Obama has recently brought up much controversy over executive powers with his proposal of protection of a large refuge in Alaska.Though only congress can enact the refuge from now until the verdict of the refuge, the area is to be protected. This refuge is where polar bear, caribou and other endanger animals mate and give birth and are extremely detrimental to their survival as a species however this also marks a plot of land that has billions untapped of barrels of oil ready to feed into the US economy. Environmentalist applaud Obama for the federal government finally taking into account the importance of the environment and the immediate effect it has on the future. However Conservative Economist or heavily scrutinizing Obama on over using his executive power, outright ignoring the bipartisanship he spoke of in the state of the union address, and destroying future economic progress. Personally as an economic liberal and an environmentalist, I am overjoyed that the federal government can finally put value in life and the health of the environment versus simply monetary gain so we can still procure a possible future that does not entail an uninhabitable earth
Is Obama being too aggressively liberal in his proposals? Is this unfair to the wants of the people and the Governor of Alaska as the might have little say in the matter on their own industry.
Does this bill stand any chance in an all Republican Congress? If no could Obama just simply be trying to state a message?
Do you believe this action reflects Obama’s wants of bipartisanship that he clearly emphasized in SOTU 15?