June 4, 1970
Page 18286
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 207 – INTRODUCTION OF A JOINT RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, on behalf of myself, and Senators JACKSON, MAGNUSON and RANDOLPH, and Senators BAKER, BAYH, BIBLE, BOGGS, CANNON, CHURCH, COOPER, EAGLETON, GRAVEL, HARRIS, HATFIELD, INOUYE, KENNEDY, MCGEE, MANSFIELD, METCALF, MONDALE, MONTOYA, MOSS, NELSON, PACKWOOD, PELL, PERCY, SPONG, STEVENS, TYDINGS, YARBOROUGH, YOUNG of Ohio, and WILLIAMS of New Jersey, I introduce a joint resolution to establish in the Congress a forum for the assessment of present and future problems affecting man and his environment.
The legislation is an expanded and revised version of Senate Resolution 78 which would establish a similar Senate Select Committee on Technology and the Human Environment. Senate Resolution 78 and its counterparts in the 89th and 90th Congress were the subjects of extensive hearings by the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations and were reported favorably to the Senate Government Operations Committee. This new resolution extends the concept of Senate Resolution 78 to include membership from both Houses of Congress.
Mr. President, we live in the midst of a scientific and technological revolution. While we have learned many things from science and technology, we have learned many things about science and technology at the same time.
On the one hand, we have learned that the potential of our scientific and technological expertise as a force for good in the world is great. In a few generations, we have added more to our store of knowledge and understanding than the accumulation of thousands of years of human thought. We have explored our surroundings and tested our abilities so thoroughly that we have created more knowledge than we have time to digest. On the other hand, we stand at the threshold of losing control over our own genius. We have come so far so fast that we have lost some of our sense of direction. We may have lost more than we have gained. We have discovered that the human and natural resources of our environment may be threatened by the very technology that has made America strong.
The difficult choices, the tough decisions, are just ahead of us. The longer we ignore the impact of our technological development on the natural environment, the more our days will be numbered. The longer we ignore the human price of technological development, the greater will be the price of life itself.
For all we have learned, we still know too little about the effects of what we have done with our scientific and technological genius. We know even less about the effects of what we might do.
In hearings on Senate Resolution 78, Dr. Barry Commoner, of Washington University in St. Louis emphasized this point in his testimony:
Before the development of modern technology, human beings breathed air consisting largely of oxygen, nitrogen, some carbon dioxide and water vapor. Now the air carries into our lungs, as well oxides of sulfur and nitrogen, carbon monoxide, flakes of asbestos, soot and dust, and a variety of man made organic and radioactive substances. It is often said that technology has transformed man. Indeed it has. The new technological man, unlike his predecessors, carries strontium-90 in his bones, iodine-131 in his lungs. We know little about the separate effects of these and the many other new agents which burden our body. We know even less about their possible interactions, which may be far more harmful than the sum of the separate effects.
As legislators, we are responsible for understanding these changes. We must be able to make accurate predictions about new technologies and we must apply this knowledge to our decisions regarding environmental protection, resource development, food production, transportation, power supply, education, communication, health, and employment.
We should assess the undesirable consequences of technological change and devise an early warning system to protect our human and natural resources.
We should evaluate our governmental institutions at all levels to determine their capability to adapt to these technological demands.
And we should analyze the impact of technological change on the people of our Nation so that we can help inform them.
It is not the intent of this resolution to establish a committee which would infringe the substantive jurisdiction of any standing committee. The joint committee would have no jurisdiction over legislation or powers of legislative oversight. Rather, it would provide a source of information and analysis not now available to the Congress. Information which the standing committees do not have the time nor the mandate to develop for themselves.
Standing committees are increasingly burdened with legislative proposals within their special fields, and the committee staffs have little opportunity to explore the broad relationships between other fields and the environment. The hearings developed by the joint committee would provide Members of Congress, their assistants, and committee staff members with information for the development of legislative and executive policy.
The standing legislative committees involved with the environment should help determine the areas of inquiry which they felt were most relevant to their requirements. They could help guide the effort of the joint committee along lines which would assure maximum benefit to the standing committees.
Through its hearings and reports, the joint committee also would make an important contribution to the executive branch, to scholars and academic institutions, to professional. organizations, to State and local governments, and to the public at large.
The need for this joint committee has been emphasized by the testimony of eminent scientists, educators, scholars and government officials during hearings held on Senate Resolution 298 in the 89th Congress, Senate Resolution 68 in the 90th Congress and on Senate Resolution 78 in the 91st Congress.
