ENVIRONMENTAL
NEWS
EPA continues to wrestle with budget cuts, short-term funding
C
ongress tossed EPA a life raft Jan. 26 in the form of a short-term continuing resolution that will keep the agency afloat, but only until the middle of March and only with the barest of funds. The resolution funds EPA at 23% less than the president had sought and draws the beleaguered agency further into an acrimonious, election-year budget-balancing fight that may have long-term effects on how EPA does business. After two federal shutdowns and four continuing resolutions, EPA Administrator Carol Browner told a Senate subcommittee Jan. 26 that EPA faces significant staffing cuts and reduced funds for inspections, enforcement actions, and regulatory development. She also warned that EPA's dedicated young staff are going elsewhere. "The lifeblood of the agency is being drained." The continuing resolution gave EPA $5.71 billion, 14% below the 1995 post-rescission level of $6.6 billion. The resolution's funding is based on the House/Senate Conference Committee appropriation compromise that the president vetoed last December. Despite Browner's complaints, congressional Republicans were quick to note that the amount was greater than the level EPA received in the preceding continuing resolution as well as in the House- and Senate-passed appropriations bills. However, some in the Republican party are rethinking their role in reining in EPA. A Republican poll and report in December revealed that most of the public does not share the party's antagonism toward environmental regulations and warned that "attacking EPA is a nonstarter" (see box). Also in late January, 30 Republican House members wrote
Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga) saying that the party "has taken a beating this year over missteps in environmental policy." It added, "If the party is to resuscitate its reputation in this important area, we cannot be seen as using the budget crisis as an excuse to emasculate environmental protection." The budget stalemate, staff furloughs, and funding cuts have left EPA to drift in a cloud of uncertainty, Browner told the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies. The hearing was called to explore the impact of the budget impasse with Browner and officials from the Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators (ASIWPCA). In opening remarks, Subcommittee Chair Christopher S. (Kit)
Bond (R-Mo.) set the stage by telling Browner that the president's most recent proposed package to resolve the VA-HUD appropriation impasse, which included $966 million more for EPA, was simply not possible. "I'm not the tooth fairy," he said. "I must deal with the reality of what it takes to balance the budget." Browner described an agency in dire straits, saying that to make cuts required by the resolution, all of its 18,000 employees would face forced furloughs of up to 19 days. Browner said the agency began preparing for cuts as soon as the House proposed funding cuts of 33% last July. She said EPA began a hiring freeze, a promotion freeze, and the indefinite postponement of many contracts. The result is an EPA that is 8% smaller with 1500 fewer workers. The cuts and criticism of EPA workers have damaged morale and triggered an exodus of young, skilled EPA workers, the administrator said. "We're losing young people, the ones who want [EPA] to change," Browner said. "One
POLITICS Poll finds environment ranks high with voters Cutting EPA's budget is not making points with American voters, according to Republican pollster Linda DiVall. In a poll released in mid-December, DiVall found that only 35% of the public would vote to re-elect a member of Congress who agrees with the OOP's majority position to cut EPA spending by one-third. Some 46% would vote against a member holding that view. These percentages resulted even though the questionnaire stated that the reductions would stop "imposition of unnecessary regulations and red tape on business, which cost money and jobs." The poll also found that although 59% of Americans believe there is too much government, only 21% believe there are too many environmental laws and regulations, and 36% believe there are not enough. The poll was conducted for the Superfund Reform Coalition, which is made up of insurance companies and other business interests seeking Superfund reform. The poll found that only 38% of the public had heard of Superfund; most support cleaning up all sites equally; and few support giving rebates to companies that agree to clean up polluted sites. DiVall concluded that by a 2:1 margin voters have more confidence in Democrats than Republicans as the party they trust most to protect the environment. "Most disturbing," she said, was that "55% of all Republicans do not trust their party when it comes to protecting the environment, while 72% of Democrats do trust their party." —JEFF JOHNSON
1 0 8 A • VOL. 30, NO. 3, 1996 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS
D013-936X/96/0929-108A$12.00/0 © 1996 American Chemical Society
