- Email: [email protected]
Environmental politics in post-World War II America
resources, conservation ELSEVIER
Resources, Conservationand Recycling18 (1996) 5-9
and
Environmental politics in post-World War II America M i c h a e l S. D u k a k i s ~ Department of Political Science, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
Abstract
America has always had to confront environmental problems, but it wasn't until after World War II that most Americans began to develop the kind of consciousness about environmental issues that has played such a role in domestic politics over the past quarter century. After the surge of post war growth, we began to recognize the limits of our ability to exploit our environment for private gain, thus creating environmental awareness and ultimately a political movement. In 1970, President Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency, and appointed William Ruckelshaus as Director. Ruckelshaus was succeeded by Russell Train and Douglas Coste, and all three men began to make serious headway in the effort to clean up the nation's environment. In 1980, however, President Ronald Reagan, taking an anti-Federal government involvement in the private sector stance, began to seriously cut the budget of the EPA. He appointed Ann Gorsuch, who cut the budget as she believed the President wished, but her poor relationship with the Congress eventually forced her to resign. President Reagan requested that Bill Ruckelshaus return, and EPA has been blessed with good leadership ever since. During the Bush years, EPA director William Reilly even managed to pass sweeping acid rain control legislation. When Bill Clinton was elected President in 1992, he did not possess a strong environmental record, however his running mate, A1 Gore, most certainly did. EPA administrator Carole Browner, in fact, was a former Gore staffer and the White House environmental office is led by former Gore people. Clinton and Gore have attempted to bring a degree of flexibility to environmental regulation, and have also involved themselves personally in resolving environmental disputes. For instance, they and Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbit worked to fashion a long-term plan for the Florida Everglades that helped warring groups and interests come to
Prof. Dukakis has served as the Governor, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and in 1988 was the Democrat's Candidate for President of the United States of America. 0921-3449/96/$15.00 Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved PI1 S0921-3449(96)0 11 63-9
M.S. Dukakis / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 18 (1996) 5-9
consensus. With the 1994 Republican victory in the Congressional elections, it appeared that the environment may once again be in danger, as the Contract with America pledged to reduce or eliminate environmental controls. Popular opinion, however, caused the Congress to change their views and even directed them to pass environmental legislation that has won the support of both the business and environmental protection sectors. These developments have displayed that Americans care deeply about the environment and provide the basis for a genuine bipartisan consensus on environmental issues which will increasingly emphasize thoughtful and effective technological solutions in the future. Although the benefits of this legislation have been drastic, we are now dealing with problems requiring more subtle and sophisticated answers than we needed in the past. Because of this, political leaders will look to the classrooms and laboratories to produce the answers to the environmental problems of the future, and in turn will be willing to support educators and researchers with resources and political clout. Neither the politicians nor the business community can solve these problems without a close working relationship with the world of environmental and biotechnology. Building that collaborative relationship is one of the most important challenges we face as we approach the 21st century. It is also, particularly for those of us who have been laboring in the environmental vineyard for years, one of the most exciting. Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Science B.V.
