>>> TONIGHT, PRESIDENT BIDEN'S BAN ON RUSSIAN OIL, DOES THE MOVE GO FAR ENOUGH TO HELP UKRAINE?

WILL GAS PRICES SOAR HIGHER?

REACTION FROM A CONGRESSWOMAN.

ALL THAT AND MORE AS "METROFOCUS" STARTS RIGHT NOW.

♪ >> THIS IS "METROFOCUS" WITH RAFAEL PI ROMAN, JACK FORD AND JENNA FLANAGAN.

"METROFOCUS" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY -- >>> GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO "METROFOCUS."

I'M RAFAEL PI ROMAN.

AFTER DAYS OF PRESSURE, PRESIDENT BIDEN THIS WEEK ANNOUNCED A BAN ON ALL IMPORTS OF RUSSIAN OIL.

THE ANNOUNCEMENT CAME AS U.S. GAS PRICES HIT RECORD HIGHS.

MEANWHILE, MANY REPUBLICANS AND SOME DEMOCRATS SAY THAT THE MOVE IS NOT ENOUGH.

IN A VIDEO CALL WITH U.S.

LAWMAKERS SATURDAY, THE PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE PLEADED FOR AMERICANS TO DO MORE.

BUT THE QUESTION NOW IS, HOW FAR IS THE UNITED STATES WILLING TO GO TO PUNISH RUSSIA ECONOMICALLY AND TO HELP UKRAINE MILITARY?

A NEW YORK REPRESENTATIVE WHO WAS ON THAT CALL WITH THE UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT HAS BEEN CRITICAL OF PRESIDENT BIDEN'S RESPONSE.

AS A MEMBER OF THE HOUSE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE, SHE'S AN IMPORTANT VOICE IN CONGRESS IN DETERMINING THE EXTENT OF U.S. INVOLVEMENT GOING FORWARD.

SHE JOINS US NOW.

WELCOME BACK TO THE PROGRAM.

>> THANK YOU.

>> CONGRESSWOMAN, AS I SAID, LAST SATURDAY YOU WERE ON THAT ZOOM MEETING WITH UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY.

WHAT WERE YOUR IMPRESSIONS OF THE MAN LEADING THIS FIGHT AGAINST THE RUSSIAN INVASION?

>> I THINK THE WORLD IS VERY IMPRESSED WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY AND HIS LEETADERSHIP.

THIS IS A DAVID VERSUS GOLIATH WAR.

PEOPLE EXPECTED UKRAINE TO NOT BE SUCCESSFUL AND IT WOULD ONLY TAKE A COUPLE DAYS FOR RUSSIA TO TAKE OVER.

THEY DEFIED THE ODDS DESPITE BEING OUTMANNED, OUTGUNNED, NOT HAVING THE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT THAT RUSSIA HAS.

THEY HAVE FOUGHT SO BRAVELY TO PROTECT THEIR HOMELAND AND THEIR FREEDOM.

MY IMPRESSION IS HE WAS SOMEONE SPEAKING PASSIONATELY ABOUT HIS COUNTRY, ABOUT THE FIGHT THAT IS NOT JUST ABOUT PROTECTING UKRAINE.

IT'S ABOUT PROTECTING THE ENTIRE WESTERN WORLD.

I THINK WHAT HE PRESSED UPON LAWMAKERS WAS THAT THIS IS A FIGHT THAT IS ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THE WESTERN WORLD, THE EU, THE UNITED STATES, EVERYONE'S NATIONAL SECURITY IS AT RISK HERE.

WE MUST BE UNITED IN THE FIGHT TO STOP PUTIN.

>> YOU KNOW, HE MADE SOME SIGNIFICANT REQUESTS IN THAT ZOOM MEETING.

PERHAPS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT WAS HE WAS ASKING NATO FORCES TO PLACE A NO-FLY ZONE OVER UKRAINE.

BARRING THAT, HE WAS ASKING FOR JET FIGHTERS, MiGS.

THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION SAID NO.

DO YOU AGREE WITH THOSE DECISIONS?

DO YOU THINK WE SHOULD GET MORE HEAVILY INVOLVED DIRECTLY IN THIS WAR?

>> OBVIOUSLY, WE DON'T WANT TO BE IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH RUSSIA.

