[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]
E-M:/ Sagady's State of the State message
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enviro-Mich message from Patrick Diehl <patmec@voyager.net>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alex Sagady:
No one dislikes John Engler more than I do, for a myriad of reasons. I
think, however, that you do a significant disservice to not only the
environmental community but to the larger community of folks involved with
public policy formation when you resort to juvenile name-calling. I am
embarrassed to know someone who begins his e-mail postings with "fat-boy
draft-dodging guv." Impressive display of professionalism, Alex.
Pat Diehl
At 01:26 PM 1/29/98 -0500, you wrote:
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Enviro-Mich message from asagady@sojourn.com
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>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
>new millenia!!
>
>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
>ridiculed and
>criticized all manner of environmental protection and conservation efforts
in
>his columns.
>
>=======
>
>
> 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
>thrilled
>at the degree to which idea-generating organizations like CEI, the Cato
>Institute
>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
>writing.
>
> 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
>collective
>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
>health."
>
> 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
>from Maggie.
>
> 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
>counterproductive.
>
> 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
>administratively
>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: asagady@sojourn.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
>http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/enviro-mich/
>
>Postings to: enviro-mich@great-lakes.net For info, send email to
>majordomo@great-lakes.net with a one-line message body of "info
enviro-mich"
>==============================================================
>
>
Patrick Diehl
Associate Director
Michigan Environmental Council
119 Pere Marquette Dr., Suite 2A
Lansing, Michigan 48912
phone: 517-487-9539
fax: 517-487-9541
e-mail: patmec@voyager.net
==============================================================
ENVIRO-MICH: Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action. Archives at
http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/enviro-mich/
Postings to: enviro-mich@great-lakes.net For info, send email to
majordomo@great-lakes.net with a one-line message body of "info enviro-mich"
==============================================================