The Politicization of Climate Change
How American environmentalism became a political issue
“The care of the Earth is our most ancient and most worthy, and after all our most pleasing responsibility. To cherish what remains of it and to foster its renewal is our only hope.” ― Wendell Berry, American poet
On January 28th, 1969, 3.5 million gallons of oil spilled off the coast of Santa Barbara, California, making this spill the largest environmental catastrophe to date at that point. Less than one year later, the United States Congress passed the National Environmental Policy Act, a bill which forced the assessment and disclosure of environmental consequences of any proposed action by either the private or public sector in the United States. By 2010, nearly 100 countries would adopt similar laws. (1)
Environmentalism became a hot political topic in the United States on April 22nd, 1970, when 20 million Americans came together in public spaces to protest the ongoing environmental crises permeating across both the United States and the world. A few months later, President Richard Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency, stating that “our national government today is not structured to make a coordinated attack on the pollutants, which debase the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the land that grows our food.” He went to say that “the present governmental structure for dealing with environmental pollution often defies effective and concerted action.” After this declaration, Time Magazine would go on to make environmentalism the issue of the year. (2)
It should be noted that American environmentalism is not a new concept. It has been in the public conversation for nearly 150 years. In 1872, President Ulysses S. Grant signed a piece of legislation that made Yellowstone National Park the first official national park. 20 years later, John Muir hosted the first meeting of the now-famous Sierra Club. This club was not only instrumental in the protection and conservation of national parks, but also influential in propelling President Woodrow Wilson to create the National Park Service as a subsidiary of the Department of the Interior. Its mission is to protect the nation’s national parks and monuments. As the 20th century progressed, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt presided over the most prominent environmental movement in history when, in 1933, his New Deal platform solidified the United States’ position on the importance of the nation’s natural resources. The extent of the conservation projects carried on during the New Deal was far more reaching than anything attempted before as soil erosion control, water conservation, the preservation of wildlife, and other environmental protection activities became a part of the everyday life and activities of American citizens. (3)Today, the United States protects 12% of its land area and 38% of its marine area, representing 530,000 and 2,000,000 square miles respectively. (4)
Prior to the dawn of the 21st century, environmental protection and activism enjoyed broad bipartisan support. This support started waning towards the end of the 20th century as Americans witnessed a massive decrease in game population, cities consumed by smog and pollution, rivers catching on fire, and acid rain upending bodies of water and forests in the Northeast. These issues affected every community across the country. After President Nixon created the EPA, the nation’s efforts to reduce climate change’s detrimental effects saw some major successes. For example, the Clean Air Act of 1970 was instrumental in reducing pollution in Los Angeles and California as a whole. The passing and enforcement of this act were only possible because the creation of the EPA led to air pollution regulations, which in turn allowed California to institute stricter state provisions.
Since around 2000, the prevention of climate change’s destructive effects has become the primary concern of most environmentalists. Combating climate change requires a systematic approach to change from a fossil fuel pollution based economy to a restorative earth economic model. Unfortunately, instead of continuing to enjoy broad bipartisan support, lobbying by special interest groups has caused climate change mitigation to become a politically polarizing issue, similar to abortion rights and gun control. This is where the politicization of climate change and sustainability has become extremely problematic.
A large percentage of conservative-oriented individuals and groups see climate change “[having] little to do with the state of the environment and much to do with shackling capitalism and transforming the American way of life in the interests of global wealth redistribution.” (5)
British blogger and anti-climate think tank (Heartland Institute) regular James Delingpole has pointed out that “modern environmentalism successfully advances many of the causes dear to the left: redistribution of wealth, higher taxes, greater government intervention, [and] regulation.” Heartland’s CEO, Joseph Bast, goes further by bluntly stating that for the left, “climate change is the perfect thing [because] it’s the reason why we should do everything [the left wants] to do anyway.” (6)
Reframing the narrative as a special interest or a plot from the left was a successful political move that was carefully seeded by special interest groups who sought to continue the wealth generation provided by the continuous use and advancement of fossil fuels. “According to a 2014 study published in Climatic Change, the denial-espousing think tanks and other advocacy groups making up what sociologist Robert Brulle calls the ‘climate change countermovement’ are collectively pulling in more than $900 million per year for their work on a variety of right-wing causes, most of it in the form of ‘dark money’ funds from conservative foundations that cannot be fully traced.”(7)
The 2016 election of Donald Trump, combined with the US Senate maintaining a conservative majority, has swung the pendulum of American politics far to the right. One major aspect of President Trump’s 2016 campaign platform targeted environmental policy for rhetorical attacks and budget cuts by seeking to eradicate the executive policies of President Barack Obama, weakening or rescinding protective regulations, and undermining the regulatory and even the scientific capacity of the federal environmental agencies. (9) Currently, President Trump has completed the rollback of 68 environmental rules, with 32 in progress. (10) This has created catastrophic environmental consequences. President Trump’s goal was to run this country “like a business” and eradicate regulation, as many businesses abhor regulation. All forms of regulation for the air and water from fossil fuel production and agriculture have been dramatically reduced. National lands and monuments have been cut down and sold off for extraction, threatening both endangered species and conservation efforts. Trump accelerated efforts to maximize fossil fuel extraction by allowing for unchecked carbon emission by removing the clean power plan and the need for methane disclosure. An important note, methane is 34x better at trapping heat than CO2 emissions. To ensure the disregard of any climate change mitigation, Trump withdrew from the Paris Climate Accords, which has a goal of keeping a global warming increase below 2 degrees Celsius. This unfortunate decision effectively signaled to the rest of the world that the United States possesses irresponsible leadership as it pertains to climate change mitigation.
These actions have had severe consequences for both Americans and people all over the world. The planet has already hit the tipping point in the Arctic, accelerating the temperature change rate and moving away from the safe space for operation. The planet has lost time to curb global warming, when America desperately needed an administration to work with the world, not against it.
“There has never been a figure in political history who was so passionately dedicated to destroying the projects for organized human life on earth in the near future.” (11)— Noam Chomsky, June 2017
What can be done?
When we look at the forces working against climate change policy, we need to remind ourselves that our current government does not reflect the average American’s interest. “Majorities of Americans say the federal government is doing too little for key aspects of the environment, from protecting water or air quality to reducing the effects of climate change. And most believe the United States should focus on developing alternative sources of energy over the expansion of fossil fuel sources, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.” (12)
The Trump administration does not reflect the views of the majority of American citizens, but rather reflects the views of fossil fuel companies and corporations. As a nation, we still agree that the health of the environment reflects human health and is worth safeguarding. As a nation, we need to give the climate crisis the attention it deserves and only elect officials that agree. We are all environmentalists in our own right. “If environmentalists hope to become more than a special interest, we must start framing our proposals around core American values and start seeing our own values as central to what motivates and guides our politics. Doing so is crucial if we are to build the political momentum — a sustaining movement — to pass and implement the legislation that will achieve action on global warming and other issues.”(13)
Not all is lost though. In the last few years, the Democratic party, which currently controls the US House of Representatives, has made intriguing strides to introduce lasting legislation which can have a positive effect on climate change mitigation. The Green New Deal, introduced to Congress by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, provides a detailed outline that serves to provide high paying jobs that both protect the environment and serve local and state communities.
Five main goals of the Green New Deal:
A) Building resiliency from climate change disasters.
B) Repairing and upgrading the infrastructure in the United States.
C) Carbon neutrality by meeting the energy demand with 100% renewable and zero-emission sources.
D) Increasing energy efficiencies and smart electricity grids.
E) Upgrading all existing buildings in the United States as well as building new buildings to achieve maximum energy and water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability. (14)
While the Green New Deal might appear to be a long-shot environmental wishlist, it’s feasible and can be a step in the right direction. This bill addresses the economic disparities and social injustices brought upon by climate change and it provides a historic chance for new prosperity and opportunity. If executed, either this bill, as it currently stands, or the similar Climate Change Plan introduced by Vice President Joe Biden for his 2020 Presidential campaign, would be one of the largest national, social, industrial, and economic mobilizations since World War II and the New Deal era.
Historically, the United States has had the willpower in the past to restructure the economy when need be. The halting of production in American factories in order to switch to military craft happened almost instantly. “In 1941, more than three million cars were manufactured in the United States. Only 139 more were made during the entire war. Instead [of making cars], Chrysler made fuselages and General Motors made airplane engines, guns, trucks, and tanks.”(15) On another front, a team of psychologists and social scientists cleverly curated propaganda to shift the mainland American diet to include organ meat, something that was usually wasted and not eaten by soldiers. This dramatically cut down food waste, thus increasing the efficiency of the [United States’] wartime diet. (16)
If executed properly, the United States can deliver remarkable change to all sectors of society at an incredible rate. Additionally, the federal budget can be transitioned into a more sustainable economy rather than one filled with the frivolous continuation of spending on fossil fuel subsidies that add carbon emissions. It is a difficult task for the United States to come together around climate change mitigation, but it ultimately can be done by achieving two main objectives: exposing and disrupting the politicization and corruption brought on by the fossil fuel industry, and creating and instituting legislation and policy that provides a more sustainable future.
Written by Brendan Hellebusch
Edited by Russell Tuchman
References:
- Eccleston, C. NEPA and Environmental Planning: Tools, Techniques, and Approaches for Practitioners 2008
- Time, Here’s Why the Environmental Protection Agency Was Created, 2017 https://time.com/4696104/environmental-protection-agency-1970-history/
- National Park Service Quick History of the National Park Service (2018) https://www.nps.gov/articles/quick-nps-history.htm
- UNEP-WCMC, Protected Area Profile for United States of America from the World Database of Protected Areas, October 2020, https://www.protectedplanet.net/country/US
- Yale Climate Connections, The Global Warming Culture Wars (2012) https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2012/04/the-global-warming-culture-wars/
- Naomi Klein, On Fire, (2018)
- Naomi Klein, On Fire, (2018)
- OpenSecretes, https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/summary?cid=N00005582&cycle=CAREER
- Richard N. L. Andrews, Oxford Research Papers, American Environmental Policy since 1964 (2018) https://oxfordre.com/americanhistory/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.001.0001/acrefore-9780199329175-e-408
- New York Times, The Trump Administration Is Reversing Nearly 100 Environmental Rules (2020) https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/climate/trump-environment-rollbacks.html
- Jacob Mag, Noam Chomsky: Trump’s Inaction on Climate Change Makes Him “the Worst Criminal in History, Undeniably” (2020) https://jacobinmag.com/2020/06/noam-chomsky-donald-trump-coronavirus-george-
- Pew Research Center, U.S. Public Views on Climate and Energy, (2019) https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2019/11/25/u-s-public-views-on-climate-and-energy/
- Shellenberger and Nordhaus, The Death of Environmentalism, (2004) https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/uploads.thebreakthrough.org/legacy/images/Death_of_Environmentalism.pdf
- H. RES. 109 (2019) https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hres109/BILLS-116hres109ih.pdf
- PBS, The War at Home (2007) https://www.pbs.org/thewar/at_home_war_production.htm
- The Atlantic, The World War II Campaign to Bring Organ Meats to the Dinner Table, (2014) https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/09/the-world-war-ii-campaign-to-bring-organ-meats-to-the-dinner-table/380737/