I THINK THE UNITED STATES AND NATO ARE VERY CAUTIOUS ABOUT ANYTHING REGARDING A NO-FLY ZONE, BECAUSE -- I DON'T THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE MAY UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT THAT MEANS.

THAT WOULD ACTUALLY MEAN THE BEGINNING OF WORLD WAR III AND THE U.S.

ENGAGING WITH BOOTS ON THE GROUND AT THE END OF THE DAY AND SENDING U.S.

TROOPS TO SHOOT DOWN RUSSIAN PLANES.

THAT IS A REAL ESCALATION.

WHAT WE DO BELIEVE THOUGH IS THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO PROVIDE UKRAINE WITH THE NECESSARY EQUIPMENT, PROTECTIVE GEAR, COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT, AMMUNITION, DRONES, WHATEVER WE CAN DO TO PROVIDE THEM WITH EQUIPMENT TO PROTECT THEMSELVES.

THAT WAS THE OTHER THING THEY ASKED FOR.

WE UNDERSTAND THE POSITION OF THE WORLD AND NATO IN TERMS OF A NO-FLY ZONE.

AT LEAST GIVE US THE PLANES.

WE WILL PROTECT OURSELVES.

THERE ARE PLANES IN POE WLAND T COULD BE USED.

THERE'S NO DEAL IN PLACE.

THERE ARE CONCERNS THERE AS WELL.

BUT I BELIEVE THAT IF WE CONTINUE TO PROVIDE AMMUNITION, CONTINUE TO PROVIDE MISSILE DISPENSE SYSTEMS, ANTI-TANK SYSTEMS, THAT WOULD PUT UKRAINE IN A GOOD POSITION.

UKRAINE IS DOING AN AMAZING JOB ON THE GROUND, BY THE WAY.

THEY HAVE BEEN MAKING A LOT OF PROGRESS AND PUSHING BACK RUSSIAN TROOPS SIGNIFICANTLY HERE.

>> OKAY.

YOU ARE VOTING -- AS WE TAPE, THE VOTE HASN'T HAPPENED.

TODAY, YOU ARE SCHEDULED TO VOTE ON A $13.6 BILLION FUNDING PACKAGE TO PROVIDE HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE AND MILITARY AID TO UKRAINE.

WILL YOU BE SUPPORTING THAT PACKAGE?

DO YOU THINK THAT YOUR FELLOW REPUBLICANS WILL BE SUPPORTING IT AS WELL?

>> I THINK YOU WILL SEE BIPARTISAN SUPPORT.

I'M STILL ACTUALLY GOING THROUGH THE LEGISLATION RIGHT NOW.

BUT I'M INCOMPLLINED TO SUPPORT.

THERE'S A LOT IN THERE NOT JUST RELATED TO UKRAINE BUT MY DISTRICT.

THIS WOULD BE A FUNDING PACKAGE THAT WOULD BE GOVERNMENT FUNDING FOR THE YEAR.

WE ARE KIND OF GOING THROUGH THAT RIGHT NOW.

>> OKAY.

NOW, AS I SAID IN THE INTRODUCTION, PRESIDENT BIDEN YESTERDAY ANNOUNCED A BAN ON THE IMPORT OF RUSSIAN OIL TO THE UNITED STATES.

HOW DAMAGING IS THAT TO RUSSIA REALLY, GIVEN THAT APPARENTLY THEY CAN QUICKLY SELL THAT TO OTHER CUSTOMERS WHO ARE JUST WAITING IN LINE?

AS THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF SAID, A NUMBER OF OUR EUROPEAN COUNTERPARTS WHO DEPEND MORE ON RUSSIAN OIL AND GAS ARE NOT DOWN WITH THIS.

THEY ARE NOT PARTICIPATING IN THIS OIL BOYCOTT OF RUSSIA.

HOW HARD IS THAT REALLY FOR RUSSIA?

SECONDLY, HOW HARD IS IT GOING TO BE FOR WORKING AMERICANS AND MIDDLE CLASS AMERICANS WHO ARE ALREADY FACING SKYROCKETING INFLATION?

>> SO, I THINK A BAN ON RUSSIAN OIL AND GAS IS A SIGNIFICANT HIT ON PUTIN BECAUSE HE GENERATES A LOT OF HIS REVENUE THAT IS FUNDING THIS WAR FROM THE INCREASED PRICES OF THE BARRELS OF OIL.

MY POSITION HAS BEEN, WE NEED TO DO TWO THINGS.

WE CAN'T JUST DO ONE.

BANNING OIL IS THE FIRST.

WE HAVE TO RAMP UP DOMESTIC ENERGY PRODUCTION.

I CONTINUE TO URGE PRESIDENT BIDEN TO LOOK AT DOMESTIC ALTERNATIVES.

WE KNOW THAT AT OUR HEIGHT IN 2019, WE WERE PROCESSING ABOUT OVER 12 BILLION -- 12 MILLION BARRELS A DAY.

WE CAN CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

WE SHOULD BE FOCUSED ON THAT EFFORT TO TRY TO RAMP UP DOMESTIC PRODUCTION AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

NOW, WITH THE SANCTIONS, I DO BELIEVE THAT LITTLE BY LITTLE WE ARE SEEING THE IMPACT OF THE SANCTIONS.

THE RUSSIAN RUBLE HAS DROPPED TO THE VALUE OF LESS THAN AN AMERICAN PENNY.

I DO BELIEVE THEY HAVE COME TOO LA LATE.

I CALLED FOR THEM EARLY ON.

I THINK IT COULD HAVE DETERRED THE INVASION AND COULD HAVE BEEN A DIFFERENT OUTCOME.

NONETHELESS, THEY HAVE COME.

WE HAVE ADVOCATED FOR MORE.

THE PRESIDENT HAS ADDED THEM.

EACH DAY WE SEE NEW ANNOUNCEMENTS.

WE NEED TO REMOVE RUSSIA FROM THE S.W.I.F.T.

BANKING SYSTEM.

THEY HAVE TAKEN OFF SOME BANKS BUT NOT RUSSIA AS A WHOLE.

I THINK THAT THAT'S THE NEXT STEP.

LET'S KEEP PROVIDING THE EQUIPMENT THAT UKRAINE NEEDS TO DEFEND ITSELF.

>> QUICKLY, YOU HAVE BEEN CALLING FOR A LONG TIME FOR THE PRESIDENT TO RAMP UP OIL PRODUCTION.

ELON MUSK HIMSELF JUST ASKED FOR THE SAME THING RECENTLY.

IN YESTERDAY'S SPEECH, THE PRESIDENT SAID THAT IT'S A MISTAKE TO ASSUME THAT HE HAS -- THAT WE ARE AT A RECORD HIGH IN PRODUCTION.

IN ANY EVENT, OIL AND GAS COMPANIES HAVE 9,000 DRILLING LEASES ALREADY THAT THEY COULD USE TOMORROW IF THEY WANTED TO AND ARE NOT USING.

THEREFORE, IT'S UNFAIR.

HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT?

>> FIRST OF ALL, THE RECORD HIGH WAS 12.9 MILLION BARRELS.

THAT WAS IN 2019.

WE ARE NOT AT THAT POINT TODAY.

THE OTHER THING IS THAT ON DAY ONE, THE PRESIDENT PUT IN A BAN ON NEW OIL AND GAS LEASES AND FEDERAL LANDS.

THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE HERE.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, LOOK, COMPANIES, COULD THEY GENERATE MORE OIL?

THEY COULD DO SO IN TEXAS.

THEY COULD DO SO IN OKLAHOMA AND NORTH DAKOTA.

THE ISSUE IS IS THAT IF WE DON'T HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PIPELINES AND HE CANCELED THE KEYSTONE PIPELINE, THESE ARE THINGS WE NEED TO RAMP UP INVESTMENT TODAY IF WE WANT TO SEE A DIFFERENCE A YEAR FROM NOW.

WHEN THE PRESIDENT CAME IN, THE GAS PRICE WAS $2.38.

PRIOR TO THE RUSSIAN INVASION, IT WAS $3.50.

YES, THE RUSSIAN INVASION EXACERBATED IT.

WE WERE FACING THIS INCREASE FOR THE LAST YEAR PRIOR TO THIS INVASION.

IF IS BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE POLICIES.

IF WE REVERSE THOSE POLICIES, AMERICAN FAMILIES WILL BE BETTER OFF.

>> QUICKLY, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS STRONGLY BACKING THE PEOPLE OF UKRAINE, OF COURSE.

THERE IS A FACTION OF THE PARTY THAT HAS BEEN SPEAKING OUT AGAINST U.S. INVOLVEMENT IN UKRAINE.

