March 23, 1970
Page 8677
THE HARD WORK OF ENVIRONMENT – ADDRESS BY SENATOR MUSKIE
Mr. HART. Mr. President, the Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE) is the leading Senate expert on pollution problems as chairman of the Air and Water Pollution Subcommittee.
In his remarks at the University of Michigan Environmental Teach-In March 13, the Senator outlined the philosophical and political background of today's earth crisis. And he again suggested a National Survival Corps for youthful activities to do the "hard work of environment."
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of Mr. MUSKIE's Michigan speech be printed at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection the remarks were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
DEALING WITH THE ROOTS OF THE CRISIS
(Remarks by U.S. Senator EDMUND S. MUSKIE)
"Every individual carries a set of about a hundred thousand genes – an inheritance he has received from all the living beings who preceded him and concentrated their qualities in him. That is the heritage he will pass on. If all the genes from the world's three and a half billion people were baked together, they would form a small ball with a diameter of about one millimeter. The contents of this small ball is what holds us together as a species, and is, essentially, all we own as human beings."
We do not own very much, and we are spread quite thin. All of what we own – our total environment of human and natural resources – is stretched around the earth no thicker than the skin around an apple. Any scar, any scratch, any nick can be fatal.
This is all we have. There are no replacements, no surplus stocks with which to replenish our supplies. We hang together by tenuous bonds that are now strained as they have never been strained before – and as they never must be strained again. We live in a world of limited natural resources and fragile human resources, and we cannot survive an undeclared war on our future. We must lay down all of our weapons of self-annihilation.
THE ROOTS OF THE CRISIS
The Teach-In this evening has focused on the roots of the environmental crisis. This is important, because unless we understand what has brought us to this confrontation with our future, we will continue to make the same mistakes we have made in the past. We can no longer afford the luxury of environmental error.
The roots of the environmental crisis stretch as far back as the nation itself. Life in America was cheap in the beginning. Natural resources were plentiful, and the idea that there had to be limits on our material growth never entered our minds.
Thus, early farming paid scant attention to conserving the land that produced the crops. We took trees from the forests without thinking of the possibility that our timber supply was not endless. Soon after industry first came to America, some of our rivers were seriously polluted and the air in someof our cities and towns was foul.
Even while our cities grew and became more crowded, enough Americans could escape from the confines of soot and clutter so that the voices of those who were trapped were never really heard.
As long as there was enough affluence in city, the squalor of the tenements was obscured. As long as people left the slums, they forgot their misery.
And when people left the urban-industrial center, what did they leave behind? True, they escaped from foul air, dirty water, and littered and noisy streets. But they also escaped from the tenements, the disease, the ugliness, and the poverty of the city.
So pollution was isolated by the very size and openness of America. A river here, a forest there, a few of our larger, more industrialized cities – these early examples of environmental destruction. seemed a small price to pay for our prosperity. Most people could escape, and those who could not were never really heard. This was the frontier ethic: America pushing ahead and getting ahead, with an unlimited future – with a manifest destiny ahead of us.
Now we find that we have overreached our destiny. The frontier ethic helped us build the strongest nation in the world. But it also led us to believe that our natural and human resources were endless, that our rivers could absorb as much sewage as we could pour in them, that there was automatic equal opportunity for everyone, that our air would always be clean, and that hunger and poverty didn't really exist in America.
Our problems are not really new. Rather, they have multiplied. They have spread to all our rivers and all our cities. Everyone is affected by them.
The frontier ethic that we never really abandoned has caught up with us. There is nowhere left for escape.
We have reached a point where man, his environment, and his industrial technology intersect.
We confront our deteriorated environment, our devouring technology and our fellow men.
Relative harmony has become a three-cornered war – a war where everyone loses.
No society has ever reached this point before, no society has ever solved this problem. We have no past experience to guide us.
So we will need all the enthusiasm, all the concern, and all the dedication we can muster. At the same time there are some dangers involved in this surge of concern.
THE TOTAL HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
I hope that the issue of environmental protection does not become a smokescreen that will obscure the overall crisis of life in America.
I am concerned that the environment will obscure the unmet challenge of equal opportunity, and there appears to be good cause for concern.