Keywords: Environmental Protection Agency; Congress; Politics; Legislation; Environment; Pollution
1. Environmental politics in post-World War II America America has always had to confront environmental problems. The c o m m o n law doctrine of nuisance was an early response to them. I f someone discovered that his property was adversely affected by a condition on his neighbor's land, he could sue to stop it. And the elaborate pattern of legal rights and responsibilities that developed in the West around the issue of water was an early recognition of the fact that the market system by itself could not deal with the consequences of westward growth and its demand for scare resources. But it wasn't until after World War II that most Americans began to develop the kind of consciousness about environmental issues that has played such an important role in domestic politics over the past quarter century. Not surprisingly, it was economic growth, the pent up demand for housing and automobiles that accompanied the end of World W a r II, and the building of superhighways to accommodate that growth and those automobiles that finally awakened the American people to the damage they were doing to themselves and future generations. Increasingly visible and severe air and water pollution; the closing of rivers and beaches to recreational activity; the emergence of smog as a critical environmental factor in areas like southern California; and the growing recognition that there were limits to our ability to exploit our environment for private gain combined to create a growing environmental awareness and ultimately a political movement. Thus, it was that in 1970 Richard Nixon, no left-leaning liberal to be sure, created the Environmental Protection Agency by executive order and appointed a
M.S. Dukakis / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 18 (1996) 5-9
young assistant attorney general named William Ruckelshaus as its first director. Ruckelshaus turned out to be a superb choice - - a man of real intellect, optimism and political skill. He knew that much of what he was doing was not being greeted with overwhelming enthusiasm by the man who had appointed him but he also knew that unless he established EPA's reputation for credibility from the outset, both the agency and Nixon would be the losers. Ruckelshaus was succeeded by two first-rate directors. Russell Train and Douglas Costle - - and by 1980 the agency, working with its state counterparts, had begun to make serious headway in the effort to clean up the nation's environment. Aided and abetted by aggressive and often sensational treatment of the issue by the press, all three of them make important contributions to the effort. They also had a Congress that was extremely supportive of them, and Federal funds for environmental cleanup flowed in increasing quantities to the States. All this stopped with a bang when Ronald Reagan was elected as President in 1980. Reagan had campaigned on a platform to get the Federal government off the backs of the American people and the American economy, and he made no bones about his intention to curb what he considered the unnecessarily intrusive regulatory apparatus of the EPA. He made good on his campaign promise. He appointed an inexperienced state legislator from Colorado named Ann Gorsuch as his new EPA director. Gorsuch had been a member of a very conservative group of Colorado legislators who dubbed themselves 'the crazies'. She cut the EPA budget; brought in people as top deputies who in many cases had worked for regulated industries; shuttled career employees off to remote parts of the agency; and began to carry cut what she considered the mandate given to her by the President. Unfortunately, she developed a terrible relationship with the Congress, both Republicans and Democrats. Many of her top appointees were either incompetent or over their heads. Public discontent began to be heard more and more loudly, and she was finally forced to resign in 1983. President Reagan sent out the call for Bill Ruckelshaus, and Ruckelshaus returned to save his baby and restore its reputation for competence and integrity. He succeeded, and the EPA has been blessed with good leadership ever since. William Reilly, the Bush EPA director, was experienced and effective. George Bush himself was a lot more interested in environmental protection than Ronald Reagan, and after eight futile years under Reagan, the Congress passed sweeping acid rain control legislation. Unfortunately, Bush had difficulty controlling another arm of his administration, the Council on Competitiveness chaired by Vice President Quayle, and Reilly found himself continually feuding with the Council. In fact, he was badly undermined at the Rio Conference in 1992 by staff members of the Council who insisted on leaking documents to the press deliberately designed to undercut Reilly's position as the President's principal representative at the conference. The 1992 Democratic ticket brought an interesting combination of backgrounds environmental interest to the national political scene and ultimately to the White House. Bill Clinton, as the governor of a small and economically troubled state, did
M.S. Dukakis / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 18 (1996) 5 - 9
not bring a particularly distinguished environmental record to the campaign. He had emphasized job creation and economic development in Arkansas, and the environment tended to take a back seat to that effort. His running mate, however, was arguably the single most outspoken and aggressive environmentalist in the Senate. He led the U.S. Senate delegation to the UN Conference in Rio. He had written a thoughtful and often passionate book on the subject. He was committed to dealing with national and global environmental problems. A1 Gore not only shored up Bill Clinton's defenses on the environmental front; he has effectively carried the environmental portfolio within the administration ever since. Carole Browner, the Clinton EPA administrator, was a former Gore staffer. The White House environmental office is led by former Gore people. And Gore himself is strongly committed to the notion that research and new environmental technology cannot only solve a lot of problems; it can be an important stimulus to the nation's economy as well. Clinton and Gore have also attempted to bring a degree of flexibility to environmental regulation that was not part of earlier Federal environmental efforts. In selecting Browner to head the EPA, they picked a former State environmental administrator who, like the President, had often chafed under inflexible Federal regulations. Clinton and Gore also made an effort to involve themselves personally in resolving some outstanding environmental disputes that had dragged on for years. They both attended an extraordinary summit involving the lumber industry and the environmental community in the Northwest. They, and Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbit have worked hard successfully to fashion a long-term plan for the Florida Everglades that seems to have produced an unusual degree of consensus among heretofore warring groups and interests. Whatever success the new administration had had on the environmental front during its first two years in office seemed to be shuttered by the Republican victory in the Congressional elections of 1994. The new majority had campaigned on the Contract with America which, among other things, pledged to substantially reduce or eliminate environmental controls which, they claimed, were handcuffing American businesses and needed economic growth. For a time they seemed to be succeeding. Then, a rather remarkable thing happened as public opinion in this country began to realize what the new Congress was up to. Slowly but surely, members of Congress began to hear from constituents that they cared about their environment and wanted it protected. A small but vocal minority of Republican members of Congress informed Speaker Gingrich and their colleagues that they would oppose efforts to weaken environmental protection. The President, sensing what was happening, seized on the environmental issue as one of the key failings of the new Congress and never missed a chance to blast it for playing fast and loose with the nation's environment. Not only did the new majority in Congress retreat; they have already passed major environmental legislation during the Congressional session that has won the support of both the business and environmental protection appear to have collapsed in the Congress. They are not likely to be revived soon.
M.S. Dukakis / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 18 (1996) 5 9
These remarkable political developments during the past two years and the realization once again that Americans care deeply about the environment around them provide the basis, I believe, for a genuine bipartisan consensus on environmental issues which will increasingly emphasize thoughtful and effective technological solutions in the future. Most of the benefits of command and control legislation have already been achieved, and those benefits in many cases have been dramatic. But we are now dealing with problems that will require more subtle and far more sophisticated answers than we had or needed in the early days of the environmental movement in this country. Increasingly, political leaders will look to those of you in the classrooms and laboratories to produce the answer to the environmental problems of the future; and, increasingly, I believe we will be willing to support you with resources as well as political clout. In fact, I believe that the emergence of a strong and growing environmental industry is one of the greatest assets we have in the battle to clean up our environment. The realization that there are jobs and profits in environmental protection has made a real difference in the public and business perception of environmental regulation. But neither the politicians nor the business community can solve these problems without a close working relationship with the world of environmental and biotechnology. Building that collaborative relationship is one of the most important challenges we face as we approach the 21st century. It is also, particularly for those of us who have been laboring in the environmental vineyard for years, one of the most exciting.
Resources, Conservationand Recycling18 (1996) 5-9
and
Environmental politics in post-World War II America M i c h a e l S. D u k a k i s ~ Department of Political Science, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
Abstract
America has always had to confront environmental problems, but it wasn't until after World War II that most Americans began to develop the kind of consciousness about environmental issues that has played such a role in domestic politics over the past quarter century. After the surge of post war growth, we began to recognize the limits of our ability to exploit our environment for private gain, thus creating environmental awareness and ultimately a political movement. In 1970, President Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency, and appointed William Ruckelshaus as Director. Ruckelshaus was succeeded by Russell Train and Douglas Coste, and all three men began to make serious headway in the effort to clean up the nation's environment. In 1980, however, President Ronald Reagan, taking an anti-Federal government involvement in the private sector stance, began to seriously cut the budget of the EPA. He appointed Ann Gorsuch, who cut the budget as she believed the President wished, but her poor relationship with the Congress eventually forced her to resign. President Reagan requested that Bill Ruckelshaus return, and EPA has been blessed with good leadership ever since. During the Bush years, EPA director William Reilly even managed to pass sweeping acid rain control legislation. When Bill Clinton was elected President in 1992, he did not possess a strong environmental record, however his running mate, A1 Gore, most certainly did. EPA administrator Carole Browner, in fact, was a former Gore staffer and the White House environmental office is led by former Gore people. Clinton and Gore have attempted to bring a degree of flexibility to environmental regulation, and have also involved themselves personally in resolving environmental disputes. For instance, they and Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbit worked to fashion a long-term plan for the Florida Everglades that helped warring groups and interests come to
Prof. Dukakis has served as the Governor, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and in 1988 was the Democrat's Candidate for President of the United States of America. 0921-3449/96/$15.00 Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved PI1 S0921-3449(96)0 11 63-9
M.S. Dukakis / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 18 (1996) 5-9
consensus. With the 1994 Republican victory in the Congressional elections, it appeared that the environment may once again be in danger, as the Contract with America pledged to reduce or eliminate environmental controls. Popular opinion, however, caused the Congress to change their views and even directed them to pass environmental legislation that has won the support of both the business and environmental protection sectors. These developments have displayed that Americans care deeply about the environment and provide the basis for a genuine bipartisan consensus on environmental issues which will increasingly emphasize thoughtful and effective technological solutions in the future. Although the benefits of this legislation have been drastic, we are now dealing with problems requiring more subtle and sophisticated answers than we needed in the past. Because of this, political leaders will look to the classrooms and laboratories to produce the answers to the environmental problems of the future, and in turn will be willing to support educators and researchers with resources and political clout. Neither the politicians nor the business community can solve these problems without a close working relationship with the world of environmental and biotechnology. Building that collaborative relationship is one of the most important challenges we face as we approach the 21st century. It is also, particularly for those of us who have been laboring in the environmental vineyard for years, one of the most exciting. Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Science B.V.
Keywords: Environmental Protection Agency; Congress; Politics; Legislation; Environment; Pollution
1. Environmental politics in post-World War II America America has always had to confront environmental problems. The c o m m o n law doctrine of nuisance was an early response to them. I f someone discovered that his property was adversely affected by a condition on his neighbor's land, he could sue to stop it. And the elaborate pattern of legal rights and responsibilities that developed in the West around the issue of water was an early recognition of the fact that the market system by itself could not deal with the consequences of westward growth and its demand for scare resources. But it wasn't until after World War II that most Americans began to develop the kind of consciousness about environmental issues that has played such an important role in domestic politics over the past quarter century. Not surprisingly, it was economic growth, the pent up demand for housing and automobiles that accompanied the end of World W a r II, and the building of superhighways to accommodate that growth and those automobiles that finally awakened the American people to the damage they were doing to themselves and future generations. Increasingly visible and severe air and water pollution; the closing of rivers and beaches to recreational activity; the emergence of smog as a critical environmental factor in areas like southern California; and the growing recognition that there were limits to our ability to exploit our environment for private gain combined to create a growing environmental awareness and ultimately a political movement. Thus, it was that in 1970 Richard Nixon, no left-leaning liberal to be sure, created the Environmental Protection Agency by executive order and appointed a
M.S. Dukakis / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 18 (1996) 5-9
young assistant attorney general named William Ruckelshaus as its first director. Ruckelshaus turned out to be a superb choice - - a man of real intellect, optimism and political skill. He knew that much of what he was doing was not being greeted with overwhelming enthusiasm by the man who had appointed him but he also knew that unless he established EPA's reputation for credibility from the outset, both the agency and Nixon would be the losers. Ruckelshaus was succeeded by two first-rate directors. Russell Train and Douglas Costle - - and by 1980 the agency, working with its state counterparts, had begun to make serious headway in the effort to clean up the nation's environment. Aided and abetted by aggressive and often sensational treatment of the issue by the press, all three of them make important contributions to the effort. They also had a Congress that was extremely supportive of them, and Federal funds for environmental cleanup flowed in increasing quantities to the States. All this stopped with a bang when Ronald Reagan was elected as President in 1980. Reagan had campaigned on a platform to get the Federal government off the backs of the American people and the American economy, and he made no bones about his intention to curb what he considered the unnecessarily intrusive regulatory apparatus of the EPA. He made good on his campaign promise. He appointed an inexperienced state legislator from Colorado named Ann Gorsuch as his new EPA director. Gorsuch had been a member of a very conservative group of Colorado legislators who dubbed themselves 'the crazies'. She cut the EPA budget; brought in people as top deputies who in many cases had worked for regulated industries; shuttled career employees off to remote parts of the agency; and began to carry cut what she considered the mandate given to her by the President. Unfortunately, she developed a terrible relationship with the Congress, both Republicans and Democrats. Many of her top appointees were either incompetent or over their heads. Public discontent began to be heard more and more loudly, and she was finally forced to resign in 1983. President Reagan sent out the call for Bill Ruckelshaus, and Ruckelshaus returned to save his baby and restore its reputation for competence and integrity. He succeeded, and the EPA has been blessed with good leadership ever since. William Reilly, the Bush EPA director, was experienced and effective. George Bush himself was a lot more interested in environmental protection than Ronald Reagan, and after eight futile years under Reagan, the Congress passed sweeping acid rain control legislation. Unfortunately, Bush had difficulty controlling another arm of his administration, the Council on Competitiveness chaired by Vice President Quayle, and Reilly found himself continually feuding with the Council. In fact, he was badly undermined at the Rio Conference in 1992 by staff members of the Council who insisted on leaking documents to the press deliberately designed to undercut Reilly's position as the President's principal representative at the conference. The 1992 Democratic ticket brought an interesting combination of backgrounds environmental interest to the national political scene and ultimately to the White House. Bill Clinton, as the governor of a small and economically troubled state, did
M.S. Dukakis / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 18 (1996) 5 - 9
not bring a particularly distinguished environmental record to the campaign. He had emphasized job creation and economic development in Arkansas, and the environment tended to take a back seat to that effort. His running mate, however, was arguably the single most outspoken and aggressive environmentalist in the Senate. He led the U.S. Senate delegation to the UN Conference in Rio. He had written a thoughtful and often passionate book on the subject. He was committed to dealing with national and global environmental problems. A1 Gore not only shored up Bill Clinton's defenses on the environmental front; he has effectively carried the environmental portfolio within the administration ever since. Carole Browner, the Clinton EPA administrator, was a former Gore staffer. The White House environmental office is led by former Gore people. And Gore himself is strongly committed to the notion that research and new environmental technology cannot only solve a lot of problems; it can be an important stimulus to the nation's economy as well. Clinton and Gore have also attempted to bring a degree of flexibility to environmental regulation that was not part of earlier Federal environmental efforts. In selecting Browner to head the EPA, they picked a former State environmental administrator who, like the President, had often chafed under inflexible Federal regulations. Clinton and Gore also made an effort to involve themselves personally in resolving some outstanding environmental disputes that had dragged on for years. They both attended an extraordinary summit involving the lumber industry and the environmental community in the Northwest. They, and Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbit have worked hard successfully to fashion a long-term plan for the Florida Everglades that seems to have produced an unusual degree of consensus among heretofore warring groups and interests. Whatever success the new administration had had on the environmental front during its first two years in office seemed to be shuttered by the Republican victory in the Congressional elections of 1994. The new majority had campaigned on the Contract with America which, among other things, pledged to substantially reduce or eliminate environmental controls which, they claimed, were handcuffing American businesses and needed economic growth. For a time they seemed to be succeeding. Then, a rather remarkable thing happened as public opinion in this country began to realize what the new Congress was up to. Slowly but surely, members of Congress began to hear from constituents that they cared about their environment and wanted it protected. A small but vocal minority of Republican members of Congress informed Speaker Gingrich and their colleagues that they would oppose efforts to weaken environmental protection. The President, sensing what was happening, seized on the environmental issue as one of the key failings of the new Congress and never missed a chance to blast it for playing fast and loose with the nation's environment. Not only did the new majority in Congress retreat; they have already passed major environmental legislation during the Congressional session that has won the support of both the business and environmental protection appear to have collapsed in the Congress. They are not likely to be revived soon.
M.S. Dukakis / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 18 (1996) 5 9
These remarkable political developments during the past two years and the realization once again that Americans care deeply about the environment around them provide the basis, I believe, for a genuine bipartisan consensus on environmental issues which will increasingly emphasize thoughtful and effective technological solutions in the future. Most of the benefits of command and control legislation have already been achieved, and those benefits in many cases have been dramatic. But we are now dealing with problems that will require more subtle and far more sophisticated answers than we had or needed in the early days of the environmental movement in this country. Increasingly, political leaders will look to those of you in the classrooms and laboratories to produce the answer to the environmental problems of the future; and, increasingly, I believe we will be willing to support you with resources as well as political clout. In fact, I believe that the emergence of a strong and growing environmental industry is one of the greatest assets we have in the battle to clean up our environment. The realization that there are jobs and profits in environmental protection has made a real difference in the public and business perception of environmental regulation. But neither the politicians nor the business community can solve these problems without a close working relationship with the world of environmental and biotechnology. Building that collaborative relationship is one of the most important challenges we face as we approach the 21st century. It is also, particularly for those of us who have been laboring in the environmental vineyard for years, one of the most exciting.