Clean
the Earth and the White House
Since
activists first established Earth Day on
April 22, 1970 -- an event American Heritage
Magazine 23 years later called "one
of the most remarkable happenings in the
history of democracy" -- a new environmental
ethos has permeated politics.
The
summer of that year, President Nixon addressed
a letter to Congress citing unorganized,
"piecemeal" government-related
activities and the need to create a unified
Environmental Protection Agency. The agency
opened its doors that December.
Politicians
facing election aren't staying silent about
environmental policies. Democratic nominee-elect
Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., blasted President
Bush's environmental record Tuesday.
According
to Kerry's critique, delivered at a Tampa,
Fla. campaign event, the president's proposals
will contribute to upward of 100,000 premature
deaths and millions of asthma attacks. He
also said Bush's policy of allowing dirtier
plants to not upgrade to cleaner technology
is doing serious environmental and human
damage.
Regardless
of how accurate these claims are, politicians
are talking about the environment in big
ways. In the modern American political scene
-- which is one of heightened environmental
consciousness -- if politicians aren't doing
more to establish a balance of human interests
and environmental quality, it's much harder
to ignore green issues.
The
Bush administration has established some
environmentally friendly policies. The Landowner
Incentive Program, for example, offers grants
to landowners who voluntarily protect the
habitats of threatened and at-risk species
that live on private property. In addition,
the president's fiscal year 2003 budget
included the largest National Parks operations
budget ever submitted -- $665 million.
Still,
Bush's White House record, it seems, is
far from unsoiled.
The
administration's environmental philosophy
is results-oriented, according to the White
House Web site "making our air, water,
and land clear."
But
a recent budget proposal slashes funding
for the recovery of endangered species by
almost $10 million. For the third consecutive
year Bush also has asked Congress to relax
environmental laws for the military, and
the Pentagon is seeking immunity from laws
that regulate hazardous waste and air quality.
For
all these efforts, the Bush administration
seems to have a problem with scientific
integrity. The White House Web site insists
"(t)he President believes that we need
to employ the best science and data to inform
our decision-making." But Monday, the
Union of Concerned Scientists released a
rebuttal to a White House statement issued
earlier this month.
The
Bush administration statement was itself
a response to an earlier UCS report, "Scientific
Integrity in Policymaking," which criticized
the government for undermining scientific
integrity. The report, signed by many prominent
scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates,
alleged the White House has manipulated
in areas including air pollution, forest
management and endangered species.
This
Earth Day, we urge the Bush administration
to re-evaluate its environmental policies
(and intellectual integrity) for the good
of America's next generation.
This
editorial originally appeared in the Oregon
Daily Emerald at the University of Oregon.
|