The concept of a Joint Committee for Technology Assessment was recommended by the National Academy of Sciences in a report to the Committee on Science and Astronautics of the House of Representatives in July 1969.
A futher recommendation has been made to the Environmental Studies Board of the National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Engineering in a report on "Institutions for Effective Management of the Environment." The study group recommended that–
The activities of the executive branch in establishing environmental policies, evaluating and overseeing their implementation, and in general managing environmental affairs should, we believe, relate to a more broadly effective congressional organization than now exists. At present several committees of both Houses of the Congress have jurisdictions that relate to environmental matters. And while we would not presume to suggest a reorganization of congressional committees, we do recommend that a joint committee of the Congress, comprised of the chairmen and ranking minority members of the relevant committees of both Houses, would provide a much needed focal point for the informed discussion of environmental affairs.
Such a joint committee would provide an open forum for annual hearings relating to the President's report, in which the important issues would be discussed and debated in public. This would, of course, in no way infringe upon existing jurisdictions relating to appropriations or other congressional activities, though careful consideration should be given to organizational realignments in the future.
During the 1969 hearings, Dr. Emmanuel Mesthene, director of the program on technology and society at Harvard University, observed that–
The jurisdictions of existing committees and subcommittees coincide with the jurisdictions of the individual agencies or the individual economic sectors – the Armed Services, agriculture, industry, and commerce, space – which are charged with technological development. This tends to lead to a fragmentation of concern to a partial view of the implications of technological development.
It seems to me, therefore, that a select cross-jurisdictional committee could be particularly responsive to this defect in the existing committee structure, because it would be able to take an overall view and to concentrate specifically on the third-party implications, the indirect effects of technological development.
In 1967, Dr. James A. Shannon, Director of the National Institutes of Health, testified that Congress and the executive branch have approached environmental problems on an individual basis, and he endorsed the comprehensive approach of a study committee. He said:
The holistic approach has been missing and the result has been widespread fragmentation of responsibilities. This way of doing business has diffused the discharge of Federal responsibilities. It has tended to confuse State and local relationships to these Federal efforts.
In 1967, Prof. Roger Revelle, director of the Center for Population Studies, Harvard University, noted that–
We live in a world of such rapid change and so beset by our own actions, that thoughtful men everywhere are trying to pierce the curtain of the future with an anxiety and intensity that did not exist in past generations.
Very few great problems of the real world can be solved within one discipline. They have to be solved by many disciplines together.
Revelle viewed a joint committee as the means for bringing the knowledge of these disciplines together and providing the Government with a forum for thinking about them over longer time horizons.
Congress, as a whole, must develop a way to inform itself on the issues of the environment. We must insure that our public institutions have the capacity to evaluate the environment together with other disciplines and the ability to reduce the hazards of future technological development to an absolute minimum. These tasks of organization and commitment may pose an even greater challenge to American government than the ultimate prescription and implementation of solutions themselves.
The environment we pass on to our children will reflect our ability to define the problems we face as much as our determination to solve them. If we fail to complete the work we have begun, our children will have to pay more than the price of our inaction. They will bear the tragedy of our failure to protect them against environmental changes which can disrupt life processes and impair physical and mental health.
The future of our society depends on how well we at the Federal level provide leadership and answers concerning the critical relationship between our human and natural resources.
Therefore, I urge prompt consideration of this resolution. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the resolution be printed in the RECORD at this point.
I also ask unanimous consent that this resolution and House Joint Resolution 1117, a similar resolution passed by the House and now being held at the desk, be jointly referred to the Committees on Public Works, Commerce, and Interior with instruction to report back to the Senate by July 15.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. ALLOTT. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, and I shall not, I shall do so only for the purpose of establishing a principle in the RECORD.
I have discussed this matter with the distinguished Senator from Maine. And I want to make it clear that in this instance I do not speak for the chairman of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs (Mr. JACKSON), because I have not discussed it with him, although I would hope that his ideas would be similar to mine.
Mr. President, is it possible while objecting to make a parliamentary inquiry?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Would the Senator yield for that purpose?
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I yield for that purpose.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state his parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. ALLOTT. Mr. President, I would like to inquire of the Chair if this matter were handled in this way by unanimous consent, would it then be regarded as a precedent of the Senate?
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.ALLEN). It would not be a precedent because this is done by unanimous consent. A joint referral could only be made by unanimous consent. No precedent would be established.
Mr. ALLOTT. Mr. President, I thank the Presiding Officer for that answer. I am very happy to hear that answer. Certainly, I am not anxious – in fact, I am very unanxious – to set up a procedure which would be a precedent in the Senate.
The Senator from Maine and I have discussed this matter. And we have both agreed that as a general principle it would be something that we would not want to establish as a precedent.
Mr. President, with this understanding, I think I am satisfied with the answer and we will have the hearings, the bill will be reported, and we can then handle it in the regular manner without getting into the setting of a precedent.
This was what greatly concerned me about the situation.
Mr. President, I have no further remarks on the matter.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, may I say that the distinguished Senator from Colorado has accurately reported the substance of our discussion.
We both agree that it would be undesirable that this sort of procedure establish a precedent.
I concur with the distinguished Senator that when more than one Senate committee has jurisdiction over a piece of legislation, the desirable approach is for each committee to handle the legislation separately from the point of view of its own jurisdiction and discharge that responsibility and then in the regular course have the matter handled by the Senate as a whole.
It is the unusual nature of this resolution, the subject matter of which covers the jurisdiction of at least three Senate committees, that finally persuaded us to take this unusual course.
I concur with the Senator. It should be regarded as unusual, it should not be regarded as setting a precedent, and any subsequent proposal of this nature should be considered on its merits at the time it is advanced.
So, Mr. President, with the approval of the Senator from Colorado I ask unanimous consent for the referral which I have requested.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. ALLEN). The joint resolutions will be received; and, without objection, will be jointly referred to the Committees on Public Works, Commerce, and Interior and Insular Affairs, with instructions to report back to the Senate by July 15, 1970; and, without objection, the Senate joint resolution will be printed in the RECORD.
The joint resolutions (S.J. Res. 207 and H.J. Res. 1117) were received, read twice by their titles, and ordered, by unanimous consent, to be referred jointly to the Committees on Public Works, Commerce, and Interior and Insular Affairs.
Senate Joint Resolution 207 was ordered to be printed in the RECORD as follows:
S.J. RES. 207
Joint resolution to establish a Joint Committee on the Environment
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That
(a) there is established a joint congressional committee which shall be known as the Joint Committee on the Environment (hereafter in this joint resolution referred to as the "committee") consisting of eleven Members of the Senate to be appointed by the President of the Senate, and eleven Members of the House of Representatives to be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Of the eleven Members of the Senate appointed under this Subsection, six Members shall be from the majority party, and five Members shall be from the minority party. Of the eleven Members of the House of Representatives appointed under this subsection, six members shall be from the majority party, and five Members shall be from the minority party. In the appointment of members of the committee under this subsection, the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall give due consideration to providing representation on the committee from the various committees of the Senate and the House of Representatives having jurisdiction over matters relating to the environment.
(b) The committee shall select a chairman and a vice chairman from among its members at the beginning of each Congress. The vice chairman shall act in the place and stead of the chairman in the absence of the chairman. The chairmanship shall alternate between the Senate and House of Representatives with each Congress, and the chairman shall be selected by members from that House entitled to the chairmanship. The vice chairman shall be chosen from the House other than that of the chairman by the members of that House. The committee may establish such subcommittees as it deems necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose of this joint resolution.
(c) Vacancies in the membership of the committee shall not affect the authority of the remaining members to execute the functions of the committee. Vacancies shall be filled in the same manner as original appointments are made.
(d) A majority of the members of the committee shall constitute a quorum thereof for the transaction of business, except that the committee may fix a lesser number as a quorum for the purpose of taking testimony.
(e) The committee shall keep a complete record of all committee actions, including a record of the votes on any question on which a record vote is demanded. All committee records, data, charts, and files shall be the property if the committee and shall be kept in the offices of the committee or such other places as the committee may direct.
(f) No legislative measure shall be referred to the committee, and it shall have no authority to report any such measure to the Senate or to the House of Representatives.
SEC. 2. (a) It shall be the duty of the committee
(1) to conduct a continuing comprehensive study and review of the character and extent of environmental and technological changes and their effect on population, communities, and industries.
(2) to study methods of using all practical means and measures, including financial and technical assistance, in a manner calculated to foster, promote, create, and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in harmony, and fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations of Americans; and
(3) to develop policies that would encourage maximum private investment in means of improving environmental quality.
(b) The environmental quality report required to be submitted, pursuant to section 201 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 shall, when transmitted to Congress, be referred to the committee as well as to standing committees in the Senate and the House of Representatives having jurisdiction over the subject matter of such report.
(c) On or before the last day of December of each year, the committee shall submit to the Senate and to the House of Representatives for reference to the appropriate standing committees an annual report on the studies, reviews, and other projects undertaken by it, together with its recommendations. The committee may make such interim reports to the appropriate standing committees of the Congress prior to such annual report as it deems advisable.
(d) Before undertaking any study or investigation, the committee shall notify and consult with standing committees having jurisdiction over the subject matter thereof to avoid unnecessary duplication with any investigation undertaken by any other joint committee, or by any standing committee of the Senate or of the House of Representatives.
SEC. 3. (a) For the purposes of this joint resolution, the committee is authorized, as it deems advisable (1) to make such expenditures; (2) to hold such hearings; (3) to sit and act at such times and places during the sessions, recesses, and adjournment periods of the Senate and of the House of Representatives; and (4) to employ and fix the compensation of technical, clerical, and other assistants and consultants. Persons employed under authority of this subsection shall be employed without regard to political affiliations and solely on the basis of fitness to perform the. duties for which employed.
(b) The committee may (1) utilize the services, information, and facilities of the General Accounting office or any department or agency in the executive branch of the Government, and (2) employ on a reimbursable basis or otherwise the services of such personnel of any such department or agency as it deems advisable. With the consent of any other committee of the Congress, or any subcommittee thereof the committee may utilize the facilities and the services of the staff of such other committee or subcommittee whenever the chairman of the committee determines that such action is necessary and appropriate.
SEC. 4. To enable the committee to exercise its powers, functions, and duties under this joint resolution, there are authorized to be appropriated for each fiscal year such sums as may be necessary to be disbursed by the Clerk of the House of Representatives on vouchers signed by the chairman or vice chairman of the committee.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I also ask unanimous consent to have printed. in the RECORD a statement prepared by the Senator from Washington (Mr. MAGNUSON).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
There being no objection, the statement by Senator MAGNUSON was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
STATEMENT BY SENATOR MAGNUSON
Mr. President, in this time of rapid change and progress Congress must retain flexibility as an institution and be prepared to improve its structure in order to meet and solve important problems facing the nation. There are no more pressing national problems than those embodied in the term "environment." It is time for Congress to adjust its structure to meet head on in a coordinated fashion these problems. Therefore, I am pleased to join Senators Muskie, Jackson, Randolph and others in sponsoring the resolution to create a Joint Committee on the Environment.
The Senate Commerce Committee has begun to recognize danger signals arising from the very developments we have pursued as goals of national policy – industrial growth and innovations; the tapping of natural resources; mechanization and cybernation; and a blanketing network of fast, powerful, efficient air, land, and water transports.
We have awakened to the realization that the uninvited companion of economic progress is too often an unseen environmental hazard or poisonous by-product. Our national cost accounts for evaluating technological progress must weigh fully in the balance the assault of that technology on our air and water and our soil, the marring of our countryside, and the brutalizing of our tranquility.
In 1970 and beyond, the commerce committee has undertaken as a first priority to evaluate, and, where necessary, balance the necessary growth of commerce against the essential preservation of the environment.
This is not a new task, though it has assumed new prominence and urgency. In the past, the Committee has both investigated and legislated on such environmental concerns as the impact of pesticides on fish and wildlife, radiation emissions from electronic products, airport and airways noise abatement, estuarine contamination, sport and commercial fisheries conservation, and rail, aviation, and motor vehicle safety – each reflecting the Committee's concern and responsibility for a sound physical environment as well as a healthy economic environment.
To meet its growing responsibilities in environmental matters as well as to facilitate its overall efficiency, the Commerce Committee established two new subcommittees in 1969: the standing Subcommittee on Energy, Natural Resources, and the Environment and the Subcommittee on Oceanography.
The work of the Committee, in particular of these two subcommittees includes such environmentally critical projects as:
(1) The stimulation of low-emission vehicle development through federal motor vehicle procurement practices;
(2) Examination of the environmental as well as the economic implications of power plant siting and related issues;
(3) The conservation and non-degradating development of ocean resources;
(4) Examination of the need for new measures to assure the environmental integrity of estuarine areas and coastal zones;
(5) The exploration of techniques for promoting more efficient, less polluting technology for energy generation;
(6) The comprehensive investigation of transportation-related noise from trucks to motorcycles to aircraft;
(7) The review of progress in controlling electronic radiation from television sets and microwave ovens;
(8) Review of recent developments and the need for restructuring in weather modification programs;
(9) The examination of available technology for control and improvement of the interior environment with emphasis on air purification possibilities;
(10) Study of the degradation of railroad rights-of-way because of sewage disposal procedures; and
(11) Exploration of the need and desirability for uniform procedures, insuring that all regulatory agencies consider fully the potential impact of their decisions on the environment and a review of progress toward the elimination of pesticides contamination of fish and wildlife.
With the creation of the Joint Committee on the Environment, which we propose today, our resources in dealing with problems rationally, competently, and thoroughly will be substantially enhanced.
Mr. HART. Mr. President, it is with great pleasure that I endorse the bill introduced today by the Senator from Maine.
Once again the Senator has taken the lead in identifying an important gap in our system of environmental protection and in moving quickly to alleviate the problem. The bill is but another example of his perceptive leadership in this area and of his ability to bring others who are similarly motivated together into joint action.
The need for the bill appears to me to be manifest. Although the Congress in the past years has become increasingly sensitive to problems of environmental quality, its efforts have been hampered to a significant degree by a lack of coordination. Duplication of effort has too often denied valuable resources to projects of vital importance. Laudable efforts have too often been dissipated by dispersal in different and sometimes inconsistent directions.
The bill which is introduced today gives us the opportunity to repair these deficiencies and thus constitutes a significant step in the adaptation of our institutions to environmental dangers we can no longer ignore or disparage. Rapid consideration and acceptance of its provisions, as I see it, can only operate to the public's advantage.
Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I am pleased to join the chairman of the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, the Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE), and other Senators, including several chairmen of other legislative committees, in cosponsoring the joint resolution , introduced today to establish a permanent nonlegislative Joint Congressional Committee on the Environment.
In my activities as a member of both the Committee on Public Works and the Committee on Commerce, I have been continually impressed with the magnitude and complexity of the national and international problems regarding the environment. It is clear that environmental issues cross every area of jurisdiction and although rational management dictates a division of responsibilities, it is essential that an integrating forum be available to Congress to explore the full range of the problems arising in man's relationship to his environment.
The Joint Committee on Environment would serve this important role, having as its principal function the development of information on the broad range of problems and making that information available to the authorizing committees of Congress, thereby assisting in the development of a unifying thread holding together the multitude of congressional activities.
This session of Congress has already seen the creation of parallel organizations in the executive branch in the Office of Environmental Quality and Council on Environmental Quality and it is entirely appropriate that Congress afford itself a similar overview capability.
I would like to point out that the recognition of the scale and complexity of these problems has led me, with the cosponsorship of Senator MUSKIE, to introduce a bill, S. 3410, which would create a system of national environmental laboratories to establish a structure that would provide integrated application of the full range of scientific research and development to the environment. The Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution anticipates hearings will begin on this measure in the month of July. I look forward to those hearings as a first step leading to the enactment of a national environmental laboratory which would provide an essential complement, to the recent establishment of the executive branch agencies and the proposed Joint Environmental Committee of Congress.
It is with considerable optimism that I see emerging from Congress a responsive program dealing with the environment which is consistent with the commitment of President Nixon and his administration and, of course, with the strong interest being expressed by the public. I look forward to the early consideration. of these respective proposals and I urge my colleagues to give them their close attention.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a statement by the distinguished Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON) relating to the introduction of the joint resolution to establish a Joint Committee on Environment, be printed in the RECORD, along with an excerpt from the committee report.
There being no objection, the statement and the excerpt requested by Senator JACKSON were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
INTRODUCTION OF A JOINT RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT
(Statement by Senator JACKSON)
Mr. President, I take great pleasure in joining with the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, the Chairmen of the Commerce and Public Works Committee, and many other Senators in cosponsoring the Joint Resolution introduced today to establish a permanent non-legislative Joint Committee on the Environment. A restructuring of the institutions of the Congress to make them more responsive to the critical environmental problems of today and of the future is in my view necessary and long overdue.
The Joint Committee which is proposed can provide the Congress and the American people with a new and an important capability for continuing review, study and assessment of environmental and technological problems.
It is clear that all Committees of the Congress have an important role to play in improving the quality of the environment and the quality of life in America. The Legislative Reference Service tabulated over 100 bills in the 90th Congress which were directly concerned with environmental issues. In the present Congress there are even more. Recent reports indicate that of the 18 standing committees of the Senate, eight have broad jurisdiction in this area. Of the 21 House standing committees, 11 are similarly involved.
On a subject so pervasive, broad, and important as "environment" and the "quality of life," no committee may exercise exclusive jurisdiction. It is also clear, however, that environmental management must be viewed in a comprehensive way. We have established the Council on Environmental Quality to provide an overview of the environmental system within the Executive Branch. We have, as yet, no comparable forum within the Congress to consider the general status of the environment at large. We must do so if our presently fragmented problem solving efforts in this area are to be made cohesive.
In view of these considerations, I proposed in October of last year, that following enactment of the National Environmental Policy Act and establishment of the Council on Environmental Quality, that the next logical step would be the establishment of a nonlegislative Joint Committee on the Environment rather than a more limited Senate Select Committee.
Mr. President, following the Joint House-Senate Colloquium to Discuss a National Policy for the Environment in June of 1988, which Congressman Miller and I cosponsored, I requested the Legislative Reference Service to prepare a report dealing with, among other things, "Alternatives For Congressional Action" in the area of environmental administration. I ask unanimous consent that this section from the report be printed at this point in the Record.
PART II ALTERNATIVES FOR CONGRESSIONAL ACTION
An impressive number and variety of legislative proposals for improving the quality of our environment have been set before the 90th Congress (see appendix). Support for action has come from diverse segments of American society: from the scientific community, from business, and from public affairs groups.
The Congress should move ahead to define clearly the desires of the American people in operational terms that the President, government agencies at all levels, the courts, private enterprise, and the public can consider and act upon.
The ultimate responsibility for protecting the human-serving values of cur environment rests jointly with the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of. our Government. The Congress, as a full partner, has the obligation to provide comprehensive oversight of all environment affecting programs of the executive branch, and also to participate in the overall design of national policy, thus serving both as architect of environmental management strategy and as the
elaborator of goals and principles for guiding future legal actions.
Under the present organization of the Congress, varying aspects of environmental management (including air and water pollution control, strip mine reclamation, outdoor recreation, housing and space planning in urban areas, highway construction, atmospheric research, oceanography, and rural conservation) are committed to different committees. While there has been a steady expansion of independent committee interest in specific environmental problems, the Congress so far has not evaluated this field in its entirety with a view toward evolving a coherent and unified policy for national environmental management..
It should be recognized that the declaration of a national environmental policy will not alone better or enhance the total man-environment relationship. The present problem is not simply the lack of a policy. It also involves the need to rationalize and coordinate existing policies, and to provide the means by which they may be reviewed continuously, made consistent with other national policies and ranked in reasonable priority.
The proper development of such a far-reaching body of policy raises many difficult organizational, economic and legal problems. Some individuals who were present at the July 17 colloquium suggested that a congressional mandate on the subject of environment, which would necessarily encompass a very wide range of problems and issues, would be impractical and ineffective. Yet others pointed out that equally broad mandates and satisfactory organizing concepts for managing our economic welfare and for guiding the development of atomic energy have been tested over a period of years, with effective machinery now operating both in the executive and legislative branches to evaluate the extent to which national goals and activities in these fields are meeting public expectations and needs.
In any event, to those involved in the colloquium and recent hearings on this subject, it is clear that two functions must be served: coordination and information gathering. Environmental problems cut across so many existing operational organizations that coordination in both the executive and legislative branches must be improved. Further, an effective channel of information exchange and overview must exist between the Congress and the administration. If, for example, an environmental council were established in the Executive Office of the President, as has been proposed, it should be complemented with a corresponding joint congressional committee for purposes of efficient and continued interaction.
The acquisition and evaluation of information specifically for the Congress must be improved. Raw facts and data from ecological and economic studies must be interpreted to be useful in the legislative process. This function should be performed in an organization reporting directly to the Congress; for example, a strong join committee staff or an expanded Legislative Reference Service environmental unit.
Congress (regardless of present or future executive branch approaches) may exert a meaningful influence on the formulation of national environmental policy by embarking on one or a combination of the following steps:
A. A concurrent resolution could be introduced declaring the strong interest of the Congress in establishing national environmental policy.
This would represent a firm expression of concern on the part of the Congress about environmental deterioration, but would not be a direct confrontation with the task of defining national policy. The resolution might urge the creation of an appropriate body to investigate all matters relating to environmental management to analyze the means and methods whereby the organization, administration and funding of government programs affecting the environment may be improved; and, to determine the ways whereby non-governmental entities could be encouraged to participate in overcoming further deterioration of the environment in the national interests. Hearings on the resolution could provide a forum for a wide range of opinion.
B. A joint resolution calling for an amendment to the Constitution on the subject of environmental values could be introduced.
This would require approval by two-thirds of the Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the States. The amending process is both slow and cumbersome. Moreover, acceptance would require a tremendous groundswell of support. However, a proposed amendment would generate wide discussion and involve the State legislatures which are vitally important in achieving environmental quality goals. The advantage of constitutional amendments lies in the unanimity of national commitment. Such an amendment for the environment could place expanded emphasis on the judicial process as an instrument of controlling future abuse of environmental values.
C. A joint committee or committees on environmental management could be established to provide across-the-board oversight on Federal programs, to conduct studies with the assistance of professional staff, and to recommend legislation. Alternatively, select or permanent committees could be established in each House.
Such committees could draw membership from existing legislative committees involved with environmental matters, and perhaps focus primarily on the review of policy and coordination matters dealt with by such groups as the Office of Science and Technology, Water Resources Council, the Council on Recreation and Natural Beauty, and various interagency coordinating committees.
D. A new environmental surveillance unit to conduct research and information-gathering services for the Congress could be organized.
In the past, Congress has shown reluctance to add new appendages of this sort to the legislative branch. An alternative might be an expansion of the functions of the General Accounting Office to make continuing studies of environmental conflicts and to prepare appropriate reports for transmittal to the Congress. New staff positions and additional funding would be required.
E. The Congress could establish a non-governmental task force to carry out in its behalf a special study of environmental policy needs.
Such a task force could engage the services of private research organizations and draw its membership from the finest talent available in the academic community. The task force could be administered directly by the Congress or made the responsibility of some arm of the Congress such as the Legislative Reference Service, Library of Congress, which has the authority to employ experts on short-term assignments.
F. A temporary environment management council could be organized.
Such a council might be similar in organization and operation to the National Council on Marine Resources and Engineering Development. Its purposes could be to identify all unmet needs and opportunities in the environmental field, to study impediments to sound environmental management, conflicts of interest and gaps in existing agency and congressional activities, and to develop recommendations for legislative action within a specified period of years.
The Congress, would retain an overview of the council and would control the budget for its operation. Establishment of a policy planning group in the Executive Office of the President forces the generation of proposals to the Congress. A receiving committee should be set up to correspond to this Council, similar to the Joint Economics Committee, and the Council of Economic Advisers.
G. A governmental commission could be established for the same purposes.
The commission could be composed entirely of Congressmen, perhaps the chairman of key committees which deal with environmental matters. Or it could be a Joint Commission including representation from the executive branch and the public at large. A third type would be a Presidential Commission with members chosen at the discretion of the Chief Executive. Through a combination of studies and hearings, the Commission could be asked to produce a blueprint for legislative action in the environmental field.
H. The Legislative Reference Service could be directed to add a central research and evaluation unit on environmental matters.
A precedent is the establishment of the Science Policy Research Division in 1964.
I. An environmental counselor could be placed on the staff of each appropriate standing committee of the Congress.
The purpose would be to increase the technical staff available for committee work. Each counselor could be given the permanent responsibility of advising the committee to which he was assigned on the probable environmental impact of all pending legislation.
SENATOR RANDOLPH ENDORSES PROPOSAL TO ESTABLISH JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my distinguished colleague from Maine as a cosponsor of the resolution to establish a Joint Committee on the Environment.
The people of the United States are properly concerned aver the condition of the environment.
They indicate daily that they wish to halt the degradation of the world in which we live. There is growing public pressure on all levels of government to provide the legal machinery and leadership under which a clean and wholesome environment will be created and maintained.
Creation of a Joint Committee on the Environment would be an important step for the Congress to take in adjusting its own organization to the new and urgent demands being made on it.
Such a joint committee would serve as a bridge to help coordinate the work of the several standing committees with jurisdiction over environmental legislation. Under the present arrangement, there is some fragmentation of responsibility in this important area which the joint committee, even though it would be non-legislative in nature, could ease.
Considering the urgency of the need for positive action on environmental matters, I hope the Senate will give a prompt and positive response to this proposal.