# Are environmentalists cowards on immigration? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 11, 2011, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086 "2011-06-11T06:04:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/21 "2011-06-12T01:51:15Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > Try playing the ball not the man. **If you think the figures about the increased carbon footprint are wrong, point that out.** Otherwise your guilt by association stuff is really not getting us towards the truth of the matter. I already pointed at research that shows that they are wrong, after that was established then playing the man is needed to be done to show all the source of the misleading information. ---
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/22 "2011-06-12T02:37:41Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > Try playing the ball not the man. **If you think the figures about the increased carbon footprint are wrong, point that out.** Otherwise your guilt by association stuff is really not getting us towards the truth of the matter. I don’t really feel the need to, even if it hadn’t already been well rebutted by **GIGObuster**. No more than I’d spend time debunking racial IQ cites courtesy of St_rmFr_nt, homosexuality studies sponsored by Lou Dobson, or responsible social media usage by Anthony Weiner. Sometimes the “ball” isn’t worth spending time on, due to the “man” behind it. That you repeatedly use cites from Tanton’s tentacles is informative enough in itself. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/23 "2011-06-12T02:54:47Z")
> [@DMC](#): > > I don’t really feel the need to, even if it hadn’t already been well rebutted by **GIGObuster**. No more than I’d spend time debunking racial IQ cites courtesy of St_rmFr_nt, homosexuality studies sponsored by Lou Dobson, or responsible social media usage by Anthony Weiner. Sometimes the “ball” isn’t worth spending time on, due to the “man” behind it. That you repeatedly use cites from Tanton’s tentacles is informative enough in itself. I’ll have a read of the report cited by GIGO Buster. Just looking at the bullet points above it doesn’t appear to address the point about people increasing their carbon footprint once they move from a 3rd world to 1st world country. It seems to sidestep it. Or the points about overall increases in net population. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/24 "2011-06-12T03:05:29Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > I’ll have a read of the report cited by GIGO Buster. Just looking at the bullet points above it doesn’t appear to address the point about people increasing their carbon footprint once they move from a 3rd world to 1st world country. It seems to sidestep it. Or the points about overall increases in net population. Are you going to continue ignoring the problems we are having with your sources? ---
**Author:** ![straight\_man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/straight_man/32/3027_2.png) [@straight\_man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/straight_man)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/25 "2011-06-12T04:42:39Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > I’ll have a read of the report cited by GIGO Buster. Just looking at the bullet points above it doesn’t appear to address the point about people increasing their carbon footprint once they move from a 3rd world to 1st world country. It seems to sidestep it. Or the points about overall increases in net population. There’s a very good reason immigrants’ carbon footprint increases: _their standard of living improves_. Very few people in the green movement would argue, “The poor must stay poor for the sake of the environment!”, since the moral shortcomings of that perspective are, IMHO, pretty obvious. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/26 "2011-06-12T21:55:15Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Are you going to continue ignoring the problems we are having with your sources? As I’ve pointed out above, saying that data comes from an unpopular figure isn’t persuasive. On that basis you could say the Nazis had anti-tobacco campaigns and identified links between smoking and lung cancer & heart disease. Therefore anti-tobacco campaigns and smoking research is fascist. > **[The anti-tobacco campaign of the Nazis: a little known aspect of public...](https://www.bmj.com/content/313/7070/1450.full)** > > Historians and epidemiologists have only recently begun to explore the Nazi anti-tobacco movement. Germany had the world's strongest antismoking movement in the 1930s and early 1940s, encompassing bans on smoking in public spaces, bans on... In any event, looking at the board of directors of this group I don’t see why you are so concerned. Does Ben Zuckerman strike you as being biased or dishonest? [http://www.progressivesforimmigrationreform.org/about/](http://www.progressivesforimmigrationreform.org/about/) ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/27 "2011-06-12T22:26:39Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > As I’ve pointed out above, saying that data comes from an unpopular figure isn’t persuasive. On that basis you could say the Nazis had anti-tobacco campaigns and identified links between smoking and lung cancer & heart disease. Therefore anti-tobacco campaigns and smoking research is fascist. > > [http://www.bmj.com/content/313/7070/1450.full](http://www.bmj.com/content/313/7070/1450.full) Good thing I do not work that way, I always look first if the information is faulty or misleading, then after that it is a fair game to look at who is making the flawed claim and the methods and sources they use. > [@Chen019](#): > > In any event, looking at the board of directors of this group I don’t see why you are so concerned. Does Ben Zuckerman strike you as being biased or dishonest? > > [http://www.progressivesforimmigrationreform.org/about/](http://www.progressivesforimmigrationreform.org/about/) Yes indeed. > **[Ramtha Riled](https://www.splcenter.org/resources/reports/ramtha-riled/)** > > Since 1989, a woman who calls herself J.Z. Knight has drawn tens of thousands of followers, including Hollywood celebrities, to her Ramtha School of Enlightenment in Yelm, Wash., where she says she channels a 35,000-year-old “Lemurian warrior.” The... > [@](#): > > CAPS’ vice president is Ben Zuckerman, a key player in the Sierra Club takeover attempts. Zuckerman, who considers Tanton “a great environmentalist,” led an effort in 1998 to push an anti-immigration resolution through the membership, and then ran in 2004 on an anti-immigration slate for the Sierra Club board of directors. (The Southern Poverty Law Center countered that effort and made public the “hostile takeover” attempt.) Zuckerman and two like-minded allies ultimately went down to defeat in the Sierra Club’s elections by a 10-to-1 margin. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/28 "2011-06-12T23:27:13Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Good thing I do not work that way, I always look first if the information is faulty or misleading, then after that it is a fair game to look at who is making the flawed claim and the methods and sources they use. > > Yes indeed. > > [Ramtha Riled](http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2007/10/03/today-at-the-national-press-club-hate-group-co-hosts-immigration-news-conference/) You’re overlooking cause & effect. Why does Zuckerman consider that a sensible and responsible policy position? He’s a Professor of Physics and Astronomy, so I would presume he has based his position on evidence and logic. > [@](#): > > As an astronomer who studies how stars develop over tens of millions of years, Ben Zuckerman instinctively takes the long view. What he sees in regard to future U.S. population numbers troubles his environmentalist’s heart: As many as a billion people on the American landscape by 2100, as many as 100 million in California, courtesy of liberal immigration policies. > > Zuckerman, a 58-year-old UCLA professor given to running shoes and organic rice cakes, believes environmentalists should be loudly demanding curbs on legal immigration and an end to illegal immigration, which are fueling the country’s surging population growth. The influential Sierra Club, to which he has belonged for more than three decades, ought to be especially vocal on the matter, he thinks. > > Zuckerman’s views conflict directly with the club’s official neutrality on immigration reform. Nonetheless, he recently was elected to the club’s board of directors with the most votes, 36,383, among the five successful candidates, despite not being anointed by the organization’s nominating committee. > > His victory, he says, is a vindication of keen-eyed Sierrans who see that “the No. 1 environmental problem–and it’s not even close–is overpopulation. A billion Americans is a disaster. I don’t know how my colleagues in the Sierra Club can save species and wetlands and so on when there are a billion Americans.”… > > Throughout the 1970s and '80s, the Sierra Club supported immigration curbs. In the 1990s, however, the club’s leadership grew shy of the issue as it waxed in controversy. In 1998, Sierrans for U.S. Population Stabilization, a group co-founded by Zuckerman, forced a club referendum on the matter. The leadership pushed for neutrality, Zuckerman’s faction for support of immigration curbs. The leadership’s position won, but Zuckerman faction’s received 40% of the vote. > > \*\*What really motivates the club leadership, Zuckerman says, is fear. Fear of being called racist. Fear of losing minority-group members and fear of forfeiting financial support from big business and foundations. > > Pro-immigration forces–including Latino politicians, the AFL-CIO and corporations, which covet both cheap labor and more consumers–are quick to swing the racism bludgeon. \*\* > > Zuckerman, a lifelong liberal and civil rights advocate, has borne such accusations painfully. “But the average person is overwhelmingly in favor of reduced legal immigration and an end to illegal immigration, and this cuts across every racial line,” he says. “How can it be racist to agree with a majority of every ethnic and racial group in the country?” [http://articles.latimes.com/2002/jun/09/magazine/tm-45400/2](http://articles.latimes.com/2002/jun/09/magazine/tm-45400/2) I think he’s hit the nail on the head in terms of why these groups have backed away from the issue of immigration. In a nutshell, race trumps their environmental concerns and fear of losing [$$$](http://articles.latimes.com/2004/oct/27/local/me-donor27/4) from wealthy donors, is a key concern. ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/29 "2011-06-12T23:27:33Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Are you going to continue ignoring the problems we are having with your sources? Is the OP in some kind of time loop, in which he receives spam from long-discredited groups & rushes to announce the “latest news” to people who’ve heard it all before? And who know where it’s coming from? ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/30 "2011-06-12T23:30:18Z")
> [@Bridget\_Burke](#): > > Is the OP in some kind of time loop, in which he receives spam from long-discredited groups & rushes to announce the “latest news” to people who’ve heard it all before? And who know where it’s coming from? If you can provide a rational response to these concerns, like those raised by Ben Zuckerman in the LA Times article above, I would like to hear them. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/31 "2011-06-12T23:38:22Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > You’re overlooking cause & effect. Why does Zuckerman consider that a sensible and responsible policy position? > > He’s a Professor of Physics and Astronomy, so I would presume he has based his position on evidence and logic. :rolleyes: As I told you before, you really think all scientists are like the Brain scientist character from Thunderbirds and you continue to think that scientists are experts on everything. What you are doing is indeed the fallacy of Appeal to Authority “Brains might had been an expert on all matters of science, but his ass was made of plastic.” [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/qZzwRwFDXw0/hqdefault.jpg "9. Climate Change - Meet the Scientists") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZzwRwFDXw0) ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/32 "2011-06-12T23:46:41Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > As I told you before, you really think all scientists are like the Brain scientist character from Thunderbirds and you continue to think that scientists are experts on everything. > > What you are doing is indeed the fallacy of Appeal to Authority No, I’m saying that you have no reason to dismiss his opinions and data on the basis of bias or dishonesty. It seems the only reason you disagree is because it goes against your own feelings. It seems to me that: 1. Environmentalists realise that increasing population necessarily involves greater resource and environmental depletion. 2. Some of the increasing US population is from immigration. 3. Opposing immigration might lead people to think you’re racist (**Tanton! Nativist!).** 4. Environmentalists let this fear trump their logical concerns for the environment. That’s about right isn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/33 "2011-06-12T23:47:15Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > If you can provide a rational response to these concerns, like those raised by Ben Zuckerman in the LA Times article above, I would like to hear them. You are really digging back in time too much, looking at modern times: [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7640365/ns/us\_news-environment/t/immigration-group-loses-sierra-club-vote/](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7640365/ns/us_news-environment/t/immigration-group-loses-sierra-club-vote/) > [@](#): > > Sierra Club members Monday flatly rejected a change in the group’s policies that would have advocated reducing immigration to the United States as a way to protect the environment > > The proposal was defeated by nearly 84 percent of the 122,308 members who voted, the club announced. About 16 percent of the club’s more than 750,000 members cast ballots during voting that began in early March. Zuckerman’s position got even less respect nowadays. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/34 "2011-06-12T23:51:47Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Zuckerman’s position got even less respect nowadays. If you read the article you cited, you’ll see that they don’t actually disagree with Zuckerman’s position. They had political concerns about alienating supporters like labor unions and civil rights groups. And as I mentioned above, large donors have indicated they would not support the Sierra Club if they took that position. [http://articles.latimes.com/2004/oct/27/local/me-donor27/4](http://articles.latimes.com/2004/oct/27/local/me-donor27/4) ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/35 "2011-06-12T23:55:29Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > No, I’m saying that you have no reason to dismiss his opinions and data on the basis of bias or dishonesty. I already looked at the data, his conclusions are misleading. > [@Chen019](#): > > It seems the only reason you disagree is because it goes against your own feelings. It seems to me that: > > 1. Environmentalists realise that increasing population necessarily involves greater resource and environmental depletion. > > 2. Some of the increasing US population is from immigration. > > 3. Opposing immigration might lead people to think you’re racist (Tanton! Nativist!). > > 4. Environmentalists let this fear trump their logical concerns for the environment. > > That’s about right isn’t it? Nope, it is clear that even after claiming you read the report that discredited what most of your sources said, you really did not read it at all or well. When the cities with the most immigrants are the ones that are the less emitters of CO2 it is clear that your sources are only looking at averages and not the specific locations that are affected by immigrants, this is misleading on the extreme and it does demonstrate that the ones peddling this disinformation are already discredited, racist charges can be added later based on the funding and orgs that supported this misleading effort. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/36 "2011-06-12T23:59:51Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > If you read the article you cited, you’ll see that they don’t actually disagree with Zuckerman’s position. They had political concerns about alienating supporters like labor unions and civil rights groups. And as I mentioned above, large donors have indicated they would not support the Sierra Club if they took that position. [http://articles.latimes.com/2004/oct/27/local/me-donor27/4](http://articles.latimes.com/2004/oct/27/local/me-donor27/4) And? You want me to worry? As I told you many times before, I would worry if your sources would get any headway nowadays, as it is, as long as they do not refuse to get support from nativist organizations their decreasing minority status will be good news. There is a big problem to solve and attempting to push this immigration issue into the environmentalist problems of the day are just made with an effort to distract and divide the movement. That is, if you are not aware yet, another reason why your sources need to be opposed. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2011, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/37 "2011-06-13T00:12:42Z")
