Image
pdy
  • pdy
  • added this
Barack Obama has been just as zealous as George Bush in stripping away environmental, health and safety protection at the behest of industry, it turns out.

Some environmental organisations were beginning to suspect this, after Obama over-ruled his scientific advisors and blocked stronger ozone standards. Now, a new report [pdf] from the Centre for Progressive Reform has dug up some key data revealing that the White House in the age of Obama has been just as receptive to the pleadings of industry lobbyists as it was in the Bush era. And it goes far beyond ozone.

Under Obama, a little known corner of the White House - known as the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, or Oira - has changed more than 80% of the rules proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency.

None of these were changes for the good, the report says.

"Every single study of its performance, including this one, shows that Oira serves as a one-way ratchet, eroding the protections that agency specialists have decided are necessary under detailed statutory mandates, following years — even decades — of work."

Oira was set up by Congress with the purpose of performing a last review of government regulations to see how they would work once they were put into effect. Its current chief is Cass Sunstein, a friend of Obama from his days teaching at Harvard Law School.

In practice, critics say the office operates as a one-stop wrecking machine undoing environmental, health, and worker safety protections that could cause political problems for the White House.

When lobbying Congress and the president fails to delay or weaken a regulation, industry has learned over the years that Oira can be their last best resort, the report says.

"A steady stream of industry lobbyists — appearing some 3,760 times over the ten-year period we studied — uses OIRA as a court of last resort when they fail to convince experts at agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to weaken pending regulations."

The lobbyists were particularly obsessed with trying to undo environmental protections. Corporate executives and indusry lobbyists turned up at the White House about once a week over the last decade to try to delay or weaken EPA regulations, or more than 440 meetings.

The steady stream of oil and coal industry lobbyists to Oira did not end when Bush left office – arguably it turned into a flood. Environmental regulations made up only 10% of Oira business in Bush's time, but 36% of the office's business was meeting with outside lobbyists.

Under Obama, Oira has dedicated more than half of its meetings, 51%, to discussing pending environmental regulations with industry lobbyists, the report says.

And for industry the meetings paid off – about as much under Obama as under Bush. Following those meetings with outsiders, Oira changed 84% of EPA rules during the Bush era. Depending on how you calculate it, the change rate was even higher under Obama. Oira changed 81% of environmental rules after meetings with lobbyists. But the change rate rises to 85% once all Oira decisions on environmental regulations are factored in.

Oira does not make public records of those meetings.

Is there any chance that Obama is unaware of what Oira is up to? Rena Steinzor, the law professor at the University of Maryland who wrote the report, doesn't think so. She notes that Sunstein is a longtime friend of Obama, who has for years advocated against government regulations.

Obama will have to own those decisions – and the failure to live up to his election promises of 2008 to run a government that made decisions based on science and expertise, not political calculus.

"To us this is a sharp departure from what we were promised when this president was elected," Steinzor said. "From sound practice what we really want is for the experts to be making decisions at government agencies – the toxicologists, the pediatricians, the geologists. That's what modern government is supposed to be about, not having the decisions made by an office that is not accountable for what it does."

She went on: "What Obama meant to us, what a transformative presidency meant was that the lobbyists wouldn't control government any more. We would be transparent to a fault. We would run a transparency presidency and we would have very protective rules. We have arguably in this specific case not gotten any of this and it is disappointing."
  1. groups:
    Community,   News and Politics,   Politics,   Culture,   6 more
  2. tags:
    Politics Obama US US Politics 3 more
  3.     
    |

65 comments // New Report: Obama as bad as Bush?

  • noxidereus
    • 0
      noxidereus  
    • Obama is worse than Bush because Obama has got many so-called liberals fooled into supporting him just because he is charismatic and has a D next to his name. Obama has effectively eliminated dissent from the majority of the left. You can see it right here on current. You can read people's comments about why they still support Obama.

      In reality if we still had Bush and Bush was doing the exact same things as Obama, the left would be fighting back hard. I believe the purpose of the Obama administration is to serve the elite while silencing the left (who are the ones who would normally be very against what is going on right now, but seem to think it's OK now because Obama is a Democrat).

    • 6 months ago
  • tverdell
  • unimatrix0
  • pdy
    • +2
      pdy  
    • unimatrix0:

      Why is that? What has he really done to prove he is better? For now all the evidence from what he has actually done (as opposed to what he promised to do) points to him being not a whole lot better!

    • 6 months ago
  • noxidereus
    • +1
      noxidereus  
    • unimatrix0:

      I'm sorry but you are wrong. What is intellectually lazy is being so partisan that you choose not to think for yourself. It is so obvious that Obama is just as bad as Bush. Your blind support for Obama is rather dogmatic. It is only based on the fact that there is a D next to his name. It obviously has absolutely nothing to do with reality.

    • 6 months ago
  • unimatrix0
  • unimatrix0
    • +1
      unimatrix0  
    • noxidereus:

      Your claim that Bush and Obama are the same is simply spurious, despite your protests to the contrary. The only people I know trying to advance such false and misleading claims are misguided libertarians, who out of intellectual laziness and political expediency always insist Democrats and Republicans are the same, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

      My support for Obama is well researched, my eyes are wide open, and he is vastly superior to Bush, or anyone else the GOP has to offer. To claim otherwise is simply not backed up by the facts.

      And yes, I am a Democrat, as all good and decent people should be.

    • 6 months ago
  • noxidereus
    • 0
      noxidereus  
    • unimatrix0:

      Nope I'm not a libertarian. I'm a liberal. I strongly disagree with the libertarian free-market ideology. I hate Ron Paul. You can't just wrap things up in a libertarian blanket and throw them away in this case. Labeling things makes it easier to throw them away without really thinking about them.

      To further clarify your point, please explain why Bush was bad and Obama is good. Then we can have something concrete to talk about. If you really think that Democrats are so much better than Republicans, then I'm sorry but reality eludes you. Both parties serve the elite. Your support for Obama cannot be well-researched. Your eyes cannot be open, if you think there is some vast differences between Obama and Bush. Please point them out. Explain what you seem to know so well, if you don't mind. I mean if there is overwhelming evidence, then please share it. You can't just call everyone who disagrees with you ignorant and assume that you win because your insults are worded intelligently. They are still just insults.

      Here are some starters:

      The Bush administration claimed the right to deny habeas corpus and deny due process when detaining anyone who they call a terrorist. This upset a lot of liberals (including me).

      The Obama administration said to hell with that, let's just kill them instead. The Obama administration claims the right to ASSASSINATE any American citizen without trial or due process. People like you don't seem to upset about it when Obama does it worse than Bush.

      "What amazes me most whenever I write about this topic is recalling how terribly upset so many Democrats pretended to be when Bush claimed the power merely to detain or even just eavesdrop on American citizens without due process. Remember all that? Yet now, here's Obama claiming the power not to detain or eavesdrop on citizens without due process, but to kill them; marvel at how the hardest-core White House loyalists now celebrate this and uncritically accept the same justifying rationale used by Bush/Cheney (this is war! the President says he was a Terrorist!) without even a moment of acknowledgment of the profound inconsistency or the deeply troubling implications of having a President -- even Barack Obama -- vested with the power to target U.S. citizens for murder with no due process." -- Glenn Greenwald

      The Obama administration is chock full of Wall-Street tools.

      Obama is cracking down on Cannabis, Medical Cannabis users. Why would someone who has first-hand experience with it and knows it's harmless still want to put people in cages over it? Putting profit and control over the needs of the people is why.

      Obama extended the Bush/Obama tax cuts even though he pretended to fight against them (old trick, but not everyone fell for it).

      The Obama administration permanently shielded the Bush administration for their war crimes and then went on to commit war crimes of its own.

      Obama cracked down on whistleblowers (Manning/WikiLeaks)

      Obama expanded and extended the "Patriot Act" so they can keep spying on you.

      Obama FAVORS cuts to social programs.

      I'm leaving a lot out too. I have a lot more.

      Decent people are Democrats only when they are being fooled by the elite. You have been assimilated. Resistance, however, is NOT futile.

      I don't expect to be able to enlighten you in the comments section here, but for further reading you should check out Glenn Greenwald, Chris Hedges, and Matt Taibbi.

    • 6 months ago
  • corderodedios
    • -1
      corderodedios  
    • noxidereus:

      Everything you say is true, but there is much ground to consider Obama far worse than Bush: George Bush was upfront with everything he did. Obama has turned out to be a dissimulating weasel - a Neocon fifth columnist, a wolf in sheep's (Democrat's) clothing - who has destroyed the Democratic Party. Sucking up to the 1%, the banksters and Wall Streeters, Paulson/Geithner leadership a Treasury, continuing Bush's SecDef Gates in the office, Gitmo, Support for Unions in Wisconsin ("If anyone threatens collective bargaining I'll be right there on the street marching with them in protest")...the list goes on and on. Refusing to treat with our adversaries, preferring to kill kill kill, terror bombing of civilians from unarmed flying terror machines in the sky, etc etc.

      One only has to look at the results of the 2010 midterm Congressional elections to see what the voting public think - and it's worse now - scarcely two years after they elected a black guy named Hussein who promised "Change" and "Hope." The only folks remaining in Obama's camp are (1) delusional "liberals" who are too fearful and weak to look at the truth; and (2) the kind of hard-core right-wing Neocon elitists who realize they lucked into a "sleeper" as POTUS who is right down there in the gutter of greed with them. In fact, yesterday I found the Obama re-election team was advertising on the Foreign Policy Initiative (ne PNAC) website. Holy smoke! The only thing left to do is get out of dollars and make sure you know where the exits are.

    • 6 months ago
  • sawwow
    • +1
      sawwow  
    • Obama and Bush are two heads of the same snake. Democrats as well as Republicans need to be aware of this. Our legislators receive a 9% approval rating for both sides. Each political side have incentives to make as mush as they can and get re-elected. What these political snakes enjoy, is when all you people blame each political party. Then, your not paying attention to the real rip-off. Kind of like arguing to be dumber - so keep blaming each other and continue to pay the price - which you pay not only with your hard earned money but with your children's future.

    • 6 months ago
  • vikasbook
  • coolplanet
  • Anonmaly
    • 0
      Anonmaly  
    • With his expansion of "war on terror" policies and tactics (which are really just in place to control the people here)....

      He sold Israel bunker busters, even Bush didn't want them to have...

      Unilaterally attacked Libya or Qaddafi, only 2 years after both he and Hillary were shaking his hand.... Now thousands of people have been reported tortured, or imprisoned in Libya no telling what for allot of it appears to be racism... Ah... And that wonderfully oppressive Sharia Law has been now adopted there...

      Mislead the people to gain office (as they all do)....

      Idk in some ways he's worse...

    • 6 months ago
  • GENERALNATTY
    • +2
      GENERALNATTY  
    • environmental concerns cost a lot of money and is an obstacle to financial gain, its just a fact, this is why corporate lobbyists fight against it, but in horrid economic conditions, environmental concerns always take a backseat to getting people back in a position to put food on the table. The fact is your average joe can't visualize what tree huggers are warning them of, so its out of sight out of mind, they want jobs and the economy back up.

    • 6 months ago
  • tverdell
    • 0
      tverdell  
    • GENERALNATTY:

      Improving environmental regulations would stimulate investment in new technologies and jobs.

      Investment, not costs because if you get behind the right technology early, you will be the next warren buffet.

    • 6 months ago
  • congoboy
  • COMMONSENSEFORCOMMONGOOD_COM
  • Vierotchka
  • queenofit
    • +3
      queenofit  
    • Vierotchka:

      His last quote here "And when Americans don’t know stupid people, the country is out of business." Gore Vidal (he was speaking about GWB). Thanks Vierotchka, worthwhile set. I have always liked listening to him speak, his candor is refreshing.

    • 6 months ago
  • congoboy
    • -2
      congoboy  
    • queenofit:

      what would be even more refreshing is if the left would look at their own party with the same intensity. besides just because gore vidal represents the left in his biased rhetoric doesnt necessarily make him right. there are plenty of stupid politicians on both sides of the aisle and if youre so biased and blind following your own only analyzing the other party you are more stupid than the politicians themselves. after all it is the public who continues to vote the same ones in

    • 6 months ago
  • pdy
    • 0
      pdy  
    • congoboy:

      you raise some good points, to blindly follow a party whether they are "left" or "Right" wing is absurd, everyone should constantly question their own side and hold them accountable for their actions.
      Actually the fact that there are only two parties that everyone votes for is even more absurd, especially when both sides have proven that they are just as bad as each other, bowing to lobbyist demands, neither making any headway with the policies they promise so much during elections.
      What they need is new strong parties to come forward and make them really fight to prove they deserve the power, and if they mess up they don't have a 50:50 chance of getting back into power!

    • 6 months ago
  • ivaanna2001
  • queenofit
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
  • Vierotchka
  • nikonwilly
    • +1
      nikonwilly  
    • Vierotchka:

      When you research the Oklahoma bombing you'll find it was almost as fraudulent as 9 11 ....they lied about everything that happened there too! Another set-up job ...what this Country is becoming all to good at!

