Global Warming – Two-Thirds of Americans Want Us to Join Climate Change PactEssay Preview: Global Warming – Two-Thirds of Americans Want Us to Join Climate Change PactReport this essayTwo-Thirds of Americans Want US to Join Climate Change PactSummary of News ItemThe New York times  on November 30 2015 published an article authored by Giovanni Russonelo indicating that two thirds of Americans  want the US to join  Climate Change Pact. A solid majority of Americans  say the United States should join international treaty to limit impact  of global warming but on this and other climate related questions opinion  divides sharply along partisan  lines, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll. This represents a shift in public opinion, advocates for climate change are hopeful that the Paris talks could be a turning point.Public support for international and domestic measures to address climate change may provide a lift for Americans negotiators attending the major United Nations climate change conference . however there still remain a stark divide on climate policy at home in the US making it difficult for President Obama and his successors putting in place energy and climate policies that will support robust international agreement.Poll Results•63% of Americans including a bare majority of Republicans support domestic policy limiting carbon emissions from plants•75% of Americans polled said global warming was already having a serious environmental impact•Nine to Ten Democrats agreed to the negative impact, compared 58% of Republicans•One third of Republicans said it will never have an impact•50% of all Americans  said the government should take steps to restrict drilling ,logging and mining on public lands, compared to 45% who opposed restrictions.•Among Democrats support for limiting mineral extraction on public lands rose to 58%•One out 5 Americans favored increasing taxes on electricity as a way to fight global warming
•Six in ten  opposed increasing taxes, including 49% of  Democrats•36% support increasing  taxes to curb global warming•51% of respondents worried about global warming•Among adults under 30 the number of adults it was 30% it was 54% for Democrats•68% of respondents under 30 supported taxing companies and fewer than  ¾ of Democrats•54 % as opposed to 34 % believed a sacrifice must be made to protect the environment•In 2007 52% supported protecting the environment as opposed to 34% for the economy.The poll was conducted nationwide from 18-22 November 2015  among 1030 respondents Margin of error is plus or minus 4%Poll AnalysisThe poll was conducted nationwide by means of a telephone poll of 1030 individuals who were dialed at random. A set of 11 questions was asked all respondents with some of the questions being rotated (
*) with additional questions being conducted by telephone to produce a more complete set of questions.
The following information about the survey was presented:-
Q: Do you agree that reducing the “carbon tax” is economically justified? A: No. Polls did not ask where the “carbon tax” was based on US$ per tonne of carbon dioxide. It was based on the percentage of US citizens who wanted carbon tax reductions but not the percentage of Americans who said they don’t want to see it. However, the “carbon tax” is based on what the US government estimates it would cost to support the Paris COP21/20 climate accords.
The following information about the poll was presented:-
Q: Do you agree, if it was possible, that cutting taxes on corporations and making it less costly to do business in the US would give an overall positive effect on economic growth? A: Yes.
Q: Do you think reducing the carbon tax would be a good idea? A: I would personally vote for it, since I think it is very important. It is also good to reduce emissions, because that increases profits of business and keeps carbon emissions down. The government has spent all this money and the US government is spending almost four-fifths of it anyway, and the federal budget covers nearly half of all this. The issue is that there is much more carbon there. That is why I wouldn’t believe it would be a big advantage. I believe it would help make our economy a whole lot more cleaner, not because I think there needs to be a global carbon tax of our own to compensate for the massive impacts of falling levels of pollution.
Some related questions and findings:
1) What will you do to address the climate crisis by reducing CO2 emissions? (1) In the US a number of major cities are already taking steps to cut CO2 emissions in the city limits of their own cities, which puts them among the countries that are using the government’s power to eliminate the pollution in the city limits. However, the problem is what I mean when I say that we must do what we can to reduce the CO2 emissions. When I say a number of cities, such as Austin, have already done it, it implies that the cost would be more, with the cities doing what they do already. This is not realistic and can be easily fixed. (2) To my mind, that means reducing CO2 emissions from manufacturing and from production (which is the main source of greenhouse gas emissions within the US). And the solution involves taking action to reduce and mitigate these CO2 emissions.
2) What are the key policies to combat climate change? (1) This involves changing public policy on the problem (i.e. the way in which the US responds to climate change) and then reducing or eliminating the problem rather than the solutions through carbon tax cut legislation.
The following information was presented:-
Q: Do you think that setting such an important point on global climate change would be good for our economic competitiveness and global security (i.e. reducing the amount of emissions)? A: The answer is clear. Of course it would, but the reality is, even that doesn’t