Yeah, politics has a lot to do with it, but so does money. Build the plants and sell the power is extremely profitable in the short run. Develop the technology properly along with the infrastructure needed to manage it and to the bean-counters it's all just "overhead". The profits will be slim and won't start coming in for a century.

You know exactly what my position on nuclear power is, and on greenhouse gases. But I feel strongly enough about this that if I had to choose between a rush to build nukes with no firm committment to waste management, and going with soft coal, I'd go with the latter. It's that important.

If the private sector feels so strongly about it, let them raise the money to do the waste recycling the old-fashioned way: borrow it. I'm sure they'll negotiate a good interest rate from the Fed, who is the only one with that kind of bucks any more. And if they want to gather public support, let them be up front and discuss the risks
(both safety and financial) honestly. The kind of corporate snake oil we've gotten from them is the reason nobody trusts them anymore, and from what I can see so far, they haven't seemed to learn that lesson very well.