|
Dubya scores a D-The League of Conservation Voters gives President George W. Bush, for his first year in office, an overall grade of D- for his environmental actions. by the League of Conservation Voters
President George W. Bush in his first year in office has actively pursued an anti-environmental agenda. From selecting industry lobbyists to regulate their former employers, to retreating on regulations designed to protect public health and the environment, to eliminating protections of our public lands, President Bush continues to roll back environmental protections. When campaigning for president, George W. Bush made few speeches on environmental issues and even fewer campaign promises relating to the environment. In the absence of campaign pledges on the environment, this report card bases its evaluation of the Bush administration's environmental record in its first year largely on the people that the president has chosen to serve in key positions in environmental agencies and on the environmental policy decisions that have been announced to date-a surprisingly large number. President Bush has made a practice of using administration appointments to place environmental policy in the hands of supporters of energy, resource extraction and corporate interests. The president made a few promising appointments, such as New Jersey Governor Christine Whitman to head the Environmental Protection Agency. However, the vast majority of his selections appear to regard the environment as a resource to be exploited and the public's health as merely one factor, among many, in a cost- benefit approach to pollution control. President Bush's appointments, taken as a whole, are clear evidence of an aggressive strategy to dismantle key environmental and public health protections. This is most evident at the Department of the Interior, where his appointees from Secretary Gale Norton on down have strong ties to timber, ranching and mining interests that are regularly at odds with attempts to protect our public lands for future generations. In its first budget, the Bush administration proposed an increase in overall discretionary spending by 4 percent across the board for fiscal year 2002, and funding for environmental programs took a major hit. Ignoring the desire of most Americans for stronger, better enforced environmental and public health protections, the administration proposed slashing over $2.2 billion in funding for critical environmental programs. The president, as promised during the campaign, did attempt to encourage redevelopment of contaminated industrial sites, fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) and eliminate the $4.9 billion maintenance backlog at national parks. However, the administration cut funds to enforce environmental laws and oversee important programs that protect public health and the nation's air, water and natural treasures and paid for some of its increases, such as the increase in LWCF, with cuts to other important environmental programs. Next year's budget is expected to continue and exacerbate these trends. Due to new funding priorities linked to the war on terrorism, the scheduled phase-in of the President's tax cut, and the rapidly cooling economy, new and larger cuts to environmental and public health programs are likely-and will reflect both the fiscal and ideological priorities of this administration. In its first year in office, the Bush administration has largely taken an unfortunate and aggressive anti-environmental approach to public policy. While upholding some positive environmental and public health protections developed under the last administration, for every step forward, this administration has taken multiple steps backward. From opening public lands to oil and gas exploration, to reneging on his campaign promise to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, to rolling back rules to protect public lands from toxic mining waste, this administration has allowed short-term political concerns to outweigh America's long-term interest in environmental protection. For example, on energy, the issue that dominated politics and the media for most of 2001, the Bush administration's policy approach reflects its strong ties to industry and its anti-environment leanings. The internal Bush administration task force, headed by former oilman Vice President Cheney and charged with developing a national energy policy, reflected a strong pro-fossil fuel bias. A pro-development imprint was unmistakable in the task force's final energy plan, which called for the construction of hundreds of new power plants over the next 20 years, an upsurge in coal production and use, a long-term shift to nuclear energy, and more domestic oil and gas drilling in America's most precious wilderness areas, while slighting clean technologies and renewable energy development. To read President Bush's entire report card visit the League of Conservation Voters website at lcv.org. This column originally appeared in February 2002 in the Chico Examiner. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
