送信者: "Kumao KANEKO" <kkaneko@eeecom.jp>
件名 : ＥＥＥ会議（ブッシュ政権の環境保護政策）
日時 : 2003年5月24日 9:14

各位殿

ブッシュ政権が環境保護に対して熱心でないことは世界周知の事実ですが、そのため
かどうか環境保護庁(EPA)のC.Whitman長官（女性）が一昨日辞任を発表しました。し
かし、ブッシュ（父）政権で環境保護庁長官を務めたW.Reilley氏（現在ＷＷＦ＝世
界野生生物保護基金＝会長）は、米国政府はもう少し環境問題に高い優先順位を与え
てもいいのではないか、例えば京都議定書は不完全だけれども、中国などに温暖化ガ
ス規制義務を課すためにも、米国は京都議定書の枠に戻り、これを改善する努力をな
すべきだ、また海を日本その他による乱獲（捕鯨など）から守るため海洋環境保護政
策を強化すべきだ、しかも、環境保護を強調すれば、イメージチェンジになり、女性
層の共感が得られるから来年の大統領選挙でも共和党に有利に働くだろう等と述べて
います。詳細は本日のNew York Timesの同氏の寄稿論文でどうぞ。
ＫＫ
**********************************************

The Green Old Party?
By WILLIAM K. REILLY


AN FRANCISCO
Lee Atwater, who was the Karl Rove of George H. W. Bush's 1988 presidential
campaign, once explained to me why he supported one of my controversial
decisions as administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency: "To me,"
he said, "your appointment is about suburban women. We need 'em. And they
care a lot about your issue."

As Christie Whitman, the most prominent suburban woman in the Bush
administration, steps down at E.P.A., the coverage primarily concerns the
issues on which she was overruled. This ignores some of her significant
achievements ・the "brownfields" legislation that will return thousands of
derelict urban sites to productive use, and the decision to reduce the
pollutants from diesel fuels. Yet again a Republican administration is
widely seen as unfriendly to the environment, and its E.P.A. administrator
as a casualty of neglect.

There are political strategists within the party who say it doesn't matter,
that environmentalists won't credit a Republican administration no matter
how green, and certainly won't vote for one. That may well be true.
Nevertheless, there are many good reasons for the Bush team to give the
environment a higher priority.

For three decades polls have consistently revealed lopsided majorities ・80
percent-plus ・in favor of maintaining or strengthening clean air and water
laws. Whether people vote the environment or not, and I admit most don't,
they still want it protected and improved.

The problem, of course, is that vigorous environmental protection involves
regulation, which is suspect if not anathema to many conservatives. And
E.P.A. decisions necessarily hit elements of the Republican base hardest:
manufacturers and other businesses, farmers, land developers. In fact, the
first thing an E.P.A. administrator learns is not to antagonize more than
one major industry at a time: if big oil is to be hit this week, big autos
had better be deferred until next week.

Nonetheless, there are several fronts on which the Bush administration could
address growing problems that not only affect people around the world, but
also threaten American economic productivity.

For example, I agree that the Kyoto protocol on greenhouse gases, as
drafted, is incomplete. However, the United States could come back to the
table and reshape the protocol. A sustained effort to make realistic and
affordable United States greenhouse gas reductions, accompanied by mandatory
monitoring and reporting of emissions by our utilities and other major
emitters, would have the support of key United States companies. American
re-engagement in Kyoto could also help prompt fast-growing developing
countries like China, which are not now constrained by Kyoto, to sign on.

New studies have come out with shocking information about the depletion of
the world's oceans, driven in large part by European subsidies to fleets and
the scouring of the seas by Japan and other countries. It would benefit
America's fishing industry, as well as the planet, to push for an end to
subsidies, new marine sanctuaries and new international conservation
agreements to end overfishing.

America's lakes and estuaries are major sources of drinking water and vital
economic generators through tourism. Washington could do more to get states,
localities and nongovernmental organizations to reduce pollution runoff,
control overfishing, preserve wetlands and protect shorelines. Especially
vulnerable are Chesapeake Bay, Long Island Sound, the Gulf of Mexico and the
Great Lakes.

And while the Bush administration has played a serious role in conservation
efforts in the Everglades and national parks, it could build on that to
preserve more of our country's special places. For one, it could give more
support to local land trusts, which can help keep family farms and ranches
in business while ensuring that the land won't be turned into subdivisions.

To suburban mothers ・not to mention young people, Europeans and much of the
rest of the world ・to be anti-environment is to be on the wrong side of
history. The Bush administration can reclaim Republican leadership on an
issue that should not be seen as belonging to one ideology or one party.


William K. Reilly, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency in
the George H.W. Bush administration, is president of Aqua International
Partners and chairman of the World Wildlife Fund.