and one of the reasons why the climate is changing is the climate has always been changing...But as far as a law that we can pass in Washington to change the weather: There's no such thing." Moments later, John Kasich <a href="">said</a>, "I do believe we contribute to climate change." But he added, "We don't know how much humans actually contribute."</p> <p>In 2015, Ben Carson <a href="">told the <em>San Francisco Chronicle</em></a>, "There is no overwhelming science that the things that are going on are man-caused and not naturally caused." A few months earlier, Jeb Bush <a href="">said</a>, "The climate is changing. I don't think the science is clear of what percentage is man-made and what percentage is natural&hellip;For the people to say the science is decided on this is just really arrogant." In one 2014 interview, Rand Paul <a href="">seemed to accept</a> that carbon pollution is warming the planet; in a different interview, he said he's "not sure anybody exactly knows why" the climate changes. Mike Huckabee <a href="">claimed in 2015</a> that "a volcano in one blast will contribute more [to climate change] than a hundred years of human activity." (That's <a href="">completely wrong</a>.) In 2011, Rick Santorum <a href="">called climate change "junk science."</a> In 2008, Jim Gilmore <a href="">said</a>, "We know the climate is changing, but we do not know for sure how much is caused by man and how much is part of a natural cycle change."</p> <p>Two other GOP candidates, Chris Christie and Carly Fiorina, seemed to largely accept the science behind climate change, but <a href="">neither of them had much of a plan</a> to deal with the problem.</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Trump's (Other) Wars on Science</strong></h3> <p>Trump's rejection of science goes well beyond basic climate research. Here are some of his more outlandish claims from the past year:</p> <ul><li><strong>Despite DNA evidence, Trump still thinks the Central Park Five are guilty. </strong>In 1989, five black and Hispanic teenagers were <a href="">charged with the brutal rape</a> of a white woman in New York's Central Park. Trump proceeded to pay for<a href="!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_970/trump21n-1-web.jpg?enlarged"> inflammatory ads in the city's newspapers</a> decrying the "permissive atmosphere which allows criminals of every age to beat and rape a helpless woman." He called on lawmakers to "bring back the death penalty and bring back our police!" The defendants, most of whom had confessed to involvement in the rape, were convicted. They were eventually exonerated by DNA evidence and a confession from the actual rapist. But Trump still isn't persuaded by the scientific evidence. "They admitted they were guilty," <a href="">he told CNN in October</a>. "The police doing the original investigation say they were guilty. The fact that that case was settled with so much evidence against them is outrageous." As Sarah Burns, who made a documentary about the case, <a href="">noted in the <em>New York Times</em></a>, "False confessions are surprisingly common in criminal cases. In the hundreds of post-conviction DNA exonerations that the Innocence Project has studied, at least one in four of the wrongly convicted had given a confession."<br> &nbsp;</li> <li><strong>Trump mocks football players for worrying about brain damage from concussions. </strong>In October, Trump praised a woman who returned to his Florida rally shortly after she had fainted from the heat. "That woman was out cold, and now she's coming back," he said. Trump, who <a href="">once owned a USFL football team</a>, added, "See, we don't go by these new, and very much softer, NFL rules. Concussions&mdash;'Uh oh, got a little ding on the head? No, no, you can't play for the rest of the season'&mdash;our people are tough." <a href="">As the <em>Washington Post </em>pointed out</a>, "Recent MRI scans of 40 NFL players found that 30 percent had signs of nerve cell damage. Florida State University College of Medicine's Francis X. Conidi, a physician and author of the study, said in a statement that the rates of brain trauma were 'significantly higher in the players' than in the general population. In the spring, the NFL acknowledged a link between football and degenerative brain diseases such as chronic traumatic encephalopathy, which is associated with symptoms such as depression and memory loss."<br> &nbsp;</li> <li><strong>Trump meets with anti-vaxxers. </strong>Trump has long been a proponent of the discredited&mdash;and <a href="">dangerous</a>&mdash;theory that vaccines cause autism. "I'm not against vaccinations for your children, I'm against them in 1 massive dose," <a href="">Trump tweeted in 2014</a>. "Spread them out over a period of time &amp; autism will drop!" He made the same argument at a 2015 GOP debate, causing a <a href="">spike in Google searches</a> for information about the supposed vaccine-autism connection. Since then, Trump hasn't said much more about the issue in public. But <a href="">according to <em>Science </em>magazine</a>, he met privately with a group of leading anti-vaccine activists at a fundraiser in August. The group reportedly included Andrew Wakefield, the lead researcher behind the seminal study (<a href="" target="_blank">since retracted</a>) of the vaccine-autism connection. <em>Science</em> reported that "Trump chatted with a group of donors that included four antivaccine activists for 45 minutes, according to accounts of the meeting, and promised to watch <em>Vaxxed</em>, an antivaccine documentary produced by Wakefield&hellip;Trump also expressed an interest in holding future meetings with the activists, according to participants."<br> &nbsp;</li> <li><strong>Trump says there is no drought.</strong> During a May campaign stop in Fresno, California, Trump offered a bizarre take on the state's "insane" water problems, implying that there wasn't actually a drought. (<a href="" target="_blank">There was</a> and <a href="" target="_blank">still is</a>.) He suggested that the state had "plenty of water" but that "they're taking the water and shoving it out to sea" in order to "protect a certain kind of three-inch fish." <a href="">As explained</a>, "California is in its fifth year of a severe 'hot' drought," and "officials release fresh water from reservoirs primarily to prevent salt water from contaminating agricultural and urban water supplies." (A much smaller proportion of water is released from reservoirs to preserve habitat for Chinook salmon, the "three-inch" delta smelt, and other fish.)</li> </ul><p><iframe frameborder="0" height="354" src="" width="630"></iframe></p> <ul><li><strong>Trump wants to use hairspray. </strong>Trump has repeatedly complained that efforts to protect the ozone layer are interfering with his hair routine. "You're not allowed to use hairspray anymore because it affects the ozone," he said in May, arguing that more environmentally friendly hair products are only "good for 12 minutes." He added, "So if I take hairspray and I spray it in my apartment, which is all sealed, you're telling me that affects the ozone layer?&hellip;I say no way, folks. No way. No way." actually <a href="">went through the trouble</a> of asking scientists whether Trump's strategy of using hairspray indoors would help contain the ozone-destroying chemicals. "It makes absolutely no difference!" said Steve Montzka, a NOAA chemist. "It will eventually make it outside."</li> </ul><h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Jill Stein (Yep, She Deserves Her Very Own Category)</strong></h3> <ul><li><strong>Vaccines. </strong>Of course, science denial isn't confined to the political right. During the 2008 presidential campaign, both <a href="">Obama and Hillary Clinton</a> flirted with the notion that vaccines could be causing autism and that more research was needed on the issue&mdash;<a href="">long after that theory had been discredited</a>. Obama and Clinton have abandoned these misguided views, but Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein is apparently still concerned. In July, she <a href="">told the <em>Washington Post</em></a> that vaccines are "invaluable" medications but that the pharmaceutical industry has too much influence over safety determinations from the Food and Drug Administration and the CDC. "As a medical doctor, there was a time when I looked very closely at those issues, and not all those issues were completely resolved," she said. "There were concerns among physicians about what the vaccination schedule meant, the toxic substances like mercury which used to be rampant in vaccines. There were real questions that needed to be addressed. I think some of them at least have been addressed. I don't know if all of them have been addressed."</li> </ul><p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="354" mozallowfullscreen="" scrolling="no" src="//" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="630"></iframe></p> <ul><li><strong>GMOs. </strong>There are plenty of <a href="" target="_blank">reasonable debates</a> surrounding the use of genetically modified crops. But when it comes to their impact on human health, scientists are pretty much in agreement: <a href="">GMOs are safe to eat</a>. Once again, Stein isn't convinced. During the 2016 campaign, Stein <a href="">called for a moratorium</a> on the introduction of new genetically modified organisms and a "phaseout" of current genetically modified crops "unless independent research shows decisively that GMOs are not harmful to human health or ecosystems." <a href="">Stein's website promised</a> that her administration would "mandate GMO food labeling so you can be sure that what you're choosing at the store is healthy and GMO-free! YOU CAN FINALLY FEEL SECURE THAT YOUR FAMILY IS EATING SAFELY WITH NO GMO FOODS ON YOUR TABLE!" That page also featured a <a href="">2013 video</a> of Stein saying, "This is about what we are eating. This is about whether we are going to have a food system at all. This is about whether our food system is built out of poison and frankenfood."</li> </ul><p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="354" src="" width="630"></iframe></p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>The Climate-Denying Cabinet</strong></h3> <p>Trump has <a href="">loaded up his incoming administration</a> with officials who, to varying extents, share his views on climate change. Vice President-elect Mike Pence <a href="">once called global warming a "myth,"</a> though he now acknowledges that humans have "<a href="">some impact on climate</a>." Scott Pruitt, Trump's pick to run the Environmental Protection Agency, <a href="">wrote in May</a> that "scientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of global warming and its connection to the actions of mankind." Energy secretary nominee Rick Perry <a href="">once alleged</a> that "a substantial number" of climate scientists had "manipulated data." Trump's interior secretary nominee, Ryan Zinke, <a href="">believes that climate change</a> is "not a hoax, but it's not proven science either." Ben Carson (see above) is slated to run the Department of Housing and Urban Development, an agency <a href="">facing serious challenges</a> from global warming. Mulvaney, the incoming White House budget director, <a href="">has said</a> we shouldn't abandon domestic fossil fuels "because of baseless claims regarding global warming." Attorney general nominee Jeff Sessions <a href="">claimed in 2015</a> that predictions of warming "aren't coming true."</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Interfering with government scientists?</strong></h3> <p>Trump hasn't even been sworn in yet, but already there are troubling signs that his administration may attempt to interfere with the work of government scientists and experts.</p> <ul><li><strong>Energy Department questionnaire. </strong>The president-elect's transition team submitted a <a href="">questionnaire</a> to the Department of Energy asking for a list of employees and contractors who had worked on the Obama administration's efforts to calculate the "social cost of carbon"&mdash;that is, the dollar value of the health and environmental damage caused by burning fossil fuels. The transition team also asked for a list of staffers who attended UN climate negotiations. As <a href="">the <em>Washington Post </em>explained</a>, the questionnaire "has raised concern that the Trump transition team is trying to figure out how to target the people, including civil servants, who have helped implement policies under Obama." (The department didn't comply with the request, and the Trump team <a href="">ultimately disavowed the questionnaire</a> after facing criticism.)</li> <li><strong>Earth science at NASA. </strong>One of Trump's space advisers, Bob Walker, has repeatedly floated the idea that the administration should begin to <a href="">remove Earth science</a> from NASA's portfolio. NASA's Earth science program is well known for producing some of the world's most important climate change research, and Walker's proposal has sparked an outcry among many in the scientific community. (Walker has suggested shifting the work to NOAA, but the incoming administration <a href="">hasn't proposed giving NOAA additional funding</a>, and Walker's critics have called the plan unworkable.) Trump hasn't actually adopted Walker's idea, and scientists such as David Grinspoon, an astrobiologist who receives NASA funding, are optimistic that he won't. But if Trump does attempt to gut NASA's research efforts, the backlash could be intense. "We're not going to stand for that," said Grinspoon on our <a href=""><em>Inquiring Minds </em>podcast</a>. "We're going to keep doing Earth science and make the case for it. We'll get scientists to march on Washington if we have to. There's going to be a lot of resistance."</li> </ul><h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Abortion and Breast Cancer</strong></h3> <p>For years, abortion rights opponents have <a href="" target="_blank">insisted that abortion can cause breast cancer</a>. That claim was based on a handful of flawed studies and has since been repeatedly debunked by the scientific community. According to <a href="">the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists</a>, "More rigorous recent studies demonstrate no causal relationship between induced abortion and a subsequent increase in breast cancer risk." Influential anti-abortion groups have frequently emphasized a more nuanced but still misleading version of the breast cancer claim: that having an abortion <a href="">deprives women</a> of the health benefits they would otherwise receive by giving birth. That argument has <a href="" target="_blank">found its way into an official booklet</a> that the state of Texas provides to women seeking abortions. According to the <a href="">latest version of the booklet</a>, released in early December:</p> <blockquote>Your pregnancy history affects your chances of getting breast cancer. If you give birth to your baby, you are less likely to develop breast cancer in the future. Research indicates that having an abortion will not provide you this increased protection against breast cancer.</blockquote> <p>"The wording in [the Texas booklet] gets very cute," said Otis Brawley, the American Cancer Society's chief medical officer, in an <a href="" target="_blank">interview with the </a><em><a href="" target="_blank">Washington Post</a></em>. "It's technically correct, but it is deceiving." Here's the problem, as explained by the <em>Post</em>:</p> <blockquote>Women who deliver their first baby to full-term at 30 years or younger face a decreased long-term risk of breast cancer than women who have their first baby at older than 30 or 35, or who never deliver a baby at all&hellip;Having a baby does provide increased protection against breast cancer, but it doesn't mean that having an abortion affects your risk one way or another. For example, women who deliver a child before 30, but then have an abortion after their first child, still have a decreased risk of breast cancer, said Brawley, who described himself as "pro-life and pro-truth."</blockquote> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Pence Denies the Existence of Implicit Bias in Police Shootings</strong></h3> <p>During her first debate with Trump, Clinton supported efforts to retrain police officers to counter so-called "<a href="">implicit bias</a>." She noted that people in general&mdash;not just police officers&mdash;tend to engage in subconscious racism. But she added that in the case of law enforcement, these biases "can have literally fatal consequences." During the vice presidential debate a few days later, Pence blasted Clinton and other advocates of police reform for "bad-mouthing" cops. He criticized people who "seize upon tragedy in the wake of police action shootings&hellip;&acirc;&#128;&#138;to use a broad brush to accuse law enforcement of implicit bias or institutional racism." That, he said, "really has got to stop."