Shouldn't National Polling = Comprehensive Action?

Written by: Rachel Dawn Scharf on Mar 25, 2007 12:37 PM EDT

Linked to groups: Blog For America

Climate Crisis Action Day yielded a wonderful turnout this past Tuesday.  What happens from this week on?

The political tactic of saying one thing and doing another is still not being properly, that is widely, reported.  National polling indicates time and again very different priorities than political punditry would imply.

According to a Bloomberg poll taken 3rd August 2006, 52% of the American public said the U.S. government should invest in alternative energy sources to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. 

If the November elections had different results, would this “administration” be talking about limited reliance on foreign energy at all?

To date, the Bush administration is increasingly intent on making it difficult for the Environmental Protection Agency’s Inspector General’s office to actually perform EPA oversight.  The fact of the matter is, if relationships are not exposed, the Bush Administration and K-Street lobbyists would continue to experience profitability from their unprecedented links to gluttonous oil companies and private contractors such as Exxon Mobil and Halliburton. 

Given 75% of Americans favor putting caps on carbon emissions, where is our federally funded national energy policy already? Will the Sanders/Boxer Bill pull through?  National polling in favor of such legislation exists; such poll results should be effected into immediate action. Additionally, despite seemingly popular political infighting witnessed earlier this week by former Vice President Al Gore, venture capitalists are on board with America’s oil free future. 

In 2007 where are mainstream media outlets in vigorously reporting the advantages of a conservative American society specialized in alternative energy manufacturing?  The International community and the majority of Americans remain disillusioned by the administrations ties to the Neo-Conservative think tank, American Enterprise Institute, and their shared repugnant efforts to disband scientific, political and economic action towards U.S. climate change solutions. 

We know full well it is this gangster like politicking that has kept us from making urgent significant progress.  

On HBO’s latest Real Time w/Bill Maher, David Frum, former white house Economist and representative of AEI, attempted to make claims about what American stratagem should be with regards to energy and foreign policy. 

He noted blaming the oil companies for climate change interference (say, for instance, arctic drilling) is “childish.” Frum quickly made use of the all too familiar regurgitation on electricity usage in place of oil, “Americans would have to pay much more for cleaner energy.”  Alongside this, Frum urged American people to economically and politically support the recent troop surges in the Middle East.   

Merely fixating on how much money combating global climate change would cost is an imprecise point.  If the AEI is talking Economics that literally impacts our future, they are in for an uninterrupted two way conversation. 

The economic benefits of taming this phenomenon by making use of Americas manufacturing sector are great.  If we federally fund the implementation of energy efficient venues, offices, schools, public and private transportation, research, etc., our economy would be on its way to vibrancy, strength, and best of all, independence from radical Islam.  Continued funding, Mr. Frum, for troop surges and permanent bases in Iraq will neither reveal a “win,” for Americans or Iraqis. 

Perhaps if this were reported on at length, United States political will could truly bring forth federal legislative action without the interference of Bush & Co.  Currently folks in every state of America are taking the matter into their own hands. 

Clearly, it is an absolute necessity to shift our ways of life, why would we the people take any further unsubstantiated risks? Why not be best prepared and work together with the International community? We do not have to claim neutrality; this is a real phenomenon and there needs to be burning incentive towards actual National Democratic policies.

Tags: