Martin's Op-Ed

The inauguration of the 44th President of the United States Barack Obama in January 2009 brought hope to environmental policy which has experienced different leadership and minimal improvement since the 1970s. It wasn’t until about 1970 when the federal government started playing a larger role in environmental policy making. In 1969 Congress passed the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) which required cooperation between state and local governments and other organizations to promote the general welfare to create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in harmony. On April 22, 1970 the first Earth Day placed environmental problems on the nation’s social and political agendas and policymakers began to see these problems as politically attractive (Vig, 11). In 1972 Sen. Edmund Muskie, D-Maine emerged as the dominate policy entrepreneur for environmental protection issues (Vig, 12). Muskie formulated environmental proposals and helped set the tone for environmental policy making for much of the 1970s.

The Nixon, Ford, and Carter administrations attempted to formulate new energy policies during their terms but were relatively unsuccessful due to political constraints but all was not lost. In 1977 Congress revised the Clean Air Act of 1970 and the Clean Water Act of 1972 through amendments to the original agreements. Unfortunately these amendments were met with some backlash due to the economic impact of implementation.

The Reagan administration brought a different outlook on environmental policy and Reagan was considered the first president to take office with an anti-environmental agenda. Reagan viewed environmental conservation as fundamentally at odds with economic growth and prosperity (Vig, 79) and reevaluated environmental policies due to his desire to reduce government regulation and shift responsibilities to the states and private sector. The Economic Recovery Act of 1981 enacted during Reagan’s term reduced taxes by approximately 25% and cut spending on environmental programs as well. Although viewed as a victory for Reagan, Congress was divided on his actions and did not support his environmental goals. Reagan attempts to further reduce environmental conservation were quite obvious. He selected individuals such as Anne Burford to head the EPA and James Wyatt as secretary of the interior who were known supporters of the mining, logging, and oil and gas industries. Reagan also attempted to abolish the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and although he was unsuccessful he cut its staff and ignored its members’ advice.

When George H. Bush took office he declared himself a “conservationist” and promised to be an “environmental president.” (Vig, 81) He vowed to reverse some of the things done under the Reagan administration by restoring the CEQ and by passing a new Clean Air Act. However, his term was deemed unsuccessful on the environmental front because he threatened to boycott the Earth Summit in 1992 and refused to sign the Convention on Biological Diversity.

The Clinton administration departed from the relationship of environmental protection and economic growth and came with high expectations from environmentalists stemming from campaign promises. These promises ranged from raising the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) to passing a new Clean Water Act. Unfortunately most of Clinton’s initiatives were unsuccessful but he was able to strengthen the EPA as well as take measures to protect the Florida Everglades, Yellowstone National Park, and the ancient redwood groves in California (Vig, 84)
When George W. Bush was elected in 2000 it was quite clear his administration would not share the same values the Clinton administration did. Due to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks his focus was shifted and he launched wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Bush was also a proponent of economic development and gave little emphasis to environmental protection. His budget proposal in 2002 called for an 8 percent reduction in funding for natural resource and environmental programs (Vig, 87). This budget proposal and his rejection of the Kyoto Protocol confirmed his lack of commitment to environmental policy.

President Obama’s campaign promises made it clear unlike his predecessors he would focus on environmental policy. Obama promised he would make combating global warming a top priority, reinvigorate the EPA, protect our children from toxins, and reverse the Bush administration attempts to chip away at our nation’s clean air and water standards (Vig, 91). Obama appointment of key personnel made a statement that he was attempting to be the strongest environmental administration ever. His $787 billion stimulus package and American Recovery and Reinvestment Act were further confirmation of Obama’s commitment to environmental policy. In addition, Obama requested $10.5 billion for the EPA (48 percent more than requested by President Bush in his final budget), including $3.9 billion for the EPA’s core operating budget and $3.9 billion for its clean water and drinking water funds (Vig, 92). Finally additional initiatives by Obama include a $2.3 billion dollar tax credit to start a clean energy sector plans to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions substantially by 2020.

As President Obama begins his second term in office a review of his environmental policy agenda provides hope for the future. Although the majority of his first term was spent dealing with a declining economy and removing military personnel from Afghanistan and Iraq his concentration on environmental issues made a profound impact. Obama was able to sustain the budget for the EPA and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 7 percent in four years. Only time will tell if he can continue making progress on his environmental agenda and keep all his campaign promises.