Obama's Free Pass

We're continually told time and time again that Republicans do not care about the environment and only Democrats can save us from Global Warming and world pollution.  Most people assume Democrats are the party that is better for the environment after all they are the party of Al Gore, Mr Environment himself.

Even I started at one point to buy into the Democrat's hype that Republicans don't do enough, that is until I started reading up on what both parties are actually doing.  One classic example is forestry.  Democrats continue to push for new laws to "protect" our forests and leave them untouched which if you don't really think too much about it sounds like a good idea on the surface.  Forestry however clears away the underbrush and dead trees that allows easy spread of forest fires.  It also creates logging roads which allow for quick access points by fire departments should fires actually break out in remote forest locations.  The laws passed by Democrats to leave the forests in CA and other states around the country untouched are directly responsible for massive forest fires that claimed thousands of acres of forests and a number of lives.

This brings us to Obama's free pass.  Bush was slammed during his 8 years in office by environmental groups for not doing enough to clean the environment and superfund sites.  Nearly every major news source in the country wrote about environmental groups that criticized Bush for cutting back spending on clean ups of superfund sites.

Now if you listen to what these same environmental groups are saying, who for the past 8 years slammed Bush, you'll find them oddly quiet.  The reason is explained in the AP new article found HERE.

During the eight years of the Bush administration, the agency finished construction at 38 sites a year on average.


In Barack Obama’s first two years in office, the Environmental Protection Agency expects to begin the final phase of cleanup at fewer Superfund sites than in any administration since 1991, according to budget documents and agency records. The EPA estimates it will finish construction to remove the last traces of pollution at 20 sites in 2009 and 22 sites in 2010.


The explanation by the Obama team is the same one put forward by Bush officials: The sites on the list have become increasingly complicated, contaminated and costly.


When EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson explained this trend to a Senate committee this year, Sen. Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat, replied: “That’s the same answer the Bush administration gave us, and I don’t buy it.”


Environmental groups such as the Sierra Club and some Democratic lawmakers who highlighted how little the Bush administration did on hazardous waste cleanups are now silent.

Of course don't let the above fool you, Obama and Democrats have a plan...

The Bush administration “didn’t make an investment. They weren’t willing to increase the tax and they weren’t willing to shift general funds. They were just willing to limp along,” said Rep. Earl Blumenauer, an Oregon Democrat who is sponsoring legislation to restore the tax. [on petroleum, chemicals and large companies]

When this tax originally expired under the Clinton administration one of the reasons was that it unfairly burdened companies that comply with environmental protection laws and that we already have other laws in place that put the burden of clean ups on those responsible.  Not to mention it also places unfair burden on tax payers in general.  The Corporate Environmental Income tax, which is also part of Obama plan also incorrect assumes a correlation between income and pollution.  If your company makes more then another company then it assumes your company therefore pollutes more, which is of course hogwash.

So as with most other things we see the same basic trend from the Democratic party... do less, tax more and blame the Republicans for everything.