Climate Change is one of the most imminent problems of the contemporary world. Many nations, including the US, are trying to make headway to stop and prevent further looming changes. Since the introduction of the theory of global warming, the two largest political parties in America, the Democrats and Republicans, have settled at opposite ends of the spectrum. The liberals, or Democrats, are known to support the terrifying reality of climate change and the massive contribution man has made. The general majority of conservatives, or Republicans, have supported the notion that the scientific evidence regarding climate change is inconclusive (NASA, 2016).

The US celebrated its first Earth Day on April 22, 1970. According to a study by Armitage, tens of millions of people were first confronted with the concerns that humans were having on the global climate. The first strictly climate change based conference was held in 1971 in Stockholm. Throughout the 70’s and 80’s, scientific research was becoming more prevalent, connecting how different factors, including CO2 emissions and aerosol, were affecting the natural cycle of the Earth’s climate. The CIA meticulously studied the discussion, and made statements to the effect that global cooling was “Perhaps the greatest single challenge that America will face in the coming years” (Armitage, 2005).

By the late 1980’s, America was experiencing some of the first signs of climate change, as the Midwest was plagued with heat and drought, leading to horrible seasonal crop loss. Floods, massive hurricanes, and cyclones hounded places like Brazil, New Zealand, Africa, India, and the Caribbean. Conferences and hearings regarding the “greenhouse effect” in the US were becoming more common. NASA’s chief climate scientist, James Hansen, made a statement in 1988, “The evidence is pretty strong that the greenhouse effect is here.'' (Armitage, 2005). A conference held in 1988 in Toronto termed, The Changing Atmosphere Implications For Global Security, concluded, “that humans were polluting the atmosphere, and should undertake immediate ameliorative measures” (Armitage, 2005). The conference proposed an immediate reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in order to do so. (Armitage, 2005).

George H. W. Bush took an immediate stance on the issue, saying not to fear the White House and that its correspondents would handle the greenhouse effect threat. Although, when the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was created, his voice shifted focus to more research, as opposed to regulations or policies claiming the theory was inconsistent (Armitage, 2005).

The Kyoto Protocol was introduced in Japan in 1997 and asked 150 nations to attend the United Nations conference. The Protocol asked the nations to sign a treaty committing to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. President Bill Clinton, along with other prominent Democratic figures, rallied support for the Kyoto Protocol, as the treaty needed 55 countries to endorse it to begin the process. In 2001, Republican President George W. Bush declared his opposition, and the US was pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol treaty (Brewer, 2011).

The Republican Party, although confronted with facts of climate change, remained in a state of denial, claiming the scientific evidence was inconclusive. Senator James Inhofe, one of the major influencers against the theory that climate change is caused by manmade CO2 emissions, has stated multiple times that the base of climate change resulting from human influence is untrue and not based around “sound science.” The senator has discussed that the reduction of emissions would be disastrous for the US economy, and regulations like the Kyoto Protocol would cost Americans money. He has also called documentaries on the issue, presented by US Vice President Al Gore, “science fiction movies.” This kind of rhetoric from high level figure leaders of the Republican Party set up an agenda in the media, framing climate change as an insignificant and unproven theory, which influences people that share the same ideology of the Republican Party (Brewer, 2011).

During the 2008 election, the polarization came to a halt when presidential nominee John McCain showed support for Obama’s climate change policy during the campaign. President Barrack Obama released his “cap-and- trade” system in 2008. The cap-and-trade policy indicated that there should no longer be doubt that climate change is being influenced by human activity and the US must react. His proposal offered that implementation of the cap-and-trade will “reduce carbon emissions by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.” Republican nominee McCain used this opposition to President W. Bush as a platform in his political campaign. McCain stated in speeches that he strongly disagreed with the Bush administration’s attitude toward climate change and uncertainty with human induced influence (Brewer, 2011).

After Obama succeeded in winning the 2008 election, he sent a bill to initiate the cap-and-trade policy. The Republican Party combatted this legislation by voting against it, and used an email leak from the East Angalia’s Climate Research Unit as proof that climate change was uncertain, although the majority of other scientific research disagreed. Senator Inhofe and other conservative figures used disapproval of Obama’s campaign as a way to “not only influence their fellow politicians but also sway the public” (Brewer, 2011). The cap-and-trade bill was passed by the House of Representatives, but did not make it through the Senate. In 2011, after debating, the cap-and-trade bill was passed, but the implementation has been slow and rocky because of the backlash and opposition of the certain elites.

Throughout history, climate change has been a controversial topic between the two leading political parties in America. While the Democrats support the scientific evidence that climate change is manipulated by human activities, the Republicans have been known to support the idea that the evidence is inconclusive, stating that there is not enough scientific proof. With the current President-elect, Donald Trump, preparing for his inauguration, his proposed policies will have a major effect on the climate change situation in the United States. With his appointed cabinet nominees and skeptic rhetoric, his cuts on reductions of gas emissions can potentially cause permanent damage to the earth, as a result of a rise in global temperature. In the near future, permanent damage will cause loss of ecosystems, rising sea levels, increased health problems, and eventually force Americans to adapt and find another planet to inhabit if the earth is destroyed.