ITS MEMBERS ARGUE AMONG OTHER THINGS -- I HAVE GOTTEN THIS FROM DIFFERENT SOURCES -- THAT WE SHOULD WORRY MORE ABOUT OUR SOUTHERN BORDER THAN THE UKRAINIAN BORDER.

THEY CLAIM THAT -- THEY SAY THAT WE SHOULD BE SUPPORTING UKRAINE BECAUSE IT'S A DEMOCRACY FACING AN AUTHORITARIAN REGIME IS WRONG SINCE UKRAINE IS A CORRUPT STATE THAT ARRESTS POLITICAL OPPONENTS AND SHUT DOWNS OPPOSITION MEDIA.

U.S. INVOLVEMENT WILL ONLY HURT THE WORKING AND MIDDLE CLASS.

MOST IMPORTANT, THAT GETTING MORE INVOLVED IN THIS CONFLICT PUTS US AT RISK OF A NUCLEAR WAR WITH RUSSIA.

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THOSE ARGUMENTS?

WHAT SHOULD THE REPUBLICAN PARTY DO WITH THIS SECTION OF THE PARTY?

>> I THINK WE CAN BE DOING BOTH, PREVENTING PUTIN FROM ADVANCING INTO NATO AND THEN POTENTIALLY HARMING THE UNITED STATES AND SECURE OUR SOUTHER BORDER.

IT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS I DID AS AN ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE WAS VISIT THE BORDER.

WE NEED TO REVERSE THE POLICIES BIDEN PUT IN PLACE THERE THAT ALLOWED FOR RECORD LEVELS OF FENTANYL TO CROSS, 2 MILLION ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AS WELL.

WE NEED TO HAVE ORDER.

THAT'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.

I ALSO FEEL THAT NO ONE WANTS TO BE IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH RUSSIA.

BY PROVIDING UKRAINE SUPPORT NOW AND HELPING THEM FIGHT PUTIN, WE ARE IN ESSENCE PROTECTING FURTHER EXPANSION OF THIS WAR POTENTIALLY INTO NATO.

IF PUTIN TAKES OVER UKRAINE, HE IS GOING TO GO INTO NATO TERRITORY POTENTIALLY OR MOLDOVA.

I DON'T THINK HE WOULD STOP THERE.

THE FACT HE IS HAVING SUCH DIFFICULTY RIGHT NOW ON THE GROUND AND HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO TAKE OVER KYIV IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE ENTIRE WESTERN WORLD AND TO CONTINUE THE UKRAINIAN PEOPLE'S FIGHT FOR FREEDOM AND SOVEREIGNTY.

>> THIS HASN'T GOT A LOT OF COVERAGE, BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT.

A KREMLIN SPOKESPERSON ANNOUNCED IF UKRAINE AMENDED ITS CONSTITUTION AND REJECTED CLAIMS TO ENTER NATO, THAT IF THEY RECOGNIZE CRIMEA AS RUSSIAN AND THE BREAKAWAY PROVINCES AS INDEPENDENT STATES, THE RUSSIAN MILITARY WOULD STOP IN A MOMENT.

DO YOU THINK THIS IS A SERIOUS PROPOSAL?

DO YOU THINK THAT THE UKRAINIANS SHOULD CONSIDER IT?

IN ORDER TO AVOID CARNAGE.

DO YOU THINK THIS WOULD MAKE PERHAPS A PUTIN VICTORY POSSIBLE WITH ALL THE CONSEQUENCES THAT THAT WOULD BRING?

>> UKRAINE IS A SOVEREIGN COUNTRY.

THEY WANT FREEDOM.

THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO DECK TATE THEIR FUTURE.

THAT'S WHY THEY BROKE FROM THE RECEIVE ET UNION.

I THEY HAVE HAD THREE CONVERSATIONS TO FIND A CEASE-FIRE.

THEY ARE FAR APART.

I THINK PERHAPS PUTIN WILL COME IN MORE IN TERMS OF TRYING TO BE REASONABLE WITH SOME TYPE OF CEASE-FIRE AS HE CONTINUES TO RECEIVE PUSHBACK AND AS YOU SEE FATALITIES AMONG RUSSIAN TROOPS.

I THINK IT'S HARD FOR PUTIN TO SELL THIS AT HOME.

