"Florida and my town have done a lot to prepare for and cope with storms. But all of our praiseworthy improvements address symptoms, not causes." Mike Gunter Jr.
Earlier this week I came across an article in USA Today entitled "Confront Climate Change Or Count On Even Crueler Hurricanes and Septembers". Originally I was excited to read it, thinking the name of the article sounded like a call to action; I wanted to learn what I could do to address climate change. I was ultimately disappointed after reading the full article. The title was misleading and the article didn't have much of a backbone to hold up the argument.
The author, Mike Gunter Jr., begins by breaking down why this past September was one of the most disastrous in recent history. He uses a quantitative measurement known as the Accumulated Cyclone Energy Index to back up his claim. He then shifts focus specifically to Florida's response to Hurricane Irma. Gunter pulls from his own experience as a Floridian and cites what worked and what didn't in terms of maintenance and response. The latter half of the article compares and contrasts the construction codes between Houston and Florida and blames lax regulation for Houston's collapse during Hurricane Harvey. Only then, within the last couple of sentences, does Gunter first use the phrase "climate change". He attributes the increasingly catastrophic hurricanes to climate change, and gives only one solution - to phase out fossil fuels.
While I completely agree with what Gunter is saying, I think his argument is weak and unconvincing. The title of the article made me believe that the main focus would be on confronting climate change and what we as a nation need to do in order to protect our future and our planet. Instead, the article focuses on the resilience of Florida in the aftermath of Irma. It seems biased due to the fact that Gunter is a proud Floridian. He touches on creating change at the governmental level when he speaks to tightening construction codes - specifically in Texas - but quickly moves on to how Florida does it better. His lack of solutions to the problem is what really bothers me. Acknowledging that climate change is to blame is only the start, and Gunter presenting one obvious solution leaves me wanting so much more. The logic is there but there isn't enough evidence and the claim doesn't seem very well fleshed out.
Mike Gunter Jr. is the chair of the political science department at Rollins College and is very educated in the topic of climate change. His title makes him a very credible author and although this is an opinion piece, I know that he has more to offer. Because USA Today readers are usually white, educated, and older, I think they will be left wanting more as well.
