New Poll Shows Overwhelming Majority of Americans Want Lawmakers to Take Action on Climate
'The American people seem far more unified than our political leadership on the need to address climate change'
Ahead of the 2016 elections, the verdict is in: Most people in the United States--including a large number of Republicans--think global warming poses a serious threat to the world and want the government to take action to stave off climate crisis.
A new nation-wide poll conducted by Stanford University, The New York Times, and environmental research organization Resources for the Future found that two-thirds of people in the U.S.--including almost half of Republicans--say they are more likely to back politicians who vow in their campaigns to fight global warming.
Likewise, the majority of respondents said they are less likely to vote for a candidate who denies the reality of human-caused global warming.
Jon A. Krosnick, Stanford University professor and an author of the poll, told The New York Times that the numbers on Republicans constitute "the most powerful finding" in the survey.
While most Republic candidates steer clear of addressing climate change, and many openly deny its scientific foundations, the study suggests that their base of support is moving in a different direction.
However, the gap between the public and their political representatives appears to extend across the political arena.
"The American people seem far more unified than our political leadership on the need to address climate change," said Resources for the Future president Phil Sharp. "As often happens, politicians would do well to catch up with the electorate."
According to the survey, 83 percent of people in the U.S. think inaction in the face of rising emissions would pose a very or somewhat serious problem in the future. At least 61 percent of Republicans fell within this grouping.
The poll also reveals that the most people in the United States believe they will personally suffer from climate change to some degree.
The bipartisan nature of this concern was demonstrated by Aliza Strauss, described by The New York Times as "a Republican homemaker in Teaneck, N.J."
"A tree fell on my house during Hurricane Sandy and in the future it might be worse," Strauss told researchers. "The stronger storms and the flooding will erode the coastline, and that is a big concern for me."
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just three days to go in our Spring Campaign, we're falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Ahead of the 2016 elections, the verdict is in: Most people in the United States--including a large number of Republicans--think global warming poses a serious threat to the world and want the government to take action to stave off climate crisis.
A new nation-wide poll conducted by Stanford University, The New York Times, and environmental research organization Resources for the Future found that two-thirds of people in the U.S.--including almost half of Republicans--say they are more likely to back politicians who vow in their campaigns to fight global warming.
Likewise, the majority of respondents said they are less likely to vote for a candidate who denies the reality of human-caused global warming.
Jon A. Krosnick, Stanford University professor and an author of the poll, told The New York Times that the numbers on Republicans constitute "the most powerful finding" in the survey.
While most Republic candidates steer clear of addressing climate change, and many openly deny its scientific foundations, the study suggests that their base of support is moving in a different direction.
However, the gap between the public and their political representatives appears to extend across the political arena.
"The American people seem far more unified than our political leadership on the need to address climate change," said Resources for the Future president Phil Sharp. "As often happens, politicians would do well to catch up with the electorate."
According to the survey, 83 percent of people in the U.S. think inaction in the face of rising emissions would pose a very or somewhat serious problem in the future. At least 61 percent of Republicans fell within this grouping.
The poll also reveals that the most people in the United States believe they will personally suffer from climate change to some degree.
The bipartisan nature of this concern was demonstrated by Aliza Strauss, described by The New York Times as "a Republican homemaker in Teaneck, N.J."
"A tree fell on my house during Hurricane Sandy and in the future it might be worse," Strauss told researchers. "The stronger storms and the flooding will erode the coastline, and that is a big concern for me."
Ahead of the 2016 elections, the verdict is in: Most people in the United States--including a large number of Republicans--think global warming poses a serious threat to the world and want the government to take action to stave off climate crisis.
A new nation-wide poll conducted by Stanford University, The New York Times, and environmental research organization Resources for the Future found that two-thirds of people in the U.S.--including almost half of Republicans--say they are more likely to back politicians who vow in their campaigns to fight global warming.
Likewise, the majority of respondents said they are less likely to vote for a candidate who denies the reality of human-caused global warming.
Jon A. Krosnick, Stanford University professor and an author of the poll, told The New York Times that the numbers on Republicans constitute "the most powerful finding" in the survey.
While most Republic candidates steer clear of addressing climate change, and many openly deny its scientific foundations, the study suggests that their base of support is moving in a different direction.
However, the gap between the public and their political representatives appears to extend across the political arena.
"The American people seem far more unified than our political leadership on the need to address climate change," said Resources for the Future president Phil Sharp. "As often happens, politicians would do well to catch up with the electorate."
According to the survey, 83 percent of people in the U.S. think inaction in the face of rising emissions would pose a very or somewhat serious problem in the future. At least 61 percent of Republicans fell within this grouping.
The poll also reveals that the most people in the United States believe they will personally suffer from climate change to some degree.
The bipartisan nature of this concern was demonstrated by Aliza Strauss, described by The New York Times as "a Republican homemaker in Teaneck, N.J."
"A tree fell on my house during Hurricane Sandy and in the future it might be worse," Strauss told researchers. "The stronger storms and the flooding will erode the coastline, and that is a big concern for me."