Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (62171)	10/21/2004 10:48:30 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Bush broke promises about environment By CECIL ANDRUS, BRUCE BABBITT AND STEWART UDALL GUEST COLUMNISTS Seattle Post-Intelligencer Thursday, October 21, 2004 Editor's note: This column was written by Cecil Andrus, Bruce Babbitt and Stewart Udall, all past secretaries of the interior. As we saw in the Oct. 7 presidential debate, there is vigorous and appropriate discussion over which candidate can do more to protect the country from outside threats. Yet there has been precious little debate over which candidate will do more to protect the air, water, soil and land that sustain our country. As we stand vigilant guard against the attack of any outside enemy, we also should make sure we suffer no injury from within: from the pollution of our air, the poisoning of our water or the exploitation of our lands. Unfortunately, instead of protecting our environment, it appears that the current administration has developed a one-sided test for setting policy on the environment -- it simply asks: "What does industry want?" It might have made sense to ask, "What does industry want?" if it had been proved that the goals of industry and the interests of the environment were in direct conflict. But all experience in modern times has proved just the opposite. In the '90s, history's longest economic expansion and largest budget surplus coincided with cleaner air, water and soil and one of the greatest records of land preservation since Teddy Roosevelt. We have proved again and again that the economy and the environment can flourish together -- but only if government insists on it. It's not the job of corporations to protect the environment; their job is to make profits. But if government writes the laws, enforces them and finances its programs in the right ways, corporations can make profits in ways that don't harm the environment. In short, if Americans believe in environmental health, we have to back it up with the power of the U.S. government. Nature cannot protect itself. Four years ago, George W. Bush campaigned as if he believed government had a role in protecting our environment. He promised to reduce the backlog on maintenance in national parks, which so many vacationing American families count on to re-connect to nature and to one another. Instead of reducing the backlog, it's increased. It's worse today than when he started. He also promised to fully fund the Land & Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), which for nearly 40 years has put in effect an elegantly simple idea: Set aside a slice ($900 million) of the billions of dollars of revenue the United States receives each year from Outer Continental Shelf petroleum revenues to help buy and protect land for recreation and conservation. It was a popular promise. He's broken it every year. Instead of fully funding this sensible program for land protection, he has more than cut it in half. Here in Washington, this broken promise is threatening one of our great treasures -- Ebey's Landing National Reserve, which protects the working farms and adjacent tidelands on Whidbey Island. Ebey's Landing, which lies within the view of Seattle, was a new type of American park where the land stayed in private hands and continued the farming heritage. Unfortunately, this land is threatened by ever encroaching urbanization. Local dairy farmers and other landowners would like to sell easements to the National Park Service in order to preserve the scenic farmland and continue the traditional way of life. The Park Service would like to buy the easements. But the Bush administration has refused to provide the needed funds. The money Bush promised when he wanted your vote is not there -- and it may well cost the people of Washington and the nation an irreplaceable landscape. The three of us have the experience of nearly half a century of public service -- in the president's Cabinet, the governor's office and Congress. Never have we seen a wider divide between the two presidential candidates on these issues. But this is more than a matter of the environment; it goes to the heart of how we choose our leaders. Bush promised you he would fully fund efforts to protect this land. He has not kept his promise. He's gambling that you won't do anything about it. In a few short weeks, we'll know if he was right. seattlepi.nwsource.com