Leavitt Defends Bush Environmental Record

By J.R. Pegg

PITTSBURGH, Pennsylvania, October 26, 2004 (ENS) - With the presidential election less than two weeks away, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Leavitt defended the Bush administration's environmental record as one that fairly balances competing economic and environmental interests without compromising environmental protection or public health.

That characterization is a far cry from the one put forth by critics of the administration, many of whom say President George W. Bush has the worst environmental record of any president in U.S. history.

Leavitt, speaking Friday to the annual conference of the Society of Environmental Journalists (SEJ) at Carnegie Mellon University, said there has been an important shift in the debate over environmental protection since the EPA was formed in 1970.

"The debate is not about should we, but about how we best do it," said Leavitt.

The former Utah governor said the nation's air and waters are cleaner, and its land better protected, than at any time in the last 30 years, but continuing this progress will not be easy.

"There is a new environmental maturity taking over the country," Leavitt said, "but there is a tension between our environmental ethic and … economic globalism."

EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt says the administration's environmental record has been mischaracterized and is one worthy of praise. (Photo courtesy EPA)

The Bush clean air plan centers on using a cap and trade system to cut emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and mercury from power plants by some 70 percent during the next 15 years.

Supporters say a cap and trade program is a more efficient mechanism for cutting pollution than strict command and control regulations.

"This will be more tons of pollution coming out of the air faster than any period in history," Leavitt said.

Environmentalists are not uniform in their opposition to cap and trade plans - many believe these are useful tools - but many believe the administration's plan is too timid.

And there is broad concern about using a cap and trade program to cut emissions of mercury. Ten state attorneys general, 48 U.S. senators, along with a wide range of scientists, environmental and public health organizations have announced their strong opposition to the proposal.

Critics say an emissions trading program, which means individual power plants will not reduce emissions at the same rate, is inappropriate for mercury. They and contend that technology - and the Clean Air Act - could enable the industry to cut mercury emissions 90 percent within four years.

Mercury emissions from the nation's 1,100 coal fired power plants are currently unregulated. These facilities emit some 48 tons of mercury each year, accounting for about 40 percent of the nation's mercury pollution.

Exposure to mercury, usually through eating contaminated fish, can cause permanent harm to the brain in humans and reproductive harm in wildlife.

The economic health of the $30 billion recreational fishing industry - and the health of part time anglers - could suffer from the increase in consumption advisories due to mercury pollution. (Photo by George Gentry courtesy U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)

The EPA says one in six U.S. women already have levels of unsafe levels of mercury in their bodies, putting an estimated 630,000 newborns at risk each year from the adverse effects of the toxic metal.

Forty-five states now have advisories for mercury - 21 of these have statewide advisories for mercury contamination in every freshwater lake and river.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who spoke Thursday at the SEJ Conference, said the administration's environmental policies - in particular its actions related to clean air - reflect the close ties between the White House and industry groups.

Kennedy, an attorney who is a longtime environmentalist with the Natural Resources Defense Council and Riverkeeper, has authored a new book, "Crimes Against Humanity," that is critical of the administration environmental record.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (Photo courtesy Keppler Associates)

Kennedy noted that the top air official at the EPA is a former power plant industry lobbyist. He specifically cited the administration's revisions to the New Source Review program, which is designed to ensure the nation's dirtiest plants do not expand operations without installing modern pollution control technology.

Pollution from those facilities is responsible for the premature deaths of some 30,000 individuals every year, "equal to 10 World Trade Centers," said Kennedy.

Earlier this month the EPA's Office of Inspector General said the Bush revisions to the New Source Review program have "seriously hampered" ongoing litigation, out of court settlements and new enforcement actions against coal fired electric utilities.

"Nothing like this has ever happened in American history before - where an industry buys its way with a donation to a presidential candidate out of a criminal prosecution," Kennedy said. "The one value this administration embraces is corporate profiteerism."

The administration's close association with the power industry is alarming to environmentalists. (Photo courtesy Energy Department)

"I am fully conscious that critics of the administration have worked hard at cultivating that idea, but it does not make it right," Leavitt said.

Critics often fail to credit the administration for enacting stricter standards for ozone and particulate matter, Leavitt said, and for a new regulation that will eliminate 90 percent of harmful emissions from non-road diesel engines used in construction, industrial, and agricultural equipment by 2014.

"We are raising the bar," Leavitt said.

The EPA administrator tried to defuse criticism that the administration is not serious about global warming by citing the debate over the Kyoto Protocol, which was boosted by Russian ratification last week.

Environmentalists have blasted Bush for pulling the United States out of the treaty and for not moving to force U.S. industries to curb their emissions.

"It is a classic example of how the environmental debate turns on symbols," Leavitt said. "Kyoto was a lousy, unfair treaty and it was not just the President who thought that. The Senate voted 97-0 against it."

Leavitt said the administration's position on climate change has been consistent and pragmatic.

"The surface temperature of the Earth is clearly increasing and it is very clear that human behavior has contributed substantially to that change," he said. "But there are a lot of unanswered questions."

Critics argue the administration has abdicated leadership on an issue for which the United States must take responsibility. With roughly five percent of the world's population, the United States contributes more than 25 percent of the world's total greenhouse gas emissions.