The great danger of the environmental issue is that we may not recognize that the total environment is at stake in America.
Whatever form your efforts take after Earth Day, the focus of your efforts must be man – man today, man tomorrow, and man in relation to all the other forms of life which share our biosphere. And in addition to the air, the water, and the land, man's environment includes the shape of the communities in which he lives, his home, his schools, his places of work, and his society.
The environmental conscience that has gripped the nation should hold great promise – not only for our air, our water and our land, but also for the future of people searching for ways out of poverty, hunger and neglect. The environmental conscience may be the way to turn the nation around.
The study of ecology – man's relationship with his environment – should finally teach us that our relationships with each other are just as intricate and just as delicate as those with our natural environment. We cannot afford to correct our history of abusing nature and neglect the continuing abuse of our fellow man.
We should have learned by this time in our development as a nation that we must find ways to live together in peace. And we should have learned that the only way to achieve peace among ourselves is to insure that all Americans have equal access to a healthy environment – to a healthy total environment.
That can mean nothing less than equal access to good schools for our children, to meaningful job opportunities, to adequate medical care, and to decent housing.
For the last ten years we have been groping toward the realization that the total environment is at stake.
We have seen the destruction of poverty, and declared a war on it.
We have seen the ravages of hunger, and declared a war on it.
We have seen the costs of crime, and declared a war on it.
And now we have awakened to the pollution of our environment, and we have declared another war.
We have fought too many losing battles in those wars to continue this piece-meal approach to self-preservation.
The only strategy that makes sense is a total strategy to protect the total environment.
We must do it now – not when inflation eases, not in a few years, not sometime soon, but now. For the sake of the environment if nothing else, we ought to find it possible to put-off grand tours of space, faster planes, and greater overkill.
This will not be merely a summertime war. The protection of our environment will be a long, hard pull. The action you take as students, will be important, but the greatest challenges will come when you assume your roles in the communities of the future.
We must forge a wholesale change in our priorities and our values. We must redefine our standard of living, reflecting the knowledge that both our human and natural resources are at stake.
This will not be easy. Walter Lippmann, stated the problem very well when he said that "The supreme question before mankind . . . is how men will be able to make themselves willing and able to save themselves."
We must turn away from uncontrolled economic and technological growth that ignores the increasing strain on the environment. As we seek to control this growth, the kinds of difficult decisions you will have to make will be surprising. As community leaders – and as students – you must see that the right decisions are made.
Our technology has reached a point in its development where it is producing more than we want, more than we need, and more than we can live with.
We have to learn to choose, to say no, and to give up some luxuries. These kinds of decisions are the acid test of our commitment to a healthy environment. Right now we are failing that test.
Look at the budget for 1971. That "balanced budget" represents shamefully unbalanced priorities.
That budget "balances" $275 million for the SST against $106 million for air pollution control. It "balances" $3.4 billion for the space program against $1.4 billion for housing. And it "balances" $7.3 billion for arms research and development against $1.4 billion for higher education.
It is a sham to say that we cannot afford the protection of our environment – just yet; or the fight against hunger and poverty – at this time; or homes and medical care for our people – for a few years. We can afford these programs now, if we admit that there are less important programs that we cannot afford.
These are the kinds of choices that have to be reversed. If they are not reversed, our concern and rhetoric will mean nothing.
There are other decisions that must be made, and they are ones in which students should take a hand.
POLITICAL ACTION
First, concerned students should take advantage of the laws that are now on the books. While we have accumulated and inherited most of our environmental problems, we have also accumulated some legislation.
The laws are not now as strong as we would like, but they provide an important start. The Air and Water Quality Acts were passed before the environmental crisis was universally recognized. In the hope that the public would become concerned, we sought to guarantee the right of the public to effective participation in the standards-setting process.
Water and Air Quality standards are being set in the States now. These standards and the implementation and enforcement plans must comply with criteria issued by the Federal Government. But they are set at the State level so that the public can participate. The public can decide what kind of air and water they want and how they want to achieve it.
