Why Climate Deniers Will Soon Be Underwater

Several congressional leaders from states like Louisiana, Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama, and Texas are staunch deniers of climate change. Here's a look at how rising sea levels will affect their home districts.
Natural landscape, Reflection, Water resources, Fluid, Bird, Bank, Wetland, Liquid, Pond, Watercourse,
Mario Tama/Getty

Unless you live in Louisiana, you probably haven't heard of Lenar Whitney. She is a Republican member of the Louisiana State House of Representatives who hails from Terrebonne Parish, a county perched on the edge of the Gulf of Mexico. The owner of a dance studio and a little old phone company, Whitney proudly describes herself as "one of the most conservative members of the Louisiana legislature." These days, she is pretty much the gold standard for climate denial.


In the above video, Whitney goes for the gusto, calling global warming "the biggest deception in the history of mankind," a "conspiracy" aimed at attacking the American Dream (in general) and the energy industry (in particular). Whitney takes aim at the big dog of climate changeAl Goreclaiming that "the earth has done nothing but get colder" every year since the release of An Inconvenient Truth a decade ago.

It's easy to debunk Whitney's claims. Among other things, this past May was the warmest on record, and 2014 is on track to be the hottest year in recorded history. Beyond that, there's the oft-cited 95-99% of climate scientists who agree that climate change is occurring and is partially caused by human activities. To put this in context, doctors are about 95% certain that smoking causes lung cancer, vitamins are good for you, and dioxin makes you sick.

Nevertheless, the congressional climate denial caucus remains strong, counting 58% of Republicans among its members. For some of these lawmakers, it's easy to see why fighting climate change legislation seems like a good idea. After all, Congressman Dan Benishek of Michigan's first districtwho described climate change as "all baloney," "just some scheme," and "unproven science stuff"has a lot to gain from global warming. A ten-degree temperature increase would make Michigan winters more bearable, and the state's ready supply of fresh water might make it a new, attractive business site as the mercury keeps rising.

Other deniers, like South Carolina's Jeff Duncan and Mick Mulvaney, may be playing the long con. Duncan, who called global warming research "questionable science," and Mulvaney, who called it "baseless claims," are both from inland districtsundervalued areas that will likely become much more attractive when rising sea levels turn them into oceanfront property.

But some of the strongest deniers come from congressional districts that have the most to lose. Oceanfront areas in Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama, Texas and, most notably, Louisiana, consistently send climate-denying congressmen to Washington.

While sea levels are only rising by a fraction of an inch each year, some experts argue that oceanfront areas may face serious problems within the next decade. Climate Central, a nonprofit news service that reports on climate change, estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance that storm surges will rise a foot by 2020. If this happens, huge sections of the coastal U.S. will be flooded. And, as recent hurricanes demonstrated, it doesn't take a year-round sea level rise to make an area uninhabitable.

Why would congressmen and senators pursue policies that are likely to put their districts under water? Some of it may have to do with the huge amounts of money that energy companies are pouring into the political process. Some may have to do with the huge number of jobs that these industries bring to areas like Louisiana and Texas.

Here is a look at nine such legislators currently holding court in the U.S. Capitol:


Rep. Scott Rigell (R, VA): Rigell represents Virginia's second congressional district, most of which occupies a low-lying stretch of land wedged between the Atlantic Ocean and the Chesapeake Bay. He has voted to allow oil drilling off the coast of Virginia and block the EPA from monitoring greenhouse gasses. He publicly stated that he does not believe that climate change is caused by human actions.

This could be a problem for the folks back home. Climate Central estimates that a one foot increase in storm surge would affect 10,388 people, 6,126 houses and 49,167 acres of land in Virginia. Much of this devastation would hit Rigell's home district.

North Carolina

Rep. Walter B. Jones (R, NC): North Carolina is a hotspot for global warming denial: all four of its Republican Senate hopefuls are deniers. Even so, Walter Jones stands out. He represents the state's low-lying third district, including the extremely fragile Outer Banks, a stretch of barrier islands that have long been ravaged by erosion and hurricanes. If storm surges rise by one foot, 15,726 people, 11,332 homes and 582,436 acres of North Carolina will be affected. Most of the damage would fall in Jones' district.

For his part, Jones argues that "there is substantial disagreement regarding the extent" of global warming, and that "The bottom line is that the scientific community does not speak with one voice on this issue."

To be fair, he's 1-5% right.


Sen. Jeff Sessions (R, AL): Alabama's damage from a one foot storm surge would be comparatively minor, affecting only 1,089 people, 1,963 homes and 7,972 acres. Perhaps that's why Sessions, who has received $368,700 from the oil and gas lobby, is so vehement in his denial of climate change. In a 2012 fight with Senator Barbara Boxer, he stated that he was "offended" by her statement that 98% of climate scientists agree about the human impact on global warming. Her response? "You shouldn't be offended by that. That's a fact."

In Senate parlance, that's called a smackdown.


Sen. John Cornyn (R, TX): Climate Central estimates that a relatively modest 3,171 people, 1,972 homes and 44,822 acres of Texas land would be affected by a one foot storm surge. That, coupled with the big shadow that the oil and gas industry casts in the Lone Star state, goes a long way toward explaining the famously outspoken denial that comes from Texas' elected legislators. As a Senator, Cornyn is more restrained than most, but in 2009, he accused NASA of fraud, suggesting that the government agency "massaged" its data to "fit the prescribed theory that global warming is attributable to man-made greenhouse gas emissions."

Rep. Blake Farenthold (R,TX): Farenthold, who represents Texas' coastal 27th district, is a bit more outspoken than Cornyn, calling global warming "A scare tactic used by groups with a political agenda." Then again, he also has received $190,177 from the oil and gas industry.


Sen. David Vitter (R, LA): As anyone who witnessed Hurricane Katrina will attest, Louisiana has a lot to lose from rising sea levels. Climate Central estimates that a one-foot increase in storm surge would affect 666,888 people, 311,124 homes and 2,276,671 acres of land in the state. Then again, oil and gas are an important part of the state's economy, and have their fingers very deep in Louisiana's politics. Senator Vitter, for example, has received $1,220,677 from the lobby over the course of his political career, a factor that may have influenced his decision to dismiss one colleague's statement about global warming's effect on air turbulence as being typical of "the ridiculous pseudo-science garbage that's so common on the left on this issue."

Rep. Steve Scalise (R, LA): Scalise, who represents the highly-vulnerable 1st district, is a pretty standard Louisiana climate denier: he's brought in $424,610 from the oil and gas lobby over his lifetime, and claims that "an increasing number of scientists ... are raising major questions about the global warming theories."

Rep. William Cassidy (R, LA): Cassidy, who represents Lousiana's 6th district, is not quite the biggest beneficiary of oil money (he's gotten $470,500 over the course of his political career), but he may be the most interesting of the state's deniers. He claims that global warming, far from being the effect of human activities, "could just be a shift on the axis" of the earth.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
More From News