Volume 147, No. 54 covering the 1st Session of the 107th Congress (2001 - 2002) was published by the Congressional Record.
The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“REVIEWING THE PRESIDENT'S FIRST 100 DAYS” mentioning the Environmental Protection Agency was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H1655-H1656 on April 26, 2001.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
REVIEWING THE PRESIDENT'S FIRST 100 DAYS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, as we approach the 100th day of the Bush presidency, we have seen history made. President Bush just may have compiled the worst environmental record in the shortest time of any President ever.
Let us run through the milestone of the Bush administration's environmental policy: Repealed the arsenic standard; unilaterally declared the Kyoto agreement on global warming dead; abandoned a campaign pledge seconded by his EPA administrator to reduce carbon dioxide emissions; supported drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
And the manner in which the Bush White House has executed its environmental policy makes matters even worse. The President, who repeatedly claimed during his campaign that the previous administration had failed to author a consistent principled energy policy, seems to be making environmental policy based on no principle at all, but rather on the basis of what he can get away with at the behest of the oil companies, at the behest of the mining companies, at the behest of the chemical companies.
It is no secret that the Bush administration owes these big polluters for the President's election last year, and they are cashing in their chips fast.
The White House even seems to be disregarding the advice of its own Environmental Protection Agency Administrator, Christie Todd Whitman. Earlier this year, Administrator Whitman publicly acknowledged the issue of global warming and said that President Bush would honor his campaign promise to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant. She recommended by memo that he do so, only to be publicly rebuked. It seems Administrator Whitman was told, along with the rest of us, that President Bush was simply abandoning his campaign pledge.
Then, earlier this week, Whitman was publicly rebuked again by her boss. Just 2 days ago, Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer appeared to chide the EPA administrator for speaking in ``confusion'' Sunday when she announced that a White House energy task force would not recommend oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. He clarified that Vice President Cheney's task force would in fact recommend that oil drilling be allowed in the Refuge after all.
When big oil talks, this administration listens. It is no big surprise, considering Vice President Cheney as an oil executive last year, in 1 year as an oil executive, made $36 million.
Strangely, it now seems possible that Christine Todd Whitman, not necessarily a great friend of the environment when she was Governor of New Jersey, Whitman may become the lone administration official willing to occasionally, occasionally oppose the naked assault on the environment.
As cochair of the Water Infrastructure Caucus in the House, the Bush administration decision that has irked me most is his weakening of the arsenic standard. Those of us who pushed for a stronger, safer new arsenic standard during a 5-year administrative process know that EPA's January decision ordering arsenic levels in America's drinking water be reduced, strengthened, if you will to 10 parts per billion, was quite simply the right thing to do.
EPA took this action in response to a National Academy of Science report, not a partisan group, not an ideological group, a scientific group, which recommended that the 1942 standard of 50 parts per billion be reduced ``as promptly as possible.''
Arsenic's toxic properties have been common knowledge for a long time. Two hundred years ago, Napoleon's death was attributed by some to arsenic poisoning at the hands of the British. In 1942, there was sufficient concern about the dangers of arsenic in our country for a 50 parts per billion standard to be put into place. But during the last 5 years, in response to the Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA asked the National Academy of Science to specifically investigate the danger posed by smaller quantities of arsenic.
The Academy produced reams of evidence that arsenic is not only a toxic, which we all knew, but is a potent carcinogen that causes bladder cancer, lung cancer, skin cancer, and has also been linked to kidney and liver cancer, birth defects and reproductive problems. Newborn babies and small children are at the greatest risk of health problems from the arsenic in water.
By adopting an updated standard, the U.S. would not be leading the developing world, but joining it. Our allies in Europe and Great Britain and in Japan had already put into place arsenic standards to protect the public's health.
In the face of all this evidence, the Bush administration still put the new drinking water standard on hold. Score another win for America's largest corporations.
In my home State of Ohio, 137,000 residents may be drinking water with arsenic levels higher than the standard recommended by the World Health Organization. This standard puts the U.S. on the same levels as India, Bangladesh, Bolivia, and China.
When you look at the President's campaign finance reports, you see the reason. In the last election, mining companies gave $5 million to Republicans, the chemical industry gave $10 million. We ask the President to reconsider.
____________________
Alerts Sign-up