Midnight De-Regulation and the Myth of A 'Center Right Nation' -- Part 1: The Environment

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sat Nov 15, 2008 at 13:34


The myth of a center-right nation is kept alive like most myths are--by the simple act of endless repetition.  But like most myths, it doesn't do so well when you try a little reality testing.  For example, if this really were a center-right nation, would the Bush Administration have to do so damn much dirty work behind closed doors, in undisclosed locations, or contracted out to somebody's horse-trainer's cousin?  Or, to put a little finer point on it, would the Bushies really have to wait until they were halfway out the door to enact a whole slew of environmental regulations like the following, without congressional input?

  • Office of Surface Mining (Interior) -- The rule would allow mining companies to dump the waste (i.e. excess rock and dirt) from mountaintop mining into rivers and streams.

  • Environmental Protection Agency -- The rule would ease current restrictions that make it difficult for power plants to operate near national parks and wilderness areas.

  • Environmental Protection Agency -- Under the rule, concentrated animal feeding operations, i.e. factory farms, could allow farm runoff to pollute waterways without a permit. The rule circumvents the Clean Water Act, instead allowing for self-regulation.

  • Environmental Protection Agency -- The rule would exempt factory farms from reporting air pollution emissions from animal waste.

List continues on the flip...

Paul Rosenberg :: Midnight De-Regulation and the Myth of A 'Center Right Nation' -- Part 1: The Environment
More Bush Administration environmental "midnight regulations":

  • Department of the Interior -- The rule would alter implementation of the Endangered Species Act by allowing federal land-use managers to approve projects like infrastructure creation, minerals extraction, or logging without consulting federal habitat managers and biological health experts responsible for species protection. Currently, consultation is required.

  • Environmental Protection Agency -- The rule would change EPA's New Source Review program, which requires new facilities or renovating facilities to install better pollution control technology, by subjecting fewer facilities to its requirements.

  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Department of Commerce) -- The rule would transfer the responsibility for examining the environmental impacts of federal ocean management decisions from federal employees to advisory groups that represent regional fishing interests. The rule would also make it more difficult for the public to participate in the environmental assessment process required by the National Environmental Policy Act.

  • Environmental Protection Agency -- The rule would reclassify thousands of tons of hazardous waste as fuel, allowing it to be burned instead of sensitively disposed of. The emissions generated by burning the waste would be more toxic than emissions from burning fossil fuels. The chemical industry is advocating for more categories of waste to be reclassified.

  • Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (Department of Transportation) -- The rule would allow truck drivers to drive up to 11 consecutive hours. Because of the effects of fatigue, longer hours-of-service periods put both truck drivers and other motorists at risk.

  • Bureau of Land Management (Interior) -- Capitalizing on a recent decision by Congress to let the ban on oil shale development to expire, the BLM rule would open 2 million acres of western land to leasing. Environmentalists say oil shale development, which involves extracting liquid oil from solid rock by heating it, increases greenhouse

The point here is blindingly simple: environmental protection is quite popular with the American people, but it is vehemently opposed by the powers that be atop the Republican hierarchy, particularly top funders of movement conservative front groups and the like.  And so these massively unpopular sorts of anti-environmental actions must be taken in the most obscure, unaccountable, low-profile manner possible.

Yet, despite the fact that such policies can't remotely stand the light of day, we are told, in effect, that this is precisely what the American people want, because, after all "this is a center-right nation".

Environmental regulations aren't the only ones involved, of course.  But support for environmental protections is so broad and so strong that it serves as perfect exemplar of just how wrong-headed the "center-right nation" narrative really is.

For more information, the original of this list (with more info on the items, and more items in other areas) can be found on OMB Watch's RegWatch blog here.


Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
In the term center-right........... (4.00 / 2)
Center comes first implying it is more center and less right. These are examples of far right policies to me. So they would be unacceptable to most center-right citizens even if we accepted that they were the majority of our popultaion - which I do not. Even in Reagan's hey day I don't think we were center right as a nation. If you asked people during that period if they were liberal they might say no, but if you asked them 100 policy questions that did not have lightning rod terms like liberal in them - they would answer many if not most of them on the center-left side. It is even more true today.

hmmm (0.00 / 0)
considering all the deregulation of recent decades, as well as the growth of military spending, surveillence, and the "national security" mantra, it is somewhat disingenuous to describe the state, or "government," as "left" or even mildly "progressive." It is indeed "center-right." Obama's Restoration of the Clinton era via Hillary, Rahm, Rubin, Podesta, et al. demonstrates this clearly.  

When it comes to the "public opinion" beast, however, a far better case can be made to say that the country is becoming increasingly "liberal-right," or some such cosmopolitan-feudal or blue-red spectrum. Yet a much deeper issue involves how much stock political scientists should put into polls. Is  THAT the level of analysis it has now come to? People are not just "voters." The correlation between what they identify as and what they definitively ARE is an issue positivist wonks cant seem to get their head around.  
 


[ Parent ]
hmmm2 (0.00 / 0)
unless of course you actually put stock in the idea that the state truly "represents" the public....which no honest observer can.  

[ Parent ]
we are really "center-center" - that is what "center" means (0.00 / 0)
     All of this talk about "center-right" and "center-left" is really an oxymoron.
    center = average = majority
    Here are some better questions to consider:
1) When you ask voters to self-identify, how many label themselves as "liberal" (or "progressive"), how may as "conservative", and how many as "moderate"?
2) When you survey the opinions of voters on various policy issues, do those voters show more support for "liberal" policies, "conservative" policies, or "moderate" policies?
3) If you compare the policy views of voters to the self-identification labels of voters, you find that a large percentage of those that self-identify as "conservative" really favor "liberal" policies. Is this the result of the billions of dollars spent by right-wing organizations to spread their propaganda? (Probably so.)
4) Now that the Republicans controlled the White House, Senate, and House from 2000 to 2006, and gave us the worst 6 years in a generation, for how long will the "Republican brand" be tarnished? What actions could be taken by the Right and the Left to influence the strength of the "Republican brand"?
*****
    Basically the claims that America is "center-right" are themselves a piece of right-wing propaganda. We need to reject that meme and just say that Americans want honest and effective government, which the Republicans have recently failed to deliver.


Luke 12:48 "to whom much is given, of him shall much be required". Would Jesus want progressive taxation, or regressive taxation?

USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox