(Mostly) Unbiased

Presidential Candidate Comparison-

Currently the two bipartisan presidential candidates, Barack Obama (Democrat), and Mitt Romney (Republican), have created a heated environment in which both individuals have jumped around in regard to their positions towards multiple platforms. Romney is known to have done this throughout his campaign, which has caused the loss of credibility towards his conviction. On the other end, President Obama having spent the last four years in office has also jumped around in regard to his original beliefs campaigned back in 2008. The President’s reasons for shifting platforms differ from Romney’s, but all the same both individuals have failed to provide conviction in their personal beliefs.

This now creates a very speculative election, which has many people calling either candidate “the lesser of two evils”. This is not how a democratic election should play out. As a nation we are becoming no better than the tyrannical developing nations, which we criticize so easily for their poor democratic representations -- which we most likely instigated through military force -- but that is not the issue we are discussing. With this poor representation of democracy, we now come to the “hard” decision of which candidate to choose for the next presidency. Let’s begin with President Obama’s positions regarding the affects he will impose on the sustainability of businesses, inferring toward the environment, the economy, and the social equity of our nation.

President Barack Obama (Democrat)

• Energy and Environmentally
• Take control of our energy future by expanding domestic oil and gas production to create 600,000 new jobs and using more renewable energy like wind and solar power.
• Reduce building energy use. Create jobs, save money, and cut pollution by improving energy efficiency in our non-residential building space.
• Make more than 75% of our potential offshore oil and gas resources available for exploration and development and permit clean energy projects on public lands that will generate enough renewable energy to power 3 million homes.
• Economically
• Ensure the wealthiest Americans do their fair share by paying at least the same tax rate as middle class families so we can reduce the deficit in a balanced way while preserving investments in education, clean energy, manufacturing, and small businesses.
• Invest in a domestic clean energy economy powered by sources like wind, solar, and clean coal. Renew successful bipartisan tax incentives that create American jobs and reduce our reliance on foreign oil.
• Invest in the next generation of scientists and engineers. Improve science, technology, engineering and math education and expand programs that expose kids to opportunities in those fields.
• Equitably
• Make the American Opportunity Tax Credit permanent to give more hardworking students a fair shot at an affordable higher education and the skills they need to find a good job.
• Make the American Opportunity Tax Credit permanent to give more students a fair shot at an affordable higher education.
• Reform K-12 education funding by encouraging states to adopt higher standards, and improving teaching and learning assessments.

Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney (Republican)

• Energy (NO Environment directed positions)
• Empower states to control onshore energy development
  • States will be empowered to control all forms of energy production on all lands within their borders, excluding only those that are specifically designated off-limits.  Federal agencies will certify, but the states will lead.
• Open offshore areas for energy development
  • Mitt will establish the most robust five-year offshore lease plan in history, that opens new areas for resource development – including off the coasts of Virginia and the Carolinas – and sets minimum production targets to increase accountability.
• Pursue a North American Energy Partnership
  • Mitt will approve the Keystone XL pipeline, establish a new regional agreement to facilitate cross-border energy investment, promote and expand regulatory cooperation with Canada and Mexico and institute fast-track regulatory approval processes for cross-border pipelines and other infrastructure.
• Restore transparency and fairness to permitting and regulation
  • Mitt’s plan will streamline the gauntlet of reviews, processes, administrative procedures, and lawsuits that mire so many new projects in red tape.
  • This emphasizes the deregulation of environmental impact reports (EIRs) for major projects (including the keystone pipeline).
• Economically
• Repeal Obamacare
• Repeal Dodd-Frank and replace with streamlined, modern regulatory framework
• Amend Sarbanes-Oxley to relieve mid-size companies from onerous requirements
• Initiate review and elimination of all Obama-era regulations that unduly burden the economy
• Ensure that environmental laws properly account for cost in regulatory process
• Provide multi-year lead times before companies must come into compliance with onerous new environmental regulations
• Equitably
• Human Capital
• Eliminate redundancy in federal retraining programs by consolidating programs and funding streams, centering as much activity as possible in a single agency
• Give states authority to manage retraining programs by block granting federal funds
• Facilitate the creation of Personal Reemployment Accounts
• Encourage greater private sector involvement in retraining programs
• Labor
• Appoint to the NLRB experienced individuals with respect for the rule of law
• Amend NLRA to explicitly protect the right of business owners to allocate their capital as they see fit
• Reverse executive orders issued by President Obama that tilt the playing field toward organized labor
• Tax
• Make permanent, across-the-board 20 percent cut in marginal rates
• Maintain current tax rates on interest, dividends, and capital gains
• Eliminate taxes for taxpayers with AGI below $200,000 on interest, dividends, and capital gains
• Eliminate the Death Tax
• Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)

And this is where we stand. Through a (mostly) unbiased analysis of the two candidate’s positions regarding the environment, the economy, and equity in there affects of the sustainability of businesses, I have come to the conclusion that Mitt Romney believes in a “business as usual” single-bottom line paradigm. In which businesses are free to operate deregulated compared to the standards that really should be set to truly account for our environment. President Obama and his positions push for a more “business as UNusual” triple-bottom line paradigm, in which businesses are required to answer to more strict environmental regulations, clean, renewable energy research is stimulated -- because without a federal stimulus it currently cannot compete against a STIMULATED oil industry, and less unionized workforces, as we are in the 21st century and unions only worked back when the industrial revolution was evolving.

You may see my bias now, but from the bullets presented above it is a clear choice of which candidate presented positions that are relevant, innovative, realistic, and not detrimental to the environment, all while providing developing domestic high-skill jobs through education, and supporting a developing economy -- that DOES NOT need to run off of GDP and infinite growth.

It was not my intention to persuade any individual on their political position. I simply intended to pose a (mostly) unbiased review of the key positions each candidate held towards the environment, the economy, and equity.

Thank you for your interest, please comment and subscribe.

Onward,

Hayden van Andel