Republicans Actually Regressing into the Dark Ages

According to a poll in the National Journal, when asked if they thought global warming was caused by human activity, the differences between the Democratic and Republican points of view were startling to say the least. The Democratic Members of Congress answered with "yes" for 95 per cent of those questioned, whereas only 13 per cent of their Republican counterparts answered in the affirmative.

Now, for the really scary part, the percentage of those Republicans that do believe that there is evidence that man's consumption of fossil fuels and unabated production of those pesky greenhouse gases, has actually dropped from 23 percent a year ago. Could it be possible that the new class of Republicans lawmakers are even more in the dark than their predecessors that they have replaced?

Granted the percentage of Democrats that answered yes also dropped by three percent, down from 98% in 2006. The survey asked 10 Democratic senators and 48 Democratic House members, so that three per cent is roughly equal to only one or two votes. The number of those answering no stayed the same, but there is now 2% of democrats that are being diplomatic and answering that "there is an overwhelming scientific consensus that the Earth is warming because of man-made pollution." Yet this same unnamed Democrat could not answer yes, as the phrasing of the question mentioned "beyond a reasonable doubt." One answer neither yes or no could account for the three per cent drop.

To be fair, most of the Republicans claim to have not answered yes due to that qualifying phrase, "beyond a reasonable doubt." Most of the anonymous quotes given in the National Journal express that man-made pollution is a part of the cause, but not the only reason that the Earth is warming. However, instead of being mature and focusing on the issue, one Republican did add that "the only inconvenient truth here is that anyone can be a movie star, even someone as boring as Al Gore." Not sure who it is that doesn't play well with others, but there is a list of 55 names to choose from.

Even more telling is who is contributing what to whose campaign coffers, namely oil and gas political actions committees (PACs). When asked what actions to reduce global warming the lawmakers polled could support, 88 per cent of Democrats answered that they would support mandatory limits on carbon emissions, but only 19 per cent of Republicans would support limits. And half as many Republicans as Dems think that higher fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks is a good idea. In fact, 90 per cent of the Republicans think that a greater reliance on nuclear power is the best solution to reduce greenhouse gases.

Now, increasing the US's reliance on nuclear energy is a great idea, as there are no downsides to nuclear power, except the waste that still is only temporarily stored in aging facilities in about 77 locations across the country, most by major waterways (see the EPA fact sheets on Yucca Mountain). Oh, and the possibility of nuclear reactor accidents, and the fact that some nuclear waste materials will remain radioactive for about a million years. But then, the US is looking into building permanent dump sites in areas either in or by reservations out west, so the rest of us can sleep easy at night.

To be fair to the Republican members of Congress, 71 percent do support increasing funding for alternative fuels as compared to 95 per cent of Democrats. However, the "alternative fuels" are not specified in the polling methodology, so it could mean more hydro-electric dams that disrupt rivers and the ecology. One of the quotes offered supports nuclear energy and hydro power as "our nation's largest source of renewable power and should be embraced." Will someone give this person a science book?