Could we be living a similar environmental decade as that experience in the U.S.A in the 1970s?
Well certainly Obama’s first four years of power are the start of a similar decade. The records (earthjustice ) of what occurred in the first four years of power of Obamas’s White House have created a new crescendo. The Obama administration on January 2009 halted an effort to remove federal protection for wolves in Idaho and Montana with a memo that ordered a sweeping review of last-minute George W. Bush regulations. President Obama’s White House also worked on reinstating protections for mountain streams which was an overturn to Bush’s rule that made it easier for coal companies to bury Appalachian streams under tons of rock. Obama also began the process of restoring the Clean Water Act to the scope Congress intended when first passed. Obama also stopped the fast-tracked plans for oil shale development in the western U.S. and which wolud have opened more than 100,000 acres of prime Utah wilderness to oil and gas drilling. And lastly, although not the only policy Obama has instituted, was that of refuting the December 2008 Bush administration plan which authorized a large polluting coal-fired power plant on public lands in Nevada.
The 1970’s were declared by President Nixon as “the environmental decade (Vig, pg. 102)”. Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, and created the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by executive order. Although not signed by Nixon, but passed over his veto, was the Federal Water Pollution Control Acts Amendments of 1972. The environmental momentum created by these Acts was diffused by Regan presidency of the 1980.
Regan was the first president in the U.S. that came to office with an anti-environmental agenda (Vig, pg. 104). Per Regan’s view, environmental regulation was a barrier to the supply side of economics and environmental conservatism as at odds with economic growth and prosperity. Regan, presidential candidate after a period of economic decline, reflected the policy change U.S. wanted, and the Republican Senate supported. In 1981 Regan’s Economic Recovery Act was passed with reduced income taxes by nearly 25 percent, and cut spending on environmental and social programs. Faced with opposition in Congress, Reagan appointed leaders that shared his environmental views in key agencies, coordinated tightly all policies being reviewed, drafted and studies in the cabinet council and White House staff, cut working budgets to environmental agencies and their programs, and enhanced regulatory oversight (Vig, pg. 105).
Regan, although weakened the White House stand within the environmental arena, revitalized environmental organizations within. Membership to these organizations increased dramatically (Vig, pg. 106), and these were able to stir public’s concern for the environment, which peaked in the late 1980s.
The elder President Bush returned to a more moderate tradition, and promised that while staying on course with the Regan’s economic policies, he would create a kinder gentler America (Vig, pg. 106). He acknowledged the new environmentalist trend set by pro-environmental organizations, and solicit their advice by appointing some of their leaders to his administration. Bush passed the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 which set up three goals: control acid rain by reducing sulfur dioxide emissions from coal-burning power plants by nearly half by 2000, to reduce air pollution inn 80 urban areas that had not met the 1977 air quality standards, and to lower emissions of nearly 200 airborne toxic chemicals by 75 to 90 percent by 2000 (Vig, pg. 107). Despite Bush accomplishments in the national arena, the president boycotted the Earth Summit of 1992 for he wanted no binding targets for carbon dioxide reduction. He also refused to sign the Convention on Biology diversity policies.
President Clinton campaigned on the issues of raising the corporate average fuel economy standards for automobiles, encourage mass transit programs and support renewable energy research and development. This agenda was bogged down in Congress (Vig, pg 109). Clinton failed also in implementing his proposal of raising grazing fees on public lands, which after meeting with western senators, he removed as proposal which was opposed strongly by environmentalists. Environmentalists also opposed his support for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the World Trade Organization. Clinton’s administration also failed in responding to climate change. Clinton authorized Vice president Gore to break the deadlock (Vig, pg. 111) at Kyoto, however Congress would not ratify the agreement and prohibited all efforts to implement it.
President George W. Bush took office in 2001 after he lost the popular vote to Al Gore. Bush’s administration focused on domestic and international issues that were non environmental in nature: Afghanistan and Iraq wars, he presided over passage of a series of large tax cuts, created the Department of Home Land Security, and education and health reforms. Bush experienced 9-11, Katrina and an economic depression worse than the one FDR dealt with. Although not focused on the environment, some of the major policy initiatives in that arena were: 1. “Reliablem Affordable, and Environmentally Sound Energy for America’s future” which was drafted in spring 2001 as a national energy plan. The ideas of the plan were passed by the House of Representatives, but stalled in the Senate. Efforts to revive the bill in the 108th Congress (2003-2005) failed (Vig, pg. 115). 2. “Clear Skies” which called for cuts about 70 percent of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and mercury emissions from power plants between 2008-2018 was also stalled. When the bill failed to clear the Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee in March 2005, the EPA issued separate rules to control sulfur and nitrogen oxides in 28 eastern states.
If we look in detail at one of Obama administration’s policies, that of halting the effort to remove federal protection for wolves in Idaho and Montana with a memo that ordered a sweeping review of last-minute Bush regulations, it was just the initial starting point to review and terminate most of Bush’s environmental legacy (or lack of it).
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s wolf delisting rule was scheduled for publication in the Federal Register on Jan. 27, 2009, but President Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, told agency directors to withdrawal Bush regulations and have all of these for a legal and policy review. Sharon Rose, spokeswoman for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, stated that because of this move the wolves will remain under the protection of the Endangered Species Act.
This move was also the start that the Fish and Wildlife Service needed to come up with a plan that works both for wolves and the people of the northern Rockies. This move was also the starting point for the Obama administration to take a look at regulations that are very controversial under previous Presidents.
References:
earthjustice: http://www.earthjustice.org/our_work/100-days-five-ways-towards-a.html?gclid=CKuou6-ZvpgCFRFWagodpH60bA
Vig, N. and M. Kraft, Eds . (2005). Environmental Policy: New Directions for the 21`st Century, CQ Press.
The Introduction
12 years ago
Original, I like how your avoided a hypothethical policy direction dealing with climate change or smart growth and focused on something not so heavily covered in the media
ReplyDeleteMaria, As always, you set the bar high! I particularly appreciated the portion of your piece where tie in the politics of the day and the give and take between the executive and legislative branches of government. I have a particular interest in the Vig book about the relationship between the Clinton administration and environmental groups.
ReplyDeleteMaria, I too liked how you spoke of Obama's environmental initiatives that are not well known. I believe Obama will effectively deliver enviromental campaign promises, partly because it is what he strongly believes, but also because the public is very passionate about the green movement. The public ultimately decides what Congress enacts because of the fear of losing re-election. Truly, I think this amount of acitivism has thus far been unseen in any other decade. Almost everybody at least knows about "going green" whereas before, I feel like a selected group was passionate about it, now I feel that everyone is making concentrated efforts to improve their standard of living.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what Obama will do in the global realm.
Maria,
ReplyDeleteI also enjoyed your praise of Obama in an environmental area that has rarely been noted by other classmates. As most of us are focusing on green house gases and green collar jobs, you bring up endangered species and preservation. It seems as though Obama is taking a stand on environmental issues even in his first month in office. I hope that this will continue through his term. With the economic crisis at hand, it will be interesting to see if he is able to balance environmental needs vs economic needs. Good view point.
I feel like I just a lesson from you Maria. Where did you find all this stuff? You did a great job exposing summarizing what President Obama has done in his first month in office. I never knew about the endangered species policies, or the Utah drilling initiatives. Thank you for sharing.
ReplyDeleteMaria,
ReplyDeleteThis was a very thorough evaluation of the literature and of the stance that Obama has taken thus far with regards to environmental policies. I am interested to see what will take place in the next four years. I enjoyed how you were able to connect the current state of the country with the 1970s and the potential that it holds pertaining to environmental policy.
-Christiana
I think that Obama and Reagan inherited similar economic situations. It will interesting to see how Obama, a command and control person, does compared to Reagan, a laissez faire person.
ReplyDeleteI think Obama wins on environment.
Nice job, Maria. You gave a very thorough overview that generated a great discussion. I think that your comparison of the current environmental climate to that of the 1970s is thoughtful. It will be interesting to see how public support for environmental issues fluctuates over the next 4 years. I also really enjoyed your discussion of the wolf de-listing issue. This demonstrates that Obama is focused on species and habitat issues in addition to pollution and alternative energy issues.
ReplyDelete