Tobacco Documents Online

COMMI.t NTA 'RY CANDACE CRANDALL Meaner grows the greenery T he average Joe on the street might be hard-pressed to find a common thread among such diverse groups as the National Association of Realtors, the American Sheep In- dustry, the Heritage Foundation, and the Independent Petroleum Association. But thsnks to a 12 page polemic now being c6rculated by the Sierra Club and a 5 page letter m Cangress from the National Wildlife Federation, activists ev- erywhere should have no trouble linking them up. These organizations and some 36 others have been "exposed" as part of a"Wise Use" conspiracy, an "environmental destruction coali- fion" that NWF President Jay Hair claims is hell-bent on tuming the planet into a "batrea moonscape" by stripmining Yellowstone, park- ing oil rigs in the Grand Canyon, and depleting the ozone layer over North America. Others named? Try such subver- sive organizations as the National Association of Homebuilders, the American Fatm Bureau Federation, the American Motorcycle Associa- Oon, and the National Cattlemen's Association. "Wise-Use," a term originally applied to land-rights citiuns' i ~,W11i+~~n ~CYp1~Cg (and other U_S _newspapers) Wednesday, December 9, 1992 groups out West, has been up- graded to a "shut-up" label (i.e., sexist, racist, bomophobe, funda- mentalist Christian, devout Cath- ohc, etc.), encompassing virtually any organization or individual that has ever had the temerity to suggest that knee-jerk environmental leg- idation wastes valuable tax dollars and puts Americans out of work, or that there an alternative scientific views on the seemingly endless litany ofpotential ecu-catastrophes now facing the planet. If this sounds as though environmentalists are falling victim to unbridled hys- teria, it is perhaps understandable. With President-elect Bill Clinton contemplating his nominee to head the Environmental Protection Agency, and the role that agency will play in national and intema- tional pofiry, there is a pressing need to stifle the growing chorus of dissent among scientists, business leaders, and members of the public if environmenhl pressure groups hope to maintain their dout on - Capitol Hill. Despite opinion polls showing continued support for a dean envi- romnent, the signs are more omi- nous than good. Guilt and fear doesn't sell the way it used to. Fur sales are inching back up. Eco- oriented mutual funds, ona touted as hot properties, are going no- where. Magazines and newsletters focused on environmental topits are battling extinction, their read- ers, according to the Wall Street Journal, overrun by messages to think and live "green." It's no better at the ballot box. In 1990, more than 200 state environ- mental initiatives went down to de- feat, including a 39 page, single- spaced regulation nightmare called "Big Green," which Californians voted down by a margin of more than2to1. This year, with the economy overshadowing all other issues, far fewer environmental measures were on state ballots, but most met similar fates. Ohio voters, by a wide margin, dumped a proposal to expand on the "toxic warning" concept for consumer products, a measure that opponents said would have done little good at great cost. Massachusetts voters killed a recy- cling initiative that carried an an- nual price tag of some $230 per household. Oregon voters defeated overwhelmingly two measures to close the Trojan nuclear power plant. Not surprisingly, leading politi- cians, ever mindful of the political cross-currents, have suddenly toned down their environmental rhetoric. Journalists, who once could be counted on tn promote the movement's agenda, are also breaking ranks, sobered perhaps by the Eatth Summit, which had been biEed as a serious discussion by international statesmen, but which revealed itself btstead-in the words of one correspondent-as an outrageously expensive bazaar of the bizarre, a sideshow of turtle- lovers, nuclear-power haters, breast-feeding advocates, Holly- wood celebrities, and Th'vd World kleptocrats intent on getting their hands on more of those good Yan- kee dollars. At many of the largest environ- mental organizations--including the NWF, Siena, and Greenpeace USA--softening public support has resulted in some highly publicized belt-tightening. Grassroots fund- raising bas been on the slide since last year; charitable foundations, enother source of revenue, report- edly are directing more and more of their environment dollars toward small groups focused on specific, local problems. "There is a sense," says journalist Stephen Greene of the Chroniele of Philanthropy, "that either the large environmental organizations don4 need the money or that their years of effectiveness have passed." In need of a new public relations strategy, environmental pressure groups have, in the months since the Earth Summit fiasco, tried to address some of the public's eco- nomic concerns by issuing report after report claiming that environ- mental regulation can actually bolster the economy, create jobs, raise new revenue, and reduce the deficit. This argument is suspect, how- ever, since jobs are not readily transferable--loggers cannot he eas0y tumed into environmental lawyers, for example-also, it misses the point. The purpose of environmental regulation is not to raise revenue to reduce the deficit, the purpose is to correct or prevent a dearly idenn'fred environmental problem. The other tactic has been to re- new efforts to silence dissenters by making them politically auspect Thus the "Wise Use" pejorative, a bogeyman that is nothing less, in the words of the Sierra Club, than an "insidious yet vastly organized plot...to dertroy the entire environ - mental movernent" [Emphasis the'trs.] This new campaign--aheady picked up by other activists-may indeed prove more successful, from a political standpoint, than a puta- tive global warming (in a cooler- than-nornrat year) or the desire to save old tree.s (at a cost of some 33,000 or more logging jobs). Per- haps the spectre of realtors or mo- torcyde enthusiasts out to "get" environmental groups will prove useful too in bringing in more of those $10 and $20 checks that make up the bulk of their support. But these kinds of tactics do little to clarify the reality and extent of our environmental problems and even less to bring about effective, cost- conscious solutions. Newsweek journalist Gregg Fasterbrook, among those recently critical of activist groups and their tendency toward overwrought rhet- oric, has pointed out that the desire to be exempt from confronting the arguments against one's position typically is seen when a movement fears it is about to be discredited. Certainly that is some of what is behind this shift in strategy. But when organizations like the Sierra Club irresponsibly counsel their members, in hysterical tones, "to take whatever action is neces- sary to stop the destmction," and then hand out arbitrarily designated hit lists, it becomes something much worse--it becomes a move- ment that threatens to undo much good that has been accomplished, a movement that threatens to im- plode. President-elect Bill Clinton should consider carefully the im- plications of this ugly trend among environmental groups. What is needed in the new Administration is the backbone to withstand pres- sures from extremists and to focus on what should be our national long-term goal--bringing con- cems for wildlife and ecosystems back into balance with concerns for the welfare of people. Candace C Crandall is execu- tive director of the Science and Environmental Policy Project, which monitors the useofscienBfre data in developing federal envi- ronmental policy. OGM4trdOZ The Science & Environmental Polirvv o.nta^• oI^, '"l°^^ ^',,. °•^^