Do Republicans care about the environment?

[BTTB]

I mean this seriously.

I was talking to a "friend" of mine who is a Republican, and the topic of the environment came up. I asked him what he thought about not being able to catch fish in CT, and he said "I don't want to catch fish in CT, though."

Rewind that sentence and play it over. More than once.

And what sparked that question was this one: "What do you think about the environment?" He responded, "We have trees."

What the HELL are the republicans thinking? He informed me that economy is more important than environment.

Thing is, republicans tend to be Christians, at leat this one. Why would you trash what God gave you? You're ruining God's gift to man, but for cash?

What are you thinking?

[eternalburn]

1. Don't need the enviroment if....

...the "rapture" is coming.

The best I can figure at the moment but I've had a few :)

[LostInAnomie]

2. Shifting Baselines.

They have come to accept the current state as the status quo and what destruction they see they deem it necessary for progress. If they could have seem what the environment was really like a few hundred years ago they could really see the damage we have caused.

[BTTB]

3. But but but

They can't argue with pure fact. That's the sad thing.

[OrwellwasRight]

4. Ah, but they do argue with pure fact!

I have to read news from a wide variety of print and web sources as part of my job and at least twice a week there is some article about how the Bush Admin is denying, distorting, or suppressing the scientific evidence about the environment.

I have a "friend" who works on the other side, and they get so much propaganda that they just don't see that there is a problem. He honestly belives that there are ZERO lasting repercussions as a result of the Exon Valdez spill, that drilling in ANWR would cause NO harm to the wildlife who live there, and that global climate change is NOT happening.

It's funny, they mock us for being "urban elites," and yet all they want to do is build, build, build, and cover the entire country with concrete. Sen. Inhofe and Rep. DeLay are the worst. They have said creepy things like let's suck the aquifer underneath Oklahoma dry, let's drill in ANWR to start a precedent of drilling in "pristine" areas, and that gloabl warming is just the theory of wacko left-wing lunatics.

There are a few "green" Repubs like Shays, McCain, and both Senators from Maine, but I don't completely trust most of them, and I don't understand how if they give a damn about the enviro they can be Republicans, who seem to be on a mission to destroy it as soon as possible.

Re your Christianity point: I thought the Bible said that god told Adam and Eve to take care of the land and animals, but the fundamentalists use some bizarre translation that says "take dominion," which they interpret to mean rape, pillage, and destroy.

I think all Americans ahould vote Dem if for no other reason than to ensure that their grandchildren are born with three eyeballs and have something to eat besides Soylent Green.

[GregD]

6. global warming

The freepers invaded a Yahoo message board for a global warming story this week, and absolutely deny any evidence that things are changing.

The fact that scientists are able to point to specific evidence and measurements, stuff that is melting, does not convince them. They call it a "theory" and insist that no actions mankind has take would have the slightest impact.

Their ideology defies logic.

[OrwellwasRight]

7. I was watching the news this week

and they were talking about the European climate change report that was just released (the one that the Bush Admin tried to suppress), and they showed pictures of Polar Bears while they discussed the prediction that Polar Bears will likely become extinct unless we STOP global climate change now, and I started to tear up.

How can someone call himself a human being with a heart and then do nothing to prevent the demise of a whole species of other beings? Isn't that taking innocent life? It is so inconceivably callous. I guess that is why I can't understand Repubs. They just seem so heartless.

[phantom power]

8. exactly: the problem starts with disagreement about "facts"

This, more than anything, is what cripples productive conversation about environment issues, or for that matter any other important issues in this country.

When I try to have these conversations, I end up arguing about the axioms. Is anthropogenic CO2 impacting the climate? We say yes, most Republicans appear to believe it's irrelevant. Did Iraq have WMD? Does isotope-dating provide a reliable measure of the age of the earth? Do massive tax-cuts pay for themselves by stimulating the economy? Is the supply of oil finite?

