What this shows is that a concrete environmental problem that directly impacts constituents can actually bypass a lot of the partisanship.
It's a lot easier to ignore climate change, since the impacts are far removed from any single direct action. But here Floridians have over the course of a generation seen a river essentially die, with a clear cause and obvious solution.
Nobody wants to destroy rivers for no gain. Rather, people are willing to destroy the environment when the benefits are evident and the costs are hidden to them (or paid by somebody elsewhere).
It's a lot easier to ignore climate change, since the impacts are far removed from any single direct action. But here Floridians have over the course of a generation seen a river essentially die, with a clear cause and obvious solution.
Nobody wants to destroy rivers for no gain. Rather, people are willing to destroy the environment when the benefits are evident and the costs are hidden to them (or paid by somebody elsewhere).