The Politics of the Disappearing Environmental Platforms of Presidential Candidates

As we have come to see in our discussions over the past couple of classes, the environment is seen as a dirty word and issues related to it can be controversial debate. Perhaps it is attributed to the fact that people do not want to face the reality of Earth as a container of finite resources. Perhaps it is because people do not want to believe that their lifestyle is directly contributing to the destruction of our only planet. Ignorance is bliss and most Americans would rather consume millions of pounds in plastic a year than face the true nature of the state of our environment. Whatever the reason, environmental issues do not receive the same level of severity or priority as economic and social issues. 

This trend is not exclusive to the American public. As potential representatives and decision makers for the American people, the platforms of presidential candidates reflect what is most important to the public. Thus, it is not surprising to me that at first glance, the energy and environment (or in Romney's case, just energy) platforms of President Obama and Mitt Romney are not as comprehensive as compared to their opinions on America's economic or foreign policy. 

In terms of key differences, President Obama’s platform seems constructed to please both sides of the environmental and economic debate while Romney’s platform seeks to utilize the environment to strengthen the economy rather than protect it for future generations. Examples of the dual appeal of President Obama’s platform includes his desire to invest in Green technology and subsequently create more jobs through this industry highlights as well as his initiative to improve fuel efficiency of passenger automobiles. Romney’s plans to exclude carbon dioxide from the Clean Air act and streamline the process for companies to conduct “pre-approved activities in pre-approved areas” reflects his desire to get the economy booming first and then maybe think about the repercussions for the environment. 

Both candidates seem to agree that the United States should reduce its reliance on foreign oil (Read: Middle East) by developing its own source of energy. To President Obama, this means developing the clean-coal industry and investing more money in developing green technology. To Romney, it means doing things like forging partnerships with neighboring countries such as Canada in order to construct ta pipeline that would deliver Canadian oil to the United States. Both have different solutions to the problem but at the very least, they agree that America's desire for energy is growing and we need to look at substitutes if we want to continue living our extravagant lifestyle. 

In general though, it seems as if the platforms of both candidates will do little to drastically change the way Americans consume and dispose of products. The major points that President Obama is pushing in his environmental platform is extremely lenient compared to how huge America's carbon food print is compared to the rest of the world. I think that he is completely bowing down to the automobile industry by giving them until 2025 to double the fuel efficiency of passgener automobiles. It is not as if the technology does not exist for that. The automotive industry can make more fuel efficient cars, it just chooses not to at this point. Giving them 13 years to improve the fuel efficiency of their cars means that we are allowing people to put even more toxins into the environment for the next 13 years before we decide to even think about changing things. Scientists have already said that it is too late to keep the Earth in the state that it has been in for thousands of years but if we follow President Obama's plans then it will definitely be entirely too late. 

Romney's platform fares no better. In fact, it seems to be even worse than President Obama's platform for the sole reason that he does not seem to even act as if he cares about protecting the environment for future generations. Looking through Romney's page, all I see are sentences related to the economy, profit, jobs, deregulation, and streamlining processes for corporations. Romney even states that green technology will hold us American companies back in the international market place. As someone else in the class pointed out in their blog post, Romney's platform does not include the word "environment". It is just simply "energy" and this makes sense because he is solely focused on how America can possess, use and develop more resources for obtaining enough energy to fuel the American economy. 

Ideally, I would love to see both candidates take this issue more seriously. President Obama should be more strict in his policy initiatives and use the power of the government to force industries such as the automobile industry to be on par with the rest of the world in terms of fuel efficiency. I would like to see Mitt Romney change his mind about green technology. While it may be costly, it should not be seen as a disadvantage for American companies competing in the global marketplace. Furthermore, he should not go through with his policy of excluding carbon dioxide from the Clean Air Act. That is only further deluding the American public.

Presidential platforms aside, what ultimately matters is that the American public needs to demand more action from their representatives. You never know when you have a good thing until it's gone. Unfortunately, we do not have another planet to escape to when things go badly on this planet... well not yet at least.