Louisiana elected a new House speaker, Representative Mike Johnson who discredits the role of fossil fuels in advancing climate change. He also does not support investing in clean energy and he attains a lot of campaign contributions from major gas and oil companies. Mike Johnson believes that climate change is not being spurred by human activity such as burning fossil fuels rather, climate change is happening due to natural patterns in Earth’s history. As a result of these beliefs, Johnson has voted against legislation that helps reduce climate change such as reducing methane leaks and requiring companies to state climate change risks. Instead, he supports cutting the funds towards the Environmental Protection Agency.
So why should you care about what Johnson does? Well, there is plenty of evidence supporting that human activities are fueling global warming. According to the United Nations, after the industrial revolution in the 1800s, human activities have been a major contributor to climate change ever since because of the burning of fossil fuels. Greenhouse gases naturally exist in our atmosphere but after industrialization, human fossil fuel burning leads to a large contribution of these gases that is not natural. Many people use the argument that the Earth naturally has a warming and cooling pattern and while that is true, this extra addition of greenhouse gases is causing global warming to happen more rapidly when there are preventative measures we can take to reduce its effects and slow it down. In class, we’ve discussed the impacts of misinformation. The reason so many people believe that climate change does not correlate with human activity is because of their lack of knowledge and belief in misinformation such as the misinformation that Johnson believes in. This is harmful because his decisions on important bills are impacted and that leads to detrimental actions for the future of our environment.
Sources: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/26/climate/mike-johnson-climate-policies.html
https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/what-is-climate-change
15 comments:
I definitely believe that Mike Johnson's beliefs on climate change will play a significant role in the House's direction under his time as Speaker, and also wanted to bring up another aspect of his political beliefs that are relevant. Being overtly religious, Johnson has very right wing views on both abortion and LGBTQ+ rights. His long legislative past of supporting bills limiting the rights of women on abortions will likely affect the topic as it continues to evolve through current discussions in the House. For those interested, Mike Johnson hosts a podcast with his wife called "Truth Be Told," in which they discuss current events from their personal Christian lens. This is a great source to learn more about his personal beliefs as more events develop over the coming months.
(https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/role-speaker-mike-johnsons-religious-views-play-politics/story?id=104366347#:~:text=As%20a%20hard%2Dline%20conservative,on%20abortion%20and%20LGBTQ%2B%20rights.&text=Johnson%20has%20a%20long%20history,.%20Anthony%20Pro%2DLife%20America)
I think Mike Johnson's selection is definitely representative of the larger trend of extreme conservatives being elected over moderates. Even though Johnson's extreme views may not represent the majority of the party, it is easier to run on an extreme position and gain the support of the most extreme wing of the party as well as most of the more moderate right-wing people (because they'd rather support an extreme right-winger than someone on the left) than to run on a moderate position and alienate the extremists as well as those who think the politician should be even closer to the center. The left has not been able to keep up as well with this idea, and most people who vote for them don't seem to be voting because they support the candidate wholeheartedly, but because they think they are better than the right-wing candidate.
I see Mike Johnson's views on climate change as representative of the overall Republican view on the matter. According to a 2022 study done by Pew Research center, while 78% of Democrat adults view climate change as a major threat, only 23% of Republicans feel the same. Moreover, climate change has a larger noticeable impact in highly populated urban cities and less so in rural areas. This could be a possible reason for the strong polarization on climate change as rural areas are strongly Republican and urban cities strongly Democratic. Yes, Johnson may be taking it a step further with his idea of cutting EPA funding, but honestly his overall view doesn't really come as a shock to me.
Here's the Pew Research Study: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/09/what-the-data-says-about-americans-views-of-climate-change/
I see the election of Mike Johnson as a continuation of the populists aka MAGA republicans taking over the party. Despite efforts by moderate members of the party to separate themselves from Trump and the right-wing populists that came along with him, those far-right members of the party are becoming harder and harder to ignore. Since the far-right members have proven they aren't willing to compromise, I think that they will mostly get what they want even if moderates will disagree because the moderates are willing to give into the far-right members as shown with the election of Mike Johnson. It might take a few more election cycles, but I think that these MAGA republicans are going to eventually take over the party.
I think Mike Johnson's election points to a greater trend that I've anecdotally noticed: the increased religious component of the far right. A lot of Mike Johnson's talking points in interviews as well as his campaign are centered around him being devoutly Christian. He has stated numerous times that America is a "Christian" nation, and in some sense that is true: around 70% of American citizens identify with some sect of Christianity, and there is a lot of religious language in the country's founding documents (The Constitution saying, "all men are created equal"). Thus, while we label Mike Johnson's views as extreme right here in California, he embodies the conservative Christian views that combat many progressive issues such as LGBTQ rights, abortion, and climate change. I believe this heavy focus on religion as a political motivator is detrimental to the health of the American democracy, as baked into our Constitution is also the freedom of religion--but the Christian majority of the nation is causing many conservative values to win over progressive values.
Link to Mother Jones article on Mike Johnson's call for a "biblically sanctioned government.
Representative Mike Johnson's perspective on climate change, which appears to be in line with a broader Republican stance, is a topic of concern. Climate change is a critical global issue that affects us all, regardless of political affiliations. The idea that urban areas may experience a more immediate impact from climate change compared to rural regions could be contributing to the existing polarization on this topic. However, it's essential to emphasize that scientific consensus overwhelmingly supports the idea that human activities, including the burning of fossil fuels, contribute significantly to climate change. Disregarding this consensus and opposing measures to mitigate climate change can have profound and lasting implications for the environment and future generations. While it may not be surprising that some politicians hold such views, it's crucial for informed citizens to advocate for policies that promote responsible environmental practices and address climate change. We must work collectively to tackle this issue and strive for a more sustainable and resilient future, irrespective of political differences.
It's pretty sad that almost every political office feels like it's becoming a tool for either side's agenda. I don't know how recent this phenomenon is, but the Speaker of the House used to be about bringing both sides together and uniting for bipartisan solutions. In the last few years, positions like Speaker of the House have felt like tools to decide which coalition is on top and whether the GOP of the future will be pro-trump, neutral trump, or only trump. We are seeing so many rippling effects of polarization, and I don't think it's stopping any time soon. My optimistic perspective is that America will elect a truly bipartisan president, we will go through a few years of real change and progress with a strong economy, bringing both sides closer together ideologically. Until then, I guess we'll continue to demonize the other side every chance we get.
I believe that Johnsons' beliefs will definitely impact Americans' future. According to PEW research center, 56% of Americans believe that the federal government is doing TOO little to change and stop climate change. This result isn't surprising due to the immense amount of political polarization. In my opinion, we need to find ways to diminish the polarization and stop letting such extreme individuals make decisions that will forever impact our future generations.
Not only is Johnson right-winged in issues such as climate change, but he also takes an extreme stance on issues related to women and the LGBTQ+ community. Polarization has the ability to impact all issues.
I think Mike Johnson's perspective on climate change is a concern, especially for our generation. The number of people nowadays who still seem to ignore the years and years of evidence is already scary, but when those kind of people get into significant positions of leadership, that's when it gets really scary. The older generations won't have to bear the burden of climate change, and if change isn't taken immediately, the effects of climate change will be felt all over the world and soon be irreversible. That is why it is imperative that we take action now. If greenhouse gasses were to stop being emitted today, the global average temperature would flatten in the next few years. Thus, hearing that people who plan to not only take no action, but cut down on the action that is being taken right now, are getting put into positions of power, is a huge reason for concern. Johnson's extremely right winged opinions will not only be felt by climate activists, but by activists in several sectors.
Taking in Rep. Mike Johnson's position on climate change is quite the mental exercise. It's not just about disagreeing with a scientific standpoint. It's about the ripple effect that such a high-level opinion might have. It makes me wonder, with all the scientific evidence laid out on the table, how do we ensure that the policies set today don't lead us down a tricky path tomorrow? It's a delicate dance between what's politically popular and what's environmentally necessary, and honestly, it's a dance we can't afford to get wrong. I'm hoping for some sort of common ground where the wellbeing of our planet is put as first priority and doesn't cause further hardship and suffering for the next generation.
Politicians are not the only ones spreading inaccurate information about climate change, though: Big Oil engages in disinformation, intentionally deceiving the public for even greater profits. Revealed documents have found that Big Oil companies have known about human's impact on climate change ever since the 1950s. In the case with Exxon(before merging with Mobil), scientists had warned "their executives about 'potentially catastrophic' anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming since at least 1977"(Science). The term "greenwashing" has become popularized more recently, as companies begin to mask their large profits behind plans towards sustainability with "low emissions". The same thing happens with other industries, like where packaging is labeled as biodegradable or recyclable material, when the product itself still isn't.
More recently, an investigation by the House Oversight Committee found various new information regarding the disinformation and made Big Oil executives admit that they contributed to the current climate crisis. Then, a couple months ago, the state of California entered a law suit against 5 Big Oil companies, emphasizing the extent to which their disinformation has negatively impacted the world's path towards sustainability and averting climate change.
Science: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk0063#:~:text=Researchers%20and%20journalists%20have%20subsequently,industry%20since%20at%20least%20the
Some links regarding government action:
https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/news/press-releases/oversight-committee-releases-new-documents-showing-big-oil-s-greenwashing
https://www.gov.ca.gov/2023/09/16/people-of-the-state-of-california-v-big-oil/
Johnson’s appointment as the new Speaker seems like a good example of the growing ideological divide between the parties, with the Republican party in particular shifting its base rightwards. Given the idea that most nominal independent voters still lean heavily to one party or the other, this strategy seems to be paying off: while the past couple of years have seen a few Republican names seek to distance themselves from the or at least oppose Trump, such as with Liz Cheney, the overall strength seems to be going strong even with what seems to be a growing trend of further-right legislation and policy, as with DeSantis in Florida. Johnson’s views on what he asserts is a less strong impact of fossil fuels on climate change may contradict science, but considering other legislation that’s recently been passed in majority-Republican states, Republicans evidently thought it workable to appoint someone so clearly partisan. There’s also an interesting trend towards younger, or less experienced, people. Johnson has had the shortest tenure of a House member elected to be Speaker in 140 years, and hasn’t served as a committee chair. (https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/25/mike-johnson-speaker-votes-00123421) It’s interesting that, given how the Republican party is typically more hierarchical, there seems to now be a preference for strong ideological commitment or policy positions rather than a blend of political experience and policy as would usually be more of the case..
I agree with Abby, Mike Johnson's beliefs regarding climate change are truly worrying. It is absurd to think that people believe climate change is a hoax because our Earth is slowly deteriorating. Due to global warming, the yearly average temperature from 1850 to 2023 has approximately increased by four degrees. Global warming is only a fraction of contributors to climate change, but from global warming alone, "We already see effects scientists predicted, such as the loss of sea ice, melting glaciers and ice sheets, sea level rise, and more intense heat waves" (NASA Global Climate Change). I think a big factor in why it is so difficult for federal workers to come to a conclusion on how to improve climate change is because of the polarizing views between Republicans and Democrats regarding climate change. Going back to Chin-Yi's comment, 78% of Democrats think climate change is a threat and only 23% of Republicans agree. Thus, unless the two parties can come to an agreement, the increasing trend will stay consistent and will continue until climate change is irreversible. Is it that hard to look at scientific data and realize that climate change is serious?
Sources:
https://climate.nasa.gov/effects/#:~:text=We%20already%20see%20effects%20scientists,will%20also%20increase%20and%20intensify.
https://climatechangetracker.org/?utm_campaign=2023-10&utm_source=Google&utm_medium=search&utm_campaign=2023-10&utm_source=Google&utm_medium=search&gclid=CjwKCAiA0syqBhBxEiwAeNx9N_opBbfcmulX0uBkuwM31i0frqN8uN0YFdBfkQmU3GRbm4-Vf2leHBoCGkIQAvD_BwE
I find Representative Mike Johnson's stance on climate change troubling and concerning. Reading about his rejection of human-induced climate change and his lack of support for measures aimed at mitigating its impact, like reducing methane leaks and advocating for climate risk disclosures, is alarming to me.
Numerous studies from credible scientific institutions, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), emphasize the critical impact of human-induced greenhouse gas emissions, primarily from burning fossil fuels, on Earth's climate. These emissions have notably increased since the industrial revolution, contributing significantly to the current climate crisis. Johnson's belief that climate change results solely from natural Earth patterns contradicts this established understanding. It overlooks the urgency of taking crucial steps to address and slow down its impact.
As someone concerned about the environment and the collective future, it's essential for me to advocate for policies rooted in scientific consensus and to support leaders who prioritize responsible environmental stewardship above political affiliations.
I firmly believe that Mike Johnson's stance on climate change will have a substantial impact on the direction the House takes during his tenure as Speaker. Additionally, it's important to note another aspect of his political beliefs that bears relevance. Due to his openly religious convictions, Johnson holds conservative views on abortion and LGBTQ+ rights. His extensive legislative history supporting bills that restrict women's rights on abortion is likely to influence ongoing discussions on the topic in the House.
Post a Comment