THERE'S A LOT OF MISINFORMATION.

THEY HAVE CUT OFF ACCESS TO MEDIA.

THE PEOPLE IN RUSSIA ARE NOT SEEING THE TRUTH ABOUT WHAT IS OCCURRING OR WHY THIS INVASION BEGAN.

WHEN PEOPLE WERE -- RUSSIAN TROOPS WERE BEING CAPTURED BY UKRAINIANS, THEY WERE -- THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE THERE TO LIBERATE UKRAINE.

THEY WERE BEING TOLD SOMETHING DIFFERENT BY PUTIN.

SADLY, THAT'S NOT REALLY THE REALITY HERE.

>> UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S ALL THE TIME WE HAVE.

ARE YOU OPTIMISTIC THAT UKRAINIANS WILL PREVAIL?

IN 15 SECONDS.

>> I'M INSPIRED HOW FAR THEY HAVE COME.

I BELIEVE IF NATO AND THE UNITED STATES CONTINUE TO PROVIDE SUPPORT AND WEAPONRY, THEY WILL BE ABLE TO PUSH BACK PUTIN.

THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR OUR EU PATTPAT ER PARTNERS AND THE UNITED STATES.

>> IT'S A PLEASURE TO TALK TO YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>>> GOOD EACH.

WELCOME TO "METROFOCUS."

I'M JACK FORD.

ARE AMERICAN SCHOOLS MISLEADING CHILDREN ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE?

IF SO, WHY?

THOSE QUESTIONS ARE THE SUBJECT OF A NEW BOOK BY AWARD WINNING FR FRONTLINE JOURNALIST KATIE WORTH.

IN THE BOOK SHE ARGUES POLITICS MORE THAN SCIENCE DETERMINES WHAT MILLIONS OF STUDENTS ARE BEING TAUGHT.

THE RESULTS COULD BE CATASTROPHIC.

JOINING US NOW TO TALK ABOUT HER BOOK AS PART OF OUR INITIATIVE, REPORTING ON THE HUMAN STORIES OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND ITS SOLUTIONS IS THE AUTHOR AND REPORTER KATIE WORTH.

>> GLAD TO BE HERE.

>> LET ME START WITH WHERE YOU START IN THE BOOK.

IN THE INTRODUCTION, YOU TALK ABOUT GOING BACK TO ONE OF YOUR SCHOOLS.

TELL ME WHY YOU WANTED TO START WITH THAT AND WHY IT WAS SO SIGNIFICANT.

>> I HAVE BEEN REPORTING -- I STARTED THIS REPORTING PROJECT ABOUT WHAT KIDS LEARN IN SCHOOL, ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE.

THEN IN NOVEMBER 2018, ACTUALLY, IT HAPPENS TO BE THREE YEARS AGO TODAY, THE TOWN OF PARADISE BURNED DOWN IN THE CAMPFIRE.

IT WAS DEVASTATING.

IT BURNED 90% OF THE BUILDINGS IN THE TOWN.

I'M FROM THE COUNTY WHERE PARADISE IS.

I'M FROM CHICO.

ONE OF MY FIRST THOUGHTS ONCE THE FIRE WAS OUT, WHAT ARE KIDS IN THIS COMMUNITY LEARNING ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE WHEN THEY HAVE ARGUABLY BEEN REALLY -- THEIR LIVES HAVE BEEN SHAPED BY IT.

I WOUND UP GOING TO MY ALMA MATER, CHICO JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL AND TALKING TO A SCIENCE TEACHER THERE WHO IS VERY INTERESTED IN TEACHING CLIMATE CHANGE.

SHE TOLD ME THIS STORY ABOUT HOW ONE YEAR A COUPLE YEARS AGO SHE WAS WORKING WITH HER STUDENTS ON SOLUTIONS PROJECTS.

THEY HAD A CLIMATE LESSON.

THEY STARTED COMING IN AND NOT KNOWING -- SAYING, THIS ISN'T REAL.

IT TURNED OUT THAT THEY HAD BEEN LEAVING HER CLASS WHERE THEY WERE LEARNING CLIMATE SCIENCE AND WALKING INTO A HISTORY TEACHER'S CLASS WHERE -- WHO WAS SHOWING THEM VIDEO -- YOUTUBE VIDEOS ALLEGING IT WASN'T REAL, IT WAS A HOAX, IT WAS ABOUT SCIENTISTS WHO WERE GRABBING FOR POWER.

