A lot in some ways, not so much in others. While most Republicans do not see climate change as an urgent issue, they are supportive of a number of ways of addressing it. They agree with some Democratic policies but not others. The reverse is also true. Let me make the case why there is more opportunity for bipartisanship on this critical issue than most people realize.

On New Year’s Eve I published “What I’ve Learned From Conservatives Addressing The Challenge Of Climate Change.” The basic point of the piece is that despite a general tendency among liberals to perceive this crowd as climate change deniers (data below will show this is not true), I now have the pleasure of knowing a number of Republicans and Libertarians who are very focused on climate change and working hard to solve this problem.

That said, and not unexpectedly, they have different views on how to do so. To summarize and admittedly oversimplify (a lot), liberals see the financial sector as leading the charge on the energy transition whereas conservatives see technology doing so. In terms of the five ideal types of climate change narratives I developed with Melita Leuosi (Scientific, Skeptical, Moral, Opportunity, and Doomsday), liberals load heavy on Doomsday and conservatives load heavy on Opportunity.

In my “what I’ve learned” piece I discuss the Conservative Climate Caucus whose founder and Chair is Rep. John Curtis (R-UT) with Vice Chair Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA). It has 81 members including 11 from Texas and six from Florida. Thus, it was with interest that I read an article in Politico based on an interview with Mr. Curtis who is running for the open Senate seat created by the retirement of Mitt Romney (and my former very blue state MA governor!). The article discusses how Mr. Curtis views being a conservative champion of climate change in a very red state.

The article mentions Danielle Butcher Franz, the co-founder (with Benji Backer) and CEO of the American Conservation Coalition (ACC). It’s website states: “For too many Americans, climate action feels confusing or out of reach. While two-thirds of the country believe we are not doing enough to address this problem, the climate conversation has been stuck between alarmism and inaction. We can do better.” They note:

1. The majority of Americans believe climate change is happening and want to see action. (A lot more on this below.)
2. We are hopeful. (So am I.)
3. There is no silver bullet. (Completely agree and we need the best ideas across the political spectrum.)

Ever eager to meet more conservative critters doing work on climate change 🐥, I asked around my Republican and Libertarian friends to see if someone could make an introduction. As luck would have it, my Libertarian buddy Eli Lehrer (see Part 1 and Part 2 of interviews I’ve done with him), the co-founder and President of the center-right think tank The R Street Institute, knows her and kindly made the introduction. I had a delightful conversation with Ms. Butcher Franz a few weeks ago and am very impressed with what she and her organization are doing. Stay tuned on this!

More good luck. Ms. Butcher Franz alerted me to a recently released report from the Center for Social and Environmental Futures, “Climate change opinion and recent presidential elections (The Report),” by Matthew G. Burgess, Christian Suarez, Ashley Dancer, Lachlan J. Watkins, and Renae E. Marshall. Burgess, Suarez, and Dancer are at the University of Colorado (my home state!) Boulder, Watkins is at Vanderbilt University School of Law, and Marshall is at the Bren School of Environmental Science and Management, University of California, Santa Barbara.

The punchline of the report is fascinating, and I will be writing about it later. But no reason to wait so go ahead and read it! What I want to do here is summarize some of the excellent contextual background for the analytical study they did on how climate change influenced the 2020 Presidential election and draw some conclusions from it.

Political Polarization in America

“Affective polarization” refers to how much partisans dislike each other. It is at an all-time high. Evidence of this is that people would rather have their children marry someone from another racial group or religion than from the other political party. At the same time, this kind of tribalism isn’t the norm. The Report cites a More in Common study “Hidden Tribes” which finds the right wing of “traditional” and “devoted” conservatives make up 25 percent of voters vs. only eight percent on the left of “progressive activists.” Run the numbers and you get the remaining two thirds, what More in Common calls “the exhausted majority.”

This group tends to be less vocal and less politically engaged. As a result, the extremes have more of an opportunity to shape policy when they can and clash about it when they can’t. This is especially true on the right. Over the past 40 years Congressional Republicans have shifted further to the right than Congressional Democrats have shifted to the left. Finally, the extremes make for more entertaining press copy and online interviews than the many moderates in between. This creates a sense of polarization which is perhaps more real than actually exists. It’s not like we’re 50/50 at war with each other. While the harder core left and right are engaged in a broad culture war on many topics (e.g., ESG, climate change, and DEI) most Americans are either not engaged in this or are finding it tiresome and wish this war would end.

