New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Republican Voters Not in Denial about Climate

An analysis of voter opinions finds that half of Republican voters think climate change is happening, and would support regulating CO2 as a pollutant. Christopher Intagliata reports.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, the Republican who heads the House Science Committee, has long been skeptical of global warming. He has accused government climate scientists of doctoring climate data. And called the U.N.'s climate reports, quote, "more political than scientific." All part of what he called the "climate change religion," in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.

But those views may be increasingly out of step with what Republican voters actually think. Because a new analysis finds that a majority of Republicans across the country would actually support regulating carbon dioxide as a pollutant.

As for the overall consensus on whether climate change is, indeed, a thing? Half of Republican voters think the climate is indeed being transformed…although far fewer think human activity is what’s responsible for the changes. The study is in the journal Climatic Change. [Matto Mildenberger et al., The spatial distribution of Republican and Democratic climate opinions at state and local scales]


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Study author Matto Mildenberger of the University of California, Santa Barbara: "I think here the picture that's emerging is that the public has a lot more appetite and would have a lot more tolerance and interest in seeing political officials act in the U.S. than you'd think just listening to some of the debate and rhetoric we hear at the federal level in the United States right now."

But perhaps that rhetoric will start to change—as climate reality makes the politics of denial too hot to handle.

—Christopher Intagliata

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe