Without 2009 data on the partisan breakdown we can’t say for sure, but as has been the case in other recent polls, much of the downward shift appears to be among Republicans:
Via Framing Science, this Stanford study (PDF) shows that the decline in concern regarding global warming some polls are finding is not entirely accurate.
Here is a video of Professor Krosnick discussing the survey:
Separately, an international survey of 9,000 people in 22 countries had the following findings:
About 16% of the respondents were from the United States.
And yet another Gallup poll shows Republicans as outliers in terms of understanding environmental issues. While Democrats and Independents think the quality of the environment has improved since Barack Obama took office, Republicans aren’t so sure:
Multiple updates at bottom of post.
Newly released Gallup polling seems to show a sharp drop in the percentage of Americans who know about, are concerned about and understand the threat of global warming.
The piece leads with a graph showing a sharp increase in the percentage of Americans who think the seriousness of global warming is generally exaggerated:
When I saw this I immediately assumed the increase was due to the changing opinions of Republicans, and did not reflect a general trend within the broader population. As Joseph Romm has demonstrated, the GOP’s understanding of climate science has been on a steady decline for years. More evidence of this here and here.
In the piece, Gallup notes that “evidence from last year showed that the issue of global warming was becoming heavily partisan in nature, and it may be that the continuing doubts about global warming put forth by conservatives and others are having an effect.” I’ll say.
Gallup has provided EnviroKnow with the full cross-tabs, which are available below. To illustrate the fact that the shifts shown in the poll are largely partisan in nature, I’ve produced a series of graphs based on the cross-tabs.
The fact that an equal number of Republicans (31%) believe that the effects of climate change have already begun as believe the effects will never happen is an excellent display of the schizophrenia of the Republican position on the issue.
Reasonable people can disagree on policy solutions for dealing with problems we face as a society. But the Republican party is playing a different game entirely. Republicans and conservative thought-leaders — at the behest of the corporate polluters who bankroll their campaigns — have made a conscious decision to deny the science in order to advance their political agenda. Put simply, they seem to think they are entitled to their own facts. Unfortunately for them, and ultimately for the rest of us as well, physics doesn’t give a damn about politics.
Here are the full cross-tabs:
On coal, President Obama said:
“For example, nobody has been a bigger promoter of clean coal technology than I am. Testament to that, I ended up being in a whole bunch of advertisements that you guys saw all the time about investing in ways for us to burn coal more cleanly.”
“We can’t operate the coal industry in the United States as if we’re still in the 1920s or the 1930s or the 1950s. We’ve got to be thinking what does that industry look like in the next hundred years. And it’s going to be different. And that means there’s going to be some transition. And that’s where I think a well-thought-through policy of incentivizing the new while recognizing that there’s going to be a transition process — and we’re not just suddenly putting the old out of business right away — that has to be something that both Republicans and Democrats should be able to embrace.”
On nuclear, President Obama said:
“I’ve said that I’m a promoter of nuclear energy, something that I think over the last three decades has been subject to a lot of partisan wrangling and ideological wrangling. I don’t think it makes sense.”
On energy policy in general, President Obama said:
“So if you look at the ideas that this caucus has, again with respect to energy, I’m for a lot of what you said you are for.”
The full exchange is below.
Update — JW Randolph at the Front Porch blog has the video.
In his comments Tuesday, Graham took aim at both the fiscal conservative and Libertarian segments of the Republican Party by dismissing the “misplaced priorities” of the Lexington County GOP.
“The 13 people who support this resolution are Ron Paul supporters,” said Graham. “They didn’t vote for me before and they’re not going to vote for me next time, and I understand that. I think it’s misplaced priorities.”
Graham also said he’s proud of working with Democrats, and that he has an overall conservative voting record.
“I do believe in finding common ground to solve hard problems…but there are some elements of my party and others that want complete agreement all the time,” said Graham.
Good for him.
Update — The State has more:
“I have come to conclude that greenhouse gases and carbon pollution is not a good thing,” Graham said. “All the cars and trucks and plants that have been in existence since the Industrial Revolution, spewing out carbon day-in and day-out, will never convince me that’s a good thing for your children and the future of the planet.”…
“Whatever political push back I get I’m willing to accept because I know what I’m trying to do makes sense to me,” Graham said. “I am convinced that reason, logic and good business sense, and good environmental policy, will trump the status quo.”
Last night, the Lexington County South Carolina Republican Party joined the fun. The Los Angeles Times Reports:
Republican leaders in a South Carolina county known as a GOP stronghold have voted to censure U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham for working with Democrats on immigration and climate change.
