"It’s Just Nature”? LaMalfa’s Climate Evasion vs. North State Reality

At an August 2025 Red Bluff town hall, Rep. Doug LaMalfa told constituents, “The climate does change… what this really boils down to is that there’s folks that want it to be blamed on human activity” (Pierce, 2025, para. 42). That line—delivered in a district repeatedly scorched by megafires and battered by drought—was not a one-off. It’s consistent with LaMalfa’s long-running habit of downplaying or dismissing human-caused warming in favor of vague appeals to “natural cycles,” even as authoritative assessments conclude the opposite (IPCC, 2021; NASA, 2024). 

The Science He Waves Away

Gold-standard authorities are unequivocal: humans are driving rapid warming. The IPCC states that it is “unequivocal” that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, oceans, and land; global surface temperatures are about 1.1°C higher than in 1850–1900, with further warming intensifying extremes (IPCC, 2021). NASA summarizes the literature: roughly 97% of actively publishing climate scientists agree that humans are causing global warming (NASA, 2024). LaMalfa’s framing—climate “just changes”—is not an alternative interpretation; it’s scientifically false (IPCC, 2021; NASA, 2024).

The human fingerprint extends to exactly the hazards battering CA-01: heat, drought, and wildfire conditions. The IPCC documents robust attribution of more frequent and intense heat and drought and rising compound fire weather in western North America (IPCC, 2021). Peer-reviewed research shows human-caused warming has already significantly enhanced wildfire activity in California, particularly in Sierra Nevada and North Coast forests (Williams et al., 2019). Federal drought scientists likewise find anthropogenic warming intensified the 2020–2022 Western megadrought, turning a severe dry spell into an exceptional one (NIDIS, 2024). These are not “just cycles.” They are the predictable results of radiative forcing from fossil-fuel emissions (IPCC, 2021; Williams et al., 2019; NIDIS, 2024). 

The Local Ledger: Fires, Smoke, and Water

Northern California has paid the price. The 2018 Camp Fire in Butte County—within CA-01—was the deadliest in California history, killing 85 people and destroying Paradise (CDC, 2020). State and academic assessments project more large fires and sharply increased area burned under high-emissions scenarios, which directly threaten Northern California communities (California Fourth Climate Change Assessment, 2018). Meanwhile, wildfire smoke has emerged as a major statewide health burden; new analyses indicate California faces the highest wildfire-smoke death toll in the U.S. by mid-century without aggressive mitigation (Williams & Lopez, 2025). For LaMalfa’s constituents, these impacts are tangible: more evacuation orders, more smoke days, higher health costs, and a growing insurance crisis in high-risk zones (California Fourth Climate Change Assessment, 2018; Williams & Lopez, 2025). 

The Pattern: Message Discipline Over Material Solutions

LaMalfa’s official messaging leans on “poor forest management” as the dominant cause of worsening fires (LaMalfa, n.d.). Forest treatments matter; Californians want every practical tool. But minimizing the well-established role of human-driven warming—hotter droughts, longer fire seasons, drier fuels—misdiagnoses risk and yields mis-policy: under-investment in climate-resilient grids and water systems; foot-dragging on clean-energy build-out; and public confusion stoked by long-debunked talking points (NASA, 2024; AFP Fact Check, 2024; Reuters, 2024a, 2024b). When a member of Congress emphasizes that CO₂ is “just a tiny fraction” of the atmosphere, experts note that this trope ignores radiative forcing and the outsized warming impact of a ~50% rise in CO₂ since pre-industrial times (NASA, 2024; Reuters, 2024b). In short: message discipline doesn’t put out fires; science-aligned policy does (NASA, 2024; AFP Fact Check, 2024; Reuters, 2024a, 2024b). 

Consequences for CA-01: More Risk, More Cost, Less Preparedness

For a rural, fire-prone district, every season of delay in aligning policy with the science means higher mortality and morbidity from smoke and extreme heat; escalating losses from fires and post-fire floods; insurance retreat and rising premiums; and chronic water stress undermining farms, fisheries, and rural health systems (California Fourth Climate Change Assessment, 2018; NIDIS, 2024; Williams & Lopez, 2025). Dismissing human causation does not protect timber towns, ranch communities, or foothill neighborhoods. It endangers them—by starving the bipartisan space for scaled fuel treatments and emissions-cutting measures that together reduce risk. When your representative shrugs off the driver, you pay the bill (California Fourth Climate Change Assessment, 2018; NIDIS, 2024; Williams & Lopez, 2025). 

Bottom Line

LaMalfa’s “it’s just nature” posture is not merely scientifically indefensible—it is politically irresponsible in one of America’s most climate-exposed regions. The consensus is clear; the attribution is robust; the local harm is mounting. Persisting in rhetoric that flatters partisan priors while denigrating empirical reality isn’t representation. It’s negligence—with CA-01 as the casualty (IPCC, 2021; NASA, 2024; Williams et al., 2019; NIDIS, 2024; Williams & Lopez, 2025; Pierce, 2025).