Evolving Views of Climate Change

Climate change wasn’t always the partisan issue it is today. Back in 1989 the percentage of U.S. adults who worried “a great deal” or “a fair amount” about climate change (Figure A below) and protecting the environment over economic growth (Figure B) was about the same. Hard to believe, I know. But the Global Warming Prevention Act of 1989 was led by Rep. Claudine Schneider (R-RI). It was co-sponsored by 144 members across the political spectrum, including Al Gore and Newt Gingrich. Although the bill did not pass (most don’t—like 90-95 percent), some aspects of it did in later legislation, such as a large increase in R&D spending for renewable energy.

Trends in Concerns about Climate Change | MATTHEW G. BURGESS

Since then views about the seriousness of climate change have substantially diverged. A recent poll by the Pew Research Center shows that while four-fifths (78 percent) of Democrats regard climate change as a major threat to the country only one-fifth (23 percent) of Republicans do so. There are many reasons for this. The Report cites political contributions by fossil-fuel interest groups, Republican voters disproportionally living in regions dependent on fossil fuel economies, conservatives being less enthusiastic about government intervention in market dynamics, and decarbonization policies can raise the price of energy and other staples.

At the same time, the Yale Climate Opinion Maps 2023 shows that only 16 percent of the U.S. population doesn’t believe in global warming. No doubt most, if not all, of them are on the right. But one can believe in global warming while at the same time simply not believing it is a major challenge, such as from not being informed or simply being optimistic that the problem will be solved in different ways. For example, I know some devout Christians who believe God will take care of us on this problem if we have sufficient faith in Him. I’m an agnostic and while I don’t share this view, I respect that others have it.

I also wonder if there is some confounding, perhaps unconsciously, about the seriousness of climate change and who is talking about it. I think it’s fair to say that liberals got the memo first en masse about the severity and consequences of climate change. They have poured substantial resources into addressing this from policy work to NGO activism. This has enabled them to shape the narrative about how to solve this problem.

In our polarized country it’s at least worth asking if many Republicans don’t see climate change as a serious problem simply because Democrats do. Like if you don’t want your kid to marry a Democrat wouldn’t logical consistency mean you don’t agree with them about the seriousness of climate change 🤔? Most people don’t have the time and interest to dig into this complex topic and may simply take the signals from their own tribe. This is why I find it so encouraging to see conservatives addressing the problem with different ideas. Both groups need to start talking to each other more. And conservative views need more prominence in the public discussion. One obvious benefit of this is their greater credibility in the eyes of their peers.

Concerns about Climate Change by Party and Age | MATTHEW G. BURGESS

Legend

It is also encouraging to see that there are segments of those who identify as Republicans for which the gap with Democrats is less. As shown in Figure A above, the “Climate Change in the American Mind” research project found that while conservative Republicans’ views of climate change haven’t changed since 2010, concern has increased with moderate or liberal (sounds like an oxymoron, I know 🐥) Republicans (and with everyone else).

Figure B above shows that young people are more concerned about climate change, including Republicans. A majority (59 percent) of Republicans under 35 believe that climate change will hurt future generations (72 percent for Independents and 92 percent for Democrats in this age group). The number for young Republicans is 10 percent higher than for those 55 and over. It’s interesting to note that while this group isn’t that concerned about climate change, nearly half think it will hurt future generations. So they are concerned about climate change; they just don’t see is as an urgent issue.

Climate Change is Not a Top Priority for Most People

A Pew Research Center poll shows that climate change ranks 17^th out of 21 issues Americans think should be a top priority for the President and Congress—37 percent vs. 75 percent at the top for strengthening the economy and 26 percent at the bottom for dealing with the coronavirus outbreak. The difference between Democrats and Republicans is stark. Climate change and protecting the environment are the two issues on which divergence is greatest. Whereas 59 percent on the left see climate change as a top priority, this is true for only 13 percent on the right. (Pretty much tied with dealing with the coronavirus outbreak and addressing issues around race.) For whatever reasons, both Democrats and Republicans see protecting the environment as more important than climate change.

It’s also interesting to note very little difference between the two groups on defending against terrorism and reducing the influence of money in politics and, to a lesser extent, reducing healthcare costs and reducing crime. All high priorities.

