Who Really Protects The Environment?

An Opinion Editorial
by McNeer Dillon, Eastern Missouri Group Political Chair

Legislators pass laws that protect or destroy the environment. Law establishes bureaus that work to protect the environment. Money goes from revenues to the support of such agencies according to laws. Agencies are given power to regulate activities by law. Limitations are placed upon enforcement of regulations by law. Fundamentally, legislators are the principal ones who protect or destroy the environment. The influence of other people to protect the environment is secondary and subordinate.

The pervasive influence of some other people to destroy the environment is like a natural force, such as gravity or hurricane wind. Provision must be made in advance to resist such forces wherever it is necessary to oppose them. Only the laws furnish floor and shelter to the environment, but it, nevertheless, continues to be degraded in various ways.

People and businesses first pursue their own interests without regard for collateral damage to the environment. Without some enforceable standards of good conduct, most would not even feel regret for causing damage; they would probably feel satisfaction that they had escaped the cost of avoiding or repairing damage to it. Business organizations that do damage will obey laws before considering moral standards apart from law. Good companies are law-abiding rather than moral. They define their morality to the public in terms of obedience to the laws that had to be passed to rectify their former conduct. They usually do not consider environmental protection and public safety first. They consider their conduct to be perfectly righteous until there comes a law to alter that point of view.

 

Passing laws can protect the environment; not passing environmental laws results in its piecemeal destruction. Therefore, electing legislators who are interested in protecting the environment is the only way we are going to get those laws to save the natural world in Missouri or elsewhere.

In view of this, it is extraordinary to me to be surrounded by so many people who profess their love for the natural world and then flee from political activity. Apparently, they see no connection between their love and taking this action. Maybe that love is really no stronger than their will to act.

If we announce a day hike, we might have twenty-five to show up voluntarily. If we want people to come canvass for an environmental candidate, we may not even see two.

Working to elect the right kind of legislator is the only way to place the right kind of people in the Missouri Legislature and the U.S. Congress. There is no effective way to protect the environment without doing political work. There is no effective way to do the political work with just a few people.

I will try to give you a view of what comprises the political work for a Group. We identify the issues of concern to us. Then we must find the candidates who agree with us. We decide whom we want elected and whom we will work to support. Then we bring them to the attention of voters and ask for their votes. Finally we await the election returns. This is a very broad outline. The details are more complicated and time-consuming. If they are to be effectively dealt with, the tasks must be distributed over a large number of volunteers.

Federal candidates do not have quite as many opportunities to protect or destroy the environment as our state candidates do at the present time. This observation does not rate the importance of the issues to be dealt with on both levels: clearly global warming and air quality, federally treated in large part, are very important issues. Significant states environmental issues are simply more numerous at present, and they are important too. So what can a Group do besides wringing hands and complaining?

The Eastern Missouri Group Political Committee undertook to discover which state candidates supported the environmental protections of concern to us by sending out a questionnaire to all candidates. Those who answered and returned the questionnaires indicated that they sought support from the Sierra Club, or they expressed their opposition to our views. Those who did not return the questionnaires were regarded as disinterested in our concerns and received no further consideration. Those who answered the questions in a manner that concurred with our views were further considered for endorsement.

In every instance, the environment cannot be protected unless there is a specific law. The honor system has never served to protect the environment. The only people in this state who can pass the proper or the inappropriate laws are the Representatives and Senators, serving in the Legislature. So how do we get them to protect the environment? Well, we will ask them to do it. Only the ones who wish to do it can be encouraged to act. Most of those who do not want to do it will not be changed and will act against protection. We have to elect those who are disposed to protect the environment. Otherwise we are guilty of neglecting our cause.

Those legislators who are firmly pledged to support business interests will not change their positions. They will not vote to protect the environment where it may cost or inconvenience any business. Businesses employ many lobbyists to promote their interests relentlessly to Senators and Representatives. If it costs a business anything to spare the environment from pollution or destruction, that organization sacrifices the environment instead. Then it obfuscates the issue for the public, if it cannot hide its act. The only chance we have to protect the environment is to elect a majority in both houses who care enough about it to defend it. We must find, support and elect environmental candidates. Consider this a high priority.

In every session of the Legislature for the last decade, it has been necessary to defeat proposals to limit the enforcement power of the DNR and to enable industrial self-policing. It is wrong public policy to free industry from restraint. Instances abound of poor business ethics in various industries. Deregulation has usually worked to the disadvantage of the public. Prices go up, while service and quality go down, and often the environment suffers some deterioration. Industries may not be trusted to serve the public interest simply out of good will; none are organized for this purpose. They provide products and services, which make them money. They must be required by law to act in the public interest. Good companies are law-abiding, not ethical. Take notice! They care for people only when it makes them money or saves them trouble.

The balance of power for our side has slipped in the Senate. We need to regain it. We must work as relentlessly as the business and industrial interests to place people in the Legislature who will understand us must. Otherwise, our cause will be lost. Business will govern. The environment will be destroyed. Do not imagine otherwise. This is an ongoing struggle.

Since the term limit law is now operative, turnover in office will occur more frequently than has been customary in all Missouri districts. More new environmentally interested candidates must be found to run for office. This requires that we improve at keeping the public, the potential office seekers, and the candidates informed of our views and concerns. We need to develop better procedures to learn what candidates believe. We must be more attentive to state politics, lest a shift in power from the protection side to the destruction side may occur abruptly in the Legislature. Term limits have not simply made office holders more insecure; they are making environmental causes less secure as well.

That we must do political things to save the world does not necessarily mean that we will do these things. Attention to political realities may stretch the mentality of the average club member beyond its elastic limit. These attentions may thrust people into learning about politics, thinking about issues, making uncomfortable decisions, disciplined efforts, and even confronting opposition. It demands much of people who prefer escaping into the outdoors for hiking, bird watching, canoeing, and flower identification, to ask them to plunge into politics.

Political activity is war without the sound of gunfire. It requires planning, organization, and people. If the Sierra Club members can’t engage in this one, who will?

Stand up now! With the most recent election over and the wounds transcended, the planning and organizing must begin immediately for the next campaign. The recent experience should be taken into account. The organization and training should be improved. The number of “warriors” must be increased. If not, then the cause is abandoned and defeat is accepted in the next election.