</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="354" src="" width="630"></iframe></p> <p>Pence's comments were a gross misrepresentation of a <a href="" target="_blank">key scientific issue</a> in the national debate over police killings of African Americans. Implicit bias does not, as he implied, refer to intentional, overt bigotry or to systematic efforts by law enforcement to target minorities (though there are <a href="">plenty of examples</a> of <a href="">those</a>, too). Rather, implicit bias refers to subconscious prejudices that affect people's split-second decisions&mdash;for example, whether or not a cop shoots an unarmed civilian. As Chris Mooney explained in a <a href="">2014 <em>Mother Jones </em>story</a>:</p> <blockquote>This phenomenon has been directly studied in the lab, particularly through first-person shooter tests, where subjects must rapidly decide whether to shoot individuals holding either guns or harmless objects like wallets and soda cans. Research suggests that police officers (those studied were mostly white) are much more accurate at the general task (not shooting unarmed people) than civilians, thanks to their training. But like civilians, police are considerably slower to press the "don't shoot" button for an unarmed black man than they are for an unarmed white man&mdash;and faster to shoot an armed black man than an armed white man.</blockquote> <p>And as Mooney noted, acknowledging that implicit biases are common&mdash;something Pence refused to do&mdash;allows scientists and law enforcement to devise trainings that seek to counter the problem.</p></body></html> Environment 2016 Elections Civil Liberties Climate Change Climate Desk Crime and Justice Energy Health Race and Ethnicity Reproductive Rights The Right Wed, 28 Dec 2016 11:00:15 +0000 Jeremy Schulman 322021 at Every Insane Thing Donald Trump Has Said About Global Warming <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" ""> <html><body><p>Donald Trump has a lot of things to say about global warming. He's called it an urgent problem, and he's called it a hoax. He's claimed it's a scam invented by the Chinese, and he's denied that he ever said that. He's promised to "cancel" the historic Paris climate agreement, and he's said he still has an "open mind" on the matter.</p> <p>Some environmental activists have <a href="">pointed to Trump's unpredictable statements</a> as evidence that he might not follow through on his campaign pledges to dismantle the Obama administration's climate legacy. But Trump has already put <a href="">one of the nation's most prominent climate skeptics</a> in charge of the Environmental Protection Agency transition. And just last week, one of Trump's top aides <a href="">assured Americans</a> that the president-elect still believes climate science is mostly "bunk."</p> <p>For those keeping score at home, here's a timeline of the Donald's thoughts on global warming. We'll update it from time to time.</p> <dl class="timeline"><dt>12/6/09</dt> <dd> <div class="inline inline-right" style="display: table; width: 1%"><img alt="letter" class="image" src="/files/Screen%20Shot%202016-11-30%20at%203.06.59%20PM_0.png" style="height: 212px; width: 250px;"><div class="caption"><a href="" target="_blank"><strong>Read the full the letter at <em>Grist</em>. </strong></a></div> </div> <p><strong>Trump signs a letter calling for urgent climate action. </strong>As <em>Grist</em> <a href="">reported earlier this year</a>, Trump and three of his children signed a <a href=";h=1836">2009 letter</a> to President Barack Obama calling for a global climate deal. "We support your effort to ensure meaningful and effective measures to control climate change, an immediate challenge facing the United States and the world today," declared the letter, which was signed by dozens of business leaders and published as an ad in the <em>New York Times</em>. "If we fail to act now, it is scientifically irrefutable that there will be catastrophic and irreversible consequences for humanity and our planet."</p> </dd> <dt>2/14/10</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump changes his mind, says Gore should be stripped of Nobel Prize because it's cold outside.</strong> According to the <em>New York Post</em>, Trump had changed his tune by early 2010, <a href="">telling an audience at one of his golf clubs</a>, "With the coldest winter ever recorded, with snow setting record levels up and down the coast, the Nobel committee should take the Nobel Prize back from Al Gore&hellip;Gore wants us to clean up our factories and plants in order to protect us from global warming, when China and other countries couldn't care less. It would make us totally noncompetitive in the manufacturing world, and China, Japan and India are laughing at America's stupidity." (He would later say he was joking about the Nobel Prize being rescinded.)</p> </dd> <dt>2/16/10</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump claims scientists admitted global warming is a "con."</strong> Around this time, Trump caught wind of the so-called "<a href="">ClimateGate scandal</a>," in which climate deniers wrongly claimed a trove of hacked emails showed that scientists had conspired to fabricate evidence of global warming. Trump said (inaccurately) on Fox News that there was an email "sent a couple months ago by one of the leaders of global warming, the initiative&hellip;almost saying&mdash;I guess they're saying it's a con." He added that "in Washington, where I'm building a big development, nobody can move because we have 48 inches of snow."</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="367" mozallowfullscreen="true" src=";end=382.6" webkitallowfullscreen="true" width="490"></iframe></p> </dd> <dt>11/6/12</dt> <dd> <p><strong>"The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese." </strong></p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">November 6, 2012</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script></dd> <dt>12/6/13</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump declares global warming a "hoax." </strong>As an unusually powerful <a href="">ice storm</a> ripped through the southern part of the United States, Trump announced that climate change is a "hoax."</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Ice storm rolls from Texas to Tennessee - I'm in Los Angeles and it's freezing. Global warming is a total, and very expensive, hoax!</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">December 6, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">We should be focused on magnificently clean and healthy air and not distracted by the expensive hoax that is global warming!</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">December 6, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script></dd> <dt>Jan. 2014</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump says scientists are in on the hoax. </strong>On January 6, Trump went on Fox News to discuss a <a href="">severe cold snap that set records</a> across the country. "This winter is brutal," <a href="" target="_blank">said Trump, adding that climate change is a "hoax"</a> perpetrated by "scientists [who] are having a lot of fun." Trump kept up this line of argument throughout the <a href="">long and miserable winter</a>.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">This very expensive GLOBAL WARMING bullshit has got to stop. Our planet is freezing, record low temps,and our GW scientists are stuck in ice</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">January 2, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">NBC News just called it the great freeze - coldest weather in years. Is our country still spending money on the GLOBAL WARMING HOAX?</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">January 25, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Any and all weather events are used by the GLOBAL WARMING HOAXSTERS to justify higher taxes to save our planet! They don't believe it $$$$!</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">January 26, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">The weather has been so cold for so long that the global warming HOAXSTERS were forced to change the name to climate change to keep $ flow!</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">January 29, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Snowing in Texas and Louisiana, record setting freezing temperatures throughout the country and beyond. Global warming is an expensive hoax!</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">January 29, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script></dd> <dt>2014</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump donates money to fight climate change. </strong>At some point in 2014, Trump <a href="">donated $5,000 of his foundation's money to Protect Our Winters</a>, an advocacy group dedicated to "mobilizing the outdoor sports community to lead the charge towards positive climate action." <a href="">As the group's website</a> explains, "If we're serious about slowing climate change, it's imperative that we decrease our dependence on fossil fuels and focus on cleaner sources of energy and electricity."</p> <p><a href="">According to the New York <em>Daily News</em></a><em>, </em>Trump made the donation at the request of Olympic snowboarding gold medalist Jamie Anderson, who was <a href="" target="_blank">one of the contestants</a> on Trump's <em>Celebrity Apprentice </em>reality show. Anderson was participating on behalf of Protect Our Winters, which, she said on the show, "brings light and inspiration to climate change." Still, Trump remained a climate change denier. During the season premier, which aired in early 2015, Trump suggested that New York's cold weather undermined Gilbert Gottfried's belief in climate science:</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="275" src="" width="490"></iframe></p> </dd> <dt>6/17/15</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump says it's "madness" to call climate change our "No. 1 problem." </strong>The day after announcing his candidacy for the GOP presidential nomination, Trump appeared on Sean Hannity's Fox News show, where he said he was "not a believer in man-made" warming. He added, "When I hear Obama saying that climate change is the No. 1 problem, it is just madness."</p> </dd> <dt>9/21/15</dt> <dd> <p><strong>"I'm not a believer in man-made global warming." </strong>During the GOP primary race, Trump kept up his climate denial. Here he is on <a href="">Hugh Hewitt's radio show</a>: "I'm not a believer in man-made global warming. It could be warming, and it's going to start to cool at some point. And you know, in the early, in the 1920s, people talked about global cooling&hellip;They thought the Earth was cooling. Now, it's global warming&hellip;But the problem we have, and if you look at our energy costs, and all of the things that we're doing to solve a problem that I don't think in any major fashion exists."</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="275" src="" width="490"></iframe></p> </dd> <dt>12/1/15</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump says it's "ridiculous" for Obama to pursue the Paris climate agreement.</strong> The long-anticipated Paris climate negotiations began barely two weeks after the city was struck by a devastating series of terrorist attacks. As the talks kicked off, <a href="">Obama called the summit</a> "an act of defiance" against terrorism and urged the world leaders gathered there to agree to an ambitious deal to combat global warming. <a href="">Trump took to Instagram</a> to <a href="">express his disapproval</a>. "While the world is in turmoil and falling apart in so many different ways&mdash;especially with ISIS&mdash;our president is worried about global warming," he said. "What a ridiculous situation."</p> <blockquote class="instagram-media" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-version="7" style=" background:#FFF; border:0; border-radius:3px; box-shadow:0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width:658px; padding:0; width:99.375%; width:-webkit-calc(100% - 2px); width:calc(100% - 2px);"> <div style="padding:8px;"> <div style=" background:#F8F8F8; line-height:0; margin-top:40px; padding:50.0% 0; text-align:center; width:100%;"> <div style=" background:url(); display:block; height:44px; margin:0 auto -44px; position:relative; top:-22px; width:44px;">&nbsp;</div> </div> <p style=" margin:8px 0 0 0; padding:0 4px;"><a href="" style=" color:#000; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:14px; font-style:normal; font-weight:normal; line-height:17px; text-decoration:none; word-wrap:break-word;" target="_blank">What is Obama thinking?</a></p> <p style=" color:#c9c8cd; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:14px; line-height:17px; margin-bottom:0; margin-top:8px; overflow:hidden; padding:8px 0 7px; text-align:center; text-overflow:ellipsis; white-space:nowrap;">A video posted by Donald J. Trump (@realdonaldtrump) on <time datetime="2015-12-01T16:12:10+00:00" style=" font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:14px; line-height:17px;">Dec 1, 2015 at 8:12am PST</time></p> </div> </blockquote> <script async defer src="//"></script></dd> <dt>12/30/15</dt> <dd> <p><strong>"A lot of it's a hoax," and "I want to use hair spray." </strong>During a <a href="">campaign speech in Hilton Head</a>, South Carolina, Trump criticized Obama for worrying too much about "the carbon footprint" of the greenhouse gas emissions that are causing climate change&mdash;an issue that Trump proceeded to <a href="">conflate with the hole in the ozone layer</a>. "I want to use hair spray," complained Trump. "They say, 'Don't use hair spray, it's bad for the ozone.' So I'm sitting in this concealed apartment, this concealed unit&hellip;It's sealed, it's beautiful. I don't think anything gets out. And I'm not supposed to be using hair spray?" He then returned to the subject of the climate hoax: "So Obama's talking about all of this with the global warming and the&mdash;a lot of it's a hoax, it's a hoax. I mean, it's a money-making industry, okay? It's a hoax, a lot of it."</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="275" src=";end=2197" width="490"></iframe></p> </dd> <dt>1/24/16</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump says his claim that global warming is a Chinese hoax was a "joke." </strong>At a Democratic debate in January, <a href="">Bernie Sanders criticized Trump</a>, noting the real estate mogul "believes that climate change is a hoax invented by the Chinese." Trump responded the next day on Fox News, suggesting that his <a href="">infamous 2012 tweet</a> was a joke. "I think the climate change is just a very, very expensive form of tax," <a href="">said Trump, according to <em>PolitiFact</em></a><em>.</em> "A lot of people are making a lot of money&hellip;And I often joke that this is done for the benefit of China. Obviously, I joke. But this is done for the benefit of China, because China does not do anything to help climate change. They burn everything you could burn; they couldn't care less. They have very&mdash;you know, their standards are nothing. But they&mdash;in the meantime, they can undercut us on price. So it's very hard on our business."</p> </dd> <dt>May 2016</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump wants to build a sea wall to protect his resort from global warming. </strong><a href=""><em>Politico </em>reported</a> that one of Trump's golf clubs asked officials in County Clare, Ireland, to approve construction of a sea wall to guard against the dangers of sea level rise and "more frequent storm events." According to an environmental impact statement submitted with the application, "If the predictions of an increase in sea level rise as a result of global warming prove correct&hellip;it is likely that there will be a corresponding increase in coastal erosion rates&hellip;In our view, it could reasonably be expected that the rate of sea level rise might become twice of that presently occurring."</p> </dd> <dt>5/5/16</dt> <dd> <p><strong>"Trump digs coal."</strong> Shortly after clinching the GOP nomination, Trump traveled to West Virginia, where he was <a href="">endorsed by the West Virginia Coal Association</a>. At a <a href="">rally in Charleston</a>, Trump pointed to signs being waved in the crowd. "I see over here: 'Trump digs coal,'" he said. "That's true. I do." Trump promised to bring back coal mining jobs by repealing Obama's "ridiculous rules and regulations."</p> <div class="inline inline-left" style="display: table; width: 1%"><img alt="Trump Digs Coal" class="image" src="/files/trump-digs-coal-wv630.jpg"><div class="caption"><strong>Coal miners wave signs at Trump's May 5 rally in Charleston, West Virginia. </strong>Steve Helber/AP</div> </div> </dd> <dt>5/26/16</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump pledges to "cancel" the Paris climate agreement.