April 18, 1997
Sustaining Environmental Progress Requires Modernizing Regulations
Tuesday, April 22, 1997, is the 27th annual celebration of Earth Day, and an opportunity for Republicans to:
Take pride in the progress that has been made over the past quarter-century (see fact sheet, attached);
Acknowledge that since the first Earth Day Americans have learned a great deal. We have a better understanding of successful environmental approaches; we have vastly improved our scientific understanding of environmental hazards; and public awareness and participation in environmental improvement have dramatically increased;
Assure Americans that Republicans will continue to work to improve environmental quality, and will do so by building on the successes and the experiences of the past. Improvements in environmental protection will require accelerating the growth of state, local, and individual responsibility; increasing the quality of the science used to make human health and environmental decisions; correcting wasteful and counterproductive approaches; and maintaining vigilance for new threats to our health and the environment.
Even prior to the first Earth Day in 1970, the United States began leading the world in environmental progress, in part because the success as an industrialized nation had brought with it serious pollution problems, and in part because the United States has such a prosperous economy that we could afford a relatively large measure of environmental protection. By the 1960s, America's heritage was becoming increasingly damaged due to industry and individual disregard for the environment. Prior to Earth Day, the chemicals in the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland caught fire, our rivers were in danger of becoming open sewers, little care was being given to how economic development was affecting our native animal and plant species, smog choked our cities, and toxic chemicals too frequently were simply spewed into the air or dumped on the ground.
Today, we can celebrate the achievements of the last quarter-century. Despite the nay-saying by some of the professional environmental lobbyists and some officials of the Clinton Administration, America is in far better environmental shape than it was in 1970, despite a 30 percent increase in population and a doubling of the economy. The air is cleaner, our forests and wetlands are increasing, twice as many of our rivers are now swimmable and fishable, toxic emissions have declined, and recycling has increased (see talking points, attached).
Much of this progress has been due to Republican leadership. It was under a Republican President, Richard Nixon, that we saw the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Council on Environmental Quality, as well as the enactment of the national Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Waste Act, and the Endangered Species Act. Under Presidents Reagan and Bush, the Clean Air Act was strengthened, and international agreements were reached to ban the use of stratospheric-ozone-destroying CFCs and to voluntarily aim to reduce greenhouse gases.
The progress we have made does not mean that we do not have to be vigilant to changing environmental circumstances. For example, the growth of the poultry industry is having an increasing impact on streams and rivers, including the Potomac. Nor does celebrating our past progress mean we should not modernize our environmental regulatory approaches based on the lessons we have learned about what works (incentives, market mechanisms, cooperation and respect for property rights, more local control, performance standards, and focus on solving public health problems), and what does not work as well (command and control, one-size-fits-all, failure to prioritize risks, failure to consider alternatives that are less harmful to other important values such as quality jobs that have good health plans, and failure to consider unintended adverse risks such as removing asbestos from schools which actually increased airborne asbestos).
The regulatory first aid needed during the pollution crisis of the 1960s is not necessarily the best long-term care for the next century. We have already reduced the easily identified and easily curtailed pollution -- mostly pollution from smokestacks, tailpipes, and factory waste streams. The next phase of environmental protection in America requires that we increase our reliance on measures that will be effective for the more disperse pollution problems.
A few programs (especially the Endangered Species Act and Superfund) have been serious failures and need overhauling to improve results and to reduce costs. Other programs, such as the Clean Water Act, have been qualified successes and need only fine tuning. Still others, such as the urban ozone control program, need to be revisited to see whether they deserve the degree of economic investment and personal sacrifice they have been receiving compared to a host of more serious health risks, particularly from poor diets, poverty, and antibiotic-resistant diseases.
______________________________________
1970 -1995
According to the EPA, between 1970 and 1995, despite a doubling of the U.S. economy ($3.4 trillion to $6.7 trillion) and a 30 percent increase in population, the absolute levels of all six National Ambient Air Quality Standards' "criteria" air pollutants have decreased substantially, and have continued to decrease over the last decade:
- Under the 1990 act, another round of sulfur reductions will be required of powerplants in
the year 2000 by imposing a cap that is only 60 percent of the 1995 limit on the amount of sulfur
allowed per million BTUs (from 2.0 down to 1.2 pounds per mmbtu).
- Under the 1990 act, the 1995 reformulated gasoline formula will have to be changed again
by the year 2000 to meet a second round of VOC emissions reductions and a new nitrogen
oxide reduction requirement.
Toxic Waste:
Clean Water: