[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 138 (Saturday, October 28, 2000)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2012-E2013]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      FEDERAL GOVERNMENT POLLUTION

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. PAUL RYAN

                              of wisconsin

                    in the house of representatives

                       Saturday, October 28, 2000

  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit for the 
Record an article written by former Senator Robert W. Kasten, Jr. The 
Honorable Bob Kasten served in both the House of Representatives (1975-
81) and the Senate (1981-93).
  Mr. Kasten writes to remind us of the fact that the Federal 
Government is the largest polluter in the United States. He brings to 
our attention anecdotes from the states, which illustrate the states' 
difficulties enforcing local environmental laws on the federal 
government. He writes about the federal government's lack of 
accountability in cleaning up its own toxic waste sites and its 
attempts to push cleanup responsibility and costs to local levels of 
government and to private landowners.
  According to a Boston Globe article last year, ``federal agencies 
have contaminated more than 60,000 sites across the country and the 
cost of cleaning up the worst sites is officially expected to approach 
$300 billion, nearly five times the price of similar destruction caused 
by private companies.'' In contrast, private Superfund site clean up is 
estimated at a fraction of the federal government at $57 billion. The 
article goes on to say that the EPA Inspector General has found that, 
federal agencies are increasingly violating the law, with 27 percent of 
all government facilities out of compliance in 1996, the latest year 
figures available, compared to 10 percent in 1992.
  Department of Energy and Department of Defense environmental clean up 
budgets are routinely last priorities in the appropriations processes. 
For example, this year I worked to cut construction funding in the 
Energy and Water Appropriations bill for the DOE's National Ignition 
Facility (NIF)--a bottomless money pit that the GAO has determined to 
be mired in waste and technological difficulties--and suggested that 
this funding be transferred to the DOE's waste management account, 
where I believe the money could be put to better use.
  The final appropriations bill increased the Defense Environmental 
Restoration and Waste Management fund by $490 million dollars. In 
comparison, the NIF project, which is 100 percent over budget and 6 
years behind schedule, was appropriated $130 million for FY 2001. The 
NIF boondoggle was granted nearly one-third of the total increase of 
the environmental clean up budget. Clearly the federal government has 
other agendas than the environment.
  We need to look more closely at Federal Government's own 
environmental problems. The State and Federal Government can work 
together to modernize environmental laws, streamline the bureaucratic 
process, and focus less on punishment and more on figuring out the best 
way to reach high environmental standards and compliance.

                 America's Largest Polluter--Guess Who

                    (By Sen. Robert W. Kasten, Jr.)

       Here is a question that really ought to be put to both the 
     presidential candidates, but especially Vice President Gore, 
     in the final weeks of the campaign: Can you tell us who the 
     largest polluter in the country is? And--important follow-
     up--if you are elected president, what would you plan to do 
     about this defiler of our planet's future?
       The answer, as market environmentalist Becky Norton Dunlop 
     notes in her forthcoming book, Clearing the Air, will 
     surprise many Americans. It isn't Exxon, duPont, or even, 
     with respectful apologies to Ronald Reagan, trees--although 
     trees are, as Reagan said, a major source of certain 
     ``pollutants.''
       Rather, as Dunlop notes, the largest polluter in the United 
     States is: the United States government. Federal vehicles are 
     not only numerous, but, in many cases, don't meet federal 
     clean air standards. Temporary bureaucrats who commute to 
     major federal centers, especially in Washington, D.C., often 
     do so in vehicles that aren't locally registered, and thus 
     don't meet area pollution requirements.
       There are even a large number of federally-protected toxic 
     waste sites. And of course, the federal government's sorry 
     effort to blame land-owners who didn't pollute for the 
     chemicals put on their property by others is a major reason 
     why the vast majority of Superfund sites around the country 
     haven't been cleaned up.
       Dunlop knows about federal pollution first-hand. As 
     Secretary of Natural Resources for the state of Virginia from 
     1994 to 1998, she had to go to court against the Gore-Clinton 
     Environmental Protection Agency to stop some federal agencies 
     from polluting, or protecting polluters being harbored 
     because they were federal contractors. For this, she won the 
     ire of some extremists for whom environmentalism means not 
     making the air, water, and soil cleaner, but expanding the 
     federal government's ability to strong-arm states, cities, 
     companies, and private citizens.
       Even some environmentalists are starting to realize the 
     irony, as Scott Harper of the Virginian-Pilot put it 
     recently, that if you're looking for the biggest polluter of 
     all, ``it's government--the same authority that's supposed to 
     protect the environment.'' The Boston Globe did a whole 
     series on the issue of government pollution in 1999. This 
     summer, USA Today did an expose on federal agency pollution 
     dating back to the 1940s, a series that has led to Senate 
     hearings this fall. But you don't have to go back to the 
     history books to find federal polluting. It's going on right 
     now, under the man supposed to be the environmental vice 
     president, Al Gore.
       Now, to be sure, one reason the federal government is the 
     largest polluter is its sheer size. The federal government 
     owns more vehicles, buys more products, employs more 
     commuters, and does a lot of other things in much greater 
     volume than any company. (That the federal government is so 
     vast is, in
       But size isn't the only reason government pollutes so much. 
     Far from it. A major contributing reason is that federal 
     authorities frequently attempt to shift the expense for 
     cleaning up their pollution to other levels of government, or 
     to private landowners--allowing federal agencies themselves 
     to continue polluting while blaming others.

[[Page E2013]]

       As Dunlop recounts, for instance, in the mid 1990s, the 
     EPA, run by former Gore aide Carol Browner, tried to prevent 
     the state of Virginia from making the federal government 
     clean up one of the worst toxic waste sites in the country. 
     Avtex fibers. The plant had been kept open thanks to Colin 
     Powell and the Bush administration because it was producing 
     valuable products for the federal government. That's 
     understandable.
       What was wrong was the effort by the Clinton Administration 
     to avoid making the party responsible for the pollution, 
     namely Uncle Sam, from paying for the cleanup. ``Can you 
     imagine,'' as Dunlop notes, ``if the guilty party had been a 
     major corporation?''
       EPA ultimately paid a huge fine to Virginia in the Avtex 
     case but only after a legal struggle. Today, Browner brazenly 
     takes credit for having cleaned up the site.
       The government as a polluter is a vital issue all by 
     itself. But in an election where trust, character, and taking 
     responsibility have become part of the debate, it may be 
     especially important.
       Wasn't it Al Gore who was led an exhaustive review of 
     everything the federal bureaucracy does, the ill-starred 
     ``re-inventing government'' crusade? How does Gore square 
     this effort and mission, and his vaunted attention to detail, 
     with the fact that he apparently paid little attention to the 
     polluting activities and policies of governmental itself?
       Here we see the intersection of something Al Gore claims to 
     revere, namely clean air and water, with the place where he 
     and Bill Clinton have had the most direct control, the 
     federal executive branch. And instead of a record to be proud 
     of, the story of EPA in the 1990s is one of political 
     vendettas, bad science, and ``the buck stops over there.''
       I'm no Jim Lehrer or Larry King, but if I were, I know that 
     I would point this out. It isn't a nit-picking question, and 
     it isn't a personal attack--instead it goes to policy and the 
     future. And it would sure be interesting what Al Gore has to 
     say.
                                  ____

       Mr. Kasten served Wisconsin in the House of Representatives 
     (1975-81) and U.S. Senate (1981-93) and is an advisor to the 
     Alexis de Tocqueville Institution.

     

                          ____________________