Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger promised to make pollution a top
priority for his administration and recently stood up for strict
new vehicle emission rules. But Californians should question his
motives for vetoing an anti-smog bill that would have reduced
unhealthy diesel pollution around the Ports of Los Angeles and Long
Beach.
During his campaign, Schwarzenegger said he would cut pollution
in half by 2010. Considering the actor-turned-politician drives a
Hummer, many were skeptical. It turns out that skepticism was
probably well placed.
At best, Schwarzenegger has sent mixed messages when it comes to
the environment.
Schwarzenegger has supported the efforts of California’s
regulators to cut automotive emissions of greenhouse gasses.
Regulators created a plan that would begin reductions by 2009 and
go into full effect by 2015. Eventually, the plan would cut
emissions from new vehicles by about 30 percent.
Remarkably, Schwarzenegger continued to support the plan even
after the Environmental Protection Agency, supported by fellow
Republican George Bush, ruled that carbon dioxide was not a
pollutant and thus could not be regulated.
But Schwarzenegger is also known for his support for big
business. On Sept. 29 he vetoed a bill that would have capped air
pollution levels at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach at 2004
levels. Considering these ports are expected to grow rapidly, the
new law would have required ships, trucks and other pollution
sources to become more efficient in order to keep pollution levels
down.
A shipping company representative, John McLaurin, told the Los
Angeles Times that the bill was “vague” and
“flawed in its construction.”
Though the bill may have had its problems, even a vague response
to record pollution is better than no plan.
A USC report released in early September showed that high levels
of pollution have serious effects on the lung development of
children. The research showed that about 8 percent of children in
high pollution areas had only 80 percent of their expected lung
capacity.
A separate study, also from USC, documented unexplainable
increases in cancer rates in areas downwind of the ports.
Schwarzenegger said he vetoed the bill because it “will
not reduce pollution in any way.”
That is hard to believe. While the bill’s semantics would
have only locked pollution at current levels, it would also have
forced the largest polluter in the region to regulate itself.
The Los Angeles Times reported that cargo movement is
“expected to quadruple by 2025.” Some of that increased
load will undoubtably translate into more pollution.
Schwarzenegger has to be more consistent when it comes to
environmental policy. It’s great that he wants to cut
automotive emissions, at least for now, but his unwillingness to
defend the environment when it could hurt California businesses
suggest that he is a little more than a political opportunist.