The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“THE ENVIRONMENT” mentioning the Department of Interior was published in the Extensions of Remarks section on pages E540 on April 16, 1996.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
THE ENVIRONMENT
______
HON. NANCY PELOSI
of california
in the house of representatives
Tuesday, April 16, 1996
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, as we approach the 26th anniversary of the first Earth Day next Monday, I would like to make the following observations about the 104th Congress.
The 104th Congress came to Washington with an aggressive, antienvironment agenda promoted largely by industry and special interest groups who were determined to turn back 25 years of progress to protect public health, safety, and the environment.
The budget cuts proposed by the Gingrich Congress for the Department of the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency are aimed at the heart of our Nation's environmental protection. The two departments with the greatest environmental authority have become the prime targets in the current attack on the environment.
The proposed cut in funding for the EPA is 21 percent below last year's level, which would seriously affect EPA's enforcement of clean air, clean water, and safe drinking water laws. The Interior appropriations bill included provisions to open Alaska's Tongass National Forest to increased logging and continue the moratorium on listing new endangered species.
The funding for protection of our Nation's wetlands, endangered species, forests, and public lands must not be sacrificed in favor of short-term profits for miners, grazers, and developers. Programs to protect our Nation's water and air should not be held hostage to budget antics that have left these primary environmental agencies limping through the 1996 fiscal year with only a fraction of the funding needed to function.
The impacts of Republican cuts to the EPA include:
Weakened enforcement of environmental laws--including a 40-percent reduction in health and safety inspections of industrial facilities;
Delayed new standards to protect drinking water--including tap water standards for pollutants like cryptosporidium, which killed 100 people in Milwaukee in 1993;
Delayed new and ongoing cleanups at toxic waste sites--start of new construction halted at 68 sites; pace of cleanup slowed at 400 sites;
Rolled back community right-to-know information about toxic chemicals;
Created barriers to developing new controls to protect rivers and streams from industrial water pollutants;
Delayed approving pesticides with lower health risks as a safer alternative for farmers;
Delayed new standards for toxic industrial air pollutants;
Delayed review of air pollution standards to ensure adequate health protection; and
Delayed studies on how toxic chemicals may impair reproductive development and studies on how pollution affects high-risk populations.
These are just some of the effects of the cuts to EPA funding. I have not even listed the serious impacts of spending cuts on the Department of the Interior.
I will conclude with two observations. First, scientists say you cannot separate personal health from the health of our environment. Pollution prevention equals disease prevention. These foolish cuts are reducing our Nation's investment in public health. It is false economy to cut back on enforcement of clean air and clean water. How sad that 26 years after the first Earth Day and a generation of fighting pollution, the Republicans are choosing to dismantle environmental programs.
Second, I will call attention to a report on environmental protection by the California State Senate. The press reports, ``Contrary to popular belief, environmental regulations are not a major cause of job losses and declining economic performance.''
The Senate report concludes that environmental laws are not a major cause for the relocation of business to other States or countries. According to the report, more jobs are lost from leveraged buyouts and mergers than from controlling pollution.
The American people have the answer--they want a safe and healthy environment. We should follow their lead, and we should live up to their expectations that the Federal Government will ensure their health and safety at all levels. We should remember that every day of every year.
____________________