</strong> In a major speech on energy policy, <a href="">Trump said that during his first 100 days in office</a>, he would "rescind all the job-destroying Obama executive actions including" his landmark climate regulations, "cancel the Paris Climate Agreement," and "stop all payments of US tax dollars to UN global warming programs."</p> </dd> <dt>7/26/16</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump says he "probably" called climate change a "hoax."</strong> In a remarkably odd exchange on Fox News, Bill O'Reilly asked Trump whether it was "true" that he had "called climate change a hoax." Trump replied that he "might have" done so following the <a href="">release of the ClimateGate emails</a>. "Yeah, I probably did," he added. "I see what's going on." Trump went on to say that fossil fuels "could have a minor impact" on the climate but "nothing [compared] to what they're talking about."</p> <script type="text/javascript" src=";w=450&amp;h=253"></script><noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href=""></a></noscript></dd> <dt>9/26/16</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump picks leading climate skeptic to run the EPA transition. </strong>Hours before Trump's first debate with Hillary Clinton, <a href="">word leaked</a> that he had chosen Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute to lead his transition efforts at the Environmental Protection Agency. Ebell has a long history of opposing efforts to fight climate change; he's even <a href=";">accused climate scientists</a> of "manipulating and falsifying the data." <a href="">As we reported</a>, "Ebell has called&hellip;Obama's Clean Power Plan 'illegal' and the Paris Climate Accord a 'usurpation of the Senate's authority.' Any small increase in global temperatures, he has said, is 'nothing to worry about.'"</p> </dd> <dt>9/26/16</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump denies saying climate change is a Chinese hoax.</strong> During the first debate, Clinton noted that Trump "thinks that climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese." In response, <a href="">Trump simply lied</a>. "I did not, I did not," he said. "I do not say that." Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway later attempted to clarify his position, <a href="">telling the <em>Huffington Post</em></a>, "What he has said is, he believes [climate change] is naturally occurring and is not all man-made."</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="275" src="" width="490"></iframe></p> </dd> <dt>11/23/16</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump has "open mind" on Paris agreement but still thinks scientists are misleading us.</strong> <a href="">In an interview with the <em>New York Times</em></a> two weeks after his victory, Trump made a number of confusing and contradictory statements about climate science and policy. Asked if he still planned to pull out of the Paris agreement, Trump said, "I have an open mind to it. We're going to look very carefully." He conceded that there is "some connectivity" between humans and climate change," adding, "It depends on how much. It also depends on how much it's going to cost our companies." He claimed that the "hottest day ever" <a href="">was in 1898</a>. He said climate is "a very complex subject. I'm not sure anybody is ever going to really know." He once again invoked ClimateGate, declaring, "They say they have science on one side but then they also have those horrible emails that were sent between the scientists." And, apparently in contrast to his request to build a sea wall in Ireland, Trump even speculated that sea level rise would actually <em>improve </em>the <a href="">Trump National Doral</a> golf course in Florida. (He may be <a href="">wrong</a> about that.)</p> </dd> <dt>11/27/16</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Trump's "default position" is that climate change "is a bunch of bunk." </strong>Following Trump's confusing <a href=""><em>New York Times </em>interview</a>, incoming White House chief of staff Reince Priebus sought to reassure supporters that the president-elect is, in fact, a climate change denier. "As far as this issue on climate change, the only thing he was saying, after being asked a few questions about it, is, 'Look, I'll have an open mind about it,'" Priebus explained on Fox. "But he has his default position, which is that most of it is a bunch of bunk. But he'll have an open mind and listen to people."</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="275" src="" width="490"></iframe></p> </dd> <dt>12/1/16</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Ivanka Trump "wants to make climate change&hellip;one of her signature issues." </strong>According to <em>Politico</em>, a "source close to" Trump's daughter Ivanka said the first daughter "wants to make climate change&mdash;which her father has called a hoax perpetuated by the Chinese&mdash;one of her signature issues&hellip;The source said Ivanka is in the early stages of exploring how to use her spotlight to speak out on the issue."</p> </dd> <dt>12/5/16</dt> <dd> <p><strong>Donald and Ivanka Trump meet with Al Gore.</strong></p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Ivanka Trump will meet today with Al Gore! to talk climate change today, the transition announces.</p> &mdash; Michael D. Shear (@shearm) <a href="">December 5, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Former Vice President Al Gore walks through Trump Tower lobby to meet with Ivanka Trump on climate change <a href=""></a></p> &mdash; Jonathan Lemire (@JonLemire) <a href="">December 5, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Climate change activist Al Gore just had 'an extremely interesting conversation' with Trump <a href=""></a></p> &mdash; Chris Mooney (@chriscmooney) <a href="">December 5, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script></dd> </dl><p><em>This story has been updated. Natalie Schreyer contributed to this article.</em></p></body></html> Environment Climate Change Climate Desk Donald Trump Energy Science Top Stories Mon, 05 Dec 2016 11:00:11 +0000 Jeremy Schulman 320386 at A Running List of Climate Change Deniers Joining the Trump Administration <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" ""> <html><body><p>Donald Trump is a global warming denier. He wants to "cancel" the Paris climate agreement and repeal the Clean Power Plan&mdash;the twin pillars of President Barack Obama's efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions. He's even promised to revive the coal industry, <a href="" target="_blank">against all odds</a>.</p> <p>But Trump won't be able to do these things all by himself. To fulfill his campaign promises and reverse the steps of his predecessor in the fight against warming, he's going to need an entire administration of like-minded people. Environmental officials who reject climate science. National security officials who dismiss concerns that climate change will destabilize the world. Diplomats who oppose international climate agreements. Department heads who want to drill, baby, drill.</p> <p>Here's a list of Trump appointees and possible appointees who deny climate change or who oppose or want to roll back efforts to deal with it. We'll update the list as the Trump transition continues. Be afraid.</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Donald Trump</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position: </strong>President</p> <p><strong>Previously: </strong>Steak salesman</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change:</strong></p> <ul><li><em>We're going to rescind all the job-destroying Obama executive actions including the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the US rule.</em></li> <li><em>We're going to save the coal industry and other industries threatened by Hillary Clinton's extremist agenda.</em></li> <li><em>I'm going to ask Trans Canada to renew its permit application for the Keystone Pipeline.</em></li> <li><em>We're going to lift moratoriums on energy production in federal areas</em></li> <li><em>We're going to revoke policies that impose unwarranted restrictions on new drilling technologies. These technologies create millions of jobs with a smaller footprint than ever before.</em></li> <li><em>We're going to cancel the Paris Climate Agreement and stop all payments of US tax dollars to UN global warming programs. [Trump campaign website, accessed <a href="" target="_blank">11/16/16</a>]</em></li> </ul><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">November 6, 2012</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Mike Pence</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position: </strong>Vice president</p> <p><strong>Currently: </strong>Indiana Governor</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change:</strong> "Donald Trump and I have a plan to get this economy moving again&hellip;by lowering taxes across the board for working families, small businesses and family farms, ending the war on coal that is hurting jobs and hurting this economy even here in Virginia, repealing Obamacare lock, stock, and barrel, and repealing all of the executive orders that Barack Obama has signed that are stifling economic growth in this economy." [Vice Presidential debate, <a href="" target="_blank">10/5/16</a>]</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="473" src="" width="630"></iframe></p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Stephen Bannon</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position:</strong> Chief strategist and senior counselor</p> <p><strong>Previously: </strong>Trump campaign CEO; chairman of Breitbart News</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>"Do you agree with the pope and President Obama that [climate change] is absolutely a path to global suicide, if specific deals are not cut in Paris [at the international climate negotiations], versus focusing on radical Islam?" [<em>Breitbart News Daily</em> via the <em>Washington Post</em>, <a href=";tid=ss_tw" target="_blank">12/1/15</a>]</p> <p>"The pope&hellip;has kind of fallen into this hysteria&hellip;Here you have the pope saying the world's near suicide if something doesn't happen in Paris." [<em>Breitbart</em><em> News Daily</em> via <a href="" target="_blank">Media Matters for America</a>, <a href="" target="_blank">12/2/15</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Ken Blackwell</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position: </strong>Head of transition team for domestic issues</p> <p><strong>Previously: </strong>Ohio secretary of state</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>"Another false environmentalist narrative is the global warming hoax. A few decades back, environmentalist "scientists" started devising computer models that predicted man-made calamity&mdash;Manhattan submerged by rising Atlantic waters&mdash;within 10 or 15 years ago. It turns out the models were rigged, the data were falsified and, in fact, there has been no measurable warming for nearly 20 years. Most troubling of all, the lying scientists colluded to ruin the careers of honest scientists who tried to tell the truth." [<em>Washington Times</em>, <a href="" target="_blank">4/30/15</a>]<br> &nbsp;</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Ben Carson</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position: </strong>Secretary of Housing and Urban Development nominee</p> <p><strong>Previously: </strong>Surgeon</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>Under the Obama administration, HUD has worked to incorporate climate change adaptation into its work. As the department noted in a <a href="" target="_blank">2014 report</a>, "The risk posed by climate change on HUD&rsquo;s programs and operations, the built environment HUD funds, and populations HUD serves is high." Carson's views on global warming are a bit confusing. As a presidential candidate, <a href="" target="_blank">he called for</a> a dramatic increase in clean energy, but he also <a href="" target="_blank">told the <em>San Francisco Chronicle</em></a>, "There is no overwhelming science that the things that are going on are man-caused and not naturally caused."<br> &nbsp;</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Myron Ebell</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position: </strong>Head of EPA transition team</p> <p><strong>Currently: </strong><a href="" target="_blank">Director of the Center for Energy and Environment</a> at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a DC think tank that promotes "limited government, free enterprise, and individual liberty."</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>Ebell, a high-profile climate skeptic, has <a href=";" target="_blank">accused climate scientists</a> of "manipulating and falsifying the data." The <a href="" target="_blank"><em>New York Times </em>describes Ebell</a> as "one of the most vocal opponents" of the EPA's Clean Power Plan.<br> &nbsp;</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Michael Flynn</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position: </strong>National security adviser</p> <p><strong>Previously: </strong>Army lieutenant general and director of the Defense Intelligence Agency</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>"And here we have the President of the United States up in Canada talking about climate change. I mean, God, we just had the largest attack...on our own soil in Orlando. Why aren't we talking about that? Who is talking about that? I mean, Fort Hood, Chattanooga, Boston, people forget about 9/11!" [Fox News, <a href="" target="_blank">6/29/16</a>]<br> &nbsp;</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Gov. Nikki Haley (S.C.)</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position: </strong>UN ambassador nominee</p> <p><strong>Currently: </strong>South Carolina governor</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>"'[The Clean Power Plan] is exactly what we don't need,' the governor said after addressing a gathering of the SC Electric Cooperatives at Wild Dunes Resort on the Isle of Palms. 'This is exactly what hurts us. You can't mandate utility companies which, in turn, raises the cost of power. That's what's going to keep jobs away. That's what's going to keep companies away.' She added that officials in Washington 'stay out of the way.'&hellip;'We need to be able to do our jobs and continue to recruit companies and recruit jobs without additional mandates,' Haley said." [The <em>Post and Courier</em>, 6/3/14]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Mike Pompeo</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position: </strong>CIA director nominee</p> <p><strong>Currently: </strong>Congressional representative from Kansas</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>"President Obama has called climate change the biggest national security threat of our lifetime, but he is horribly wrong. His unwillingness to acknowledge the true threat posed by Islamic extremism will get Americans killed. His perverse fixation on achieving his economically harmful environmental agenda instead of defeating the true threats facing the world shows just how out of sync his priorities are with Kansans and the American people." [Pompeo press release, <a href="" target="_blank">11/30/15</a>]<br> &nbsp;</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Rick Perry</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position:</strong> Secretary of Energy nominee</p> <p><strong>Previously:</strong> Governor of Texas</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>"I do believe that the issue of global warming has been politicized. I think that there are a substantial number of scientists who have manipulated data so that they will have dollars rolling into their projects. And I think we are seeing almost weekly, or even daily, scientists who are coming forward and questioning the original idea that manmade global warming is what is causing the climate to change&hellip;The cost to the country and to the world of implementing these anti-carbon programs is in the billions, if not trillions, of dollars at the end of the day. And I don't think, from my perspective, that I want America to be engaged in spending that much money on still a scientific theory that has not been proven and, from my perspective, is more and more being put into question." [Perry campaign speech via CBS News, <a href="" target="_blank">8/17/11</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Reince Priebus</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position: </strong>Chief of staff</p> <p><strong>Currently: </strong>Republican National Committee chairman</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>"Democrats tell us they understand the world, but then they call climate change, not radical Islamic terrorism, the greatest threat to national security. Look, I think we all care about our planet, but melting icebergs aren't beheading Christians in the Middle East." [CPAC speech, <a href="" target="_blank">2/27/15</a>]</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Obama's