EPA: Strengthening by supporting There is a popular misconception in this country that EPA is responsible for the protection of the environment and that any deficiencies in that respect result from the failings of the Agency. In fact, that was never true, and it remains a fallacy. EPA is a part-a critically important part-of a very large, poorly coordinated network of federal agencies that play various roles in environmental protection. These include the departments of Interior, Defense, Energy, and Commerce, several agencies, and offices such as OTA, OMB, and the Office of the Presidential Science Advisor. All of these are funded by the U.S.Congress and most report either directly or indirectly to the executive branch. Increasingly, it is clear that Congress and the executive branch, not EPA, are responsible for the effectiveness, or lack of effectiveness, of the federal establishment in addressing the multitude of problems that it faces. Many people feel that this is because of a structural problem within the federal government. There are many manifestations, and many causes, of the problem. First, we are still in the process of trying to correct a large number of environmental messes that should have been addressed years ago. Although we recognize that pollution prevention is the key element in environmental policy for the future, we are forced to deal with many nagging and persistent problems that are legacies of the past. These problems, and new ones that seem to be revealed yearly, place the government in the position of having to respond without adequate data or models. Public clamor for actionoften based on emotional reactions and perceptions of risk that, though sincere, are inadequately supported by data-has caused Congress to place priorities where public concern is highest, without knowing if the prescribed action was prudent or even if it could complicate remediation. There is a great gap between the political will to affect solutions and our knowledge of how to solve these problems to the satisfaction of the public. In almost every area of concern-hazardous waste treatment, ozone depletion, global climate change, electric fields, radiation, or bioengineered organisms-more research and analysis are needed in order for EPA and other agencies to make intelligent decisions. Unfortunately, there is simply 0013-936X/91/0925-809$02.50/0 0 1991 American Chemical Society
not time to do this research. In our political system, decisions have to be made now, however poorly based in science they may be. All who contemplate seriously the protection of the environment and public health know that this dilemma is real, and we empathize with EPA and the Congress as they face the challenge. Many people say, “Fine, we have to do our best now, making decisions on the best evidence and best analysis available, but what are we doing to correct the situation?” Are we making any corrections to the system to prevent the propagation of this dilemma into the next century? In 2001, and beyond, will we still be faced with a dismal lack of data and models on which to base decisions? Will we continue to have no systematic, nationwide accumulation of environmental statistics? Will we continue to have an underfunded, fragmented, inadequately staffed environmental research program? Will the training of environmental professionals and the sustenance of academic environmental research continue to be low priorities for NSF and other federal research agencies? In this new congressional session, which will focus on Clean Water, RCRA, and other major environmental issues, many people are asking, “How will it be different this term?’’Political pundits tell us it will be no different unless the public demands change. Let us hope, however, that Congress and the executive branch will transcend politics and provide the long-term solutions that are so badly needed. Great leadership, especially where there are gaps in information or new principles are involved, must go beyond party politics and quick fixes. The protection of the planet, indeed of human civilization, is involved. We need enlightened, courageous leadership from the halls of Congress and the White House.
Environ. Sci. Technol., Vol. 25, No. 5, 1991 809
