As the U.S. emerged from the environmentally bleak years of the George W. Bush presidency, a new light was visible at the end of the tunnel. When Barack Obama won the 2008 election and was subsequently sworn in as President, many environmentalists seized on this opportunity for new leadership and enthusiasm. Indeed, the early days of President Obama's administration were filled with pledges and policy initatives ranging from reducing vehicle emissions to creating a new sector of green-collar jobs in the U.S. economy. As has been the pattern with past administrations, however, the Obama administration has only made moderate progress toward these sweeping goals in the past four years. Other issues such as the recovering economy, withdrawal of troops from Iraq and the continuing conflict in the Middle East have commanded much of the President's and Congress' energy. As the next election rapidly approaches, President Obama is making a renewed bid to focus more heavily on environmental policy. Touting his achievements, including an increase in use of renewable energy sources, particularly solar and wind power, President Obama hopes to build on the nation's environmental momentum, mirroring the policymaking productivity of the 1970s.
Beginning in the Nixon administration and continuing through Carter's presidency in the late 1970s, the cause of environmentalism enjoyed a period of huge growth and enthusiasm. With the first Earth Day on April 22, 1970 (Kraft & Vig, 12) came a wave of awareness and action underlining the importance of preserving natural resources. Existing agencies related to the environment, such as the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, began to take on a more environmentally friendly approach, while other agencies were specifically created with this purpose in mind, namely the Environmental Protection Agency. These institutions provided support and the ground-level operations needed by both the President and Congress in order to fulfill the rapidly growing number of environmental policy initiatives. The Clean Air Act (1970), Clean Water Act (1972), and the creation of the "Superfund" to clean up areas marred by toxic waste, among many others, were some of the major policy achievements of this era.
The 1980s saw President Reagan take office, and with him, a drastic reduction in Federal responsibility for the environment. At first, Congress seemed to go along with the new President's agenda, emphasizing the economy and state responsibilities for regulating environmental issues. However, as the scope of environmental agencies was cut back, along with their budgets, Congress was able to use its own power and authority to continue policy decisions that would help conserve natural resources. Above and beyond the effect the Congress, though, was the impact that President Reagan's actions had on the grassroots environmental movements in the U.S. Support and activism grew as the environmentally-lax Reagan administration progressed, coming to a peak as President George H. W. Bush took office in 1988.
Moving forward into the 1990s, President Bush (Sr.) began showing his support for environmental issues by pushing for the enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. It became apparent very early in the administration, however, that while George H. W. Bush was clearly more supportive of the environment than Reagan had been, there was still a definite preference for economic support over environmentalism. As the 1992 election approached, interest and emphasis on environmental issues was heightened once again. President Bush seemingly reverted back to a more standard conservative stance, supporting the economic and business interests of the nation, while the Democrat's nominee, Bill Clinton, campaigned heavily for the environment. In addition to Bill Clinton, the Vice Presidential nominee, Al Gore, was also a strong symbol for the importance of the environment in this campaign. However, after winning the 1992 election, President Clinton had to rely almost solely on his executive authority to make advances for environmental policy, due to the opposition he faced in Congress. While some important advances were made during President Clinton's administration, such as the increased protection of public lands, the overall perception was that Clinton's administration had been generally ineffective in terms of the environment.
Most recently, prior to the current Obama administration, George W. Bush took office in 2001, and began taking action to reduce Federal regulation of environmental issues. Much like Reagan, Bush favored economic growth over protection of the environment, and was seemingly in denial about the detrimental effects of climate change. When the terrorist attacks on 9/11/01 occurred, general consideration of environmental policy issues seemed to evaporate. The subsequent military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the deteriorating U.S. economy further distanced environmental policy agendas from the Bush administration's awareness.
The first four years of the Obama administration have shown increased importance and support for environmental issues, particularly in the areas of sustainable energy and balancing economic concerns by creating new green jobs. President Obama seems to be following the models set forth in the 1970s for utilizing a period of national enthusiasm to make real strides in environmental policymaking.
Joanna,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your op-ed. The economic focus vs. environmental focus relationship throughout specific administration periods was very effective. Unfortunately, I too think that Obama has a lot on his plate to balance the economic and environmental needs in the US. Especially with the economic crisis at hand, it seems as though the environmental needs will be pushed aside until the U.S. can vividly see a shift in economic trends in the near future. Or at best, the environmental needs will be minimally addressed until the economic needs are further under control. Good view point and supporting information.
I too enjoyed your point of view. I think that Obama will have far too much on his plate and will thus not devote less attention than he promised to environmental policies: I am not blaming him for this, I just think he realizes that being President is about balance, and unfortunately, with the recent economic downturn, going full force with pro-environment legislation may not be in the country's best interest for now. Whether it is necessary are not, requiring businesses and househoulds to live in a more "green" way (such as reducing emissions, reducing pollution, creating products that are green-friendly, and constructing new homes and businesses in a green manner) is incredibly expensive. An expense that many in the economy cannot afford, especially businesses. What I find interesting is that he is trying to combine economic growth with environmental progression. This is an admirable goal, but ultimately, I do not see it doing much for the immediate future of the economy. It creates 3 million jobs, but will also cause businesses to lay-off workers as they decrease production because of the increase in price. Hopefully I am wrong. It would be nice to have both economic recovery and progressive green measures (although I don't think many of them should be enacted by the federal government).
ReplyDeleteAlso, something to think about that kind of shocked me. You stated that Bush rejected the science of climate change. Well, I read that a lot of climatologists do as well- as in they suggest that science does not support the theory of climate change. So, I think we have all accepted it as fact because of the huge marketing forces that are behind it.
Although I understand the believe that, in light of the economic situation, Obama will not be able to focus as much as he has committed to, I am going to have to disagree.
ReplyDeleteObama has consistently shown that he will not play into political trends and has increasingly called for long term, comprehensive policy changes if the United States wants to truly change its course on many issues. Obama thinks and acts with a long term vision. I think that we are going to continue seeing action on the issues Obama has committed to in the next four years. It might not be feasible to commit to 100% of the campaign promises that we all remember, but I think that he will be consistent with his support on a plethora of issues, including the environment, while vigorously combating our crumbling economy.
I would have to respectfully disagree. Although President Obama does have a lot of outstanding issues that need crucial attention, I think he has the audacity to address the economic issues, while supporting the environment. What I mean is, one of his campaign platforms was job creation, and one way he planned to create new jobs was by encouraging new technologies that will require skilled labor reduce our dependendcy on fossil fuels at the same time, thus helping the environment.
ReplyDeleteJoanna,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your op-ed, your thorough review of the literature, as well as the history of environmental policy over time. I am hoping that President Obama will make continuous efforts to address the environmental concerns that have presented over the past few years. His work thus far has given me hope that things will change with his presidency. The next 4 years will be critical in determing the direction that environmental policies will take in the future.
-Christiana
I like that you took the stance that Obama will only make minimal gains in the environmental realm due to competing priorities. This is an apt application of history and unfortunately a likely reality. You did that particularly well by tying in the Iraq war as a theme that bridged both the Bush and Obama administrations. However, I am more inclined to agree with Tyler Curry. I think Obama will take the longer view and push for a greener tomorrow. Further, I hope that with a favorable Congress Obama will be able to at last marry the environment and the economy. Perhaps the funds stemming from the bailout package will finally catalyze the American Solar industry and we can being generating energy for the world.
ReplyDeleteGreat job, Joanna. I thought it was particularly interesting when you said "President Obama seems to be following the models set forth in the 1970s for utilizing a period of national enthusiasm to make real strides in environmental policymaking." I am quite curious to know if we will look back in 2012 and think that the American public was focused on the environment like they were in the early 1970s. As you mention, the issue of the economy could reduce this focus, but certainly President Obama has outlined energy and environmental quality as key issues for his administration. I also think that we will see an increased level of engagement in global environmental issues (e.g., climate change, air pollution, etc).
ReplyDelete