[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 54 (Wednesday, April 24, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E610-E611]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        COMMENDING THE NEW YORK TIMES ON ITS EARTH DAY EDITORIAL

                                 ______


                           HON. GEORGE MILLER

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, April 23, 1996

  Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring the 
attention of my colleagues to the following Earth Day editorial which 
appeared in the April 22, 1996, New York Times.
  This editorial correctly points out that the American public will not 
be fooled by the hollow illustrations of environmentalism displayed 
today in the districts of many congressional Republicans--the same 
Members of Congress who, over the past year, have consistently voted 
for legislation to repeal decades of environmental protection for our 
air, our water, and our public lands. Planting a tree, collecting 
litter or visiting a zoo today will do little to mask the year-long 
environmental assault orchestrated by the Republican Congress.
  As noted in the editorial, the persistent Republican efforts to 
include antienvironmental riders on the appropriations bills for the 
Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Interior are 
most egregious. Although both of these bills have been vetoed by 
President Clinton, Republicans still insist on including many of the 
most offensive provisions in an omnibus budget bill to fund the 
agencies through the end of the fiscal year. Even Speaker Gingrich has 
acknowledged that including objectional policy riders in appropriations 
bills greatly reduces their chances of eluding another Presidential 
veto. Today's Washington Post quotes the Speaker as estimating that the 
chances of passing a funding bill for the remaining agencies is 
``probably about 50-50'' but that the odds improve if the contentious 
policy riders were removed and debated separately.
  I commend the New York Times for its continually excellent editorials 
and note that the 1996 Pulitzer Prize awarded to Robert B. Stemple, 
Jr., for his editorials on environmental issues is richly deserved.

                        Defunding Mother Nature

       The television networks and cable channels are falling over 
     each other to satisfy a growing public appetite for nature 
     programming. An article in The Times last week noted that 
     wildlife programs, once the preserve of the Public 
     Broadcasting Service, have spread like mangroves to NBC, 
     Turner Broadcasting, the Discovery Channel and Disney, among 
     others. This is welcome news. Quite apart from the fact that 
     such programming is of a higher order than most television 
     fare, its popularity is further evidence of what the polls 
     have already told us. Americans care about what is left of 
     their natural resources and the threatened creatures who 
     inhabit them.
       Viewers would be equally well served, however, if 
     television stole just a few minutes from the air time now 
     devoted to wolves, wildflowers, sharks and salmon and trained 
     its cameras on the denizens of the United States Congress, 
     where a less inspiring show is taking place. Undaunted by a 
     string of Presidential vetoes, heedless of public opinion and 
     deaf to the pleas of their moderate colleagues, conservative 
     Republicans and a few stray Democrats are pressing forward 
     with their efforts to undermine the country's basic 
     environmental laws.
       There are many destructive proposals on the Congressional 
     agenda, including several

[[Page E611]]

     bills that would transfer millions of acres of public land to 
     state and commercial jurisdiction. But the most urgent 
     example of bad legislation is an omnibus appropriations bill 
     now under consideration in a House-Senate conference. The 
     bill sharply reduces appropriations for the Environmental 
     Protection Agency and the Interior Department and contains 
     a dozen or so crippling anti-environmental riders. The 
     worst of these riders would authorize increased logging in 
     old-growth forests, reduce protection for the Mojave 
     National Preserve, strip the Environmental Protection 
     Agency of its power to protect wetlands and extend an 
     earlier moratorium on any new listings of endangered 
     plants and animals under the Endangered Species Act.
       The listings rider should be of special interest to the 
     viewers of those nature programs. Under law, the Interior 
     Department cannot act to preserve the habitat of an 
     endangered species unless it is listed as such. Among the 250 
     species that scientists think are dangerously close to 
     extinction, but cannot now be listed by the department's Fish 
     and Wildlife Service, are three that occasionally pop up on 
     TV--the Florida black bear, the Atlantic salmon and the 
     Mexican jaguar. Unless Congress comes to its senses, these 
     and other creatures may survive only on celluloid.
       Today marks the 26th anniversary of Earth Day. In full 
     knowledge of that, House Speaker Newt Gingrich recently 
     formed a 77-member Republican environmental task force. 
     Although 36 members of this task force earned ``zero'' 
     ratings from the League of Conservation Voters for their 
     routine support of anti-environmental legislation, many of 
     them are likely to spend the week planting trees, visiting 
     zoos and striking friendly poses next to recycling bins. But 
     the best thing Mr. Gingrich could do for his country and his 
     party would be to recognize that what counts here is content, 
     not imagery--and remove those riders from the appropriations 
     bill.

                          ____________________