It’s the second time since November that Republicans in a South Carolina county have voted to censure the GOP senator.
Lexington County Republican Party Chairman Rich Bolen said Tuesday the county’s executive committee voted 13-7 to rebuke Graham following more than an hour of debate late Monday.
Here is the Lexington County GOP’s full censure resolution:
Sen__Graham_Resolution.source.prod_affiliate.74 –
In November, I noted the consequences of these types of developments:
The Republican party is quickly becoming a caricature of itself, purging anyone who isn’t a hateful, ignorant science-hater. While it is good for Democrats politically, it is a largely negative development for the discourse and the country as a whole. It is hard to have a reasonable and intelligent debate when one of the two major political parties is completely unreasonable.
This assessment — which is backed up by the increasing likelihood that the Republican party will nominate a climate change denier in 2012 — remains valid. Further indications that the GOP will continue shifting to the right on climate policy include the evolution of Senator McCain’s position due to a primary challenge and several recent polls showing a sharp uptick in climate change denial among Republican voters.
So what makes Senator Graham different? A few factors come to mind:
1. He is not up for reelection until 2014.
2. He is a strong supporter of nuclear energy, and will likely be able to demand massive subsidies in exchange for his support.
3. He rightly considers climate change a national security issue, and in addition to serving on the Armed Services Committee in both the House and the Senate, he served in the United States Air Force prior to entering politics.
4. Graham has always been a bit of a maverick, frequently showing willingness to reject the party line:
In recent years Graham has developed a reputation as an independent dealmaker. In 2005 he joined with 13 moderates to block then Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist from destroying the filibuster in a fight over judicial nominees. In 2006 and 2007 he braved another censure – this one from Greenville County – to work with Ted Kennedy on immigration reform, telling incensed South Carolinians that they’re “bigots.”
What else am I missing? Why is Senator Graham an outlier in the Republican party on climate change legislation?
GOP Rep Eric Cantor is charging that the aid the U.S. has pledged to a $100 billion annual global fund to help poor countries combat global warming may be unconstitutional. Cantor fired off a letter to White House budget director Peter Orszag, asking 10 questions about the pledge.
Here is the letter:
Democrats are more likely than Republicans to view global warming as an urgent problem. Fifty-two percent say it should be a high priority, compared with 22 percent of Republicans. Nearly 40 percent of Republicans say global warming is not a serious issue.There is also a gender divide: Men are far more likely to say global warming is not serious (30 percent say so) than woman (16 percent).
Here are the results:
The data show that Republicans are increasingly isolated in their denial of global warming: The largest percentage of GOPers yet in Ipsos’ polling says it isn’t happening, and the rise in their denial is far more pronounced than among Dems or independents.
The poll asked whether people believe that the world’s temperature “has been going up slowly over the past 100 years.” A surprisingly large percentage of Republicans, 43%, say it isn’t happening, versus only 23% of independents and 16% of Dems. Meawhile, only 57% of Republicans say it’s happening, versus 68% of independents and 82% of Dems.
An Ipsos official confirms that this is the lowest percentage yet of Republicans who say it is happening, and that their skepticism is rising at a much more pronounced rate than among Dems or indys.
Here are the poll’s results:
A WaPo-ABC poll last month had similar findings:
Since its peak 3 1/2 years ago, belief that climate change is happening is down sharply among Republicans — 76 to 54 percent — and independents — 86 to 71 percent. It dipped more modestly among Democrats, from 92 to 86 percent. A majority of respondents still support legislation to cap emissions and trade pollution allowances, by 53 to 42 percent.
Polls like these, and a competitive primary challenge from the right, may conspire to take away Senator McCain’s vote on climate legislation this spring. Meanwhile, it looks increasingly likely that Republicans will nominate a climate change denier for President in 2012.
Republican senators in Washington are not the only ones that are overwhelmingly opposing efforts to move a cap-and-trade bill, as the next wave of potential GOP officeholders has near-unanimously come out against the legislation.
In fact, there are virtually no major Republican Senate candidates running for office in 2010 that are in favor of the cap-and-trade climate bill.
That Republicans in solidly conservative states would run on anti-cap-and-trade platforms comes as no surprise. But the current crop of GOP candidates is primarily running in states that voted for President Obama last year and those states are seen as being somewhere between swing and solidly Democratic.
If the young people and environmentalists who propelled Obama to the Presidency actually turn out to vote next year, the chorus of pundits predicting a wave of Republicans will end up with egg on their faces.
