President Obama's environmental initiatives are a work in progress. They have definitely been put on the back burner while he focuses on issues such as health care, financial reform, and the economy. Unlike the Bush administration, he does believe in strong environmental regulation by the federal government. His appointments to the EPA reflect his view. But he does not have the necessary votes in the senate to accomplish some of his environmental priorities and as a result, he has not been able to have passed what he believes is important, such as his cap and trade proposal and other limits on pollution.
Obama has not been able to fulfill his campaign promises largely because he has had other priorities which he wanted to achieve first. Also, he has run into a Republican brick wall that favors business and opposes any regulation that creates a hardship for business, such as environmental regulations. Although his heart is in the right place, he has not been able to move things forward on the environment.
The president's environmental policies have also been diverted by the BP oil spill. This has taken away many of his initiatives because of the need to focus on the immediate after effects of the spill. He was criticized for not responding sooner to this environmental disaster. Some environmentalists thought that President Obama gave too much authority to BP in managing the cleanup.
The federal government has the power to regulate the environment both through legislation and sometimes executive orders. The president also can try to encourage and persuade businesses to be environmentally responsible. I believe that the federal government must play an active role in regulating the environment and I am hoping that the Obama administration will move this issue to the front burner after the fall elections.
I agree with most everything you're saying, but you don't substantiate any of your claims in the first paragraph. For instance, which appointees make him more progressive than Bush, and why? Are you sure he wouldn't have enough votes in the senate? I think Congressional democrats stand rather firmly behind the president, but then again my claim is also unsubstantiated.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the President's heart is in the right place. His motives are understandable (wants to increase his ratings) but they aren't really conducive to policy change. I think the administration dropped environmental policy because they wanted to boost approval ratings by making policy in other areas (financial and immigration, for example).
Further, I think the spill would have been the ideal situation to get good policy onto the books. Heck, just look at the advice of one of his advisors: Never waste a good crisis.
The environment was at it's most salient with this oil spill and it is disheartening to see Obama drop the ball by not utilizing the saliency of the oil on the surface of the Gulf. Rather,the Obama administration cosigned with the millions of gallons of dispersant used to decrease the saliency of the oil. It makes me wonder what his priorities are.
ReplyDelete