If the opportunity for influencing these decisions is abdicated on a "let George-do-it-basis," then this procedure will fail. On the other hand, if students and other concerned citizens seize these opportunities, we can have tough, effective Air and Water Quality standards.
These provisions for public participation are the greatest promise for clean air and water we have, and we intend to build on them.
Once Air and Water Quality standards are set, they must be enforced. I have suggested amending both the Air and Water Quality Acts so that citizens can bring class suits to enforce these standards, extending the concept of public participation to the enforcement process. But the primary responsibility for enforcement will rest with the State agencies. These agencies should be reminded – over and over again – that standards must be enforced.
You must take your campaign where most of the important battles are fought – to the State and local levels.
Too many people, for too long, have assumed that participating in a democracy begins and ends at the ballot box. State and local agencies charged with the protection of the environment have functioned in the abyss of public neglect. Those who have been able to afford constant representation in legislative lobbies and in City Halls have dominated the decision-making process – often only because of their constant presence
The public has abdicated civil responsibility, and the result has been devastating. It could worsen. If we destroy our environment through public neglect of the political process, we will have only ourselves to blame. The public must combine the power of voices, votes and pocketbooks to make its presence felt.
CITIZEN'S LOBBY
I hope that all of you who have participated in the Teach-In will move beyond these demonstrations of concern to continuing political involvement.
A Citizen's Lobby for Environmental Protection would be an excellent way to do it. A Citizen's Lobby could voice effective demands for tough legislation. It could support candidates for public office who have shown a continuing commitment to strong environmental legislation. And it could bring pressure to bear to spend the money that must be spent.
At the same time, a Citizen's Lobby could keep a watchful eye on industry. Selective purchasing policies may be a means to discourage the use of non-degradable packaging, non-return bottles, or phosphate-heavy detergents. These policies would also encourage industries to install the best possible pollution control equipment.
Student members of Lobby could use employment interviews as an opportunity to question the interviewer about his industry's commitment to environmental quality.
The creation of a successful Citizen's Lobby will not be easy, but Earth Day could be an important first step. Government and industry will respond to the concern expressed here this week and all across the nation next month only if your voices and your power are directed at the political process.
EDUCATION
Everyone must be brought into the act to protect the environment. The educational task will be enormous.
We must create new values for life in a kind of world that man has never known – a world of increasingly delicately balanced between man and his environment.
The University of Michigan and a few other colleges and universities have developed comprehensive programs of environmental and ecological studies, but there is much more that we can and should do.
First, we should broaden the mission of our land-grant universities. We must move from a production-oriented educational system to a system designed to preserve a balanced and healthy environment. Our universities must reach out to the people of their States with programs of environmental extension services.
Second, we should develop a system of National Environmental Laboratories to explore
the effects of technology and growth on the human and natural environments. Finally, Teach-Ins must become Teach-Outs. The urgent message you are developing this week at the University of Michigan must be taken to the people of the whole State of Michigan in the coming months and years.
NATIONAL SURVIVAL CORPS
While we educate, we must also act. The energies and commitment of young people who want to do something should not be lost because there is nothing to do but talk.
Pollution emission sources must be monitored; waste treatment plants must be built and operated; debris must be cleared from our cities, our parks, and our waterways. This is the hard work of environmental protection.
If young people are willing to do this work, then there should be a way to do it. I would suggest the creation of a National Survival Corps for this purpose, and plan to introduce legislation in the Senate to establish it. The Corps could work on Federal projects and lands, reclaiming mines and forests and performing emergency tasks such as oil-spill clean up. At the same time, members of the Corps would be available to States and cities for similar purposes.
This suggestion is an example of the flood of ideas engendered by this sense of urgency. I thought the National Survival Corps was a good idea. Then Secretary Hickel voiced a similar thought. I still think I have a good idea.
However we fight this battle for survival, man must learn to live with his environment and with himself. This is a very small world, and it is crowded. We have little time to learn what we should have been learning for thousands of years.
The Santa Barbara Declaration of Environmental Rights put this thought very well. "Today is the first day of the rest of our life on this planet. We will begin anew."
We cannot really begin anew because we cannot recreate the earth. But we can protect and enhance what we have left. It is about time man learned to appreciate what he has been given.