war on <a href="">#energy</a> kills jobs and raises costs. <a href=""></a> Stop the war on <a href="">#coal</a>. <a href=""></a></p> &mdash; Reince Priebus (@Reince) <a href="">January 14, 2015</a><br><br> &nbsp;</blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><h3 class="subhed"><strong>Scott Pruitt</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position: </strong>EPA administrator nominee</p> <p><strong>Currently: </strong>Oklahoma attorney general</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change:</strong> "The EPA does not possess the authority under the Clean Air Act to accomplish what it proposes in the unlawful Clean Power Plan. The EPA is ignoring the authority granted by Congress to states to regulate power plant emissions at their source. The Clean Power Plan is an unlawful attempt to expand federal bureaucrats' authority over states' energy economies in order to shutter coal-fired power plants and eventually other sources of fossil-fuel generated electricity." [Pruitt press release, <a href=";article_id=16092" target="_blank">7/1/15</a>]</p> <p>"Scientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of global warming and its connection to the actions of mankind. That debate should be encouraged&mdash;in classrooms, public forums, and the halls of Congress." [Pruitt <em>National Review </em>op-ed, <a href="" target="_blank">5/17/16</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Thomas Pyle</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position:</strong> Head of Energy department transition team</p> <p><strong>Currently:</strong> President of the Institute for Energy Research and the American Energy Alliance, related groups that have received fossil fuel industry funding</p> <p><strong>Previously:</strong> Koch Industries lobbyist</p> <p style=""><strong>Views on climate change:</strong> As <a href="" target="_blank">described by the <em>Los Angeles Times</em></a>, "For years,&nbsp;Pyle has led&nbsp;a coordinated national assault on renewable power&hellip;Pyle's groups&hellip;reject the findings of most mainstream scientists regarding climate change. They specifically&nbsp;dismiss as overblown the&nbsp;warnings from scores of published academics that a global temperature rise of more than 2 degrees Celsius, or 3.6 Fahrenheit,&nbsp;would be devastating. Preventing&nbsp;a rise in&nbsp;temperatures of that scale&nbsp;is at the root of the global climate agreement the United States and 195 other countries signed last year in Paris. Pyle's groups are pushing for Trump to make good on his vow to scrap that deal." As <a href="" target="_blank"><em>Bloomberg</em> first revealed</a>, Trump's transition team recently asked the Energy Department "to list employees and contractors&nbsp;who attended United Nations climate meetings, along with those who helped develop the Obama administration's social cost of carbon metrics, used to estimate and justify the climate benefits of new rules." According to Bloomberg, sources at the agency said staffers were "unsettled" by the request. (The department has since <a href="" target="_blank">declined</a> to produce the list of names.)</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Jeff Sessions</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position: </strong>Attorney general nominee</p> <p><strong>Currently:</strong> US senator representing Alabama</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>"The balloon and satellite data track each other almost exactly, and it shows almost no warming. So what we're talking about is: The predictions aren't coming true." [<em>Washington Watch</em> via Right Wing Watch, <a href="" target="_blank">11/30/15</a>]<br> &nbsp;</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Rex Tillerson</strong></h3> <p><strong>Possible positions:</strong> Secretary of State nominee</p> <p><strong>Currently: Exxon Mobil CEO</strong></p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>As we <a href="" target="_blank">previously noted</a>, "Tillerson, whose consideration for the role only became public in recent days, has long had a contentious relationship with climate change. His company, for which he has worked for his entire career, has been accused of covering up research and <a href="" target="_blank">misleading</a> the public about climate change since the 1970s, according to two groundbreaking investigations by <em><a href="" target="_blank">InsideClimateNews</a></em> and the <em><a href="" target="_blank">Los Angeles Times</a></em>. The investigation led several attorneys general to launch a fraud <a href="" target="_blank">inquiry</a> into the company. Tillerson <a href="" target="_blank">recently</a> acknowledged that climate change has 'real' and 'serious' risks but has previously <a href="" target="_blank">downplayed</a> its effects.</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Ryan Zinke</strong></h3> <p><strong>Position:</strong> Secretary of Interior nominee</p> <p><strong>Currently: </strong>Congressman representing Montana</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>"'[Climate change is] not a hoax, but it's not proven science either,' Zinke said. 'But you don't dismantle America's power and energy on a maybe. We need to be energy independent first. We need to do it better, which we can, but it is not a settled science.'" [<em>Billings Gazette</em>, <a href="" target="_blank">10/4/14</a>]</p> <hr><h2 class="subhed rtecenter">Other Possible appointments</h2> <p>&nbsp;</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Eric Bolling, Fox News host</strong></h3> <p><strong>Possible position: </strong>"A position&hellip;in the Department of Commerce," according to <em><a href="" target="_blank">Politico</a>.</em> Among other things, Commerce oversees the <a href="" target="_blank">National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration</a>, which is one of the country's most important bodies for researching climate science.</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>Bolling, a <a href="" target="_blank">former crude oil trader</a> on the New York Mercantile Exchange, <a href="" target="_blank">pointed out last year</a> that "there's a great tweet that's going around the internet: When Al Gore was born, there were 130,000 glaciers, and now there are only 130,000 glaciers." Here's how he explained <a href="" target="_blank">his views on climate science</a> in 2014: "I have two questions for you. Number one: If a&hellip;meteorologist can't tell us if it's going to rain tomorrow or be, you know, 20 degrees or or 50 degrees, how can they tell us what it's going to be 2,100 years from now&mdash;that this whole global warming thing, what we're doing now, is going to affect then? And the other thing is: Even if some of the carbon we're emitting&hellip;is manmade, how much is it? And is it really the reason why the globe is increasing in temperature&mdash;if it is&mdash;every so slightly? I mean, there's so many questions. The hoax is that if a meteorologist were to say, or a weather scientist were to say, that 'yeah, this is normal&mdash;it's weather, it's cold, it's hot, it's normal,' then they wouldn't get funded. All these big projects wouldn't be funded."</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>John Bolton, former UN ambassador</strong></h3> <p><strong>Possible position: </strong>Deputy Secretary of State</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change:</strong> "Obama can achieve his climate change legacy only through delicate negotiations with Congress. His poor relations with the House and Senate, especially on foreign policy, appear to render success unlikely. Obama may rely on his unilateral authority to join a world climate pact [in Paris], but without Congress his most important promises will be empty ones whose fate will be left to his successor." [<em>Los Angeles Times</em>, <a href="" target="_blank">12/1/15</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas)</strong></h3> <p><strong>Possible positions: </strong><a href="" target="_blank">US Supreme Court justice</a></p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>"If you are a&hellip;liberal politician who wants government power, if that is your driving urge&mdash;government power over the American citizenry&mdash;then climate change is the perfect pseudoscientific theory. Why is that? Because it can never be disproven&hellip;The climate is always changing. It has been changing from the beginning of time." [Cruz campaign event via the <em>Washington Post</em>, <a href="" target="_blank">2/3/16</a>]</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="381" mozallowfullscreen="" scrolling="no" src="" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="630"></iframe></p> <h3 class="subhed"><span class="section-lead">Newt Gingrich, former speaker of the house </span></h3> <p><strong>Possible position:</strong> "I want to be the senior planner for the entire federal government, and I want a letter from you that says Newt Gingrich is authorized to go to any program in any department, examine it and report directly to the president." [<em>Hill</em>, <a href=";utm_medium=website&amp;utm_content=link" target="_blank">7/20/16</a>]</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change: </strong>Gingrich used to be in favor of taking action on climate change, <a href="" target="_blank">even appearing in an ad on the subject</a> with Nancy Pelosi and <a href="" target="_blank">voicing support</a> for a cap-and-trade carbon pricing system. He later called his participation in the ad "<a href="" target="_blank">dumb</a>" and <a href="" target="_blank">opposed the cap-and-trade bill</a> backed by Obama in 2009. Last year, <a href="" target="_blank"><em>Politico </em>reported</a> that Gingrich "said it should not be a given for politicians to assume that climate change is man-made. 'I don't think it should be a given. The truth is, I think we don't know. There&rsquo;s a difference between political science and science,' he said."</p> <h3 class="subhed"><br><strong>Laura Ingraham, radio host</strong></h3> <p><strong>Possible positions: </strong>Press secretary</p> <p><strong>Views on climate change:</strong> "This entire effort [the Paris climate negotiations] is about setting up global rules of governance. Rules that will, if instituted&mdash;which we know they won't be&mdash;but if ever instituted would mean that we have less control over our own destiny as a country than we do today. Because Congress will have limited ability to change any treaty. Again, I don't think it's going to happen. But if these rules should go into place, we should expect the same compliance from countries like China that we get from China in deals like the World Trade Organization and the World Trade Organization Treaty. So, if people want less sovereignty in the United States, less independence, less oversight, our congressional authority to be meaningful, then we should all be excited about what's going on with 150 leaders in Paris. But this has nothing to do with terrorism. It has everything to do with bringing America's economy down, hurting the fossil fuel industry, etc., etc.&mdash;one of the few sectors that's actually growing jobs and still paying people decent wages in the United States. So forgive me if I'm not all hot and bothered by the Paris events." [Fox News via Media Matters, <a href="" target="_blank">12/1/15</a>]</p> <p><em>This article will be updated throughout the transition period.</em></p></body></html> Environment Climate Change Climate Desk Donald Trump Fri, 18 Nov 2016 19:46:17 +0000 Jeremy Schulman 319406 at 11 Democrats Who Could Defeat President Trump in 2020 <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" ""> <html><body><p>It's official. Donald Trump won.</p> <p>The next presidential election is four years away. It's hard to imagine Hillary Clinton making a third attempt at the White House. Joe Biden will be 77 years old. Bernie Sanders will be 79. But there are plenty of other Democrats who might take a shot, and if history is any guide, they could start <a href="" target="_blank">jumping into the race</a> as early as 2018. So here, in no particular order, is our very early list of the Democrats who might make a run:</p> <h3 class="subhed">Elizabeth Warren</h3> <div class="inline inline-center" style="display: table; width: 1%"><img alt="Elizabeth Warren" class="image" src="/files/2020warren630.jpg"><div class="caption">Ira Chaplain/ZUMA</div> </div> <p>An obvious place to start. Warren, an anti-Wall Street crusader, has an impressive following among progressives and a knack for generating huge publicity online. Plus, the Massachusetts senator <a href="" target="_blank">loves going after Trump</a>:</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Let&rsquo;s be honest - <a href="">@realDonaldTrump</a> is a loser. Count all his failed businesses. See how he cheated people w/ scams like Trump U.</p> &mdash; Elizabeth Warren (@elizabethforma) <a href="">March 21, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><h3 class="subhed">Tim Kaine</h3> <div class="inline inline-center" style="display: table; width: 1%"><img alt="Tim Kaine" class="image" src="/files/timkaine630.jpg"><div class="caption">Maurice Ross/ZUMA</div> </div> <p>Despite some criticism of his debate performance, the Democrats' 2016 VP candidate is emerging from the campaign relatively unscathed. The Virginia senator <a href="" target="_blank">remains reasonably popular</a> in his home state, where he previously served as governor. He has a <a href="" target="_blank">quietly impressive progressive record</a>, and&mdash;until last night&mdash;he'd never lost a race.</p> <h3 class="subhed">Amy Klobuchar</h3> <div class="inline inline-center" style="display: table; width: 1%"><img alt="Amy Klobuchar" class="image" src="/files/2020klobuchar630.jpg"><div class="caption"><a href="" target="_blank">Stuart Isett/Fortune Most Powerful</a>/Flickr</div> </div> <p>The Minnesota senator has <a href="" target="_blank">sky-high approval ratings</a>. She's already been the <a href="" target="_blank">subject of presidential speculation</a>. She <a href="" target="_blank">told the <em>Star Tribune </em></a>last year that she's given some thought to running for governor or the White House.</p> <h3 class="subhed">Kirsten Gillibrand</h3> <div class="inline inline-center" style="display: table; width: 1%"><img alt="Kirsten Gillibrand" class="image" src="/files/2020Gillibrand630.jpg"><div class="caption">Mike Segar/Reuters via ZUMA</div> </div> <p>After Clinton became secretary of state, Gillibrand replaced her as New York's junior senator. Will Gillibrand succeed Clinton as the party's presidential nominee, too?</p> <h3 class="subhed">Kamala Harris</h3> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="354" src="" width="630"></iframe></p> <p>The California attorney general was elected to the US Senate on Tuesday. If she decides to take on Trump, she'll have served in federal office for only a couple of years&mdash;which is exactly how long Barack Obama served in the Senate before launching his White House bid. In a headline last year, the <em>Washington Post </em>asked, "<a href="" target="_blank">Is Kamala Harris the next Barack Obama?</a>"</p> <h3 class="subhed">Tammy Duckworth</h3> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="354" src="" width="630"></iframe></p> <p>After two years as assistant secretary of veterans affairs and two terms representing her Illinois district in Congress, Duckworth defeated GOP Sen. Mark Kirk on Tuesday. An Iraq War veteran, Duckworth was awarded the Purple Heart after losing both her legs in combat. Following two consecutive Democratic nominees who made history, the party could select a third by tapping the first Asian American major-party nominee.</p> <h3 class="subhed">Cory Booker</h3> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="354" src="" width="630"></iframe></p> <p>The New Jersey senator and former Newark mayor has a reputation as a political reformer. His first attempt to run for mayor against an entrenched political machine is chronicled in the documentary <em><a href="" target="_blank">Street Fight</a></em>.<em> </em>He once <a href="" target="_blank">saved a woman from a burning building</a>.</p> <h3 class="subhed">Martin O'Malley</h3> <div class="inline inline-center" style="display: table; width: 1%"><img alt="Martin O'Malley" class="image" src="/files/2020omalley630.jpg"><div class="caption"><a href="" target="_blank">Karen Murphy</a>/Flickr</div> </div> <p>The former Maryland governor's style&mdash;a bland mix of liberalism and technocratic competence&mdash;never really caught on this time around. But after a couple of years of Trump, who knows?</p> <h3 class="subhed">Chris Murphy</h3> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="354" src="" width="630"></iframe></p> <p>The Connecticut senator got <a href="" target="_blank">a bit of buzz</a> earlier this year as a possible running mate for Clinton. He's perhaps best known for his <a href="" target="_blank">outspoken gun control advocacy</a> in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre in his state. In June, he received substantial media attention when he <a href="" target="_blank">spearheaded a 15-hour filibuster</a> in support of firearms legislation.</p> <h3 class="subhed">John Hickenlooper</h3> <div class="inline inline-center" style="display: table; width: 1%"><img alt="John Hickenlooper" class="image" src="/files/630hickenlooper2020.jpg"><div class="caption"><a href="" target="_blank">Stuart Isett/Fortune Brainstorm Tech</a>/Flickr</div> </div> <p>The Colorado governor is <a href="" target="_blank">generally disliked by environmentalists</a> because of his coziness with the state's fracking industry. Still, his name was floated this year as a possible VP pick, and he's a <a href="" target="_blank">popular politician</a> in a swing state.</p> <h3 class="subhed">Michelle Obama</h3> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="354" src="" width="630"></iframe></p> <p>Former Barack Obama adviser David Axelrod <a href="" target="_blank">recently declared</a> that he "would bet everything" he owns that Michelle Obama won't run for office. But the popular first lady <a href="" target="_blank">clearly has no love for Trump</a>, and if she did choose to seek the nomination, it's hard to imagine another Democrat beating her. Sure, she's never held an elected office of her own&mdash;but you know who else hasn't?</p> <p><em>This article was revised on November 9 to reflect election results.</em></p></body></html> Politics 2016 Elections Elections elizabeth warren Martin O'Malley Tue, 08 Nov 2016 22:21:35 +0000 Jeremy Schulman 318386 at Here Are the Races to Watch if You Care About Global Warming <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" ""> <html><body><p>The climate <a href="" target="_blank">didn't get much attention</a> in this year's debates, but Tuesday's election will still have major consequences for the fight against global warming. Donald Trump thinks climate change is a <a href="" target="_blank">hoax</a>; he's pledged to <a href="" target="_blank">withdraw</a> from the historic Paris climate accord and <a href="" target="_blank">to repeal President Barack Obama's Clean Power Plan</a>, which is intended to cut greenhouse gas emissions from coal plants. Hillary Clinton has said she will continue Obama's climate legacy and has called for installing <a href="" target="_blank">half a billion solar panels</a> by the end of her first term.</p> <p>The debate isn't restricted to the top of the ticket; there are a number of state races that will play a key role in determining US climate policy, along with a handful of ballot initiatives covering everything from rooftop solar to a proposed carbon tax. The situation in each state is unique. Some races&mdash;New Hampshire's Senate contest, for instance&mdash;feature two candidates who want to act on climate change. Others, such as West Virginia's gubernatorial election, feature two candidates who are champions of the coal industry. The impacts of climate change also vary from state to state: Alaska faces wildfires and melting permafrost; Florida is confronting rising seas; Iowa could be hit with falling corn yields. And of course, the voters in each state are different, too. Coloradans overwhelmingly acknowledge that humans are warming the planet. Their neighbors in Utah: not so much.</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="760" id="datawrapper-chart-ej1ah" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" src="//" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" width="100%"></iframe><script type="text/javascript">"undefined"==typeof window.datawrapper&&(window.datawrapper={}),window.datawrapper["ej1ah"]={},window.datawrapper["ej1ah"].embedDeltas={"100":1167,"200":892,"300":803,"400":772,"500":731,"600":731,"700":717,"800":700,"900":700,"1000":700},window.datawrapper["ej1ah"].iframe=document.getElementById("datawrapper-chart-ej1ah"),window.datawrapper["ej1ah"]["ej1ah"].embedDeltas[Math.min(1e3,Math.max(100*Math.floor(window.datawrapper["ej1ah"].iframe.offsetWidth/100),100))]+"px",window.addEventListener("message",function(a){if("undefined"!=typeof["datawrapper-height"])for(var b in["datawrapper-height"])"ej1ah"==b&&(window.datawrapper["ej1ah"]["datawrapper-height"][b]+"px")});</script>Below, we've listed every state with a competitive presidential, Senate, or gubernatorial race&mdash;as well as ones that are voting on climate-related initiatives. And we've included a few key facts: namely, where the candidates stand on climate; the specific consequences of warming in each state; and the percentage of each state's residents who are climate science deniers (<a href="" target="_blank">according to research</a> from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication). One final note: For the sake of consistency, we included every Senate and gubernatorial race that the <a href="" target="_blank">Cook Political Report</a> rates as "toss up," "lean," or "likely." Many of these elections will probably be close, but a few (see: Alaska's Senate race) almost certainly won't be.</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Alaska&nbsp; </strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "Alaska has warmed twice as fast as the rest of the nation, bringing widespread impacts. Sea ice is rapidly receding and glaciers are shrinking. Thawing permafrost is leading to more wildfire, and affecting infrastructure and wildlife habitat. Rising ocean temperatures and acidification will alter valuable marine fisheries." [National Climate Assessment, <a href="">2014</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 47%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> No.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p>Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R): "I do believe that our climate is changing. I don't agree that all the changes are necessarily due solely to human activity." [Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee session, <a href="">1/8/15</a>]</p> <p>Joe Miller (L): "We haven't heard there's man-made global warming." [<em>Fairbanks Daily News-Miner</em>, <a href="">8/22/10</a>]</p> <p>Ray Metcalfe (D): "Every [Alaskan] has witnessed climate change over the past fifty years. Our winters are warmer, our summers are longer, and our Arctic Village shores, once protected by sea ice are eroding. Bold clean energy action is needed to stave off a climate hostile to human life. Unfortunately, Congress is protecting the profits of those opposed to protecting the planet." [Metcalfe Facebook post, <a href="">8/2/16</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Arizona</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "Annual precipitation has decreased in Arizona during the last century, and it may continue to decrease. So soils are likely to be drier, and periods without rain are likely to become longer, making droughts more severe&hellip;Increasing droughts and higher temperatures are likely to affect Arizona's top agricultural products: cattle, dairy, and vegetables." [Environmental Protection Agency, <a href="">August 2016</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 43%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Maybe.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p>Sen. John McCain (R): "I think we need to address greenhouse gas emissions. But I try to get involved in issues where I see a legislative result&hellip;So I just leave the issue alone because I don't see a way through it, and there are certain fundamentals, for example nuke power, that people on the left will never agree with me on. So why should I waste my time when I know the people on the left are going to reject nuclear power?" [<em>Time</em>, <a href="">3/2/14</a>]</p> <p>Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D): "The EPA's [Clean Power Plan] is another example of Washington's lack of understanding when it comes to rural and Western energy issues. I oppose this new rule because it hurts my district, which has four coal-fired plants that power Arizona's big cities, small towns, businesses and residences. These plants also provide good-paying jobs in our tribal and rural regions. The Navajo Generating Station in Page, for example, employs hundreds of people, mostly Native Americans, and provides nearly all of the power for the Central Arizona Project. That means our entire state has a big stake in the energy production and economic stability of these plants. We need to find a balance between protecting our local economies while pursuing the longer-term goal of producing clean, affordable and reliable power. I will not support efforts that kill jobs in my district and lack provisions for responsibly transitioning us toward a clean-energy economy." [Kirkpatrick press release, <a href="" target="_blank">6/2/14</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Colorado</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "Rising temperatures have and will continue to impact the state's resources in a variety of ways, including more rapid snowmelt, longer and more severe droughts, and longer growing seasons&hellip;Moreover, Colorado experiences numerous climate-related disasters, such as [tornadoes], hailstorms, and wildfires, that will continue to occur and may be exacerbated by climate change." [University of Colorado and Colorado State University, <a href="">January 2015</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 41%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Yep.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p>Sen. Michael Bennet (D): "Colorado's economy is already being threatened by unchecked climate change&hellip;[The Clean Power Plan] is an important step toward curbing carbon pollution and addressing climate change." [Bennet press release, <a href=";id=3416" target="_blank">8/3/15</a>]</p> <p>Daryl Glenn, El Paso County commissioner (R):</p> <p style="margin-left:.5in;">Ryan Warner, Colorado Public Radio: To get you on the record, you do not agree with the majority of scientists who say climate change has human causes. Is that correct?</p> <p style="margin-left:.5in;">Glenn: Well that's your assumption. You're bringing an assumption to the table and the premise to your question has me to basically adopt your position and I can't do that without verifiable data.</p> <p style="margin-left:.5in;">Warner: Oh it's not my position. It's that the majority of scientists believe that climate change has a human caused component. Do you concur with them?</p> <p style="margin-left:.5in;">Glenn: Again, you are bringing facts to the particular issue that I don't have, been presented to me. You're saying that the majority of scientists are saying that. That's your statement.</p> <p style="margin-left:.5in;">Warner: Right. Well, that's a fact. Is it a fact that you agree with?</p> <p style="margin-left:.5in;">Glenn: Well that's the fact that you're representing and I don't accept your premise of that question.</p> <p style="margin-left:.5in;">Warner: Do you believe that climate change has human causes?</p> <p style="margin-left:.5in;">Glenn: Well again, I would, I am a data guy, I would want to see the, a verifiable information of that.</p> <p style="margin-left:.5in;">Warner: There's a lot out there. Have you looked at it?</p> <p style="margin-left:.5in;">Glenn: We've looked at a lot of things. We've also looked at that and we've also looked at the economic impact of this policy and how they are disproportionately hurting people when it comes to their livelihood. So that's really where the focus is. We need to make sure we're looking at policies like that that we're looking at both sides of the equation instead of just one. [Colorado Public Radio, <a href="">7/29/16</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Florida</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "There is an imminent threat of increased inland flooding during heavy rain events in low-lying coastal areas such as southeast Florida, where just inches of sea level rise will impair the capacity of stormwater drainage systems to empty into the ocean. Drainage problems are already being experienced in many locations during seasonal high tides, heavy rains, and storm surge events." [National Climate Assessment, <a href="" target="_blank">2014</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 42%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Always.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p>Sen. Marco Rubio (R): "I do not believe that human activity is causing these dramatic changes to our climate the way these scientists are portraying it&hellip;And I do not believe that the laws that they propose we pass will do anything about it&mdash;except, they will destroy our economy." [ABC News, <a href="">5/13/14</a>]</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="354" src="" width="630"></iframe></p> <p>Rep. Patrick Murphy (D): "Everywhere I go in Florida, I see the effects of [climate change]. Sen. Rubio denies science." [WFTV debate via Media Matters, <a href="">10/17/16</a>]</p> <p><strong>On the ballot:</strong></p> <p>Rooftop Solar (Amendment 1): This is a <a href="" target="_blank">confusing initiative that could actually undermine</a> rooftop solar in the Sunshine State. <a href="" target="_blank">As we reported</a> in March, "Amendment 1 was created by an organization with a grassroots-sounding name: Consumers for Smart Solar. In reality, though, the organization is <a href="" target="_blank">financed by the state's major electric</a> utility companies as well as by conservative groups with ties to the Koch brothers&hellip;The amendment says state and local governments have the authority 'to ensure that consumers who do not choose to install solar are not required to subsidize the costs of backup power and electric grid access to those who do.'" That's widely seen as an attack on net metering, the policy requiring utilities to pay consumers for the extra power produced by their solar panels.</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Georgia</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "Sea level is rising more rapidly in Georgia than along most coasts because the land is sinking. If the oceans and atmosphere continue to warm, sea level is likely to rise one to four feet in the next century along the coast of Georgia. Rising sea level submerges wetlands and dry land, erodes beaches, and exacerbates coastal flooding&hellip;[H]urricane wind speeds and rainfall rates are likely to increase as the climate continues to warm. Whether or not storms become more intense, coastal homes and infrastructure will flood more often as sea level rises, because storm surges will become higher as well." [EPA, <a href="" target="_blank">August 20</a><a href="">16</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 45%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Apparently so.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p><em>(Goes to a runoff if no one wins a majority)</em></p> <p>Sen. Johnny Isakson (R): "I've done everything I can as a United States Senator to educate myself on the carbon issue and the climate change issue. Seven years ago I went with Sen. Boxer from California to Disko Bay in Greenland with Dr. [Richard] Alley who's the leading glaciologist in the world to study for a while what he says about the possibility of carbon being the cause of climate change. And there are mixed reviews on that; there's mixed scientific evidence on that." [<em>Atlanta Journal Constitution</em>, <a href="">3/18/15</a>]</p> <p>Jim Barksdale (D): "Climate change is a reality and if left unchecked, rising ocean tides will harm Georgia's Atlantic coast and threaten our state's robust tourism and shipping industries." [Barksdale campaign website, accessed <a href="">10/28/16</a>]</p> <p>Allen Buckley (L): "Change the gas tax to be an energy tax with the following general concept&mdash;the cleaner a fuel is, the less tax it bears and the dirtier a fuel is, the more tax it bears. For example, the current federal excise tax is 18.4 cents per gallon of gasoline. If, in the future, one-third of our vehicles run on gasoline, one-third run on batteries and one-third run on hydrogen, and the respective 'well to wheels' carbon dioxide output is 6, 3 and 1, then the 18.4 cent excise tax should be allocated so that gasoline bears 33.1 cents per gallon, battery-powered cars pay 16.6 cents per gallon in gasoline-equivalent terms and hydrogen vehicles pay 5.5 cents per gallon in gasoline-equivalent terms&hellip;Concerning global warming, while I believe it is happening, the degree to which it is man made is very hard to gauge." [Buckley campaign website, accessed <a href="">10/28/16]</a></p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Illinois</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change: </strong>"Changing climate is likely to increase the frequency of floods in Illinois. Over the last half century, average annual precipitation in most of the Midwest has increased by 5 to 10 percent. But rainfall during the four wettest days of the year has increased about 35 percent, and the amount of water flowing in most streams during the worst flood of the year has increased by more than 20 percent. During the next century, spring rainfall and average precipitation are likely to increase, and severe rainstorms are likely to intensify. Each of these factors will tend to further increase the risk of flooding&hellip;In Lake Michigan, changing climate is likely to harm water quality. Warmer water tends to cause more algal blooms, which can be unsightly, harm fish, and degrade water quality." [EPA, <a href="">Aug. 2016</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 39%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> No.