jdmann@cdp.uucp (David Yarrow) (10/14/89)
/* Written 6:44 pm Oct 2, 1989 by gn:greenlink in cdp:gp.press */
/* ---------- "FAR RANGING ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVE" ---------- */
Subject: FAR RANGING ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVE UNVEILED
Date: October 11, 1989
Via GreenLink:
==============
By INGRID BECKER
LOS ANGELES (UPI) -- A coalition of environmental groups
unveiled a sweeping initiative Tuesday that would end the use of
cancer-causing pesticides, protect California's shorelines from
oil spills, preserve water supplies and clean up the air.
Opposition to the proposed Environmental Protection Initiative
of 1990 began forming soon after it was announced, particularly
from farming interests who said a number of the measure's
provisions seemed "arbitrary" and redundant.
But supporters are prepared for a tough campaign in winning
passage of the initiative, which they acknowledge "runs smack
into the face of some of the most powerful financial interests in
the state," said Al Meyerhoff of the Natural Resources Defense
Council, one of environmental groups backing the measure.
"This initiative is the most significant proposal for protecting
the environment ever placed before the voters in this country,"
said Assemblyman Tom Hayden, D-Santa Monica, a longtime
environmentalist and one of the initiative's key supporters.
State Attorney General John Van de Kamp said the measure,
expected to appear on the November 1990 ballot, "offers
Californians an environmental bill of rights on some of the
critical issues of our time."
"By passing this initiative, Californians can make a sweeping
public pronouncement on behalf of environmental protection that
will help turn the tide," he said.
The initiative would phase out use of cancer-causing pesticides
in foods by 1996, and reduce by 20 percent over the next decade
the levels of carbon dioxide emissions.
It would also phase out by 1997 most chlorofluorocarbons, halons
and other gases and chemicals used in refrigerants, industrial
solvents and styrofoam products that damage the Earth's ozone and
lead to the so-called global warming effect.
California's coastline would get new protections through the
imposition of stricter standards regulating the discharge of
pollutants by various industries. The state would also have to
start a new monitoring program for water and sediment quality.
The measure would also establish a $500 million oil spill and
prevention cleanup fund and ban future offshore oil drilling in
state waters unless in case of a national emergency.
Additionally, it would require the state to develop a farmworker
safety program to prevent or reduce pesticide exposure among
agricultural laborers, including posting of fields that have been
sprayed and granting farm workers access to pesticide use
records.
An elected office for an environmental czar would be created to
ensure compliance of the measure.
The initiative is backed by the Sierra Club and the California
League of Conservation Voters, among other environmental groups.
Supporters said the greatest opposition to the measure will
likely come from the same industry and agribusiness sources that
opposed Proposition 65, the safe drinking-water initiative of
1986 that prohibits detectable levels of cancer-causing chemicals
in water.
Farming interests were among those to express their concerns.
"The food safety provisions (of the measure) probably cause us
some problems because it's pretty arbitrary in some of the things
it requires," said Clark Biggs of the California Farm Bureau,
which represents 50,000 farmers statewide.
"We're not going to say that it's going to shut down
agriculture, but we think regulation as it exists can protect
people from chemicals," he said.
The initiative, which requires 500,000 signatures to qualify for
the ballot, would also establish a $300-million bond program to
save Redwood forests and for replanting forests.
Supporters said the initiative provides critical environmental
protections that the state Legislature and Gov. George Deukmejian
have so far failed to provide.
"This initiative signals the end of politics as usual. By
adopting it, the people of California can regain the momentum
that was lost in Sacramento and give this state a fighting
chance," said Bob Hattoy, the Southern California representative
of the Sierra Club.
Added Greg Karras of Citizens for a Better Environment: "It
tackles the toxics which industries discharge down drains, closes
sewage treatment loopholes, assigns the biggest polluters their
fair share of the needed cleanups, and at last addresses the
runoff which adds to ocean pollution."
---
Patt Haring | United Nations | Screen Gems in
patth@sci.ccny.cuny.edu | Information | misc.headlines.unitex
patth@ccnysci.BITNET | Transfer Exchange |
-=- Every child smiles in the same language. -=-