On Being Regulated

Lisa Jackson received a lot of attention after her announcement in April. As President Obama’s head of the EPA, she simply stated that the agency will be moving forward with a plan to declare carbon dioxide, along with five other greenhouse gases, a threat to human health. This means the EPA may start to regulate these pollutants most responsible for global warming.

Sounds like the epitome of common sense, but remember that during the recent Bush administration the EPA was blocked from setting mandatory air quality regulations regarding greenhouse gasses. Politics often interfered with and inhibited science. In fact even Ms. Jackson was not above criticism for her performance in New Jersey, where she had served as Commissioner of Environmental Protection, before being tapped by the Obama Administration for the EPA post. The group, ‘Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility,’ criticized her “highly politicized approach.”

Environmental protection is particularly prone to political posturing because it is, after all, regulatory. It means you are required to clean up your mess, rather than just sending it downstream or downwind. Since Reagan (who famously said that government is the problem), de-regulation has been touted as a cure-all for everything from banking to trade. Add to this “tax relief” for the most wealthy, and prosperity was expected to “trickle down.”

Reagan may have had an overly optimistic view of human nature. We now find ourselves in a real financial fiasco that has followed in the footsteps of de-regulation. The only people unhurt by this are the beneficiaries of what may seem the opposite of Reaganomics; a ‘trickle-up’ economy.

De-regulation might sound good on the surface, but think about it. Would you let a pitcher call his or her own strikes? There has to be a reasonable amount of oversight; an umpire. Look where lack of oversight can lead. Certainly the managers of coal burning power plants would prefer to decide how much to spend on cleaning up their spew of smelly smoke. Since the wind just takes it “away,” why spend any money? Paper mills would be happy to determine whether they should dump their waste into the river, where the current just takes it “away.” Municipalities save a bundle by simply sending raw sewage downstream to that special place called “away.” Unfortunately we all live downstream… from someone.

After retirement, my wife, Mary, and I set out to explore a little bit of this ‘Land of the Free.’ Freedom is indeed a special gift. But when traffic lights turned red, we stopped. While most drivers didn’t pay a lot of close attention to posted speed limits, at least they were somewhat in the ballpark. Signs told me not to litter or I’d be fined.

Freedom doesn’t mean doing whatever you want. Being required to stop at a red light (or stop putting effluent in the river) doesn’t make you less free. If you could do whatever you wanted that would be called something else, such as licentious, or anarchy. Freedom requires responsibilities and yes, regulations.

In Kindergarten we learn this. We learn to clean up after ourselves, to get along with others, and to share. Many of our parents taught us to clean up our messes… without even having to be told… and to share.

Then something happens when we reach adulthood. Particularly within that peculiar cultural artifact we call capitalism. Those lessons from kindergarten get forgotten. This can be seen in polluted air and water, conflicts that are seemingly ubiquitous, and extravagant salaries and bonuses for upper management that coincide with losses of jobs, health benefits, and pensions for employees. So much for cleaning up, getting along, and sharing…

The fact that we need government to enforce littering laws as well as pollution standards suggests that some of us could use a Kindergarten refresher course. Author, Don Marquis asserts, “The chief obstacle to the progress of the human race is the human race.” Anatole France (Nobel Laureate) says that it is human nature to think wisely and act foolishly.

There is some truth in what Reagan said, “Government is the problem.” But the problem is that it hasn’t been regulating very effectively. Nature is all about dy namic equilibrium. Capitalistic economy is all about growth. These concepts are at odds, putting us on a collision course. Only government is in a position to anticipate and do something to avoid disaster… to detect the iceberg and turn this Titanic.

We need to reinvent modern capitalism. James Speth, professor of Forestry and Environmental Studies at Yale University, put forth a framework for change in his recent book, “The Bridge at the Edge of the World.” According to Speth, “all we have to do to leave a ruined world to children is just keep doing what we’re doing today – the same emissions of pollutants, the same destruction of ecosystems, same toxification of the environment – and we’ll ruin the planet in the latter part of this century.”

His solution is a three part change. One: Transformation in the market… a revolution in pricing. Things that are environmentally destructive would be almost out of reach, prohibitively expensive. Two: Transformation to a post-growth society. Produce programs and products in a targeted way to focus on need. For example: mental and physical health care; green collar industries; and high tech. Three: Transformation to a wider variety of ownership patterns in the private sector. For example: more co-ops; more employee owned enterprises; less rigid lines between profit and not for profit sectors.

We all must change. Consumers need to commit to living more simply, so that others can simply live. But real change probably needs to start in the political realm. It will require the ambitious task of reasserting popular control over politics before it’s too late. The environmental community in particular needs to see political reform as central to its agenda, which according to Speth, it doesn’t currently.

When Lisa Jackson made her announcement about regulation of air pollutants, Republican leaders called the decision “reckless” and declared that any regulations it devised would be unnecessarily expensive.

Rep. Mike Pence, Republican of Indiana, is chairman of the House GOP American Energy Solutions Group, a group of lawmakers whose mission is to lower energy costs. He said the EPA regulations would result in “massive new national energy costs” and was “completely irresponsible.”

What Rep. Pence doesn’t understand is that ecological health is fundamental to sustainable economic health. GOP should not stand for “Go On Polluting.” His narrow perspective is precisely the problem. The ecological costs we are incurring are staggering. Our responsibilities extend well beyond short term profits and bonuses. This isn’t about aesthetics, it’s about survival. Ours.