A few weeks ago as I scoured the internet to find new topics regarding U.S. Environmental Regulations, I realized the search was pretty futile. With the presidential election coming up and a new administration guaranteed to be in place next year (unless Cheney invokes some new super vice-presidential power), nothing is happening of going to happen.
First of all, the other nations of the world are done with President Bush regarding environmental issues (all others as well). It became evident in the new U.N. led global warming talks and the emissions talks we led in Hawaii that our current agenda doesn't suit anyone, and they mine a well wait for the next president. In fact, the agenda created in Bangkok for future talks was partially built around this timetable so the U.S. can help the cause instead of wasting time with a lame duck administration.
I also wonder how things can get done domestically when 3 key members of our senate aren't doing shit but campaigning. Do you think Sen. Clinton, Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain are working on new bills to pass through the senate? No. They are creating lofty agendas that aren't nearly feasible. Obama is the worst with this.
Obama can talk, I'll give him that, but should we believe a word that comes out of his mouth? He has been a senator for one term, and has been campaigning for most of it. Then he comes with these messages of change that make me crazy. How the hell does this guy know how to work within the government let alone be in charge of it? He says he is going to get universal health care and fix the economy and save the environment and it seems a lot of people are convinced he is. The only problem is more experinced politicians have been doing the same thing for decades and havn't had success. I wonder what his special quality is that "can change politics like usual" as he always claims. Rousing speeches don't create legislation and break down centurys of tradition.
Anyway, I digress. Whoever becomes President next is a better environmental President than George Bush. The momentum of support for environmental issues is at an all time high and any politician worth a damn should be able to ride it for some change. How we get there will be the key.
All three candidates support emission trading, but no infrastructure is in place to do so. We do not even have a record of who pollutes what. Will the candidates (here's looking at you McCain) be able to resist powerful lobbyists and require reductions worth a damn or will we end up with a bloated number of credits where its cheaper to pay for excess pollution rather than curb it?
I am just worried words like "foreign oil dependency", "carbon reduction", "renewable energy", and the other "green"(which is becoming grossly cliche) are becoming words without meaning. Are our politicians, the people who represent us in our great democracy, really coming up with solutions or is all this talk just people saying what we want to hear. When Bush says we need technology to pave the way to a better environment, is there actual work being done or is he just hoping one of those god-hating, dirty hippy scientists he hates makes a new invention to save the world? Where are the actual plans people? I can sit here and promise you solar energy will reduce emissions by X percent, but that doesn't change the fact I have no idea on how to do that.
Personally, I think Hillary is the best person for the job. She is smart, experienced, would have an incredibly influential first-husband and gets things done. It infuriates me that so much judgement about how a candidate will perform as leader of the most powerful nation in the world is based on how good a speech you can give. Please tell me why else Obama has come from nowhere to the possible democrativ nominee. It wasn't his work in the senate. He just seemed to become good at his job overnight.
If he does win, I won't be horrible upset, there is a chance he will do well. He has that window after he gets elected to use his momentum to get a lot of things done, a la President Kennedy. If he has smart people around him and can be steadfast about what he things is right, a powerful speech and a few smiles could get a lot done. However, if things don't get done right away or there are no marketable improvements, the Republican machine will be sure to break him down into a silly idealist, a la Gerald Ford perhaps? I'm too young for accurate portrayals of old presidents.
Change is in the air (along with a staggering amount of carbon emissions), and just the post-Bush high should be enough for some serious improvements. Who knows, maybe that was his plan all along. Get the American people and the rest of the world so down on the United States government that when he leaves, the goodwill felt by all will be enough to curb the recession. Sort of like the celebration seen in the Wizard of Oz after Dorothy crushed the wicked witch, but with a global economy.
I have learned a tremendous amount about what is being done throughout the world to halt global warming in writing this blog. What I particularly like is that learning about acutal legislation means the technology is ready here and now. Politicians (most) don't rely on theoretical scenarios and possibilities, their changes need to be realistic. The changes they talk about are the ones we will actually feel, and I believe I have a better understanding about what is to come (environmentally speaking) than most.
Its been real.
Shane
0 comments:
Post a Comment