Introduction
The current issue that I’m looking at is toxic emissions
from major sources (i.e. industries).
A bill regarding this issue that’s currently being reviewed
is H.R.235: Cut Unsustainable and Top-Heavy Spending Act of 2011. The
title of this bill is 21st Century Energy Independence Act of 2011.
Sponsor: Rep Jackson
Lee, Sheila [TX-18] (introduced 1/7/2011)
Whom
does this issue affect?
The people that are affected the most
by this issue are low-income citizens who live in areas polluted by toxic
emissions from factories and the owner’s of the businesses with the factories
in question. The owners have the most to lose out of this bill because it would
force them to have to change the current methods of product development in
their factories. The people who stand to gain the most are those who live in
the polluted areas and would see a decrease in the toxic emissions in the air
around them.
What
are the consequences?
For those who own the factories they
may have to spend extra money on either new manufacturing systems or more
expensive, cleaner ways to produce products. That said, they likely will still
have lots of money so their families shouldn’t be affected at all. The
low-income population will likely see an increase in health conditions for
themselves and their families. Society in areas affected by toxic emissions
will see an increase in quality of life while other locations will see little
change.
What
is the economic impact?
The industries that create the toxic
emissions will carry most of the financial burden in regards to reducing
emissions, though I’m sure State or National funding will play a role as well.
I don’t think anyone will benefit directly from this bill in an economic sense.
What’s
the social impact of the issue?
The only social costs I can see would
be on the industries that have to change the ways. New methods of product may
take a toll on the employees at the factories. Social benefits will be apparent
in the civilian populations living around the factories and will be reflected
in quality of life
What
are the barriers?
The only barriers I could see would
come from oppositions to the bill by the heads of the affected industries of
contrary view points from the apposing political party in the House of
Representatives. I think they could be overcome with factual data support the
bill’s cause and overwhelming evidence of the publics support of the bill.
What
are the resources?
The resources that will be needed are
funding and regulation of the program. I believe both of these resources would
be best supplied through the US Government. Founding could be achieved by a
raise in taxes on certain forms of waste disposal or raised taxes on the
general population.
What
is the history of the issue?
The issue of toxic emissions hasn’t
been around for to terribly long, and measures to control it have only been
developed in the past 30 years or so. That said, there have already been
extensive amounts of bill past on the regulation of toxic emissions into the
environment. Though most programs have found a degree of success, there still
is much more that needs to be done.
Allies
& Opponents
People who would support this issue are
environmentalist and citizens who live in areas polluted by the toxic emissions
of large industries. Those who oppose it would consist of affected business
executives and individuals resistant to government intervention and regulation.
I can involve the two sides of the issue by trying to take an increased value
approach. By finding a way to improve profits and productivity for industries through
cleaner emissions and product development I believe we could reach a win/win scenario.
My
Recommendation
I would want policy makers to vote in
favor of the bill. The industries that produce the toxic emissions will make
profit even with cleaner practices so I see ne reason not to try and improve
their effect on the air in our environment.
