By Jerson Castillo
Dana Perino, the associate director for communications for the
White House Council on Environmental Quality, defended the Bush
administration Tuesday (“Bush serious about Clear
Skies,” Viewpoint) in response to UCLA student Mike
Bitondo’s column, “Bush’s attractive policy
titles hide truth” (Viewpoint, Jan. 15).
Bitondo refuted the claims that these initiatives live up to
their expectations, but Perino attempted to continue the argument
that propositions such as the Clear Skies Initiative and the
Healthy Forests Initiative will produce meaningful results. The
truth is that Perino’s standpoint is convincing and true, as
long as we stay within the confines of the Bush
administration’s perspective. These statements severely
neglect critical evidence.
Perino claims that the administration’s environmental
proposals will result in a 70 percent reduction in major power
plant toxins, including mercury. Under the current Clean Air Act,
power plants have to reduce mercury emissions to 5 tons by the year
2008. Instead, Bush’s proposal on mercury reduction will keep
that number above 26 tons in the year 2010, and then reduce it to
only 15 tons by the year 2018. This will result in almost a 10-year
delay in pollution reduction.
Living in the United States, you should be aware that power
plants and other sources in our country emit levels of mercury so
high that, according to the Public Interest Research Group,
“43 states have advisories in effect for mercury-contaminated
fish, warning the general population or sensitive subpopulations to
reduce or avoid consumption.”
According to the Web site
thewheelerreport.com, frequent exposure causes severe
neurological and developmental problems in fetuses and very young
children whose brains are still developing.
Regarding the administration’s forest policies, Perino
also says, “What cannot be dismissed, though, is the
destruction from last year’s wildfires in California, which
cost $250 million to contain and resulted in 22 civilian
deaths.” She implies that if the White House’s Healthy
Forest Initiative had been passed before the fires, lives and money
could have been saved.
However, like in her previous arguments, Perino neglected to
mention some key details, such as the fact that about 9 months ago,
former Gov. Gray Davis asked the White House for $450 million in
federal aid desperately needed to reduce a buildup of flammable
brush over half a million acres of dried-out forest in the San
Diego, Riverside and San Bernardino counties. At the same time,
Bush allowed logging companies to continue to destroy old-growth
forests.
The environment would be in a far better situation if our
current environmental protections stayed intact, without
interference from White House proposals. The present Clean Air Act
could go further for public health, but it is far better than the
Clear Skies Initiative and other environmental policies suggested
by the White House. In fact, we should go beyond our current laws,
not dismantle them. If our government supported more clean,
renewable energy sources and sustainable forest practices, then we
would have fewer problems with asthma, mercury and polluted
drinking water.
Be aware that our government is first and foremost interested in
staying in office. So let’s give leaders a choice: Either
they reform their ways (by leaving our beautiful world the way it
is), or we will take action and find someone that will fight for
the right to keep our environment clean.
Castillo is a third-year psychobiology student and a member
CALPIRG.