    • 6 months ago
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
    • 0
      congoboy  
    • Image
    • Vierotchka:

      gore vidal on the obama presidency...To mark the recent publication of Gore Vidal's memoir, Snapshots in History's Glare, The Atlantic's John Meroney interviewed the American literary and cultural icon at his house in Hollywood. In the interview, Vidal continues his provocations of recent years, discussing President Obama's lack of experience and Roman Polanski's "hooker" victim.

      On President Obama:

      "...remember that I was brought up in Washington. It was an all-black city when I was a kid. And I've always been very pro-African-American--or whatever phrase we now use. I was curious to see what would happen when their time came. I was delighted when Obama appeared on the scene. But now it seems as though our original objection to him - that experience mattered - was well-founded." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/28/gore-vidals-vile-remarks_n_336995.html

    • 6 months ago
  • Vierotchka
  • congoboy
    • 0
      congoboy  
    • Vierotchka:

      oh darlin why must we always bicker. you know joy got cancelled. too much hatred and leftest rhetoric for even her most liberal admirers. and the dimwitted part i believe is directed at obamas democratic base not society at large

    • 6 months ago
  • Vierotchka
  • nikonwilly
  • congoboy
    • -4
      congoboy  
    • time to wake up. almost all of them are incompetent. what, you believe just because theyre politicians they are somehow smarter than you?

    • 6 months ago
  • alexandrek
  • congoboy
    • -1
      congoboy  
    • alexandrek:

      yes this is correct. for the most part neither major political party in th u.s. care about the american public, except at election time. its all about power and greed and its bi-partisan

    • 6 months ago
  • dugdog47
    • +3
      dugdog47  
    • It would seem we we're lied to, however, remember John F. Kennedy. Abraham Lincon. Rock the boat too much and it might be the last thing you do.

    • 6 months ago
  • corderodedios
    • 0
      corderodedios  
    • This is for folks who can't see the forest for the trees. Anyone wonder why Obama kept on Bush's SecDef? How about Timothy Geithner? How about the trillions in bailouts between 2008 & 2010 that we're just finding out about? How about Gitmo? We've known exactly this for years. Obama has destroyed the Democratic Party, and we're in line for a probable whacko President in 2012 as a result. The voting public had Obama's (and the Democrats') number in 2010 when they threw the weakling slimeballs out.

    • 6 months ago
  • COMMONSENSEFORCOMMONGOOD_COM
  • Dagum
    • +5
      Dagum  
    • Sad state of American politics when all we have left to argue over is who was slightly less incompetent, who was slightly less disingenuous, who was slightly less corrupt.

    • 6 months ago
  • queenofit
    • 0
      queenofit  
    • Dagum:

      It is sad, arguing over who is the least worst? Is that what we have come to? I don't think corporations will agree, they are probably quite satisfied. We really need to realize that this is not a red vs blue issue anymore, it is our future that is at stake. Corporations and Govt will survive, it is the rest of us who are going to be getting the crumbs.

    • 6 months ago
  • kennymotown
  • Varex_Sythe
    • +1
      Varex_Sythe  
    • kennymotown:

      If Obama is as bad as Bush then the Republicans probably hate him on the grounds that he is not their proverbial bastard. Sure, Bush was (and still is in my opinion) an idiot and a jackass, but he was, and still is, an idiot and a jackass who is playing for the Republican team. And it seems to be a trend, at least when the Republicans are concerned, to unquestioningly file in behind the perceived leader when he/she is from your team, but to fight the perceived leader on every issue when he/she is not from your team (even if that leader is doing a lot of similar things that the leader from your team did).

    • 6 months ago
  • ilikeike
    • +5
      ilikeike  
    • kennymotown:

      They don't really, but appearances must be maintained. How long would this charade last if it was obvious to a majority that they were actually in agreement about everything that matters? (serving the 1%) Actually after having just written that, it seems really really obvious.

    • 6 months ago
  • ilikeike
    • 0
      ilikeike  
    • Varex_Sythe:

      You think its as elementary as team identification? Looking at all the evidence will show that this perceived hate is a ruse, or at most, misguided republican foot soldiers set free.

