Bush's Environmental Policy Has He Done Whats Best for the American People? Liberal Voice

Author: May Boeve

What exactly is an "environmental policy"? If one were to base her definition on the current U.S. presidential administration, it would be "How Best to Increase Profits of U.S.-owned Multinational Corporations." The president succeeds with this as his objective, as his administration initiates rollback upon rollback of environmental protections in the interest of Corporate America.
But he doesn't stop there. Along with reversing the positive policies made by previous, more ecologically conscious administrations, he adds his own shockingly reactionary policies.
Examine, as an example of how the Bush administration has condoned environmental degradation, its policies regarding global warming. When the administration convened a panel from the National Academy of Sciences to review its proposed plan to address climate change, the panelists scoffed at the modicum of funds allocated for the project.
However, the real whoopee cushion of an embarrassment entails the panelists' ridicule of a plan that involved conducting "research on questions about which there is already scientific consensus" (National Resources Defense Council, Feb. 25, 2003).
Another impressively backward plan initiated by Bush is his new idea for controlling power-plant emissions. No alternative energy sources will be employed, nor will U.S. power plants discontinue fossil fuel use. Rather, the plan is to construct the world's first carbon-dioxide emissions-free power plant - run on coal! Nice idea, I guess, but whom are we kidding here? I can hardly fathom the irony of a coal-run power plant. Just how much money is the U.S. coal industry contributing to Bush's re-election campaign?
Therein lies the trend of these disheartening policies. When one reads in the news about yet another bill that will wreak irreversible damage on the environment, it can usually be explained with a little reading between the lines concerning which industry might benefit from a particular ecosystem's loss.
At such times, Bush's interests aren't even vested: they're sticking out of the front pocket of his suit coat.
In response to the array of abuses raining down from Capitol Hill, various environmental groups have their hands full attempting to counteract some of them.
Lobbyists representing environmental groups are using their allies in the House and Senate to try to offset pressures of a different nature from corporate lobbies (who carry more weight given the make-up of the current Congress).
Much of the environmental organizations' efforts lie in publicizing what exactly the administration is up to: so many regulatory laws are being overturned that it is difficult to keep track of them.
Friends of the Earth, the Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council are good examples of such organizations, and their Web sites maintain updated reports.
Along with this, the Sierra Club's Web site includes an interactive activity called "The Big Book of Bush," full of edgy irony. For example, one activity involves the participant clicking on different states on a map of the United States as part of a Bush-Cheney field trip across National Forests to look for areas to drill for oil. But just beneath the surface exists the discouraging truth of what actually occurs as a result of this legislation.
So don't be duped, my fellow students of a school that lists "recycling" in the Student Life link on its Web site.
Even though Bush shows all the signs of an environmentally conscious individual, he maintains direct ties to the oil industry and he is no friend of the earth.
Often what one problematic presidential administration puts into place by way of policies can be easily reversed by succeeding presidents (just look at the Clinton to Bush transition of powers).
In the field of environmental protection, this is not the case because damage to the environment is largely irreparable.
The corporations that receive the losses of air, water and wildlife will continue to grow and environmental stability will diminish.