Republicans just plain believe the answers to all the above questions are the exact opposite of what most of us believe. If you can't agree on the basics, the rest of the dialogue is doomed before it even begins.

[pnutchuck]

22. Even the Dalai Lama is pissed

and that's a sad turn of events when a man that has been exiled from his home, his followers imprisoned and he's turned his concerns to Western technologies' affect on the environment!

"The world grows smaller and smaller, more and more inter-dependent. Today more than ever before life must be characterised by a sense of Universal responsibility, not only nation to nation and human to human, but also human to other forms of life".
H.H. The Dalai Lama

http://www.buddhanet.net/mag_eco.htm

[pnutchuck]

23. I commend Russia and the EU for reinitiating the Kyoto Treaty

Thanks to Russia ammending the Kyoto Treaty, it has been revived. The Treaty required the ammendment by one of the larger countries, like the US or Russia. Bush refused, but Putin agreed and has breathed like back into it. All of the EU countries, Russia, Japan, and a few others must be in compliance with the treaty by 2010 reducing CO2 output by 17 percent globally.

[GregD]

5. I belong to Trout Unlimited

In the Summer of 2003, I was at a work party doing stream restoration work. Most of the guys who were there, and are the most active in the chapter, turned out to be Republicans. I did not know that prior to that day, as we had all come together around environmental issues and never really talked politics beyond that topic.

Well, we ended up arguing so fiercely over war and Bush's policies, I have abandoned my active role with the chapter, because I cannot tolerate these people's passionate support of Bush. Literally, nothing he did was bad in their eyes.

Do R's value the environment? I sure thought so. The ones I know locally sure appear to. I do not know, however, how they voted this time. (I'm in the SF Bay Area)

[Buzz Clik]

9. Do Pubbies care about the environment? Do they value it?

Of course they care about the environment. As with everyone else, they don't want to drink water that will make them sick, and they don't want poisonous air. According to Rush Limbaugh, that alone makes him an environmentalist. Keep in mind that the US EPA, Clean Air Act, and Clean Water Act were signed into being by a Republican.

However, the REAL question is do they value the environment, and it is not even close to being the same as "do you care about the environment?". Republicans are set apart from Democrats by the way in which they prioritize things. The GOP wants to be sure that regulations don't get in the way of commerce or industry, whereas Dems tend to believe that polluters should factor pollution prevention and cleanup into their cost of doing business.

When discussing environmental issues with Republicans, find the common ground first and go from there. If you're cleaning up a fishing stream with a bunch of sportsmen, talk about how pesticides have been proven to contribute to hypoxia. Talk about eutrophication from excess phosphates in streams. Show how environmental responsibility will benefit them directly.

Unless you're extremely well versed on global warming, avoid the subject entirely. The underlying science is highly complex and interdisciplinary, and the odds of finding a Pubbie (or a Dem) who could possibly fathom it are nearly zero.

Environmental issues are a high priority for roughly 60% of the population, so it should be easy to have a civil conversation with Republicans if you avoid incendiary issues. Separate yourself from those who are viewed by everyone as radical -- members of ELF (and their tendency to use violence to make their points) are not our friends.

Moderation in all things...

[OrwellwasRight]

10. I think you make good points but it also depends on use of

language. If wanting to drink clean water means one cares about the environment, then Repubs should want to preserve the Safe Drfinking Water Act and Clean Drinking Water Act, but the current Administration and majority are trying to gut both.

Nobody wants to be poisoned, but self-preservation is not the same as either caring or valuing, to my mind. I think thefundamental differnence is what somebody started another thread about (perhaps we are victims of our own success). Because most Americans don't see sudsy water in the rivers like they did in the 60s and 70s, they think the environmental problems are fixed.

And, unfortunately, we have not done a good job of getting people to see that corps simply do not look out for their best interests. They don't want to believe that Monsanto would put our future in danger by propogating GM seeds, they don't want to belive that Johns-Manville knew it was dooming tens of thousands of people to die a horrible death due to asbestiosis, they don't want to belive that Union-Carbide would run unsafe plants that endanger folks with chemical poisoning, so they simply don't belive and they write us off as caring more about animals and plants than people.

I have tried what you have suggested, but I find that the Republicans tend to retreat to "the environment is fine, quit taking away my ATV riding areas," "who cares about a stupid turtle," "jobs for loggers are more important than owls," and similar non-sequitir arguments which don't really allow for a true discussion.

Yes, Nixon founded the EPA, but I think most Repubs (not all) think the job is done.

[enki23]

25. trout unlimited isn't about "the environment"

it's about trout streams. if something were necessary to protect the overall environment, but would interfere with trout fishing, you'd find that out right quick.

here in louisiana, when they were just beginning testing on a freshwater diversion project, (one approach they're taking to combat loss of wetlands) some local sportsmen found out that it had a locally negative effect on duck hunting. ducks have a certain ratio of dry/wet that they prefer to hang out in. the freshwater diversion pushed the local area over to the too-wet side, and ducks unlimited was up in arms against it right quick. funny enough, the reason they're doing the freshwater diversion in the first place is that they're trying to replenish the sediment supply to the area and build up a little more land. in louisiana, you see, wetland loss generally means turning wetland into open water. and ducks (and duck hunters,) don't generally spend much time in large areas of open water.

so, long-term, the freshwater diversion was in their favor. but down here, even most of the democrats are republican, and long term thinking is something most rank and file republicans just don't engage in much.

moral of the story is: most republicans who care about the environment only do so in a very limited way, entirely driven by a narrow understanding of what they feel is their own self interest. actually, to be frank, that's the way most dems are too, when it turns out they might have to give something up to protect it.

[jean]

11. my relatives are wealthy repubs living in coastal MS - they don't

care about environmental problems because (they have said this) there will always be a way for business to find a solution. For instance, you say the water is polluted and undrinkable? Goodie! Buy stock in bottled water companies.

These people live right on the Mississippi River delta and have no regard for the sanctity of our environment. I think it will take global warming, the melting of the polar ice caps and the resulting rise in sea level (estimated 27 ft rise?), which will FLOOD their house and property, before they go, "Huh?"

[OrwellwasRight]

12. And then they'll want a government bailout for their underwater

property, but they won't call it government welfare, and they'll still bitch about paying taxes...

(Please don't take this as an insult to your relatives; I'm just ranting about the irrational Repub mindset)

[ramapo]

13. It's a more general question

Do Americans really care about the environment?

I submit the answer is no.

The qualifying word is really. Take a survey. Ask people if they want clean air, clean water, less sprawl. You'll probably get close to unanimous yes.

Follow up by asking what are you prepared to give up or pay? How about higher taxes to fund mass transit or perhaps much higher tolls to support highways while the huge subsidies for road building get diverted to mass transit.

Maybe higher gas prices to reduce consumption? How about giving up the SUV to reduce consumption?

What about higher electric rates to cover cleaning up polluting coal plants or ending the subsidy on nuclear power?

Ask if building should cease on barrier islands, require one-time buyouts in flood plains, stop development in ecologically sensitive areas and mandating redevelopment of our cities and brownfields in order to reduce sprawl and stop the insane and unsustainable car culture.

Look at water consumption, building in the desert, lawn watering, fertilizer use. Don't forget the waste stream, people just want to throw or flush everything away.

My gut feeling is that less than 25%, probably a lot less, would say that they are willing to make significant lifestyle changes in order to protect or improve the environment.

The Republican Party certainly has more openly anti-environmental policies and now makes a mockery of their "conservative" principles as developed by Teddy Roosevelt. Unfortunately the Democrats haven't done a whole lot better. Al Gore, (Earth in the Balance), went along with throwing the environment under the bus when it came time to increase CAFE standards during the '90s.

Real public awareness of the environment passed from the scene with the 1970s.

We are all guilty here. I waste gas every day. My kids who are 17 and 21 are (despite my best efforts and gentle nagging) indifferent at best to the environment and such simple things as recycling.

I'm of the opinion that not much will change until people are forced to modify their behavior. The government won't do it because the political will is simply not there. If enough people demanded tougher environmental laws then we would have them. (That's how we got the EPA, Clean Air, and Clean Water acts in the first place).

One day we will change our lifestyles but it will be because we have no other choice, not because we were smart enough to look at what's happening and what will happen over the next decades, and decide that it would be best to be proactive.

[OrwellwasRight]

14. Great analysis, but depressing.

I think you are absolutely right. But maybe a few of us could set some good examples. I for one gave up my car when I moved to a city that has a subway. Although it is a pain in the ass sometimes, I think I do my bit every day when I walk or bike to work. :-)

So those of us who change our lifestyles must be an example to others, or maybe we're just suckers.

If we wait until we are "forced" to change (e.g. because New Orleans becomes submerged), it will be too late won't it?

[ramapo]

15. Every little bit helps

Not to mention walking and biking is so much better for you.

A big impediment is that it is absolutely impractical, make that impossible, due to the decisions on growth made over the past 50 years, for most people to get anywhere for anything without the use of a car.

The car culture feeds upon itself. Kids don't walk places for a variety of reasons. That makes it even less likely they'll walk or bike when they're older.

I do think the right leadership could make a difference but I don't see anybody that would command the attention and respect needed to sway public behavior.

Jimmy Carter recognized the issues but was kicked out of office. Iran and the economy were the main issues but his energy and conservation policies were sneered at. It's been all downhill since Rayguns.

[blindpig]

16. brainwashing, advertising, immediate gratification

I fear that you are too right. As a member of LVC I've often waved around that survey concluding that 84% of Americans consider themselves environmentalist. After this election no longer.

They've been at this for half a century, championing the infantile desire for gratification, preferably immediate. If you can't buy it, own it, eat it, it's not worthy of consideration.

Only an environmental disaster so great and ugly that no lover of Earth would consider it a partisan boon will sway these people, and then it's too late.

[pnutchuck]

24. We are centuries behind Europe

I in Paris now and don't own a car here. Most of my friends own tiny little cars that would be laughed at in the US. When I do go home to SD, I take the trolley or car pool with friends. In the day time I ride my bike. I had a professor in college that was a true throw back from the '60s: didn't own a car, rode his bike everywhere, didn't own a television, just listened to the NPR. You're right though, most Americans aren't willing to make any sacrifices to save Mother Earth. It really is a shame.

[MisterP]

26. that was a VERY good analysis

[KT2000]

17. Environment is public health

When your air food and water is polluted with chemicals then people get sick; children and fetuses do not develop proplerly; our health care system goes bankrupt

that is not God's will that is humans destroying themselves.

Tons of neurotoxins are poured over this planet daily. Ask your repub friend if Alzhemer's, Parkinsons, ALS, learning disabilities, mental illnesses, more sociopaths and psychopaths among us has anything to so with that.

[Viking12]

18. The Green Elephants

here's a group of Republicans that get it. Thankfully, they are all not James Watt.

http://www.repamerica.org/

[blindpig]

19. geez, Log Cabin Environmentalist

these people are pathetic. They didn't endorse bu$h, BFD. If they really gave a damn they would repudiate the party thaat pisses on their values. But just like the Log Cabin folks money trumps all.
One of my best friends is of this ilk. I could rip his lungs out.

[Polly_Sorbate_60]

20. My BIL joined this group

He's a study in contradictions.

[Trailmix]

27. Thanks

Ill check this site out....

[From the south]

21. I think he was teasing you

I notice that many people take ribbing from the right to seriously

[blindpig]

28. and I note that many people on the right are consciousless greedheads n/t