„There is nothing so American as our national parks. The scenery and wildlife are native. The fundamental idea behind the parks is native. The parks stand as an outward symbol of this great human principle”. These sentences are not extracted from the platform of the American Green Party – they are from a quote of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the 32nd President of the United States, a Republican. In his thinking, “conservation was closely tied to American Values” (Sussman/ Daynes/ West 2001: 169). During his governing period, environmental care was directly incorporated in governmental action – various agencies and bureaucracies were established to deal with this topic.
Today, the United States reject major international environmental treaties such as the Kyoto Protocol, requiring participants to reduce green house gases below the 1990 level by 2012. The Bush administration has presented plans to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, a swathe of land in northeast Alaska, populated by migratory birds, wolves and caribou. The House of Representatives had already approved these plans, the Senate rejected them. In voting George W. Bush their 43rd President, a majority of the American people made their cross for a candidate with a green record tending to zero.
But not only does environmental policy seem to have left the political agenda on a larger scale, observers more and more get the impression that the American people seem to care lesser for environmental aspects than ten or twenty years ago – only considering, among many other factors, the increasing number of polluting light trucks and SUVs on American roads. So can we conclude that, considering the fact that the parties fight for the support of the American mainstream, both Democrats and Republicans have banned environmental politics from their platforms?
This paper is to figure out to what extent the field of environmental policy still is a factor in the American political landscape and what ideological and sociological factors are at play in this process and in the party-internal treatment of the topic.
Table of Contents
1. General Introduction
1.1 Introduction and problem identification
1.2 Approach of this term paper
2. Environmental policy in the American discourse
2.1 Ideological determinants
2.2 Areas of Tension
2.2.1 Economic efficiency vs. Ecology
2.2.2 Sociogeographical variances
2.2.2.1 Traditional labour versus modern production
2.2.2.2 Translation into politics
3. Parties and Positioning in the field
3.1 Republicans: home for anti-environmentalists
3.2 A “green” voting record in Congress: the Democrats
3.3 The Green Party and environmental organizations
4. Historical Perspective: Presidential performance
4.1 “The Green Decade”
4.2 The Eighties: Reagan and Bush
4.3 Clinton and the 104th Congress
5. Conclusion and outlook
6. Bibliography
Research Objectives and Core Themes
This paper examines to what extent environmental policy remains a significant factor within the American political landscape, specifically focusing on the roles and strategies of the major political parties. It investigates how ideological and sociological influences shape the internal party treatment of environmental issues and how these parties have historically occupied this political field.
- Ideological determinants of environmental discourse in the USA
- Tensions between economic efficiency and ecological protection
- Sociogeographical variances and their impact on party positioning
- The divergence in environmental voting records between Republicans and Democrats
- Historical influence of presidential administrations on environmental policy
Excerpt from the Book
1.1 Introduction and problem identification
„There is nothing so American as our national parks. The scenery and wildlife are native. The fundamental idea behind the parks is native. The parks stand as an outward symbol of this great human principle”. These sentences are not extracted from the platform of the American Green Party – they are from a quote of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the 32nd President of the United States. In his thinking, “conservation was closely tied to American Values” (Sussman/ Daynes/ West 2001: 169). During his governing period, environmental care was directly incorporated in governmental action – various agencies and bureaucracies were established to deal with this topic.
Today, the United States rejects major international environmental treaties such as the Kyoto Protocol, requiring signatories to reduce green house gases below the 1990 level by 2012. The Bush administration has presented plans to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, a swathe of land in northeast Alaska populated by migratory birds, wolves and caribou. The House of Representatives had already approved these plans, the Senate rejected them. In voting George W. Bush their 43rd President, a majority of the American people made their cross for a candidate with a green record tending to zero.
But not only does environmental policy seem to have left the political agenda on a larger scale, observers are increasingly getting the impression that the American people seem to care less for environmental aspects than ten or twenty years ago – only considering, among many other factors, the increasing number of polluting light trucks and SUVs on American roads. So can we conclude that, considering the fact that the parties fight for the support of the American mainstream, both Democrats and Republicans have banned environmental politics from their platforms? Indeed, it is the needs of American public that party platforms should address, as a part of the identification of a problem or issue of salience and the formulation of a policy. If such a tendency becomes obvious, do the parties react in that way?
Summary of Chapters
1. General Introduction: This chapter introduces the problem of environmental policy's status in American politics, contrasting historical conservation values with modern trends like the rejection of the Kyoto Protocol.
2. Environmental policy in the American discourse: This section explores ideological and sociogeographical factors, specifically analyzing the tension between economic efficiency and environmental protection.
3. Parties and Positioning in the field: This chapter analyzes how the Republican and Democratic parties position themselves regarding environmental issues, noting the growing gap in their voting records.
4. Historical Perspective: Presidential performance: This section reviews historical presidential approaches, from the 1970s "floodtide" of legislation to the Reagan/Bush eras and the Clinton administration.
5. Conclusion and outlook: This final chapter synthesizes findings, arguing that while environmentalism is a divisive issue, it remains a distinct, major point in Democratic platforms versus Republican market-based strategies.
Keywords
Environmental policy, United States, political parties, Republicans, Democrats, ideological determinants, economic efficiency, ecology, sociogeographical variances, environmental opposition, presidential performance, conservation, political discourse, political landscape, sustainability.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary subject of this research paper?
The paper explores the role of environmental policy within the American political landscape and examines how the major political parties, the Republicans and Democrats, position themselves on this issue.
What are the central themes discussed in the text?
Key themes include the ideological and sociological roots of anti-environmentalism, the impact of economic interests on political decision-making, and the historical evolution of environmental policies under different presidential administrations.
What is the central research question?
The paper asks whether political parties in the U.S. still function as vehicles for environmental politics, how they occupy this political field, and which ideological and sociological factors influence this process.
Which scientific methodology is used?
The author uses a qualitative approach, analyzing existing literature, historical legislative records, state environmental performance rankings, and party platform documents to identify patterns of political behavior.
What does the main body cover?
The main body investigates areas of tension (such as economy vs. ecology), classifies environmental opposition based on regional and industrial factors, and evaluates the divergence in voting records between the two major parties.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
The most important keywords are environmental policy, United States, political parties, ideological determinants, economic efficiency, and presidential performance.
How does the author characterize the Republican position on environmental policy?
The author argues that the Republican Party has become a political home for anti-environmentalism, largely due to its ties to traditional industries, "big business," and a conservative ideology that prioritizes deregulation and economic growth.
What role do environmental organizations play in this political system?
Environmental organizations act as critical counterweights, exerting pressure through lobbying, funding candidates via PACs, and mobilizing public awareness during periods when government policy shifts toward anti-environmental agendas.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Lars Dittmer (Autor:in), 2005, Are the parties in the United States still vehicles for environmental politics? How do they occupy this political field, and what ideological and sociological aspects affect this process?, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/49287
