To Till and to Tend

A slew of stories emerging from Washington and around the world are giving renewed hope to many environmentalists who have been fighting a steep uphill battle in recent years. A combination of bills in Congress, Presidential directives, and global actions indicate that the tide may finally be turning in the fight against climate change and other environmental disasters. First on the minds of most Americans, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (more commonly known as the ‘economic stimulus package’), includes billions of dollars for investment in renewable energy technologies to drive the green economy of the future. The most recent version of the recovery package includes funding for green jobs training programs, weatherization for low-income communities, and investment in ‘smart grid’ technology to encourage efficiency and conservation in homes, schools, and public buildings. The economic downturn presents a unique opportunity to make the long-term investment needed to clean up our nation’s economy and environment, and the latest version of the bill appears takes this charge seriously.

President Obama continued to lobby for the stimulus on Monday, pushing for clean energy provisions backed by strong environmental regulation as part of his strategy. To this end, the President recently issued two strong directives to his administrators at the Department of Transportation and Environmental Protection Agency to update and strengthen standards on fuel economy and tailpipe emissions for automobiles. As American automakers face increasing unemployment and drastic drops in demand, building more efficient vehicles is the way to bring these corporations into the 21^st century and ensure the security of both American jobs and our environment. The directives demonstrate the Administration’s dedication to confronting climate and energy issues in a meaningful way.

Climate is not the only environmental issue receiving attention during the first 100 days. Obama’s Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, has ordered a halt to the implementation of any regulations put in place in the final days of the Bush Administration- so-called ‘midnight regulations’- which include changes to the Endangered Species Act that were strongly opposed by many in the environmental community. Maintaining the strength of the conservation and environmental protection laws that we already have in place is a critical piece of our environmental agenda, and reexamining changes to the ESA and other environmental laws is yet another political tool to reverse our course of environmental degradation.

President Obama has clearly declared that the U.S. is done ‘dragging its feet’ on climate and a whole host of other issues, but the action this week was not limited to Washington. A recent piece by Lester Brown of the Earth Policy Institute discusses policies underway in China and other Asian nations to fight climate change by ending logging practices. Deforestation is a huge contributor to climate change, and the fact that developing nations are acting on this front, even absent leadership from the developed world, is beyond encouraging.

Despite this progress, the climate crisis is upon us and here to stay. Our greenhouse gas emissions are already causing droughts, floods, and dangerous damage to species habitats, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. With so many environmental challenges currently facing our planet, we are all responsible to follow the news and push for greater awareness and action (such as passing a green economic recovery package). While the new Administration brings new opportunities, it is up to all of us to begin to build a green, sustainable world.  

Rachel is an Eisendrath Legislative Assistant working on environment and energy issues at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism in Washington, DC. She will be a regular guest blogger on To Till and To Tend this year, posting entries every other Thursday. This, and all of Rachel’s entries, can also be found on the Religious Action Center blog.

        President Obama’s inaugural address last week touched on many themes.  One of the most noteworthy of these was the idea that the government could only be part of the response to our economic troubles; that citizens would have to participate in the hard work of national economic recovery.  After eight years in which we were blissfully encouraged to reject personal sacrifice—of paying for two wars with tax cuts, of responding to 9/11 with shopping sprees, of reacting to the end of the internet bubble with the creation and perpetuation of a vastly more destructive housing bubble, it was indeed refreshing to hear a politician actually asking something of the American people.  But what does this have to do with the environment?

Plenty, in my humble opinion.  Last year, when gas prices spiked to over $4.00/gallon, we began to see the emergence of a national consensus on the need to rethink the way we consume energy in the US.  People in mainstream America, and in Detroit, started talking seriously about creating more fuel-efficient cars and investing in research and development to cultivate new energy sources.  Though this sentiment was born out of the economic reality of high gas prices, economics were not the sole reason being expressed for why we ought to purchase hybrids or build more wind turbines.  Instead, everyday Americans spoke about greater conservation and alternative energy creations as ends in their own right.  There was a palpable momentum the likes of which I had never experienced; a momentum which, if maintained, led to the feeling that there was a legitimate possibility of enacting real change.

            The problem, though, is that gas prices have dropped precipitously since then, and people during a recession are inclined to vote with their pocketbooks rather than with their consciences.  If the market is left to its own devices (a proposition whose dangerousness has been laid bare over the past four months of economic disaster), people will not be willing to pay more for electric cars or energy-efficient home insulation but will instead continue to purchase cheaper gasoline-fueled cars and home heating oil.  http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/opinion/28friedman.html  And if this continues to occur, the fledgling market for new technology cars and alternative energy investment generally will collapse.  We will be left vulnerable and exposed whenever the next energy shock occurs because we will have failed to develop the energy infrastructure needed to mitigate our reliance on foreign oil.  And we will continue to cause irreparable harm to our planet in the process.

            So what should we do?  I believe it goes back to President Obama’s inaugural address.  We need to be willing to act against our immediate self-interest to provide the incentive necessary to continue the alternative energy momentum and avoid slipping back into complacency.  There is one clear-cut way to do this—a gas tax.  Yes, I know, raising taxes is anathema in America during tough economic times.  But instituting a tax, along the lines articulated here http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/27/opinion/27sat1.html?scp=2&sq=gas%20tax&st=cse, will achieve what we all know is in our economic, environmental, and foreign policy long-term interests.  Though in the short-term raising gas prices will be hard on certain sectors of the economy, these sectors—like Big Tobacco before them—over time will find ways to compensate and should continue to thrive.  And we will finally stop vacillating in the economic wind about our commitment to a greener, safer, and more secure energy policy.