Bush not the environmental president

To the editor:

At the second presidential debate that was held in St. Louis, President Bush was asked, “How would you rate yourself as an environmentalist?

Whatispecifically has your administration done to improve our nations’ air and water supply?”

In a response that was laced with plans, propositions and bills he fought for, the president did indeed sound like the “good steward” he professed to be. His record, however, tells a totally different story.

During his tenure as governor, the state of Texas ranked first in toxic releases into the environment, first in toxic chemical accidents and first in cancer-causing pollution.

However, Governor Bush did see to a de-crease in spending.

Under his leadership, Texas dropped to 49th in spending on the environment.

One of his first acts as president, in a rather big flip-flop of his own, George Bush dropped lawsuits against 47 violators of the Clean Air Act, even though he previously promised to pursue them.

His administration is responsible for changes in the New Source Review rules that make it easier for industry to pollute.

The Superfund was allowed to go bankrupt.

Hard-fought battles to clean polluted rivers and streams have now been lost be-cause we lost the ability to force the polluters to comply with the rulings.

As a result, any cleanups must now be paid for by the taxpayers. We should all be environmentalists.

Our health, jobs, finances and even our national security can be affected as a result of how we care for our planet.

Jill LeMay

Oakville