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p>Sen. Mark Kirk (R): "I have voted that climate change is happening and it's also caused by man&hellip;The best thing that we can do on climate change is make sure that China converts to a more nuclear future to limit those&mdash;that one coal-burning plant coming on a week that we expect&mdash;that would really help the planet&hellip;We need to work cooperatively with developing countries to make sure they emit less." [WICS debate via Media Matters, <a href="">10/27/16</a>]</p> <p>Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D): "Of course climate change is real. And I support an all-of-the-above approach attacking climate change&mdash;everything from moving our country towards being carbon-neutral, moving our country towards clean energy&hellip;My opponent has not been consistent&hellip;Depending on whether or not he's up for election...he's either voted for the Clean Power Plan or against the Clean Power Plan. He's switched back and forth." [WICS debate via Media Matters, <a href="">10/27/16</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Indiana</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "Changing the climate is likely to increase the frequency of floods in Indiana&hellip;During the next century, spring rainfall and average precipitation are likely to increase, and severe rainstorms are likely to intensify. Each of these factors will tend to further increase the risk of flooding...Although springtime in Indiana is likely to be wetter, summer droughts are likely to be more severe...Longer frost-free growing seasons and higher concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide would increase yields for some crops during an average year. But increasingly hot summers are likely to reduce yields of corn and possibly soybeans." [EPA, <a href="">August 2016</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 46%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> No.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p>Former Sen. Evan Bayh (D): "Evan Bayh supports Indiana's coal industry, including opposing the EPA's coal rules. Pointing out that the coal industry contributed $2 billion to Indiana's economy, Evan argued that the EPA's rules would put 'tens of thousands' of Hoosier jobs at risk. In the Senate, Evan not only voted twice against cap-and-trade legislation, he signed a letter stating that he would not support any climate change bill that did not protect Indiana jobs." [Bayh campaign website, accessed <a href="">10/28/16</a>]</p> <p>Rep. Todd Young (R): "My mind remains open about the various scientific questions and so forth. We're often told that there is a consensus among scientists, and I've come to discover&mdash;as the number of scientists I've talked to and the number of things I read&mdash;that's not necessarily the case. But I think we need to prepare for the worst, and so I support energy efficiency measures. I think natural gas has been a big part of the solution if in fact we need to reduce man-generated carbon dioxide emissions. And I think any public policy that doesn't account for the fact that most CO2 emissions don't come from the United States, but they come from other countries, is a flawed policy. So let's not unilaterally tax our power, our people, to solve a global problem." [WLKY, <a href="">10/8/14</a>]</p> <p><strong>Gubernatorial race:</strong></p> <p>John Gregg, former Indiana speaker of the House and <a href="">former coal lobbyist</a> (D): "Like my family, I've worked in the coal industry. And I've opposed federal rules impacting coal jobs." [Gregg campaign ad, <a href="">8/11/16</a>]</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="354" src="" width="630"></iframe></p> <p>Lt. Gov Eric Holcomb (R): "[Holcomb will] stand strong against unreasonable Federal EPA rules, like the so-called Clean Power Plan, that continue to lead to higher prices for Hoosiers." [Holcomb campaign website, accessed <a href="">10/28/16</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Iowa</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "[Iowa] will face the highest likely losses of any Midwest state from climate-related commodity crop yield declines. By the end of this century, absent significant adaptation by Iowa farmers, the state could face likely declines in its signature corn crop of 18% to 77%&mdash;a huge hit for a corn industry worth nearly $10 billion." [Risky Business, <a href="">January 2015</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 44%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground? </strong>Yes.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p>Sen. Chuck Grassley (R): "We had global warming between 1940 and 1998. Since then, we haven't had a rise in temperature. That doesn't mean we don't have a problem. If that problem is going to be solved, it ought to be solved by an international treaty." [Iowa Agribusiness Radio Network, <a href="">5/17/14</a>]</p> <p>Former Lt. Governor Patty Judge (D): "Climate change is very real. It is a serious issue it should be treated that way&hellip;It is not just ours here in Iowa or even in the United States. One of the things that we need to do immediately is try to move our self away from petroleum-based or fuels from carbon-based fueling of this country, and, you know, we started doing that here in Iowa and we've been very successful with developing our alternative energy programs." [Iowa Public Radio, <a href="">5/31/16</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Maine</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "Heat waves, more powerful storms, and rising seas are increasingly transforming Maine&mdash;effects that most climate scientists trace to greenhouse gases warming the planet&hellip;Over the past 100 years, temperatures throughout the Northeast have risen by about 2 degrees Fahrenheit&hellip;Precipitation has increased by more than 10 percent, with the worst storms bringing significantly more rain and snow. And sea levels have climbed by a foot. A study by the Gulf of Maine Research Institute this year found that coastal waters are warming at a rate faster than 99 percent of the world's other oceans." [<em>Boston Globe</em>, <a href="">9/21/14</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 42%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground? </strong>Yes. (Maine allocates electoral votes by congressional district, and the<a href=""> 2nd district is competitive</a>.)</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Michigan</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "Changing the climate is likely to harm water quality in Lake Erie and Lake Michigan. Warmer water tends to cause more algal blooms, which can be unsightly, harm fish, and degrade water quality. During August 2014, an algal bloom in Lake Erie prompted the Monroe County Health Department to advise residents in four townships to avoid using tap water for cooking and drinking. Severe storms increase the amount of pollutants that run off from land to water, so the risk of algal blooms will be greater if storms become more severe. Severe rainstorms can also cause sewers to overflow into lakes and rivers, which can threaten beach safety and drinking water supplies." [EPA, <a href="">August 2016</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 43%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Yes.</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Minnesota</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "The state has warmed one to three degrees (F) in the last century. Floods are becoming more frequent, and ice cover on lakes is forming later and melting sooner. In the coming decades, these trends are likely to continue. Rising temperatures may interfere with winter recreation, extend the growing season, change the composition of trees in the North Woods, and increase water pollution problems in lakes and rivers. The state will have more extremely hot days, which may harm public health in urban areas and corn harvests in rural areas." [EPA, <a href="">August 2016</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 43%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Perhaps.</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Missouri</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "Seventy years from now, Missouri is likely to have more than 25 days per year with temperatures above 95&deg;F, compared with 5 to 15 today. Hot weather causes cows to eat less, produce less milk, and grow more slowly&mdash;and it could threaten their health. Even during the next few decades, hotter summers are likely to reduce yields of corn. But higher concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide increase crop yields, and that fertilizing effect is likely to offset the harmful effects of heat on soybeans, assuming that adequate water is available. On farms without irrigation, however, increasingly severe droughts could cause more crop failures. " [EPA, <a href="">August 2016</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 45%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Probably not.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p>Sen. Roy Blunt (R): "Electric service providers in Missouri have warned that the EPA's so-called Clean Power Plan will raise energy costs for Missourians, reduce jobs, and hurt our state's economic competitiveness. As a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I've fought hard to ensure provisions that would defund this harmful power grab were included in the final appropriations bill. I also support legislation to block this harmful rule and protect workers and families from the damaging effects of the Obama Administration's executive overreach and costly energy regulations." [Blunt press release, <a href="">8/3/15</a>]</p> <p>Missouri Secretary of State Jason Kander (D): "He understands that climate change is a real consequence of human activity and we have a moral obligation to address this challenge. That means reducing carbon pollution and accelerating our transition to clean energy, not only to protect our planet, but also to ensure our national security." [Kander campaign website, accessed <a href="">10/31/16</a>]</p> <p><strong>Gubernatorial race</strong></p> <p>Eric Greitens (R): "Federal overreach from agencies like the EPA is hurting family farms. I will fight against these crippling regulations, and always side with the hard working farmers and ranchers of Missouri." [Greitens campaign website, accessed <a href="">10/31/16</a>]</p> <p>Missouri Attorney Gen. Chris Koster (D): "The EPA's Clean Power rule effectively eliminates Missouri's competitive advantage as a low energy-cost state&hellip;A significant question exists whether the final rule goes beyond EPA's authority to set emission standards&hellip;For these reasons, I have decided to file suit against the EPA as soon as the final rule is published. Look folks, I believe that climate change is real, and cleaner energy production is an important state goal, one Missouri's energy producers are already aggressively working toward&hellip;However, it is essential that we achieve these goals in a responsible way that makes sense for Missouri's economy and Missouri's future." [Koster speech transcript, <a href="">10/9/15]</a></p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Montana</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "Since the 1950s, the snowpack in Montana has been decreasing. Diminishing snowpack can shorten the season for skiing and other forms of winter tourism and recreation&hellip;More than one thousand glaciers cover about 26 square miles of mountains in Montana, but that area is decreasing in response to rising temperatures. Glacier National Park's glaciers receded rapidly during the last century." [EPA, <a href="">August 2016</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 46%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> No.</p> <p><strong>Gubernatorial race:</strong></p> <p>Gov. Steve Bullock (D): "Steve believes Montanans should control our own energy future. He introduced a balanced and responsible plan that builds upon Montana's traditional base of energy generation, like coal in Colstrip, while sparking a new generation of clean technology development, investing in renewables like wind and solar and encouraging innovation, savings, and energy efficiency for homes and businesses." [Bullock campaign website, accessed <a href="">10/31/16</a>]</p> <p>Greg Gianforte (R): "This [the Supreme Court's decision to halt the Clean Power Plan] is great news for Montana, but the fight isn't over. We cannot rest. We must keep up the pressure and work to defeat this "costly power plan" once and for all." [Gianfote press release, <a href="">2/9/16</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Nebraska</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "The number of high temperature stress days over 100&deg;F is projected to increase substantially in Nebraska and the Great Plains region. By mid-century (2041&acirc;&#128;&#144;2070), this increase for Nebraska would equate to experiencing typical summer temperatures equivalent to those experienced during the 2012 drought and heat wave." [University of Nebraska-Lincoln, <a href="">September 2014</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 47%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Trump will win Nebraska, but the state awards its electoral votes by congressional district, and the 2nd district might be up for grabs.</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Nevada</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "Much of Nevada's tourist income comes from attractions that will be vulnerable to climate impacts. For instance, Las Vegas's 45 golf courses, which are used by one-third of all visitors, could see a sharp decline in golfers due to rising temperatures and decreased water supplies&hellip;Lower water levels in Lake Mead significantly reduced recreational visitors, especially boaters, as marinas and docks were left high and dry." [Demos, <a href="">4/19/12</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 41%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Yes.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p>Former Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D): "The Clean Power Plan is a bold step not just in lowering carbon emissions, but also in creating the clean energy jobs of the future. &nbsp;With our abundance of wind, solar, and geothermal energy, Nevada has been a leader in moving away from carbon emissions and embracing a clean energy economy that has created good-paying jobs in our state that can't be shipped overseas." [Cortez Masto campaign press release, <a href="">8/3/15</a>]</p> <p>Rep. Joe Heck (R): "To maintain our economic and national security, we must maximize all of our nation's energy resources, including renewable sources, alternative fuels, and fossil fuels, all in a way that balances economic development and protecting our environment. Nevada is poised to lead our nation in renewable development and we must harness those resources. However, we shouldn't penalize those that depend on fossil fuels for energy and the jobs they provide. [The Clean Power Plan] is not the all-of-the-above energy strategy needed to boost job creation and reduce energy prices for families." [Heck press release, <a href="">8/3/15</a>]</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="473" mozallowfullscreen="true" src="" webkitallowfullscreen="true" width="630"><br></iframe></p> <p><strong>On the ballot:</strong></p> <p>Electricity Deregulation (Question 3): Nevadans will be voting on a state constitutional amendment that would dismantle the monopoly held by NV Energy, the state's biggest utility. If Question 3 passes&mdash;and then passes again in 2018&mdash;consumers will be able to purchase power from any electricity retailer willing to sell it. The measure is backed by a number of large, energy-intensive businesses in the state, <a href="" target="_blank">including Tesla and Sheldon Adelson's Sands casinos</a>. Proponents argue deregulation will allow them to purchase cheaper renewable energy. According to the <em><a href="" target="_blank">Wall Street Journal</a></em>, one of Questions 3's supporters, a Nevada data storage company called Switch, "estimates it is currently paying NV Energy&nbsp;as much as 80%&nbsp;more&nbsp;for green power&nbsp;than it would pay a competitive supplier." Opponents, including the state's <a href="" target="_blank">AFL-CIO chapter</a>, counter that the measure could harm consumers and cost jobs, according to the <em>Journal</em>. (For more on the problems surrounding energy deregulation, <a href="" target="_blank">read our investigation</a>.)</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>New Hampshire</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "The frequency of extreme heat days is projected to increase dramatically, and the hottest days will be hotter, raising concerns regarding the impact of extreme, sustained heat on human health, infrastructure, and the electrical grid&hellip;Southern New Hampshire can also expect to experience more extreme precipitation events in the future. For example, under the high emissions scenario, events that drop more than four inches of precipitation in forty-eight hours are projected to increase two- to three-fold across much of southern New Hampshire by the end of the century." [University of New Hampshire, <a href="">2014</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 43%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Yes.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p>Gov. Maggie Hassan (D): "Yes I do [believe climate change is man-made]. I have been fighting climate change and working to improve our environment. Sen. Ayotte, when she first ran for the United States Senate, <a href="">doubted whether climate change was real</a>. And I have the endorsement of the Sierra Club, and I'm very proud of that." [NH1 TV debate via Media Matters, <a href="">10/27/16</a>]</p> <p>Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R): "I do believe that [climate change] is real, and Gov. Hassan again needs to understand that <a href="">I was the first Republican in the country to support the president's Clean Power Plan</a>, that I've crossed party lines, even taken criticism from my own party to protect New Hampshire's environment, and that goes back to my time as attorney general." [NH1 TV debate via Media Matters, <a href="">10/27/16</a>]</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="video-embed" frameborder="0" height="360" scrolling="no" src="" width="480"></iframe></p> <p><strong>Gubernatorial race:</strong></p> <p>Chris Sununu, member of the New Hampshire Executive Council (R): "I'm an environmental engineer&hellip;The Earth has been slowly warming since the mid-1800s; there's not doubt about that. Is it man-made or not? Look, one thing I do know: Nobody knows for sure&hellip;One of the biggest concerns of this entire issue is that we've created all this regulation that pushes down on businesses and pushes down on individuals. I'm going to free that up and do it smart and responsibly." [WMUR debate, <a href="" target="_blank">9/7/16</a>]</p> <p>Colin Van Ostern, member of the New Hampshire Executive Council (D): "Van Ostern is a strong advocate for clean energy, and he'll increase investment in solar and renewable energy. He believes clean energy projects are critical for boosting our clean tech economy, limiting energy costs, protecting our environment, and creating thousands of jobs." [Van Ostern campaign website, accessed <a href="">11/3/16</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>North Carolina</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "Most of the state has warmed one-half to one degree (F) in the last century, and the sea is rising about one inch every decade. Higher water levels are eroding beaches, submerging low lands, exacerbating coastal flooding, and increasing the salinity of estuaries and aquifers." [EPA, <a href="" target="_blank">August 2016</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 44%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Yes.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p>Sen. Richard Burr (R): "US Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., voted against legislation in January 2015 that declared in part that 'human activity contributes to climate change.'&hellip;'Senator Burr believes that climate change is real and humans do contribute to those changes,' said spokesman Jesse Hunt. 'However, it is his belief that the best way to reduce emissions and pollution is not through partisan political theater but through developing consensus on areas that will bring about effectual change.'" [<em>Citizen-Times</em>, <a href="">10/4/16</a>]</p> <p>Former State Rep. Deborah Ross (D): "[Ross] voted repeatedly to support clean energy, oppose fracking, address climate change, and protect North Carolina's land, air, and water&hellip;Deborah knows that we need to slow the harmful effects of climate change. The best ways to do this are to invest in renewable energy and clean technology." [Ross campaign website, accessed <a href="">11/1/16</a>]</p> <p><strong>Gubernatorial race:</strong></p> <p>Gov. Pat McCrory (R): "I believe there is climate change. I'm not sure you can call it climate warming anymore, especially here in the Carolinas. I think the big debate is how much of it is man-made and how much of it will just naturally happen as Earth evolves." [ABC, <a href="">2/16/14</a>]</p> <p>North Carolina Attorney Gen. Roy Cooper (D): "A strong economy and a healthy environment go hand-in-hand. I am glad North Carolina has become a leader in renewable energy technology and that energy companies are shifting toward more sustainable power supplies than coal. As Attorney General, I have disagreed with the state environmental regulators who were focused on scoring political points rather than protecting our water, air and other natural resources." [Cooper campaign website, accessed <a href="">11/1/16</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Ohio</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "In Lake Erie, the changing climate is likely to harm water quality. Warmer water tends to cause more algal blooms, which can be unsightly, harm fish, and degrade water quality. During August 2014, an algal bloom in Lake Erie prompted the City of Toledo to ban drinking and cooking with tap water. Severe storms also increase the amount of pollutants that run off from land to water, so the risk of algal blooms will be greater if storms become more severe. Increasingly severe rainstorms could also cause sewers to overflow into the Great Lakes more often, threatening beach safety and drinking water supplies." [EPA, <a href="">August 2016</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 45%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Yes.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p>Sen. Rob Portman (R): "[Portman voted] 'yes' this week on an amendment declaring that climate change is real, caused by human activity, and Congress should do something about it. In January, Portman voted 'no' on a similar amendment, which said 'human activity significantly' contributes to climate change&hellip;Portman, who is seeking re-election in a key swing state, said he opposed the January measure because he's not sure how much of a factor human activity is in global warming. 'I'm not going to quantify it because scientists have a lot of different views on that,' he told reporters Thursday&hellip;Portman has been a vocal opponent of the Obama administration's new regulations designed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants 30 percent from 2005 levels by 2030." [<em>Cincinnati Enquirer</em>, <a href="">3/29/15</a>]</p> <p>Former Gov. Ted Strickland (D): "Strickland supports Obama's plan to cut carbon dioxide emissions from coal-burning power plants while boosting clean-energy jobs. He says he wants to be sure its implementation doesn't hurt Ohio, although it is unclear how he or anyone could do anything about it if that happens. But one way, he and other Democrats say, is to support expansion of alternative energy sources&mdash;wind, solar, biomass&mdash;and help those industries become catalysts for jobs. As governor, Strickland signed a bill with the goal of getting 25 percent of electricity sold in Ohio to come from alternative energy sources by 2025&mdash;a plan that Gov. John Kasich, who defeated Strickland in 2010, put on ice." [<em>Cleveland Plain Dealer</em>, <a href="">9/3/15]</a></p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="473" mozallowfullscreen="true" src="" webkitallowfullscreen="true" width="630"></iframe></p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Oregon</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "Reduced snowpacks, less water for irrigation, drought-related wildfires, rising sea levels and insect-infested timber. Those are just a few of the impacts of climate disruption that could affect Oregonians, two environmental groups warned Tuesday." [<em>The Oregonian</em>, <a href="">5/6/14</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 40%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> No.</p> <p><strong>Gubernatorial race:</strong></p> <p>Gov. Kate Brown (D): "This year, Oregon became the first state to envision a future without coal-powered electricity when Kate signed the nation's first 'coal-to-clean' law, which will completely phase out dirty coal power by 2030 and double Oregon's reliance on renewable energy by 2040. In 2015, she stood up to Big Oil and signed a law that bolsters the use of cleaner-burning vehicle fuels in Oregon. Kate will continue the fight to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and support innovation that reduces Oregon's reliance on fossil fuels." [Brown campaign website, accessed <a href="">11/1/16</a>]</p> <p>Bud Pierce (R): "Repeal the Low-Carbon Fuel Standard Law so ordinary Oregonians will not have to spend an extra 19 cents to a dollar per gallon of gasoline in a hidden gas tax whose proceeds will go to state-favored, out-of-state green energy companies." [Pierce campaign website, accessed <a href="">11/1/16</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Pennsylvania</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "The commonwealth has warmed more than half a degree (F) in the last century, heavy rainstorms are more frequent, and the tidal portion of the Delaware River is rising about one inch every eight years. In the coming decades, changing the climate is likely to increase flooding, harm ecosystems, disrupt farming, and increase some risks to human health." [EPA, <a href="">August 2016</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 44%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Yes.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p>Sen. Pat Toomey (R): "Senator Toomey believes that coal is an essential part of America's energy future, not to mention an important part of Pennsylvania's economy. Unfortunately, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been especially aggressive in pursuing regulations that specifically target coal power plants. These regulations have already put hundreds of Pennsylvanians out of work and will continue to cause economic distress while yielding negligible benefits for our environment." [Toomey Senate website, accessed <a href=";id=32">11/1/16</a>]</p> <p>Katie McGinty, former Pennsylvania Secretary of Environmental Protection (D): "Climate change presents a serious global threat to our health, economic well-being and national security. In the Senate, I will lead the way to a healthier and safer environment by working to pass commonsense climate protections with investments in energy efficiency and clean energy." [McGinty campaign website, accessed <a href="">11/1/16</a>]</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Utah</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "[Utah] has warmed about two degrees (F) in the last century. Throughout the western United States, heat waves are becoming more common, and snow is melting earlier in spring. In the coming decades, the changing climate is likely to decrease the flow of water in Utah's rivers, increase the frequency and intensity of wildfires, and decrease the productivity of ranches and farms." [EPA, <a href="">August 2016</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 48%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Supposedly.</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Vermont</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "High nighttime temperatures are increasingly common and have widespread impacts on humans, recreation and energy demand. In winter months, warmer nighttime temperatures threaten snow and ice cover for winter recreation. In summer months, this causes increased demand for cooling. An increase in high-energy electric (lighting) storms is projected to continue particularly threatening infrastructure and transportation systems." [Vermont Climate Assessment, <a href="">2014</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 38%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> No.</p> <p><strong>Gubernatorial race:</strong></p> <p>Sue Minter, former Vermont secretary of transportation (D): "I'm opposed to a carbon tax. But I am very concerned about climate change. And I think it is clear that change is not just real&mdash;it is here; it is having an enormous effect on all of us&hellip;I have plans to address climate change, focusing on our clean, green energy future here. Looking at collaborating with other northeastern states like we've done before to reduce carbon emissions." [WPTZ debate via Media Matters, <a href="">10/25/16</a>]</p> <p>Lt. Gov. Phil Scott: "I would veto [a carbon tax] if it hit my desk. I believe that this would just ratchet up the cost of living across Vermont. I don't think that we can afford it. I'm not looking to do anything that would raise the cost of living on already-struggling Vermonters." [WPTZ debate via Media Matters, <a href="">10/25/16</a>]</p> <p>Former baseball player <a href="">Bill Lee</a> (Liberty Union Party): <a href="">Um, well, just watch this video</a>:</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="video-embed" frameborder="0" height="360" scrolling="no" src="" width="480"></iframe></p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Virginia</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "The combination of land subsidence, sea level rise, flat and low tidewater topography and intensive coastal real estate and infrastructure development puts southeastern Virginia, namely the Virginia Beach/Norfolk/Hampton Roads region, at extreme risk from storm surges&hellip;Climate change will make the situation much worse." [Demos, <a href="">4/19/12</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 43%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Yes.</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>West Virginia</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "During the next century, average annual precipitation and the frequency of heavy downpours are likely to keep rising. Average precipitation is likely to increase during winter and spring but not change significantly during summer and fall. Rising temperatures will melt snow earlier in spring and increase evaporation, and thereby dry the soil during summer and fall. As a result, changing the climate is likely to intensify flooding during winter and spring, and droughts during summer and fall." [EPA, <a href="">August 2016</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 49%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> No.</p> <p><strong>Gubernatorial race:</strong></p> <p>Jim Justice, billionaire coal baron (D): "Until we have really accurate data to prove [that humans contribute to climate change] I don't think we need to blow our legs off on a concept. I welcome the scientific approach to it and the knowledge. I would not sit here and say, 'absolutely now, there's no such thing' or I would no way on Earth say there is such a thing. I believe there's an awful lot of scientist that say, 'no, no, no, this is just smoke and mirrors.' I welcome the discussion, but I don't know, I just don't know." [<em>The Register-Herald</em>, <a href="">4/27/16</a>]</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="354" src="" width="630"></iframe></p> <p>State Senate President Bill Cole, (R): "West Virginia must continue to lead the fight for our energy industry against an Obama administration that's dead set on destroying the development of fossil fuels. The rich history of our state has always been tied to its abundance of natural resources. Those whose motives are highly questionable&mdash;will say that the days of coal, oil and gas are over and that we need to move on to solar, wind and other alternative sources of power&hellip;Bill Cole supports Donald Trump for President because he will allow our miners to go back to work, let us harness our natural gas, and free us of the impossible roadblock to growth that is the EPA." [Cole campaign website, accessed <a href="">11/3/16</a>]</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="354" src="" width="630"><br></iframe></p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Washington</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "In Washington and Oregon, more than 140,000 acres of coastal lands lie within 3.3 feet in elevation of high tide. As sea levels continue to rise, these areas will be inundated more frequently&hellip;Ocean acidification threatens culturally and commercially significant marine species directly affected by changes in ocean chemistry (such as oysters) and those affected by changes in the marine food web (such as Pacific salmon)...Warmer water in regional estuaries (such as Puget Sound) may contribute to a higher incidence of harmful blooms of algae linked to paralytic shellfish poisoning." [National Climate Assessment, <a href="">2014</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers: </strong>40%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> No.</p> <p><strong>On the ballot:</strong></p> <p>Carbon Tax (I-732): Washington voters will decide whether to adopt <a href="">a carbon tax</a> to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Revenue from the tax would be offset through a sales tax reduction, as well as through tax rebates and credits to individuals and businesses. A number of environmentalists support I-732, <a href="">but other environmentalists oppose it</a>; they argue that it won't do enough to support clean energy, that it will disproportionately hurt low-income residents, and that communities of color didn't have enough input in developing the proposal.</p> <h3 class="subhed"><strong>Wisconsin</strong></h3> <p><strong>Impacts of climate change:</strong> "Research suggests that warming temperatures in spring and fall would help boost agricultural production by extending the growing season across the state. However, increased warming during the summer months could reduce yields of crops such as corn and soybeans, with studies suggesting that every 2&deg; F of warming could decrease corn yields by 13 percent and soybean yields by 16 percent." [Wisconsin Initiative on Climate Change Impacts, <a href="">2011</a>]</p> <p><strong>Percentage of residents who are climate deniers:</strong> 43%</p> <p><strong>Presidential battleground?</strong> Yes.</p> <p><strong>Senate race:</strong></p> <p>Sen. Ron Johnson (R): "I've never denied climate change. It's always changed, always will. I would ask the questioner: What would happen if we had no sun? It would be a cold, hard rock orbiting in space. So obviously the sun has the primary effect on weather and climate on planet Earth. So I'm just not a climate change alarmist&hellip;The jury's out [on man-made climate change]&hellip;I'm a skeptic." [<em>Milwaukee Journal Sentinel</em> interview, <a href=";theater">10/21/16</a>]</p> <p>Former Sen. Russ Feingold (D): "This is enormously threatening to the future of our country and our planet. Anyone who talks about children, grandchildren, great grandchildren has to take this seriously. The climate is obviously changing dramatically." [WUWM Milwaukee Public Radio, <a href="">11/2/16</a>]</p> <p><em>This article has been revised.</em></p></body></html> Environment 2016 Elections Climate Change Climate Desk Donald Trump Energy Hillary Clinton Mon, 07 Nov 2016 11:00:13 +0000 Jeremy Schulman 318161 at A GOP Senate Candidate Just Got Angrily Booed for Denouncing Trump <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" ""> <html><body><p>The Republican running for US Senate from Nevada was angrily booed at his own campaign rally today when he told the crowd that he could no longer support Donald Trump and that the GOP nominee should drop out of the race.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Joe Heck, campaigning to take retiring Harry Reid's seat, gets heckled and booed after saying Trump should drop out <a href=""></a></p> &mdash; Colin Jones (@colinjones) <a href="">October 8, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><p>Heck was reacting to the 2005 video <a href="" target="_blank">published Friday by the<em> Washington Post</em></a>, in which Trump bragged that his fame enabled him to "do anything" to women. "Grab them by the pussy," he said in the video. "You can do anything."</p> <p>At the rally, Heck&mdash;a congressman locked in a tight race to fill Harry Reid's seat in the Senate&mdash;said, "I can no longer look past the pattern of behavior and comments that have been made by Donald Trump. Therefore I cannot in good conscious continue to support Donald Trump. Nor can I vote for Hillary Clinton." That drew a mix of applause and jeers.</p> <p>Moments later, when Heck said that Republicans should "formally ask Mr. Trump to step down" from the ticket, the crowd erupted in loud boos.</p> <p>Heck is one of several prominent GOP politicians to un-endorse Trump in the wake of Friday's revelations. Others include New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte, Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo, and Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz.</p></body></html> Politics 2016 Elections Donald Trump Sex and Gender Top Stories Sat, 08 Oct 2016 17:30:50 +0000 Jeremy Schulman 316081 at Here's What Donald Trump Really Thinks of America's Scientists <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" ""> <html><body><div class="inline inline-left" style="display: table; width: 1%"><img alt="Trump hats" class="image" src="/files/trumphats2000full.jpg" style="height: 516px; width: 630px;"><div class="caption">JRLPhotographer/iStock</div> </div> <p>It wasn't much of a surprise Thursday when Donald Trump's campaign issued a <a href="" target="_blank">blistering statement</a> condemning the Paris climate agreement. The deal&mdash;which has now been ratified by enough countries to go into effect next month&mdash;is a giant first step toward cutting the greenhouse gas emissions that are causing global warming. "Politicians like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton continue to make bad deals that undermine the interests of the American people," said a Trump spokesman. "The Paris Accord is just the latest example. Hillary Clinton and other supporters of this global political agreement ignore the reality that it will cost the American economy trillions of dollars."</p> <p>It was a bit more surprising, however, that Team Trump decided to use the opportunity to criticize the nation's scientists. "Mr. Trump and Gov. Pence appreciate that many scientists are concerned about greenhouse gas emissions," said the statement. It then added, "We need America's scientists to continue studying the scientific issues but without political agendas getting in the way."</p> <p>A few months ago, the implication that scientists were skewing their results to match their supposed political agendas might have seemed like a relatively tame statement from Trump. After all, he spent years declaring that global warming is a "hoax" perpetrated by "<a href="" target="_blank">scientists [who] are having a lot of fun.</a>" In July, he defended his use of the word "hoax" by <a href="" target="_blank">invoking</a> the widely debunked <a href="" target="_blank">"ClimateGate" scandal</a>: "If you look at Europe where they had their big summit a couple of years ago, where people were sending out emails&mdash;scientists&mdash;practically calling it a hoax, and they were laughing at it."</p> <p>But more recently, Trump has been trying to run away from that rhetoric. During the first debate, Trump insisted (<a href="" target="_blank">falsely</a>) that he'd never described climate change as a Chinese hoax. The following day, Pence&mdash;who once <a href="" target="_blank">described climate change as a "myth"</a>&mdash;acknowledged that human activities do "have some impact on climate." Regardless, it's now clear that Trump still thinks scientists are lying to us.</p> <p>I reached out to a few climate scientists to get their reaction to Trump's latest attack on them. Needless to say, they weren't pleased. Trump's statement is "just another underhanded way of dodging the scientific reality and engaging in mud-slinging against honest scientists by arguing they are engaging in a political agenda," said Michael Mann, an atmospheric scientist at Penn State, in an email. "This is very Trumpian projection, since of course it is only him and Pence and their fellow congressional climate change deniers who are engaged in a political agenda."</p> <p>But years of Trump-like rhetoric seems to have taken its toll. A <a href="" target="_blank">new survey from the Pew Research Center</a> found that just 32 percent of respondents believe that climate science is guided by the "best available evidence" most of the time. Meanwhile, large majorities of respondents say that climate research is influence&nbsp;at least some of the time by the scientists' political beliefs and efforts to advance their careers.</p> <p>All of this helps explain why, according to Pew, just 21 percent of respondent have "a great deal" of confidence that scientists will act in the best interests of the public. Of course, that doesn't mean the public trusts Trump. In the same survey, just 4 percent of respondents had a great deal of confidence in the nation's business leaders.</p></body></html> Environment 2016 Elections Climate Change Climate Desk Donald Trump Energy Science Top Stories Fri, 07 Oct 2016 21:33:57 +0000 Jeremy Schulman 315961 at Someone Finally Asked a Debate Question About the World's Most Important Issue <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" ""> <html><body><p>It's been <a href="" target="_blank">nearly eight years</a> since American presidential candidates were last asked about climate change during a general election debate. Lester Holt didn't ask Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump about the issue<strong> </strong>when they met last week at Hofstra University. Bob Schieffer, Jim Lehrer, and Candy Crowley <a href="" target="_blank">never asked about global warming during</a> the 2012 debates. Nor did Martha Raddatz, who moderated that year's vice presidential showdown.</p> <p>As it turns out, though, the problem goes well beyond presidential debates. During the first 10 general election debates in competitive Senate and gubernatorial races this year, moderators asked no questions about global warming, according to <a href="" target="_blank">research released last week</a> by the liberal group Media Matters for America. Candidates occasionally brought up climate change on their own&mdash;that <a href="" target="_blank">happened briefly</a> in last week's presidential debate&mdash;but the moderators simply ignored the issue. That meant zero questions about <a href="" target="_blank">rising seas</a>; zero questions about how <a href="" target="_blank">devastating floods</a>, <a href="" target="_blank">heat waves</a>, and <a href="" target="_blank">wildfires</a> are becoming more likely; and zero questions about the threat that the changing climate poses to our <a href="" target="_blank">food supply</a> and to <a href="" target="_blank">our military operations</a> and to <a href="" target="_blank">international stability</a>.</p> <p>Finally, on Friday&mdash;the day after Media Matters published the initial installment of its debate scorecard&mdash;a moderator got around to asking about climate change. During a debate broadcast by WMUR (a Manchester ABC station), New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R) and her challenger, Gov. Maggie Hassan (D), were both asked whether global warming is real and what the government should do about it. Ayotte is somewhat unique among GOP politicians: She embraces climate science and even supports the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan&mdash;a set of regulations designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions from the power sector. The result was a pretty informative exchange. You can watch it below:</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="video-embed" frameborder="0" height="360" scrolling="no" src="" width="480"></iframe></p> <p>The Media Matters scorecard is an impressive undertaking&mdash;one that the researchers plan to update daily until the election. According to Andrew Seifter, the group's climate and energy program director, the project involves constant news and database searches to track dozens of upcoming debates across the country, the videos and transcripts of which the researchers obtain and analyze. (Full disclosure: I used to work at Media Matters. Seifter is a friend and former colleague.)</p> <div class="inline inline-center" style="display: table; width: 1%"><img alt="Media Matters debate scorecard" class="image" src="/files/debatescorecard1003.png" style="height: 583px; width: 630px;"></div> <p>In addition to showing what (if anything) was said about climate change at debates that have already taken place, the scorecard lists the broadcasters and moderators in charge of those that are coming up. The goal, says Seifter, is to empower concerned citizens to pressure moderators into addressing the issue. Rather than waiting until after the election season to release the results, he says, the scorecard will serve as a "living, research-based resource" that people can use to "demand change."</p> <p>The debates, Seifter argues, are the "best opportunity for the voters to learn about where the candidates stand" on climate change. So let's hope more moderators start asking about it.</p></body></html> Environment 2016 Elections Climate Change Climate Desk Donald Trump Hillary Clinton Media Top Stories Mon, 03 Oct 2016 21:18:22 +0000 Jeremy Schulman 315511 at Did Trump Call Global Warming a Chinese Hoax? (Yes. And Tonight He Lied About It.) <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" ""> <html><body><p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="354" src="" width="630"></iframe></p> <p>According to Donald Trump, Donald Trump <a href="" target="_blank">never supported the Iraq war</a>; he <a href="" target="_blank">never called pregnancy</a> an "inconvenience" for employers; and he certainly never&mdash;ever&mdash;<a href="" target="_blank">called climate change a Chinese hoax</a>.</p> <p>Trump, you'll be shocked to learn, wasn't exactly telling the truth. Let's focus on the climate claim, which you can watch in the video above.</p> <p>During Monday night's presidential debate, Hillary Clinton said: "Donald thinks that climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese. I think it's real. I think science is real."</p> <p>"I did not, I did not," countered Trump. "I do not say that."</p> <p>Clinton is correct. Here's what Trump tweeted in 2012:</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">November 6, 2012</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><p>Trump has <a href="" target="_blank">since suggested that this comment was a joke</a>&mdash;a hilarious one, no doubt. Regardless, Trump has repeatedly called global warming a "hoax." On Fox News in 2014, for instance:</p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="video-embed" frameborder="0" height="360" scrolling="no" src="" width="480"></iframe></p> <p>And on Twitter:</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Ice storm rolls from Texas to Tennessee - I'm in Los Angeles and it's freezing. Global warming is a total, and very expensive, hoax!</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">December 6, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">We should be focused on magnificently clean and healthy air and not distracted by the expensive hoax that is global warming!</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">December 6, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">NBC News just called it the great freeze - coldest weather in years. Is our country still spending money on the GLOBAL WARMING HOAX?</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">January 25, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Any and all weather events are used by the GLOBAL WARMING HOAXSTERS to justify higher taxes to save our planet! They don't believe it $$$$!</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">January 26, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">The weather has been so cold for so long that the global warming HOAXSTERS were forced to change the name to climate change to keep $ flow!</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">January 29, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Snowing in Texas and Louisiana, record setting freezing temperatures throughout the country and beyond. Global warming is an expensive hoax!</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">January 29, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Massive record setting snowstorm and freezing temperatures in U.S. Smart that GLOBAL WARMING hoaxsters changed name to CLIMATE CHANGE! $$$$</p> &mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="">February 5, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script></body></html> Environment 2016 Elections Climate Change Climate Desk Donald Trump Hillary Clinton Top Stories Tue, 27 Sep 2016 03:39:32 +0000 Jeremy Schulman 314996 at