Americans’ Rankings of 21 Policy Issues

Topic Priority Ranking by Americans | MATTHEW G. BURGESS

Bipartisan Support for Dealing with Climate Change

Despite the political polarization around climate change, there are still areas where some bipartisan consensus can be found as shown in the graphs below based on data from the Pew Research Center. A large majority of Americans support general policies to deal with climate change, such as U.S. participation in international efforts and taking steps to be carbon neutral by 2050. It is worth noting that while support from conservative Republicans is less, it is still between about 30 and 40 percent. This shows that while most Republicans do not worry a lot about climate change, they are supportive of efforts to address it. There is much less conservative Republican support for Biden’s policies. Some of this is tribal. But some of this is simply different views on what the right policies should be.

Support for Policies to Address Climate Change

Support for Policies to Address Climate Change by Party | MATTHEW G. BURGESS

Both Democrats and Republicans are enthusiastic about planting a trillion trees to absorb carbon emissions and with virtually no difference between them. Hey, everyone loves ❤️ trees 🌳 🌲🌴 ! After that both groups, although not to quite the same degree, support requiring oil and gas companies to seal methane gas leaks and proving a tax credit to businesses developing carbon capture and storage (CCS) facilities. This clearly shows that while climate change may not be a top priority for Republicans, they do agree it is an issue which needs to be addressed by reducing carbon emissions.

About half of Republicans support taxing corporations based on their carbon emissions. This is amazing to me. I’ve written about the inevitably of a carbon tax. When I raise this issue, I’m told by both sides it’s a political non-starter. People probably thought the same thing about gay marriage until “The Respect for Marriage Act.” Yes, the carbon tax is not a silver bullet but it could be incredibly effective if done right. I think both sides are throwing in the towel too soon on this.

Support for Policies to Reduce Carbon Emissions

Support for Policies to Reduce Carbon Emissions by Political Party | MATTHEW G. BURGESS

The biggest differences in policy views are in the low Republican support to prioritize alternative energy over fossil fuels, requiring power plants to eliminate all carbon emissions by 2040, and requiring most new buildings to be run on electricity with no gas lines. These differences reflect a fundamentally different theory of change between liberals and conservatives on how best to adapt to climate change. The former emphasize reducing fossil fuel use as rapidly as possible (and sometimes by whatever means) while the latter see a greater role for fossil fuels for years to come (addressed through technologies such as CCS that are not yet commercially viable at scale). This should be the basis of a robust public policy discussion but it’s a hard one to have since both sides have strong, sometimes entrenched, views. Liberals say, “Conservatives don’t care about global warming and are in the pockets of fossil fuel companies and their trade associations.” Conservatives say, “Liberals are totally impractical with their net-zero commitments and they ignore the need for a just transition for ordinary Americans.”

Nevertheless, concrete bipartisan steps have been taken, often not using the words “climate change,” or near equivalents, in the name of the bill. The Report notes that “At the federal level, the bipartisan COVID-relief package of 2021, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (a.k.a. bipartisan infrastructure law) of 2021, and the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 all included billions of dollars in funding for renewable energy and other low-carbon technologies.”

Most voters would like government to do even more. According to the “Yale Climate Opinion Maps 2021,” 61 percent of Americans nationally think Congress should do more to address global warming. The same is true for majorities in 47 of the 50 states (plus D.C.), 424 of 436 Congressional districts (so clearly nearly every red one), and 2,414 of 3,148 counties (77 percent).

There’s Less Polarization about Climate Change than Most People Think

Only 16 percent of Americans don’t believe global warming is happening. This is an astonishingly low number. To put this in perspective, a 2021 Gallup poll found that 41 percent of Americans believe alien 👽 spacecraft 🛸 have visited the Earth 🌎!

While it is true that most Republicans don’t see climate change as a serious and urgent issue, this is changing for moderate/liberal and younger ones. Even the older ones see climate change as an issue that will affect future generations. Many to most Republicans support international efforts and net zero by 2050 efforts to address climate change. There is also broad support for some ways to reduce carbon emissions at nearly the same level as Democrats. Almost half of Republicans support a carbon tax. A majority of Americans in nearly every Red state, nearly every Red congressional district, and many red counties want the government to do more to address climate change.

I draw three conclusions from this. The first is that the climate change discussion should shift from purity tests about how concerned someone is about climate change to finding areas of common ground for reducing carbon emissions. The second is that liberals need to listen more to conservatives who see climate change as a serious and urgent issue but who have different ideas about how to address it. The third is that every liberal who is concerned about climate change should find a conservative who is as well and invite them to lunch. I’m a liberal who is actively growing his list of conservative friends so happy to help with introductions 😍.