For many voters leaning toward the Green Party's Ralph Nader, the environment is the issue, beside which all others pale. And in a sense, they're right. If the planet is uninhabitable, no one will be left to worry about the Supreme Court, abortion, education, gun control and the whole host of other issues we've seen debated in this campaign. That fact is inescapably clear to me. But what is equally clear to me is that Gore will be a far better President for the environment than Bush will be.
Al Gore's environmental record is strong, notwithstanding his ties to Occidental Petroleum. His book on global warming, "Earth in the Balance," published in 1992, was the culmination of nearly two decades of environmental activism in both the House and the Senate. He held the first congressional hearing on global warming after his election to Congress in 1974 - long before many environmentalists had focused on the issue. He is credited with salvaging the United States' role in crafting the Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and reputedly, he has been a major force behind President Clinton's unprecedented push to preserve wilderness areas. As both a legislator, and as the Vice President, he has continued to call for tough air and water quality standards, and opposed attempts to weaken them.
George Bush's environmental record is equally clear. As governor of Texas, he has consistently fought any federal regulation of industry with regard to air and water quality, and proposed that companies voluntarily reduce harmful industrial emissions, rather than be required to do so by law. He has appointed no environmentalists to state commissions that oversee environmental programs. In fact, many of his appointments have sparked criticism because of their strong ties to chemical, oil and real estate interests, and in some cases their relationships to businesses regulated by the commissions.
Another environmental factor in a potential Bush Presidency, as mentioned in the first part of this article, is his intention to appoint "strict constructionists" in the mold of Thomas and Scalia to the Supreme Court. Those two Justices are the most ardent supporters of "state's rights" - especially the right to be free of any federal regulations.
Of course, a number of states already have their own environmental regulations, equal to, or in some cases, better than federal air and water quality standards. (Texas is not one of them, of course.) The planet is unlikely to become uninhabitable with four years of a Bush Presidency. And market forces have already begun to convince some companies to voluntarily reduce their pollution. In short, it is not likely that the sky will fall if George W. Bush is elected president. But it's certainly likely to get a lot heavier.
~Karen~
Next page > Health Care > Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5