    • 6 months ago
  • wolfess
    • +4
      wolfess  
    • ilikeike:

      Exactly! Like I've been saying for awhile -- Bush-dark and the reptards are nothing more than a game of 'good cop/bad cop' and they're playing it for us. (Kinda like that awful, old saying -- hire the handicapped, they're fun to watch; only in this case they're playing the game b/c WE are fun to watch >:)!

      Pwr 2 KB! Dismember the trolls and their vermadon!

    • 6 months ago
  • JanforGore
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
  • ithink
  • Cruzankenny
    • -3
      Cruzankenny  
    • kennymotown:

      Very good question! That may be the answer as to why the group of candidates they've chosen to run against him? He is just as bad as the progressives fear and the repugs want him to stay.
      That doesn't answer his Supreme court choices.

    • 6 months ago
  • Leen61
    • +1
      Leen61  
    • ilikeike:

      I'm with you on this as well, ilikeike. In all reality, we haven't had a true change in the powers that be technically since Jimmy Carter was ousted. Starting with Reagan, there has been a direct link to the Bush Crime Family. Poppy ran the WH when Reagan was the figurehead. Then, Poppy had his own 4 years. Then the son he wish he had, Clinton, ran it for 8. His dumbass son W. for 8 more and now the torch has been passed to "Bush: The Next Generation starring Obama."

    • 6 months ago
  • Ambill94
  • kennymotown
  • nikonwilly
    • +1
      nikonwilly  
    • kennymotown:

      They don't , it's all a game, a scam, both parties are needed just as they are to function...it's good cop -bad cop with both becoming powerful and wealthy, the vote means nothing now and it's simply more of the same regardless who is in office...they are working together behind our backs ...it's all for show! Don't trust anything that breathes in Washington or part of this government! It's become rotten throughout.

    • 6 months ago
  • kennymotown
  • noxidereus
    • +4
      noxidereus  
    • kennymotown:

      Attacking Obama as if he is on the left serves multiple purposes.

      1. It serves the purpose of getting lefties to support the right-wing agenda:

      The most obvious example is that it raises such questions as yours: "how come the Republicans hate him so much?" and makes liberals feel like they have to defend Obama's right-wing behavior.

      2. It attempts to move the entire country further to the right.

      What does the right wing rhetoric sound like? It's all about how socialist Obama is... how he's too far to the left. In reality Obama's policies are extremely Bush-like. Attacking Obama's right-wing actions as if they're socialist attempts to redefine the left as being far to the right of where it is supposed to be. The new right-wing is of course the crazy tea party.

      3. It keeps the people divided.

      Gotta separate people in about half -- the D's and R's and pit them against each other... That's how they know that nothing will ever threaten the elite. We're too busy fighting each other over made-up nonsense.

      So the elite win. They get a right-wing, wall-street-tool president to do their bidding. The liberals are neutered by the fact that Obama the Democrat is the president, so they are not fighting against Obama's servitude of the elite as hard as they would if he was a Republican.

      The elite also chuckle as Fox viewers fight with lefties about how Socialist, Obama is, forcing the lefties to come to Obama's defense. Meanwhile the elite have the entire country moving to the right.

      Half the country is running to the defense of the elite's puppet while the other half is fighting to move the country even further to the right. Who wins? The elite win because people in general are ignorant and easily manipulated ... trained like dogs.

    • 6 months ago
  • Leen61
  • JanforGore
    • +1
      JanforGore  
    • congoboy:

      Actually if you have been paying attention, Mr. Gore has really been one of the only Democrats holding Obama to task for his environmental missteps. And he doesn't play golf BTW, as far as I know nor is part of this current administration. And you bet he is precious to me. Glad you understand that.

    • 6 months ago
  • congoboy
    • -1
      congoboy  
    • JanforGore:

      there are others but possibly gore is one of the more well known and or out spoken. i hope that your fantasy bubble never pops beautiful and if it ever does that you have someone close to console you

    • 6 months ago
  • kennymotown
    • +2
      kennymotown  
    • noxidereus:

      Thats about it, we can thank the Religious right for this fine mess. Cause without them constantly embracing the right because they keep telling them they will end abortion, they wouldn't have been elected.

    • 6 months ago
  • EmperorThan
  • 2warsoffbooks
  • PressCore
    • +3
      PressCore  
    • Maybe you should ask if Obama is as bad as McCain would have
      been if given the chance. NOTHING is as abysmaly evil as Comrat
      McCain. Just " tryin to make it real compared to what ? " You dig ?

    • 6 months ago
more from Community:

top videos