SO THEY WERE GETTING THESE TWO -- THESE WERE 11-YEAR-OLDS, SIXTH GRADERS GETTING REALLY MIXED MESSAGES FROM THE ADULTS IN THEIR LIVES THAT THEY TRUSTED ON THIS ISSUE.

THERE'S JUST SO MANY POINTS OF TENSION OVER THIS ISSUE.

THAT WAS A REALLY -- ONE EXAMPLE OF MANY THAT I CAME ACROSS IN MY REPORTING.

>> TELL US ABOUT IN TERMS OF YOUR REPORTING -- YOU TRAVELED.

TELL US SOME OF THE THINGS YOU DID, JUST QUICKLY, TO PUT TOGETHER THE INFORMATION THAT FORMED THE BASIS OF THE BOOK.

>> YEAH.

I TRAVELED TO A COUPLE DOZEN -- I OBSERVED A DOZEN CLASSROOMS IN A COUPLE DOZEN COMMUNITIES AROUND THE COUNTRY.

I BUILT A 50-STATE DATABASE.

I READ THROUGH DOZENS OF TEXTBOOKS.

I REALLY DID BOTH QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THIS.

AS I SAID, WHAT I FOUND WAS -- THIS IS A POINT OF FRICTION IN A LOT OF COMMUNITIES.

ESPECIALLY IN PRETTY CONSERVATIVE COMMUNITIES.

IN THE REDDIST STATES AND REDDIST PARTS OF THE BLUEST STATES EVEN.

I'M FROM CALIFORNIA.

THAT'S WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN MY HOMETOWN.

THERE'S REALLY A RED/BLUE DIVIDE.

YOU CAN ROUGHLY GUESS WHAT A KID IS GOING TO LEARN ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE BY KNOWING WHETHER THEIR STATE LEGISLATURE IS RUN BY REPUBLICANS OR DEMOCRATS.

>> LET ME TALK ABOUT SOME OF YOUR PROJECTS.

THERE'S SO MUCH IN HERE.

IT'S A MARVELLOUS BOOK.

WELL RESEARCHED.

PEOPLE SHOULD READ IT.

IT'S IMPORTANT.

LET ME TALK ABOUT SOME OF YOUR FINDINGS.

ARE TEACHERS ACTUALLY KNOWINGLY PROVIDING MISINFORMATION TO THEIR STUDENTS?

OR ARE THEY DOING THIS WITHOUT KNOWING THAT THEY ARE DOING IT?

>> I THINK IT'S FAR, FAR, FAR MORE COMMON THE LATTER.

A LOT OF TEACHERS DIDN'T LEARN ANYTHING ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE THEMSELVES WHEN THEY WERE GROWING UP.

THEN THEY HAVE HEARD FROM THEIR NEWS SOURCES, FROM THEIR POLITICIANS THAT THIS MAY OR MAY NOT BE HAPPENING.

SO THEY AREN'T -- WHAT'S WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO PASS ON TO THEIR KIDS.

TEACHERS ARE ALL OVER THE SPECTRUM.

IT'S NOT SOME KIND OF INTENTIONAL -- FROM THE TEACHER'S POINT OF VIEW, IT'S NOT AN INTENTIONAL MISEDUCATION.

IT'S JUST PASSING ON MISINFORMATION THAT THEY THEMSELVES HAVE ABSORBED A LOT OF THE TIME OR JUST COMPLETELY LEAVING IT OUT OF THE LESSON PLANS BECAUSE THEY KNOW IT WILL BE A POINT OF TENSION.

OR IT'S JUST A MATTER OF THEM JUST NOT HAVING MUCH TRAINING IN HOW TO TEACH IT.

>> TALK ABOUT WHAT IS DESCRIBED AS THE PROBLEM OF A BOTH SIDES-ISM APPROACH TO THIS IN THE CLASSROOM.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?

WHY IS THAT CONCERNING TO US?

>> YEAH.

THERE HASN'T BEEN A TON OF RESEARCH INTO HOW TEACHERS TEACH CLIMATE CHANGE.

BUT THERE HAVE BEEN A COUPLE OF SURVEYS.

THEY FIND THAT ABOUT A THIRD OF TEACHERS TEACH IT AS A DEBATE.

