CONGRESS UNDERMINE ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRESS?
February 27, 2011
We hold certain
truths to be self-evident . . . among them is the fact that the U.S. Congress
has changed its makeup considerably since the last election. Meanwhile,
most environmentalists would agree that three of the best things any Congress
ever did for the environment were the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act
and the Endangered Species Act, all passed in the 1970s during the Nixon
of the general public who are aware of the way we used to treat the environment
would agree that all of those changes were in the best interest of the
general public. Will the current Congress keep this environmental progress
intact? Is there any way such admirable advancements in environmental
policy, which benefit the citizenry of an entire country, could be threatened?
Can anyone come up with a reason why a politician would propose diluting
strong environmental laws that are good for the country? Read on.
current self-evident truth is that times are tough economically, although
a wide range of opinions can be found about exactly when they started
and who should shoulder the blame. But whatever the perceived cause of
our economic adversity, the new Congress will be expected to improve the
situation. Unfortunately, during economic hard times, some officials elected
to fix economic problems make environmental issues the scapegoat. People
with self-serving agendas begin to attack environmental rules and regulation.
Beware of rhetoric that uses slogans like "creating jobs," "reducing
the national debt" or "being good for the economy" while
undermining environmental safeguards. Such catchphrases are presented
as if they are incompatible with protecting the environment. They are
not. But we are already beginning to hear of moves afoot to weaken the
laws that ensure clean water and clean air, and that protect our native
species. Political efforts to weaken the Environmental Protection Agency
are another red flag, usually a corporate agenda seeking unrestrained
use of environmental resources that belong to all of us.
Attempts to change environmental laws that are good for the nation become
especially noticeable when commerce intrudes on our common assets: air,
water and the natural resources of our native plants and animals as well
as their habitats. These commodities, all of them, belong as much to any
one of us as to any other, regardless of wealth, land holdings or social
position. Free enterprise should be lauded, but not at the cost of weak
environmental laws that will benefit a few financially while being detrimental
to the rest of us.
four decades ago the House and Senate acted wisely and decisively with
regard to safeguarding air, water and wildlife. The passage of that powerful
environmental legislation has benefited the whole country. We have the
highest water standards of any country in the world. This would not be
true were it not for the Clean Water Act (1972). The Clean Air Act (1977)
enacted strong measures against air pollution, focusing on the question,
whose air is it anyway? The Endangered Species Act of 1973 saved several
species from certain doom, and the program remains one of the ecological
success stories of the last century.
environmental gains have been achieved through these laws, without dire
economic consequences. Yet some people persist in wanting to weaken the
regulations in all three of these nation-saving legislative acts. Anytime
you hear someone, whether politician, industrialist or just plain folk,
talk about the need to curtail any of these laws, take a careful look
at who is going to benefit. I guarantee it will not be you.
is certain--the congressional zenith of passing the environmental laws
of the 1970s to protect our natural heritage will be hard to follow. But
for other senators and representatives to weaken them would be to reach
a congressional nadir. Let's not stand for it. Let's make it clear to
all that to truly realize life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in
America, we must do so with clean air and water and with our biological
communities and natural habitats intact.
you have an environmental question or comment, email