As Democratic primary election action heats up in Iowa and New
Hampshire, the candidates’ criticisms of the Bush
administration have been heating up as well. One criticism I find
particularly revealing is in regard to the deception and
double-speak the Bush administration utilizes in presenting its
policies to the people ““ or, should I say, selling its
policies. Or, maybe, propagandizing its policies.
In some cases, these policy names are simple exaggerations: for
example, “Operation Enduring Freedom.” In other cases,
however, they are outright dishonest like the “Clear Skies
Initiative.” These names are brilliant political ploys that
take advantage of the unfortunate fact that most Americans do not
pay attention to the specific things that President Bush’s
policies do. If the president’s policies really were as happy
and jolly as their names imply, then the United States would look a
lot like Disneyland.
So, to celebrate the last year of Bush’s first term in
office, I have prepared the following list of some of his
best-named policies.
No. 1: the “Healthy Forests Initiative.” A more
appropriate name for this policy would be the “Clear-cut Our
Forests Initiative.” The initiative uses a real environmental
problem ““ overgrowth in national forests ““ as an excuse
to pass an anti-environmental kickback to the logging industry.
Healthy Forests’ solution for overgrowth is a lot like
saying, “We’re going to solve the education problem by
eliminating schools” ““ and don’t worry ““
I’ll get to that. A real solution would have focused on
thinning forests around communities instead of cutting large
fire-resistant trees from thousands of acres of pristine wilderness
backcountry. According to the National Resources Defense Council,
“the president’s so-called Healthy Forests Initiative
exploits the fear of fires in order to gut environmental
protections and boost commercial logging.”
No. 2: the No Child Left Behind Act. This initiative is
President Bush’s not-so-heralded education reform policy. A
more truthful name would be the Many Schools Left Behind Act.
This policy’s name is simply a cruel joke. Instead of
helping students who are being “left behind” in the bad
schools in the current system, it punishes the children who need
the most help. Under this policy, funding and support are revoked
for the worst achieving schools in the nation. Isn’t that a
bit counterintuitive? Clearly, those schools are not able to
provide the programs and attract the teachers (inevitably the
result of lack of funds) necessary to reach or maintain high
standards. Taking away what little they have to begin with is not
going to help. And threatening to take it away is not going to act
as a motivator ““ there is only so much a school can do if it
is not supported.
Bush’s policy revokes funding from low-achieving schools,
ensuring they have poorly trained teachers, larger class sizes,
dilapidated infrastructure and outdated textbooks. No Child Left
Behind is the very definition of an unfounded mandate. It flies in
the face of even the most conservative education ideologies of
local control by requiring burdensome federal regulations to be met
by schools without giving these educational facilities any
resources to do so. U.S. public schools should not be forced to
spend resources to implement expensive new testing regimes;
they’re already suffering from massive funding cuts due to
the wave of state and local budget crises.
A true “No Child Left Behind” policy would provide
resources for better-trained teachers, smaller class sizes,
improved infrastructure and better textbooks.
And, No. 3 on the list: the “Clear Skies
Initiative.” This is my personal favorite. It makes a
blatantly anti-environment policy look like a pro-environment
policy. A more suitable name would be the No Lobbyist Left Behind
Act.
The president and his corporate henchmen billed Clear Skies as
an initiative that sets tough new emissions regulations on the
industry. What Clear Skies really does is lower the emission
standards set under current law by the Clean Air Act of 1972. In
the end, emission standards would be higher if the Bush
administration merely enforced existing law.
For example, under current law, mercury emissions would be
reduced by as much as 90 percent per plant by 2008. Under Clear
Skies, however, mercury emissions only will be reduced by 46
percent nationwide. Mercury is well-documented for causing
reproductive problems, brain damage, kidney and lung damage and
even death.
Additionally, the Clear Skies Initiative creates a cap-and-trade
system, which allows big polluting plants to buy pollution credits
from clean plants so they can release far more toxins than
emissions standards normally allow. Although this might average out
to the same overall amount of pollution, it ends up creating local
areas of highly concentrated of air pollution around big polluting
plants that receive pollution credits.
Dishonest policy names are a serious problem with the current
administration. If the Democratic candidates are smart, they will
bring this subject into the fray and make it a campaign issue.
Bitondo is a third-year political science and history
student. E-mail him at mbitondo@media.ucla.edu. Send general
comments to viewpoint@media.ucla.edu.