Americans Care More About Gay Marriage Than Global Warming
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto on 08.29.07
Pollster American Environics studied American attitudes toward energy and the environment and found depressing results:
1) Americans overwhelmingly believe that global warming is occurring.
2) They don't care. "dealing with global warming" came 20th out of 23 policy priorities.
3) They won't give anything up. The cost of energy is more important than global warming.
As the graph shows, 69 percent of the public is prepared to overlook disagreement about the environment and there are six issues that rate ahead of the environment in terms of the number of people who consider them dealbreakers.
Among Republicans global warming rates DFL, and among Democrats, 17.
It is beyond depressing; notwithstanding all of our blogging, writing, movie making and politicking, the inconvenient truth is that we are getting nowhere. The report concludes:
The dramatic increase in media coverage of global warming in 2006 and 2007 has not made global warming a high priority for voters. Despite the unprecedented coverage of global warming, the issue remains a relatively low priority compared to other national issues. It is also a low priority compared with other energy issues. This could become important if action on this relatively low priority issue is perceived as raising energy prices.
Coupling global warming with energy independence, higher gas prices, and national security increases the issue’s saliency. While global warming and energy are inextricably intertwined at a policy level, most voters do not see energy through an environmental lens. Action on global warming and energy independence rank as a higher priority concern than “strengthening the military and keeping America safe,” according to Democracy Corps in March 2007.
Concerns over higher energy costs could undercut action on energy or global warming.
Americans tend to view energy as consumers and are extremely sensitive to the cost of energy. For this reason they steadfastly reject policies that increase the cost of gasoline or electricity in order to encourage conservation. Any public policy responses that have the effect of increasing energy costs rather than decreasing energy costs will likely exacerbate the high levels of energy cost anxiety felt by Americans. The rejection of Proposition 87 by California voters in November 2006 is a cautionary tale.
::Environmental Economics; Matthew Yglesias;
Download PDF of American Environics Report here
But this study appears odd to me. Why doesn't it mention health care? It mentions a lot of issues that are "trigger" or "hot button" issues. Especially for Republican types. And it just mentions "the environment" in an all encompassing way. It doesn't divide up environmental issues, and mention climate change.
Looking over that list, I think that most of those issues carry an equal level of importance. It's a shame that more people aren't paying attention to global warming, but even more discouraging is that all of these issues are basically treated as election fodder. They've all becoming merely talking points for politicians to promote their own agendas.
I hardly think these are significant findings when you consider how many people were surveyed, and when. The first chart is taken from a poll of 800 people, which is a pitifully small sample compared to the actual number of registered voters anyway- and was done in 2005! So why dress them up to look like some major discovery?
It also does not take into account the increase in awareness of these issues over time (though comparing the 2005 to 2007 numbers in the info provided gives some extremely rough idea, though the questions are phrased significantly differently).
Where did global warming rank on a comparable list of issues 5 years ago? Or 10? Was it even on the list? I'd be willing to wager that they were a heck of a lot lower.
Assuming there isn't a typo in the date of the first graph, using 2005 data as the basis for a headline in mid-2007 is completely misleading. So much has changed (and sadly not enough . . .).
As pointed out above, the headline doesn't really reflect information that can be gleaned from this study. Even if 800 surveyed were enough to draw statistically sound conclusions, the phrasing is deceptive. People are not being asked about "Global Warming," they are being asked about the environment. I would vote for someone who has different policy ideas about environmental problems. I wouldn't vote for someone who didn't believe those problems exist. The other topics included in the survey don't allow for the same sort of dichotomy. Either you believe gay marriage is ok, or you don't. There's no way for me to share your big picture, but disagree on the details.
im guessing one of the more regressive states was poled here.
Agreed - This tries to re-frame "Environment" as parallel to other issues. An Absurd approach.
Example: Abortion rights are as much an environmental issue as a religious one to many (maybe most) people.
Another: Energy development is NOT opposed to environment - if you frame it as one or the other - I would have said Energy is more important too - it's the most important environmental effort we need to make! Without cheaper, cleaner energy, we can't rainse standards of living in the rest of the world and therefore have no hope of reducing population. Without cleaner energy, we'd need 4 Billion people to die before we could hope to make earth sustainable.
And you can't EVER expect humans to drop their desire for religious freedom (the first 2 on the list in the 2005 poll at the top) - who'da thunk it? people have religious fervour over religious issues - they'd let the world burn before giving up their right to listen to God. (Unfortunately, in the USA, some people would also die for their right to interfere with OTHER peoples relationships with God)
The most recent poll is from APRIL! This is hardly a show of current attitudes.
The first one was taken in 05, over a year before the midterms. And almost all the issues above GW are very polarizing. The question isn't about what people care about, or even what their top priority is. Just what they would never vote for someone who didn't agree with them.
Agree with the commenters: poor design and small sample.
Were the respondants registered voters even?
Keeping in mind that a quarter of the US populace is functionally illiterate (can't read effectively), that means a quarter of this sample gets their info only from TV, which is hardly a place where climate change has received "emphasis" as an issue.
People are friggin' sheep.
...Peopole piss me off. As cynical as the may sound, I fear that the earth would be well rid of us. We are very much like so many parasites. Disheartening. Disgusting. Will we ever learn?
Hardly surprising. Americans are so isolated.
News flash: Americans are far smarter than previously assumed
This just goes to show that Americans will not let Eco-Marxists tell them how to live their lives. They are not being duped by questionable circumstantial evidence into believing in fallacious anthropogenic global warming, and they know that climate change is being caused by documented cyclical changes in the Earth's atmosphere. Within the next few years, when the 27-year sunspot cycle reaches its apex and the Earth starts cooling again, as it has done over and over again for hundreds of thousands of years, we will all look back on this and be glad that we did not annihilate our economy because a few socialists wanted to control the basic aspects of our lives--what cars we drive, or how big our houses are, how much we travel, or how we heat our homes. Don't worry guys, this will all be over soon.
That pie chart means nothing. Developing a new energy source overlaps with protecting the environment. The new energy movement is all about smarter, more Earth friendly energy.
Look its not difficult to see what your intentions are with a title like this. "People care more about the enviroment les than gay marriage."
But I'm not sure that's the message you want to send.
Gay Marriage and the enviroment are apples and oranges in their own categories...
People care about straight people care about procreating more than ANYYTHING...
Why are you drawing gay marriage into this quagmire AGAIN...
Pick on some other sub culture with your rhetoric will you.
peace
what a lame site...
The thing to remember here is that people don't disagree that the environment needs help. But many people disagree on Gay marriage. Why are you sensationalizing this?
Careful what you post... I hardly think 800 people represent the country... where was this poll conducted???
Eco-Marxists
Why does Treehugger let this shit get published? Are you that desperate for eyeballs?
I live in Orlando. I hate this place and agree about the whole shopping thing. I pretty much almost rarely go out shopping here in Orlando because the traffic is so horrendous. An hour and a half to get to a decent mall, an hour back maybe.
All these people have nothing better to do with their lives so they go shopping for crappy clothes. I know being a dude I don't care about fashion as much but I do like decent threads. It just sucks, people in general don't seem to have anything else to do, they need a life. I call my mom sometimes and all she talks about is shopping.
Central florida is dumb, abundant concrete, shopping, corporate mouse, minimal nature, everything that this site hates is what this young town seems to thrive on.
Honestly, people need to stop thinking with their wallets.
I love the reasoning of certain individuals who think the earth is going through a phase. Surely, the reason why the climate is changing is not because of all the unnatural crap we put into the air (not to mention water and land) on a daily basis. I mean LA was always smoggy. Those exhaust fumes were there when the city was first established.
And bravo to the comment on how sociallists "are trying to control on how we live". I mean those are the real villains of today, not lying policitians or greedy CEOs who have thousand killed or steal from those who are already struggling to make ends meet.
There is more to life than material possesions.
It's amazing that all of these things are problems. Is there anything socially important that is actually functioning well in America?
Isn't developing a new energy source and protecting the environment the same thing? (pie chart) Or are we equally excited to find new dirty energy like the idiots looking for more oil?
The people in denial over climate change totally crack me up. Keep posting!!! You are going in my book anonymously; and the profits are going to the environment. Thanks for helping!
Who cares? The government follows the money, not public opinion. They'll care more about environmental impact when it affects their lifeblood of resources. Public opinion is no problem for a political system with one party that wears two different costumes.. and the monkeys buy it, every time.
Hard to belive...
Funny - so many people assume people care about the environment. After more than 30 years trying to convince friends, family and strangers about the many environmental issues of the plant I've come to the conclusion that this study is pretty much right on target. People in general care much less about the enviornment than they care about their own desires. I've lost friends over this horrific and apathetic position - and I continue to lose friends, by choice because I cannot accept that they do not care.
umm this doesnt seem very real to me i mean sence when has there been 300% not 100??
This is another case like the post that cited a very old article as though it were a recent development. You can't take a 2005 survey [and even the two from the very beginning of 2007] and say it shows there has been no effect after the media coverage of climate change in 2006 and 2007. Please check your sources more thoroughly, guys. It's bad enough that it's constantly apparent you need an editor. At least check your research better.
However, even if this is still true, which it probably is, it doesn't matter as much as you make it sound. I think it matters more what people feel on specific issues, rather than when you lump everything together under "environment" and stick it with a bunch of other electoral debate issues.