Federal elections and policy implications in 2012 - Research Paper Example

Federal Elections and Policy Implications After Federal Policy Environment The policies in the United States engulf all functions that are often undertaken by the federal government. It is the primary function of the executive branch to ensure that all the policies of the land are enacted. However, the United States’ policies are segmented and driven from collective laws, legal proceedings, and executive decisions (Coleman 62). There are often different types of federal policies in the United States. These policies are usually subdivided according to the subject matter. The policy issues Almanac provides the background upon which information, links, and archived documents to cardinal America’s public policy issues are organized and categorized (Gleick, Christian-Smith, and Cooley 13). The United States has divided its public policies into nine categories: Criminal justice that include death penalties, drug policies, and gun controls Cultural and social policies including abortion, art, and civil rights Economic affairs policies that include taxes and budgets Education policies that incorporate elementary, secondary, and higher education Environmental policies that concentrate on global warming and quality of air Government operation policies that govern the campaign financing reforms and the privatization Health care policies that include health insurance and Medicare Social welfare policy that deals with social security and welfare Foreign affairs and national security policies that govern spending on the national defense The 2012 campaigns revolved on few of the above policies; nonetheless, all other policies are equally profound for any government that wins election. Among the policies that were highly concentrated on during the 2012 campaigns are the economic affairs policies that highly concentrated on reviving the deteriorating American economy (Coleman 88). Each side of the divide, the democrats, and the republicans had different ways they thought was the best to boost or recover the economy that is already trailing on the deficits. Disregarding the budgetary part of the policy, both sides concentrated on the form of taxation mechanisms to be used towards salvaging the situation that is already moving from worse to dire. Notably, during the 2007 elections, president Obama promised much on the economic recovery. At the end of his first tenure, it seems that he did not deliver fully as he had promised and the economy that was affected by Bush policies and administrations still moved to the worse. These facts have made the economic affair policy environment quite volatile for either party (Coleman 127). Regardless of who could have won the 2012 presidential elections, the economic affair policy environment still remains heated. Additionally, the health policy was also a significant issue in the 2012 presidential campaigns. Despite the differences in opinions concerning the appropriate health care policies to be enacted, at some point Mitt Romney at one point agreed with some elements of the Obamacare (Gleick, Christian-Smith, and Cooley 21). Regardless of these agreements in opinions, the health affairs policy environment also remained a heated campaign throughout the campaign period. Other policies were viewed as one party or presidential aspirants show. For instance, president Obama mainly addressed the cultural and society policy on same sex marriage. Regardless some significant policies were not given concentration they deserved. For instance, the environment policy is a radical policy that not only threatens United States but the entire globe. The environmental policies are the concerns of the citizens since from the 2008 election campaigns; it seemed the sure way of providing the cheap energy alternative (Gleick, Christian-Smith, and Cooley 54). The 2008 presidential campaign captured the attention of numerous Americans since the “DRILL, baby, drill” promised Americans cheap and reliable energy that was to be produced at home rather than being imported. However, in the 2012 presidential elections, no slogan emerged to match the same 2008 environmental concern. Nonetheless, energy has become an issue of concern especially in relation to the national security and environmental concerns with more concern that it might be the road to economic recovery. Notably, the energy and environmental policies were never heard of in public rallies; however, during debates between the presidential and vice president debates, they created volatile policy environment with each presidential candidate pulling the argument on his or her own presidential bid or favor (Gleick, Christian-Smith, and Cooley 81). Despite the different policy environment created or manifested during the 2012 presidential campaigns and elections, all the policies that are of national interest must be implemented adequately towards providing better living standards to the American citizens and other nations and people affected by the same policies. Analysis of the 2012 Election Results Different policies in the United States are legislated at different levels of government depending on area of effect or application of the policy. Some policies are infected at the federal government level while other are affected at the state government levels. Therefore, there different levels of governance that affects policy creation in the United States that the intern has different electoral posts namely the president, senate, and the United States House. The 2012 election outcome had numerous vital political changes that are projected to have significant implication in the American political landscape (Gleick, Christian-Smith, and Cooley 32). Notably, the most significant federal electable policy making organs in the United States include the president and the senate. The 2012 election led to the reelection of president Obama for the second term into the office. The 2012 presidential election received the attention that was considered worth of it (Carlarne 159). It is the responsibility of the president to make the final decisions on vital state policies. Additionally, it is his constitutional function to oversee staffing of the armed forces, federal administrator, and nomination of the federal judges, as well as implementing executive branch policies. The notable branch policy is the Obamacare that will take effect in 2014. The 2012 election also led to the election of 55 Democratic senators. These include both the independent senators’ caucus and the Democrats; thus, the Democrats are compelled to pick two seats in the Senate. This may be considered a desperate move since they were defending twenty-three seats out of the thirty-three seats up for the 2012 election (Coleman 82). Historically, in the year 1980 was the last time that one party had to defend many seats in the house. Nonetheless, a strong combination of the Democrat candidates especially from North Dakota and Massachusetts and poor selection and disastrous nominees of the Republicans in several states may be blames of the cause of these unlikely results. Notably, the Republicans must be annoyed with both 2010 and 2012 for losing its most winnable races just because of nominating unappealing candidates for the race. Generically, Republicans could have most of these senate seats. Regardless of the win, lose situation the result are vital since the Senate Majority Leader Reid is likely going to seek fillister of the Senate seats. Historically the Democrats have usually been disappointed by the Senate Republicans who have ever filibustered almost everything in the Senate rule, in an unprecedented United States history, (Gleick, Christian-Smith, and Cooley 90). Regardless of this historical domineering, if Senator Reid succeeds in blocking the obstruction, his Senate majority would matter significantly on shaping the congressional Democrats effectively. This would significantly shape the policy making as well as approval of the Obama administration at both the judicial nominees and the executive branch levels. The 2012 election results saw many women being elected in the senate than any other election in the American history. The next senate will be made up of twenty women that are a lot less than the eighty men are. Nonetheless, this figure is still historically higher, and it is a notable achievement since the most resent notable women number was two by the year 1992 (Gleick, Christian-Smith, and Cooley 81). If the federal government policymakers believe in diverse policymaking body that aims at affecting numerous government functions then this hybrid senate will produce the same. It is worth noting that sixteen of these women senate are democrats. Regardless of the high number of women in the senate, for better for worse, the effect of the Republicans in the congress will remain overwhelming composed mainly of the white men. For more intriguing expression of diversity and inclusiveness in decision making, in Congress, the senate elect Hirono is the first Asian American women to be elected in the senate (Coleman 28). Moreover, she is the Buddhist to elect in the democratic America. Additionally, the senator elect Baldwin is the first openly lesbian or gay member to be elected in the Senate. These diversities of cultural among other societal practices have diversified decision making in the most of the federal policy making bodies following the 2012 election in the United States. Apparently, from the results of the elections numerous policies and policy makers changed. For instance, the American society increased acceptance and support of the same sex marriage that defined Americans with LGBT majority (Scott and Thomas 22). Numerous voters in Maine, Maryland, and Washington State legalized the same sex marriage in their states. However, some states including Minnesota disregarded or banned same sex marriage in their constitution (Gleick, Christian-Smith, and Cooley 91). Earlier, before the 2012 elections, same sex marriages were only legalized through either state Supreme Court decision or winning state legislature support and being signed into law by governor. It should be noted that most of the states’ constitution have broader and intense civil rights protections than the American constitution. Additionally, it is the first time (Scott and Thomas 02) in the American history that an openly bisexual and gay or lesbian to be elected both at the US House and Senate respectively. Many states in the United States experience open state legislators who have some sexuality complication (Carlarne 71). It through the 2012 election that numerous reductive discussions of a variety of issues of social concern that either supported or opposed moves that predicted these social adjustments of the policymaking and the policy makers. The United States’ opinion firmly supported gay marriage (Gleick, Christian-Smith, and Cooley 43). However, it had conflicting opinion where others supported while others opposed the legality of abortion. The campaigns and the results of the 2012 elections appear to have had support for treatment and rights of LGBT citizens. Nonetheless, it should be noted that there are still federal laws protecting the LGBT Americans from social discrimination. The 2012 election was a remarkable gain for the Republicans especially in the West Virginia. However, at the national level, the Democrats won most of the electorates for the presidency, senate, and the house. Nonetheless, the republicans will still have control in the House since they won most of the districts. The Republicans party had a notable gain in the West Virginia despite not winning the control of the House of Delegates. They have worn more seats than the observers expected them to have done. Their candidate picked up a seat at the Supreme Court. Notably, Romney won every county in the state something no American presidential candidate has ever done before. Patrick Morrisey defeated the veteran Attorney General once Darrel McGraw. This defeat is mainly significant for the Obama administration. The