LETTERS: ANTI-ENVIRONMENT PLANS NEED NIPPING

To the editor:

Some of our state's anti-environmental right-wing politicians seem to want it both ways. When the Environmental Protection Agency develops national regulations concerning potential human and environmental health problems, they argue that we shouldn't have a one-size-fits-all set of regulations. Rather, they argue, we should allow states or local authorities to determine what regulations should be developed and how these should be enforced.

In marked contrast to that position, we find that U.S. Sen. Larry Rohrbach (R-Calif.) has introduced an anti-environmental bill that would prevent state officials from developing, or the state Department of Natural Resources from enforcing, regulations controlling clean air and water that are stricter than federal regulations. Federal regulations are developed as minimum criteria and are often inappropriate or substandard in local situations. The consequence of Senator Rohrbach's bill would be to impose exactly the one-size-fits-all policy.

When we examine who is supporting this excursion into environmental non-protection, we realize exactly what the bill is really all about.

Prime among the supporters of this proposal are the Associated Industries of Missouri, the Chemical Council of Missouri, the Mining Council and the Missouri Chamber of Commerce. When it comes to environmental protection, these groups have consistently opposed any reasonable regulations that would protect human and environmental health. It seems, for them, economic gain should always be paramount, while human and environmental health should always be relegated to secondary or non-consideration.

Public-opinion polls consistently show that Americans consider environmental protection should be a high political priority. There is no reason to suggest that Missourians are any different. If we are to be consistent with public opinion, proposals such as those of Senator Rohrbach should be nipped in the bud.

ALAN R.P. JOURNET

Cape Girardeau