|
Environment
What's New? - Archive
WomenMatter will continuously post updates on all this and other
issues as we monitor the continuing philosophical and practical debates nationwide.
Please check back often for updates. Past updates are available for reference on
the Environment Archives page.
Three Branches: Where Environment and Government Merge
Environmental legislation may have the longest-lasting effect of any Congressional action. But at first, the scope of environmental policy may be imperceptible.
Social change (for example, economic change) often happens quickly and is somewhat detectable, while environmental change (even when it is the result of human actions) occurs comparatively slowly and is therefore harder to perceive. It may be years before we truly understand the environmental policy of the George W. Bush era.
What is the policy?
The Bush administration has made changes to the Clean Air Act. Industrial facilities are no longer required to install pollution control devices when they update their facilities, as long as the total cost of the improvements is less than 20% of the plant's value. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contends that this policy change will not increase emissions.
Environmentalists do not agree. They believe that the policy will increase toxic emissions significantly and will contribute to the greenhouse effect. For a more in-depth discussion of the changes to the Clean Air Act, click here.
What is the policy and what is the philosophy?
The Bush administration asserts that the Clear Skies Initiative will positively affect the environment. Bush explains that the old rules discouraged routine maintenance because plants were required to install expensive new equipment each time they wanted to upgrade. The administration claims that the new policy promotes efficiency and, therefore, reduces the negative impact on the environment.
The policy is to promote efficiency; plants pollute less. The philosophy behind the policy is that industry will self-regulate and/or that the regulations are not needed.
Environmentalists vehemently oppose this philosophy. They do not have faith that industry will voluntarily choose to protect the environment. They believe, therefore, that a policy of government regulations is essential to a philosophy that is centered on the planet's health and public health.
States respond to Clear Skies
Some states agree with environmentalists and are taking the federal government to court. Thirteen states and more than twenty cities have filed lawsuits to block the policy changes from taking hold in their localities.
The Associated Press has reported that the attorneys general for New York, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin have banded together and filed a claim against the EPA on the basis that the Bush policy fails to protect public health and the environment. Illinois is filing a separate but similar claim, and California is considering doing the same.
Environmental protection as a state's right
The lawsuit brings the issue of states' rights into the environmental debate. Since environmental policy coming from Washington D.C. directly affects air quality in Washington state, shouldn't states have a say?
Technically, they do. Congresswomen and men have the power to create and approve environmental regulations in order to protect the states that they represent.
However, the states that are suing are largely Democratic. Since Democrats are the minority party in both the House and the Senate, they likely feel unable to pass their own environmental policies.
Nevertheless, Democratic-backed environmental policy is being introduced to the Senate. In the last days of October or the first days of November 2003, the Senate will vote on a bi-partisan bill that works to reduce greenhouse gases. The bill does not have the support to pass, but its sponsors, Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) and John McCain (R-AZ), believe that it is an important step in the legislative effort to protect the environment.
Green Court?
Since states are suing to change policy, our nation's courts will have a forceful voice in the debate over the environment. The personal philosophies of judges and justices will shape environmental law that will affect generations. This is one more reason that court appointments are taken very seriously by policy makers on both sides of the aisle.
Environmental law and you
Environmental policy affects us all. It regulates the air we breathe and the water we drink. Environmental law is yet another example of the personal as political. How does your personal experience inform this issue?
To discuss with other WomenMatter readers, join one of our online forums. Read more about the environment, or contact your representatives and let them know your views on the issue.
Posted on: 11/3/2003
click here to go to next section
return
to top
|