contribution of Morrisey makes to end up in a strong position, in the Republican Party. Finally, it is worth noting that the Republicans also hold the US House and the House may remain under their control through to 2022. Obama beat Romney with about three percent in the popular votes. However, Democrats led in the majority and the Senate as well as winning more US House votes in the race than Republicans (Gleick, Christian-Smith, and Cooley 53). Nonetheless, the Republicans are controlling the House a trend that is not likely to (Robert 01) change anytime soon. This makes Republicans have ease of policy making within the house. Different policymaking bodies are ever politically manipulated and the party that has a majority in either level has an easy time in effecting their intended policies. Policy Outcomes: Environmental Policies The 2012 federal elections were marked with president Obama defeating senator Mitt Romney. The election saw the democrats’ incredible adding two seats to its senate majority. The entire process was not a good deal to the business community unless an individual supported the burdensome regulations and the anti-employer or anti-business policies that election created (Scott and Thomas 58). The GOP “firewall” of the House remained constant; however, one of the seats lost meant a lot to the security ind1ustry. Notably, as per the 2012 federal elections, the GOP was likely to lose a net of six to seven seats form its current twenty-four majority. According to the homeland security subcommittee on infrastructure protection, Cyber-security, and technology, the 2012 elected leaders had to focus immensely on these areas. Additionally, Obama’s administration should aim at increasing federal regulation on environment, financial, health, and homeland security fields. Most of the administrative areas and considerable public policies were maintained up until after the election. Reconfirmation of Obama for the second term has increased the cyber security with intent for further increase in future (Coleman 26). The Obama’s new administration intended to change the face of the homeland security by having a new homeland security secretary (Gleick, Christian-Smith, and Cooley 53). Furthermore, there was a new chairperson and ranking member that is responsible for the senate homeland security and Government Affairs Committee. The administration also introduced a new House Homeland Security Committee’s chairperson. The Federal Election and Environment Policy The president Obama’s reelection combined with continued Republican House and government in the Congress-Democratic senate aimed at changing federal energy and environmental policies that was previously based on existing regulation but not the new legislations (Scott and Thomas 39). Notably, the continued strength of the House Republican that forms the majority and the large Senate Democratic majority, both the energy and environmental policies are likely to take different and new legislations on the new Obama’s administration. For some time now, many coal, oil, and natural gas producers have had enormous advantages due to what seem (Scott and Thomas 58) to be a lack of legislations on these products. The laws that are administering the production of coal, oil, and natural gases seem to have been constant despite the change in the federal administrations. Fine-tuning of these laws would be quite advantageous; however, the entire process has never been considered as a legislative change (Gleick, Christian-Smith, and Cooley 72). During the campaigns or other federal administration never envisioned nor desired energy and environmental policies. There are different energy policies that are perceived differently leading to a different situation analysis of the environmental policies (Manheim 24). Temporary laws governed the energy and environment tax provision or policies before the 2012 federal election (Carlarne 61). These laws must be extended, and many grants and loan programs that are supportive of renewable energy projects must have new legislative changes that aim at making these policies workable and attainable towards positive attainment. Regulation Agenda Numerous environmental groups have expressed their concerns and they feel that environmental issues must be addressed aggressively. These concerns have exerted immense pressure of the Obama Administration towards introducing strong regulations actions on regards to energy and environment policies and regulations. Many regulatory decisions have been initiated towards curbing the energy and environmental concerns. Most of these initiatives are geared at introducing radical regulatory impacts on refineries and electricity producers, oil and natural gas producers (Buckman 92). In fact, in the before the second term of president Obama in the office, a new final environmental protection agency is expected to introduce regulatory decision on the Clean Air New Source Performance Standards (NSPS). These newly intended regulations aim at introducing new energy and environmental measures to the new power plants and refineries. Moreover, they aim at stating effects on the existing power plants as from 2013. Some other energy industries targeted by this new energy and environmental regulatory policies include boiler and cement Kiln MACTs, coal ash, Ozone NAAQS, and the PM 2.5 NAAQS. Nonetheless, this new energy and environmental regulation policies are expected not to be fully successful; therefore, EPA is expected to have a continued push towards controlling the emission of greenhouse gases. Additionally, there is another early regulatory decision to be effected by the Obama Administration (Coleman 42). This decision involves the approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline that aims at bringing oil from the Canadian oil sand into the United States’ refineries (Lehrer 13). However, the disposal of this intended pipeline from Canada is a vital objective of the environmental community; thus, they are not expected to give the Administration on this matter as a light issues, but rather an issue of considerable concern. According to Philip English, former representative, the year 2012 election mainly ratified the status quo. He further added that since the nation depends on the foreign oil; thus, making it difficult in adopting these proposed oil and other energy and environment development alternatives (Gleick, Christian-Smith, and Cooley 93). Furthermore, the national debate focused on the development on the energy sources. In addition, there were concerns on how the new government was to maximize the benefits obtained from the new natural gas exploitations. There was national concern on the federal energy policy (Buckman 24). However, the election rhetoric on energy policy is uncertain to produce a coherent national energy policy regardless of the endless debate on the role of shale gas, coal, and biofuels on the future of America’s domestic energy. Therefore, it was the role of the both Democrats and Republicans to convince the public on their prescriptive roles in relation to tax and regulation policies towards driving the energy and environment changes. The greatest challenge facing the rapid, continued natural gas and oil production from the shale and the tight rocks that are essential in the EPA federalization of hydraulic fracturing regulation and are always regulated primarily by state authorities. EPA is known as the environment regulatory authority; however, the new government administration seems to have new systems or policy changes on the same. Nonetheless, the EPA is required to report on the environmental issues annually (Carlarne 25). For instance, the EPA is expected to report on water safety issues in association with the hydraulic fracturing. Additionally, the Obama Administration on environmental policies mandates EPA with the responsibility of drafting the guideline on the use of fuel in frack fluid concerning the Safe Drinking Water Act. Additionally, the Department of the Interior is also mandated with the establishment of its own regulations on the issue related to the hydraulic fracturing of public lands. There are high possibilities of these independent environmental regulations to clash with the pertinent state regulations. Therefore, energy producers will have to maintain their vigilance on energy and environment policy reviews towards responding to the regulatory changes adequately (Scott and Thomas 83). There are high possibilities of leasing coal, natural gas, and oil froth offshore and onshore federal lands since there is limited possibility for Obama’s second term administration to expand federal lands for the same activities (Ghertman and Me?nard 201). Notably, these lands are under the Department of Interior that has significantly reduced the new leasing. Thus, the energy produces should expect other additional requirements and regulations on all other aspects of coal, oil, and natural gas production from the federal land. The old habits are hard to die; thus, neither the administration nor the congress has adjusted to the new energy policies or realities that deal with surplus rather than a shortage. The president Obama campaign revolved around these issues where he concentrated on what energy reforms his new government will pursue, but the Republicans never believed. On the other hand, the environmentalists feel that the Republicans are right, and the second Obama Administration will only drag all the reforms on the fossil fuels. The most likely scenario goes between two options including the administration that cannot disregard tremendous benefits of the newly realized America’s energy resources, but the country can never adopt drilling and drilling position. There is a need for serious discussion about the underlying threats that are thought of being more contentious than the fight over taxes and health care or the Obamacare. Legislative Agenda It is apparent that everyone knows how a divided congress functions; however, the congress is expected to have a common ground on a policy matter. Different senators often introduce new bills that they often support for significant changes in society (Gleick, Christian-Smith, and Cooley 53). For instance, Senator Wyden focused on the renewable energy while Senator Murkowski focuses on the hydrocarbon production. Nonetheless, these bills have to pass through different committees to find a common ground. Obama administration is expected to adopt and maintain strong support the production of the renewable energy on private, public, state, and Native American lands. However, the expansion of the renewable energy is at risk due to the numerous renewable energy tax provisions of the year 2012. In response to this risk, Senator Ron Wyden has called for the amendment of the Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit Law to be fair to that hydropower (Scott and Thomas 63). The current federal budget outlook shows that the Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit is currently facing significant hurdles (Smith 01). However, the overall tax bill will determine the reauthorization of the renewable energy tax support. The American economy depends on energy; thus, the federal government through Obama administration needs to embark on plans that for new energy production and conservation of the environment towards securing the energy for future nation use (Ervin and Smith 78). Tax provisions that are related to oil and natural gas production should remain the prime target for the Obama administration and the Democrats in the Congressional area. However, appropriate vigilance among the producers is likely to lead to minimum change (Scott and Thomas 53). Numerous leaderships have changed towards improving the energy and environmental policies, and some of these leaderships include Senator David Vitter of R-LA who is now a member of e Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. Despite the changes in the House Natural Resources Committee, leadership is unlikely to change the agenda for energy and environmental policy. Numerous environmental groups are currently urging the president to initiate a number of legislations including introducing Clean Energy Standards and climate legislation among others. However, even the submission of the proposals, there are fears that they may not be enacted (Carlarne 91). The most likely legislation area addressing energy and environmental matters will be limited intensely if the proposal is passed through the US House since this policy making body will try to prevent and or reduce regulations within the administration (Guo, Kassiola, and Zhang 46). However, the US House has successfully enacted most of the energy and environment policies, and there is feeling that they will continue pushing for their legislative power towards maximizing the implementation of the vital energy and environmental policies. Conclusion The 2012 election had ended, and President Obama was back in the office for his second and last term. The main thing that President Obama must put at the forefront in the Americans; therefore, he should harmonize both is and Mitt Romney’s policies that would elevate the economic recoveries. Despite the outcome of the 2012 general election, all the policymaking organs, or bodies including the executive, Congress, and the House should embark on initiative and passing policies that aim at reforming America both economically and environmentally. Notably, at some policy-making bodies, it is apparent that Democrats dominates over the Republicans. This disparity should not cause suffering to the American. In other words, all leaders who are mandated with policymaking should initiate viable and reliable policies that aim at improving lives in American instead of playing party politics in the policy-making chambers. Energy and environmental policy are a vital policy that is quite vital that should be looked into with great concerns. The enactment of the environmental policies will be helpful to the federal government in different ways (Scott and Thomas 58). For instance, the use of Obama’s energy policy of introduction of the use of solar and wind energy will save the environment by minimizing environmental pollution as well as saving the economy by minimizing the revenue used in importing energy. These initiatives have ample initiatives towards economic recovery to the United Status. Decision-making is vital steps in management and leadership. Notably, coal is also vital natural resources that can also be exploited for lower domestic demands. In other words, different policies have different implication for the nation, and it is upon the leadership of the policy makers to initiate and evaluate which policies are vital (Scott and Thomas 58) for the development of the country. Finally, the leadership of president Obama must identify all sectors that require agent policy adjustment and work on them accordingly. Moreover, Democrat leaders should ever work in hand with Republicans towards a better America especially during this economic hard time and at all times without posing difficulties to a given party due to the difference in political interest and opinions. The political leadership should also incorporate different experts in initiating and discussing national policies. This will ensure that vital decisions are made towards resourceful use of the available resources without interfering with other resources and policies. Works Cited Buckman, Robert T. Latin America 2012. Lanham, MD: Stryker Post Publications, 2012. Print. Callan, Scott J, Callan-Thomas, and Janet M. Thomas. Environmental Economics & Management: Theory, Policy, and Applications. Mason, Ohio [u.a.: Thomson/South-Western, 2007. Print. Carlarne, Cinnamon P. Climate Change Law and Policy: Eu and Us Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print. Coleman, Jackson. 2012 General Election Analysis. Arent Fox 2012 Federal Election Energy and Environmental Policy Analysis. 2012, retrieved December 10, 2012, web. < http://f.datasrvr.com/fr1/512/57881/Alert-GR-Federal-Election-Energy-20121107.pdf> Ervin, Justin, and Zachary A. Smith. Globalization: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO, 2008. Print. Ghertman, Michel, and Claude Me?nard. Regulation, Deregulation, Reregulation: Institutional Perspectives. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2009. Print. Gleick, Peter H, Juliet Christian-Smith, and Heather Cooley. A Twenty-First Century Us Water Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Print. Guo, Sujian, Joel J. Kassiola, and Jijiao Zhang. Environmental Protection Policy and Experience in the U.s. and China's Western Regions. Lanham, Md: Lexington Books, 2010. Print. Lehrer, Nadine. U.s. Farm Bills and Policy Reforms: Ideological Conflicts Over World Trade, Renewable Energy, and Sustainable Agriculture. Amherst, N.Y: Cambria Press, 2010. Print. Manheim, Frank T. The Conflict Over Environmental Regulation in the United States: Origins, Outcomes, and Comparisons with the Eu and Other Regions. New York: Springer, 2009. Print. Miller, Roger L. R, Frank B. Cross, and Gaylord A. Jentz. Essentials of the Legal Environment. Mason, Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning, 2011. Print. Patel, Kant, and Mark E. Rushefsky. Health Care Politics and Policy in America. Armonk, N.Y: M.E. Sharpe, 2006. Print. Robert. 2012 Election Round-Up, Part 2 – Notable Results. 2012, Retrieve December 10, 2012, web< http://polisci.wvu.edu/political_science_blog/2012/11/12/2012-election-round-up-part-2-150-notable-results> Schofield, Norman, and Maria Gallego. Leadership or Chaos: The Heart and Soul of Politics. Berlin: Springer, 2011. Print. Smith, Ralph. Election Results 2012: What are the Implications for Federal Employees? November 7, 2012. Retrieved December 10, 2012 web< http://www.fedsmith.com/2012/11/07/election-results-2012-what-are-the-implications-for-federal-employees/> Wilson, James Q, John J. DiIulio, and Meenekshi Bose. American Government: Institutions & Policies. Boston, MA: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning, 2013. Print. Read More