Analysis Nancy Skinner and Lenar Witney, how they stand and response on climate change legislation
Analysis of Nancy Skinner and Lenar Whitney Conflict Over Climate Change Science
Challenge or Support of Climate Change Science
Skinner is a national television and radio commentator in Michigan. She is frequently involved in the political events of the area connected with the climate change. She believes one has to fight to control effects that the process has on the daily and future activities of people. Although she has not acquired any seat on the political arena, her campaigns are well-known on the territory. For instance, she addressed the president Clinton to tackle the 1993 flood effects that were caused by climate change influence.
On the other hand, Whitney has approached the issue from an opposite perspective. She is a businesswoman in the Louisiana who also has political ambitions like her counterpart. Her position has been controversial since she believes that the claimed climate change notion is a hoax aimed at generating money from stakeholders. Furthermore, she has suggested that human activities have nothing to do with the changes that enhance the global warming and, thus, climate change.
Skinner has been associated with projects that have enhanced the fight for protection of the environment to ensure human sustainability in the present and the future. Her radio and television programs have also facilitated the global campaigns towards making sure that any human action that has an impact on the milieu is checked and controlled. Her support for climate change science was established in the year 1993 when she challenged the then government to create a new town on the flood prone plain under the principle of sustainable development. Her other priority was towards the launching of the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCE) to address global climate challenges through the free market world policy. These steps have resulted in various campaigns and programs that are carried out to educate the public on the impacts of weather transformation and the ways to avert them. Her activity has been instrumental across the world. Different stakeholders are involved in her new campaigns to facilitate a society that uses renewable energy. Skinners actions are aimed at creating a climate change free Michigan.
Whitney has publicly challenged the belief that climate change is real and an issue that should concern the human community. The same is seen in her political strategy schemes where she aims to inform the public on the fact that they receive misdirected information. She strongly believes that the global conditions have not changed over years since she can remember. She disapproves of the scientific research stating that a child can obtain the same results using a thermometer. Furthermore, the woman criticizes the reduction in the number of high energy light bulbs used in the country. In general, Whitney insists that human activities should be checked on the basis of profits in the field of oil rather than complaints about something that people have no control over. She does not believe the climate change science is necessary since, in her opinion, the earth has not changed over the years.
Read also: "Academic Book Review: How to Complete It"
Resources of Each Actor
Resources enhance the transmission of information concerning a given issue to the public. They vary from finances to individual support. Finances will sponsor any idea either politically or through private campaigns that are conducted. In the case of personal support, the people need to be involved to facilitate dissemination of information to other players to gain backing.
Skinner has used both her position and influence to spread the climate change science ideologies. In her shows, she has been trying to motivate the public and other stakeholders to consider the importance of conducting environmentally friendly activities. Her programs on the radio, television and blog sites have encouraged most individuals to be aware of their surrounding and protect it from harsh activities. Her political influence in the region has also managed to convince the local and national authorities to adhere to the views of creating a human reliant environment. Such schemes have seen the launching of organizations in the area that enhance global programs on climate and sustainable development projects.
Whitney, on the other hand, has used her political influence and the public to challenge the views propagated by climate change proponents. In several media interviews and in her blogs, she insists that the hoax about climate changes has misdirected the people. Her supporters in the political class have been promoting the same belief through participating in her campaigning activities and programs. She has not been credited with any environmentally friendly program unlike Skinner who has several recognitions from different authorities. Thus, the type of resource material influences the way in which a given actor either supports or challenges the ideologies that surround climate change activities.
Reasons Behind the Actors Positions
Skinner has enhanced climate programs in her support for global friendly environment. The administrator of the Earth System Science Centre at Penn State University, Michael Mann told ThinkProgress, Nancy understands that unchecked climate change is the greatest threat we face to our economy, out health, our national security. This was one of the reasons he favored her candidacy. Gaius Publius in his article in the AMERICA blog has noted that supporting Skinner to win in the runoffs will mean that the environment has won. Such reviews from her public resources have enhanced her continuous support for climate change science programs.
Whitney took the position of opposing climate change science during her campaigns for different reasons. Her personal understanding is that climate change is a myth that has been created by scientists in the field of the environment. In the article written by Tom Boggioni, the author quotes Laners words who has said that The conspiracy of global warming has had a devastating effect on the American Dream. She went further on to state that:
It was the burning of oil that energized the foundation of a real middle class in the twentieth century. Giving them luxuries like electric lights, refrigeration, and automobiles. But now, both capitalism and our energy industry are under attack and the hopes of global warming is the dagger.
Her interviews have clearly shown that she does not support climate change programs on the local, national and international levels.
Comparison between the Two Actors
The two actors have each used different ways to communicate to the public on their concerns about the issues affecting climate on the local, national and international levels. Skinner has approached the problem from a community and candidacy point of view. She intends to create an environmentally friendly surrounding for all persons in the society. Thus, she insists on protection of the environment through her campaign strategies and comments in her radio and television programs. Her base of support has been the public and the different stakeholders interested in the same field. As compared to Skinner, Whitney has used the media to propagate her hoax idea about global warming. She is, however, not affiliated to any organization that supports her beliefs. Her main backing has been the public that intends to vote for her in during the primaries.
The issues surrounding climate change have caused a division of ideas between proponents and opponents of the idea. Skinner and Whitney have embraced climate change science differently to facilitate their campaign strategies in the primaries. Skinner has been involved in schemes promoting better human activities that will foster friendly environment while Whitney has used the idea to challenge global warming. It is obvious that climatic issues will remain controversial in any region in the world based on the different views each side takes to discuss.