[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 193 (Wednesday, December 6, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H14141-H14142]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               REPUBLICANS ROLL BACK ENVIRONMENTAL GAINS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening in very strong 
opposition to Speaker Gingrich's and the Congressional majority's 
attack on clean water, clean air, and our national parks.
  No one who has followed the legislative activities of this Chamber 
over the last several months can deny that there has been--and 
continues to be--a concerted effort underway to roll back a host of 
laws that protect our natural resources and the environmental health 
and safety of the American people.
  Already this body has voted to gut the Clean Water Act, to cut 
hundreds of millions of dollars from grants to local communities that 
help keep drinking water safe and beaches swimmable, to allow oil and 
gas drilling in the pristine wilderness of the Arctic National Wildlife 
Refuge-- America's last frontier, to cut the Environmental Protection 
Agency's budget by 33%, including a 50% cut in enforcement activities 
and a 19% cut in the program that cleans up hazardous waste sites, to 
slash funding for land acquisition for national parks and wildlife 
refuges by 40%, to cut major wetlands habitat conservation programs by 
24%, and terminate altogether the EPA's role in protecting wetlands, to 
accelerate timber sales and logging road construction in our national 
forests, including the Tongass, a vast temperate rain forest in 
southeastern Alaska, to cut by one-third the recovery program for the 
grey wolf in Yellowstone National Park, to repeal a key component of 
the California Desert Protection Act, to cut climate and global change 
research by 41%, and to terminate recovery research programs on whales 
and other marine mammals.

  Thankfully, an attempt to sell off our national parks was defeated. 
But the list goes on and on.
  This summer, the Republican majority voted in favor of seventeen 
special interest loopholes that would restrict the EPA from enforcing 
programs important to public health, such as controls on airborne 
emissions of benzene, dioxin, and other cancer-causing pollutants from 
oil refineries, cement kilns, and paper plants.

  When the American people found out about these outrageous provisions, 
it did not take long for some Members to do an about-face. Most of 
those special interest riders have been removed. However, we are still 
faced with a bill that imposes deep cuts in the EPA.
  Mr. Speaker, the American people want to know what is next on the 
Republicans' environmental chopping block. Well, the Endangered Species 
Act, for one, is on life-support in critical condition. Apparently some 
feel that because the bald eagle is no longer 

[[Page H 14142]]
in imminent danger, we do not need to worry about endangered species 
any more.
  Another area in jeopardy concerns global warming. Despite the clear 
consensus of the international scientific community, some politicians 
are disputing the role that chemicals such as cholorofluorocarbons have 
in the depletion of the ozone layer. Unbelievably, we have leaders on 
the Republican side of the aisle who claim they know more about the 
threat to the Earth's ozone layer than Nobel prize-winning scientists 
and who are working to repeal bans on these harmful chemicals. Is this 
how public policy is supposed to be made? Certainly not.
  What seems to underlie all these environmental attacks is the false 
assumption that a strong economy and a clean environment are natural 
enemies. Because the vast majority of Americans do not support their 
attack and the facts do not back their arguments up, the proponents of 
these rollbacks have to resort to polarizing the debate into a choice 
between jobs and environmental stewardship.
  Well, my colleagues, do not be fooled. A strong environment and a 
strong economy go hand-in-hand.
  I come from an area in New York that borders Long Island Sound. The 
people I am privileged to represent in New York know first-hand that 
pollution-based prosperity is short-sighted and ends up costing more 
than it gives back. That is why business leaders, labor groups, and 
environmental organizations in New York and Connecticut have come 
together and are working in unison to restore the ecological health of 
the Sound. With the help of the EPA and the Federal rules it enforces, 
Long Island Sound is slowly coming back to life. Now is not the time to 
turn back the clock.
  Many in this Chamber like to talk about the importance of learning 
from history, lest we repeat the mistakes of the past. Well, history 
around the world has clearly shown that there is a high price to be 
paid for abandoning environmental stewardship.
  Mr. Speaker, what it all comes down to is a choice between the 
philosophy of Teddy Roosevelt--a Republican, I remind you--and James 
Watt. One saw the wisdom of preserving nature's beauty for future 
generations, the other sought to sell off national parks to the highest 
bidder.
  The American people know who is right. It is high time that Speaker 
Gingrich and the Republican leadership wake up and recognize this too.

                          ____________________