What I conclude in the end is that the real cowardice is in the efforts to divide the environmentalist movement with what amounts to be really a cheap shot. The reality is that virtually all conservatives in office that oppose immigration also oppose doing anything about CO2 emissions, worse, they claim that there is no problem at all. Until I see any brave efforts by those anti-immigrant organizations to pressure republican leaders to do something about the main causes of the big carbon footprint that the US has, It is clear to me that they are indeed just doing a real coward thing by continuing to accuse the ones that have the least to blame, the immigrants. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2011, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/38 "2011-06-13T00:21:43Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > I already looked at the data, his conclusions are misleading. > > Nope, it is clear that even after claiming you read the report that discredited what most of your sources said, you really did not read it at all or well. > > When the cities with the most immigrants are the ones that are the less emitters of CO2 it is clear that your sources are only looking at averages and not the specific locations that are affected by immigrants, this is misleading on the extreme and it does demonstrate that the ones peddling this disinformation are already discredited, racist charges can be added later based on the funding and orgs that supported this misleading effort. I still don’t see how that gets environmentalists off the hook. You cannot ignore the obvious connection between population increase in the US and increased emissions. There’s a basic formula that Paul Ehrlich and John Holdren (currently President Obama’s chief science advisor) suggest of I = P x A x T, where environmental impact (I) is a function of total population (P) times per capita consumption (A, for “affluence”) times the technologies used in production (T). Between 1990 and 2003, U.S. per capita CO2 emissions increased 3.2 percent while total U.S. CO2 emissions increased 20.2 percent (U.S. Department of Energy). During that same period, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, America’s population increased 16.1 percent. So what population level do you think the US should aim for? 1 billion? Does it just not matter? ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2011, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/39 "2011-06-13T00:28:14Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > What I conclude in the end is that the real cowardice is in the efforts to divide the environmentalist movement with what amounts to be really a cheap shot. The reality is that virtually all conservatives in office that oppose immigration also oppose doing anything about CO2 emissions, worse, they claim that there is no problem at all. > > Until I see any brave efforts by those anti-immigrant organizations to pressure republican leaders to do something about the main causes of the big carbon footprint that the US has, It is clear to me that they are indeed just doing a real coward thing by continuing to accuse the ones that have the least to blame, the immigrants. Hardly a cheap shot, population is part of any discussion of environmental impact as set out above in the Ehrlich & Holdren formula. Btw. Zuckerman edited this book on issues of [global warming & human population](http://books.google.co.nz/books?id=a1gW4uV-q8EC&pg=PR7&lpg=PR7&dq=Ed+Zuckerman+Human+Population+and+Environmental+Crisis&source=bl&ots=t3seKBFb0M&sig=YbPxHYEetbvNDOHkAT7Ja2jw2c4&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false) in the 90’s (before Al Gore made global warming a cool political issue). He’s been entirely consistent on the issue. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2011, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086/40 "2011-06-13T00:35:10Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > So what population level do you think the US should aim for? 1 billion? Does it just not matter? That population level will depend on new developments in energy production and CO2 controls that will be in place in the near future. So that population level does matter, but not as much as the immigrants being a part of it, what matters is that we \*\*all \*\*have to reduce the carbon footprint, and the reality is that solutions like cap-and-trade or a tax on carbon are currently dead in the water thanks also to the support many tea partiers representatives got in the previous election from organizations involved with John Tanton. [http://imagine2050.newcomm.org/2009/04/14/white-nationalists-tied-to-tea-parties/](http://imagine2050.newcomm.org/2009/04/14/white-nationalists-tied-to-tea-parties/) As the results are in, the Republican House is busy refusing to even vote on doing something about the issue, and worse, they are attempting as we speak to underfund even the science organizations that keep track of the problem. So clearly, there was really no interest by nativists on doing something about the environment, the whole point was an attempt to create a wedge issue, and then to stop any efforts to do anything about the carbon footprint in the USA. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-environmentalists-cowards-on-immigration/585086.md?page=3)