THAT'S NOT -- DEBATE IS PRETTY GOOD IN CLASSROOMS BECAUSE IT ENGAGES KIDS AND MAKES THEM THINK CRITICALLY AND PAY ATTENTION.

BUT IF YOU ARE HAVING KIDS DEBATE SOMETHING THAT'S NOT A DEBATE -- LIKE YOU ARE NOT HAVING KIDS DEBATE THE ROLE -- THE CELL THEORY, BECAUSE THERE'S THIS ABUNDANCE OF EVIDENCE FOR IT.

DEBATING IT MIGHT MAKE THEM THINK THERE ISN'T.

RIGHT?

THE SAME IS TRUE WITH CLIMATE CHANGE.

THERE'S AN ABUNDANCE OF EVIDENCE.

THERE'S NO EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY.

SO TO HAVE KIDS DEBATE IT IS DOING A DISSERVICE.

IT PLANTS THIS IDEA THAT EVEN WITH AN ABUNDANCE OF EVIDENCE, IT MAY OR MAY NOT BE TRUE.

>> YOU TALK ALSO ABOUT THIS PROBLEM BEING COMPOUNDED BY MESSAGING.

BY GROUPS AND ORGANIZATIONS WHO ARE JUMPING IN AND ACTIVELY TRYING TO MOVE THE CONVERSATION AWAY FROM THE TRUTH OF CLIMATE CHANGE.

GIVE US A SENSE OF SOME OF THE ORGANIZATIONS AND HOW ARE THEY GOING ABOUT DOING THAT?

>> THERE'S THIS LONG HISTORY OF FOSSIL FUEL -- THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY INSERTING THEIR MESSAGES INTO CLASSROOMS.

AT ONE POINT, THEY ACTUALLY -- THERE WAS A PLAN MADE TO INSERT CLIMATE DENIAL INTO CLASSROOMS IN A LEAKED MEMO THAT "THE NEW YORK TIMES" PUBLISHED IN 1998.

THEY SAID THAT THEY WANTED TO, QUOTE, ERECT A BARRIER AGAINST FUTURE REGULATION OF FOSSIL FUELS.

SO THERE WAS KIND OF AN ACTUAL CONCERTED CAMPAIGN BY THE FOSSIL FUEL COMPANIES FOR A LONG TIME TO MAKE KIDS DOUBT CLIMATE CHANGE.

THEN THAT -- FOSSIL FUEL COMPANIES ARE NOW MORE OR LESS ON BOARD.

THEY ARE NO LONGER PUSHING DENIALISM.

>> IS THAT TRUE?

I SUSPECT PEOPLE WOULD BE -- MIGHT NOT KNOW THAT.

ARE YOU SEEING THAT GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE FOSSIL FUEL BASED COMPANIES ARE SAYING, IT DOES EXIST?

LET'S SEE WHAT ROLE WE CAN PLAY?

>> IT TOOK A LOT OF PUBLIC PRESSURE.

THEY AT LEAST PUBLICALLY NOW SAY, CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL.

WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT THEIR OWN SCIENTISTS HAVE BEEN SAYING SINCE THE '50s, BY THE WAY.

YEAH.

THEY AT LEAST PUBLICALLY ARE SAYING, IT'S REAL.

WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT.

NOW THEIR STRATEGY IS SAYING, BUT THE ANSWER TO IT ISN'T TO REGULATE US.

IT'S TO MAKE INDIVIDUALS, LIKE, TAKE THE BUS INSTEAD OF DRIVING TO WORK.

MAKE IT AN INDIVIDUAL -- BECOME VEGAN.

THEY ARE TRYING TO PUSH ANY ACTION ONTO INDIVIDUALS RATHER THAN ON THEIR CORPORATION.

BECAUSE THERE'S JUST -- THERE CAME TO BE TOO MUCH PUBLIC PRESSURE TO CONTINUE WITH DENIALISM.

IN THEIR PLACE, THERE ARE THESE CONSERVATIVE THINK TANKS.

ONE OF THEM IS BASED IN CHICAGO.

IT'S CALLED THE HEARTLAND INSTITUTE.

A FEW YEARS AGO, IT SENT OUT CLIMATE DENYING MATERIALS TO IT CLAIMED EVERY SCIENCE TEACHER IN AMERICA.

SO YOU CAN IMAGINE THAT A LOT OF TEACHERS RECEIVED THIS AND JUST IMMEDIATELY THREW IT AWAY.

BUT SOME RECEIVED IT AND TOOK IT IN GOOD FAITH AND STARTED USING IT IN THEIR CLASSROOMS.

>> THERE'S A FASCINATING PART OF THE BOOK HERE WHERE YOU TALK ABOUT THE FACT THAT PUBLISHERS WILL DISTRIBUTE DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE SAME TEXTS TO DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE COUNTRY.

EXPLAIN THAT TO US.

>> YEAH.

THE WAY THAT TEXTBOOK MAKERS CONDUCT THEIR BUSINESS IS THEY ARE TRYING TO SELL TEXTBOOKS.

SOME STATES, TEXAS AND FLORIDA AND CALIFORNIA, ALL HAVE STATE WSTA STATEWIDE ADOPTION.

A COMMITTEE LOOKS AT THE TEXTBOOK WITH A FINE TOOTH COMB AND REJECTS IT OR ACCEPTS IT.

WHEN THEY ARE MAKING THESE TEXTBOOKS, THEY HAVE IN MIND, WILL THIS BOOK PASS THE SCRUTINY OF THE TEXAS TEXTBOOK COMMISSION?

SO THEY KIND OF -- THEY REALLY ARE VERY CAREFUL IN THEIR LANGUAGE ABOUT POLITICAL ISSUES.

I TALKED TO SEVERAL PEOPLE WHO WORKED IN THE INDUSTRY WHO SAID THAT THERE WERE EXPLICIT CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HOW TO PRESENT CLIMATE CHANGE IN THEIR TEXTBOOKS.

AS A RESULT, WHAT WE FOUND WHEN WE READ THROUGH ALL THE TEXTBOOKS WAS THAT THERE'S A LOT OF CLIMATE DENIAL LANGUAGE IN IT.

THERE'S GOOD INFORMATION ABOUT CLIMATE SCIENCE.

BUT THEN THERE WILL BE A PARAGRAPH THAT SAYS, WHILE MANY SCIENTISTS BELIEVE CLIMATE CHANGE IS CAUSED BY HUMANS, SOME BELIEVE IT'S NATURAL AND IT'S BEING CAUSED BY SOLAR CYCLES, ET CETERA, WHICH THERE'S NOT EVIDENCE FOR.

IT'S NOT BASED ON SCIENCE.

BUT THEY ARE INCLUDING THAT SO WHEN THAT CONSERVATIVE TEXAN TEXTBOOK COMMISSION LOOKS AT IT, THEY WILL BE LIKE, WELL, IT INCLUDES BOTH SIDES.

THERE'S A TEXTBOOK THAT'S MADE SORT OF WITH TEXAS AND LOUISIANA AND FLORIDA IN MIND.

THEN THERE'S NOW A SECOND TIER OF TEXTBOOKS THAT GOES INTO MORE DEPTH ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE FOR THE CALIFORNIANS OF THE WORLD WHO WANT A ROBUST EDUCATION ABOUT CLIMATE SCIENCE.

>> KATIE, THERE'S SO MUCH IN THIS BOOK THAT IS WORTHY OF OUR CONSIDERATION, WHERE WE NEED TO BE DEALING WITH IT, ESPECIALLY AS PARENTS, TO START A BETTER GRASP OF WHAT YOUR CHILDREN SHOULD BE LEARNING.

AS YOU TALK ABOUT IN THE BOOK, THERE CAN BE DIRE CONSEQUENCES FOR OUR CHILDREN AND A GENERATION OF CHILDREN NOT TO BE TAUGHT ABOUT THE REALITY OF CLIMATE CHANGE.

ONCE AGAIN, THE BOOK IS "MISEDUCATION, HOW CLIMATE CHANGE IS TAUGHT IN AMERICA."

GO READ IT.

GET IT INTO YOUR SCHOOLS.

WE APPRECIATE YOU TAKING TIME TO CHAT WITH US.

YOUR RESEARCH IS COMPELLING.

SHARING YOUR THOUGHTS AND YOUR FINDINGS WITH US IS VERY PROFITABLE FOR US.

YOU TAKE CARE NOW.

>> YEAH.

THANK YOU.

MY PLEASURE.

BYE-BYE.

>>> "METROFOCUS" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY --