[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]
E-M:/ Perspective on State of the State and Engler Anti-Environment Position
- Subject: E-M:/ Perspective on State of the State and Engler Anti-Environment Position
- From: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: 29 Jan 1998 13:26:37 -0500
- List-Name: Enviro-Mich
- Reply-To: email@example.com
Enviro-Mich message from firstname.lastname@example.org
As we hear of an election year "conversion" of John Engler on
the environmental issue, let us not forget the hostile/anti-environment
posture of our fat-boy draft dodging guv from his speech as
a "darling" of the Washington DC based Competitive Enterprise
Institute..... Read this to know the true John Engler, which I'm reposting
for the benefit of those who have joined the list in the last year....
George Weeks, political columnist for the Detroit News, has been
trying to "rehabilitate" Engler's environmental record. I'm convinced
that Engler wants to be President; but he can't do it without having
some kind of raproachment on the environmental issue. Given Engler's
record, Michigan enviros should deny him this or otherwise potentially face an
Engler White House in 2000 or 2004.... not a good way to face the
For the younger folks out there, Warren T Brookes is a deceased former
Detroit News opinion columnist who had a direct line to anti-environmental
PR from all of the Washington trade associations and who relentlessly
criticized all manner of environmental protection and conservation efforts in
Warren T. Brookes Fellowship Memorial Dinner
Remarks by Governor John Engler
Tuesday, November 19,1996
As you may know, Joe Olson, before he took the post of Insurance
Commissioner in my administration, was Chair of the Board of Directors
at the Mackinac Center -- a Michigan-based think tank that we call the CEI
of the midwest.
Actually, if Warren Brookes were alive today, I am certain he would be
at the degree to which idea-generating organizations like CEI, the Cato
and the Heritage Foundation are leading the debate in Washington.
Certainly, he would be proud -- extremely proud -- of the scholars who have
so ably filled the Warren Brookes Fellowship in Environmental Journalism.
Beginning with Ron Bailey, and continuing with Michael Fumento, Michelle
Malkin and James Bovard, these Warren Brookes fellows have represented
the epitome of excellent scholarship, thoughtful analysis and outstanding
Indeed, every time I pick up a newspaper like the Wall Street Journal and
see a column by a scholar such as Jim Bovard, I think of Warren and know
that he lives on -- not just through the CEI fellows but through all of us.
We share his belief in the power of free markets. We share his skepticism of
bureaucratic science -- BS as Warren used to call it. And we share his
lifelong commitment to the principle that people make better decisions --
for their businesses, for their families and for the world they live in --
better decisions than government ever could.
Warren Brookes was an honest broker in the marketplace of ideas
and information. And while we miss his voice twice-a-week in the paper,
we certainly continue to benefit every day from the power of his ideas and
the diversity of his intellect.
I wish that Warren would have been alive to see Republicans take
control of Congress. What I wish even more would have been to see
the fun Warren would have had skewering the Clinton administration -
on issues ranging from his pre-election land grab in Utah to the
225,000 pages of rules that have been added to the federal register
over the past four years.
Considering the withering criticism Warren had for a previous
administration, we can only imagine what he would have said about
the current president. Recall this example of what Warren said about the
1990 debate over the Clean Air Act:
". . . in the current environmental debate on Capitol Hill, the
hole in the White House and legislative heads may be larger and more
permanent than the one that shows up every fall in the ozone layer
over the Antarctic -- and more dangerous to our economic and ecological
Just imagine what Warren might have written about the Clinton-Gore
mantra -- "protect Medicare, Medicaid, education and the environment."
Or what he would have said about a vice president who has a portrait of
Rachel Carson hanging in his office.
Remember, this is the same vice president, who is his 1992 book,
Earth in the Balance, said that the automobile was a mortal threat to our
national security. In addition, I bet that Warren would have been the first
to point out that the president's so-called bridge to the 21st century is
a toll bridge.
In a world where too many people get their news from Oprah Winfrey
and Geraldo Rivera, we need more journalists like Warren Brooks. And
fortunately, more journalists -- like John Stossel, last year's speaker at this
dinner -- are rising to the challenge.
Just yesterday, for example, two op-eds in the Wall Street Journal,
one by Julian Simon, the other by David Rothbard and Craig Rucker,
debunked for the the umpteenth time -- the myths about a population
explosion and fear of famine currently being propagated at the U.N.
Food Summit in Rome.
We learn from their able scholarship that people worldwide are better
fed living longer and healthier lives. More importantly, we learned that
continuously improving farming methods are more than capable of feeding
a growing world population.
As the father of triplet daughters, I had been concemed that I had
unwittingly contributed to an impending worldwide disaster. I was
especially concerned because my little Maggie does not like to
share her food. Let me tell -- no one is going to take apple juice away
Seriously, there is no doubt that when it comes to environmental
joumalism, those who follow in Warren's footsteps are outnumbered
by those who don't. But we have an ally on our side that usually wins
in the end -- the truth. And I have developed a method of getting back
at the fearmongers, especially liberal fearmongers
I'll say to them, "Did you know that one in four liberals is at risk of
developing cancer and that one in five liberals will die from it?"
Of course, I don't tell them that conservatives -- indeed all Americans
-- face the same risk of cancer.
I should note, however, that Warren wrote about much more than
environmental issues. Often, he wrote about a subject dear to my hear
-- taxes, and the economic benefits of cutting them. For example, he
wrote in his column in June 1991:
"One of the genius strokes of the U.S. Constitution is that it
provides the one thing most governmental systems lack, namely
competition within government itself. The federalist system still allows
states to pursue varying tax, fiscal and regulatory policies that strongly
influence their economic activity. This means states automatically
become 'laboratories' for economic policy. Unfortunately, liberal think
tanks have all but ignored this fertile field for research -- and with
good reason: There is a virtually unblemished record of
strong economic performance in low-tax states, and vice-versa.
As usual, Warren was right. And Michigan's success story proves it.
Just a few months after I became Michigan's governor, I invited
Warren, Tom Bray and several other friends over for dinner. At the
time, Michigan's economy was mired in recession. Unemployment
was approaching ten percent.
The state budget was nearly $2 billion in the red and the deficit
was growing. At the same time, taxes -- especially property taxes
-- were skyrocketing and welfare was becoming a way of life for
more and more families. A tent city of protestor had camped out
on the lawn of the State Capitol.
Twenty-one tax cuts later, Michigan is a far different place. Twenty-one
tax cuts have put more than $6.5 billion back into the wallets and
purses of Michigan taxpayers. I'm talking about the biggest property
tax cut in history, cutting income taxes, raising exemptions, eliminating
inheritance taxes and most taxes on pensions. We're even phasing
out Michigan's capital gains tax.
The result has been an economic turnaround that is the envy of
America. Our unemployment rate has been below five percent
every month this year. In fact, we are headed for the lowest
unemployment rate since 1969.
That's not the only good news. Since 1991, Michigan employers
have created more than 500,000 new jobs. Over the same period,
personal income in Michigan has climbed more than 25 percent --
the fastest growth rate in the nation.
Since 1994, more than 100,000 families have left the welfare
rolls and achieved independence. Michigan's budget has been
balanced five years in a row and our state's Rainy Day Fund
is at an historic high of more than $1 billion.
And I should note that we have accomplished all of this, not
inspired by Washington, but in spite of Washington . . .
. . . in spite of the biggest tax increase in history
. . . in spite of two vetoes of welfare reform
. . . and in spite of an EPA that has increasingly overstepped
its bounds and usurped the lawmaking responsibilities of Congress
and stepped on the state's ability to implement environmental reform.
Indeed, I am reminded of a story that NYU law professor
David Schoenbrod tells in his book, Power Without Responsibility,
about the battles between Franklin Roosevelt and the Supreme
Court concerning the limits of federal power.
Schoenbrod -- who is also a scholar at the Manhattan and Cato
Institutes -- cites a case in which the Supreme Court struck down
several provisions of FDR's National Industrial Recovery Act --
legislation creating a federal agency to write and enforce
its own laws dictating wages, prices and production schedules.
At the time, Justice Louis Brandies told a top Roosevelt aide:
"This is the end of this business of centralization, and I want
you to go back and tell the president that we are not going to let
this government centralize everything. It's come to an end. As for
your young men, you call them together and tell them to get out
of Washington -- tell them to go home to the states. That is where
they must do their work."
My friends, we have been doing the work in Michigan. As governor
of a state with more than 3,000 miles of coastline on the nation's
most precious fresh water resources -- the Great Lakes -- I know
that the quality of our natural resources directly affect the lives an
livelihoods of all our citizens.
I believe strongly that a healthy environment and a healthy economy
are mutually sustainable. You cannot have one without the other. On
a microeconomic level, I also believe that good environmental policy
is good business. However, the unfortunate reality id that government
policies designed to protect or to clean up the environment that do not
recognize this basic principle of mutual sustainability are usually
For example, consider the federal Superfund program. Rather
than directing limited resources to achieve the most cost effective
reduction in health risk to the public, Superfund has spawned endless
lawsuits and legal wrangling, much-delayed and ever more costly
cleanups, and contaminated sites that remain unused, undeveloped
and a threat to public health. Indeed, I am told that as much as 80
percent of the funding for this program goes to pay lawyers.
Maybe we ought to rename Superfund the "Superlawyer Fund."
I am especially concerned about the program's explicit failure
to rehabilitate urban "brownfield" sites and to make them available
for redevelopment. In a scientific survey of Michigan's environmental;
problems. The inability to reuse such urban sites in favor of suburban
and rural "Greenfield" was identified as our state's top concern.
The current CERCLA liability scheme of strict, joint and several
and retroactive liability is part of the problem. While the system
is labeled "polluter's pay," in reality it is "deep pockets pay." As
a result, redevelopment efforts are stymied as cleanup costs skyrocket
and liability disputes escalate.
Until last year, Michigan's cleanup rules had mirrored the
federal CERCLA liability scheme and the lack of results, especially
in our inner cities, was all too evident. With tlie support of a wide
geographical range of city mayors, in June 1995, I signed legislation
that replaced strict liability for owners and operators with a liability
standard based on causation.
This approach retains the concept that the polluters should pay by
still holding the parties that caused the problem liable for cleaning it up.
We also enacted a blanket exemption from liability for existing contaminated
culpable purchasers and occupants of contaminated property.
In addition, we have strengthened and expanded liability protections
available to lenders who foreclose on contaminated property. I strongly
encourage identical liability protections be included in Superfund in
each of theses areas. Such reforms are vital to state and city efforts
to encourage reuse of contaminated property.
Further encouragement can be provided by cleanup standards based
on land use. Recent reforms in Michigan allow us to use containment
remedies and land use controls in lieu of performing costly remediations.
Combined with a single risk level and specific soil and groundwater
cleanup criteria, we can develop remedial action plans for sites of
environmental contamination far more quickly than Records of
Decision can be developed under Superfund.
Our new cleanup standards allow us to use our limited resources to get
the best protection for our citizens. Indeed, we estimate that these reforms
will reduce the cost of cleaning a site by up to 50 percent while still
providing fully protective remedies.
The results so far have been impressive. A study of our reforms that was
released earlier this year showed an increase in investment by the private
sector of more than $220 million and the creation of more than 2,300 jobs
in redevelopment projects.
In contract, on the federal level, under the current Superfund law we have
the worst of all possible worlds: Burdensome cleanup rules and
considerable duplication between the federal and state government
serve to waste money, delay cleanup projects and deny accountability
to the public.
Superfund is only one example of a federal environmental policy
that is counterproductive, costly, and cumbersome to the states. I wish
I had time to discuss all my concerns with management of the EPA, but
let me just briefly highlight a few.
First, the Clinton administration has proposed stricter clean air
standards that threaten to put virtually every major metropolitan area
in Michigan and America into noncompliance. The result would be
severe restrictions on economic growth in those areas, especially
the very same inner cities that desperately need growth and new jobs.
Second, the EPA has launched an all-out assault on states that have
enacted environmental audit laws that encourage companies to
perform such audits and promptly report and correct violations. In fact,
the EPA has punished such states by interfering in the state delegation
of federal programs like the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and
other environmental statutes.
Heavyhanded, autocratic, and unelected bureaucrats at the EPA
are telling the states that we are guilty until proven innocent. Even
worse, we most likely face similar punishments for implementing
emissions trading programs and wetlands mitigation banks. To
the EPA, no good deed by the states goes unpunished.
Third, bowing to pressure from environmental extremists,
the EPA recently took unprecedented steps to stall a solution
mining project in Michigan's Upper Peninsula, delaying the project
for at least 18 months and costing at least 100 jobs.
The reversal of EPA policy came as a shock to the mining
compacy, the workers and state officials, for the EPA had been
working closely with them for two years and had previously
approved the project.
The irony is that an idle copper mine threatens nearby
Lake Superior. An active solution mine would permanently
protect the lake. The end result of the EPA's meddling? Jobs
lost and a Great Lake threatened.
Fourth, a recently leaked memo from the EPA reveals a secret
Clinton plan to raise the federal gas tax by 50 cents, increase CAFE
standards and tighten auto emission restrictions -- all without the approval
of Congress. I would call this secret plan a disaster for Michigan --
the nation's number one auto-producing state!
Using an obscure section of legislation enacted in the early 1960's,
the author of this memo claims the president has the authority to
enact such measures based on national security concerns. That tells me
we need more CEI fellows standing careful watch over an administration
that accepts environmental extremism as gospel and rejects common
sense cost-benefit analysis as heresy.
That's why they punished the president for his 1.7 million acre land
grab in Utah by defeating that state's only Democratic Congressman,
Bill Orton. That's why they re-elected a Republican Congress for the
first time in 70 years. That's why states from Maine to Montana
rejected extremist ballot measures.
In Michigan, for example, by a two to one margin, voters rejected a
measure sponsored by animal rights activists that would have virtually
eliminated bear hunting.
In our democracy, that is our saving grace -- the vote of the people.
And that is the best reflection of Warren Brookes' legacy -- a voting
public that is better informed on issues from the environment to the economy.
The voters don't make the right choice every time, but with the wise
balance of power devised by our founding fathers, I believe that
America is back on track to developing an environmental policy
based on sound science, relative risk, and free market principles.
We won't get there overnight, but we will get there. That's our
promise to Warren Brookes and his legacy to us.
Thank you very much.
About CEI | Public Policy
Alex J. Sagady & Associates Email: email@example.com
Environmental Consulting and Database Systems
PO Box 39 East Lansing, MI 48826-0039
(517) 332-6971 (voice); (517) 332-8987 (fax)
ENVIRO-MICH: Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action. Archives at
Postings to: firstname.lastname@example.org For info, send email to
email@example.com with a one-line message body of "info enviro-mich"