I think it is clear that there is an imperative and there is an urgency for environmental education.

I think the greatest evidence of this is that there are presently 80 laws in the California State Legislature specifically on air pollution and there are not 20 worth passing.

I feel that the primary reason for this is that our legislators do not have the facts the facts may not be available-and in other cases, they may be, but they have been pressured by public sentiment to get their name on a bill to insure that they be re-elected in November.

This is a problem not just at a State level, obviously.

Mr. BRADEMAS. You are quite right about that.

Miss CITRON. OK. Well now, I cannot understand, for instance, the Clean Air Act by reading it. Okay. And I expect that they do not understand me when I am talking in a biological jargon.

One of our essentials is to have a translation system to legislators to whom we entrust, hopefully, wise decisions on our behalf.

It is certainly well understood that this education is needed. I think also that it is evidenced by the fact that there is this Environmental Quality Education Act in both Houses of Congress and that we must pay very strict attention to it so it can be implemented in the most feasible, rational way possible, if that is possible, at all.

I think that it is clear to all of us, or at least to many of us, that the American system of democracy has been one that has been, I think, a plague on the species homo sapiens and I think what we need to do is to really understand the difference between homo sapiens as a species, and society as a collective group of individuals who are oriented on a temporal-mind basis. We have done very little to aid homo sapiens. We have done, often, a lot of injurious things to society as a cultural entity and I think we have to start educating people to the understanding of the fact that we are animals and a part of the natural world.

If we continue to believe that we are somehow exempt from natural laws, if we believe that we are exempt from the plague, and present danger of pesticides, for instance, on the California condor and on the brown pelican, then we are really in a bad way. We have to recognize our part in the natural world.

I think this is the kind of cultural attitudinal change that has got to take place.

We keep thinking we can do anything, we have the right to say anything. Well, I do not know about speaking but we have the inherent right, as individuals of a democracy, supposedly, to choose to do anything we want. We are supposed to do this in mind of collective society and not stepping on each other's toes but we certainly do not seem to do this in terms of the collective species. We do not seem to think there is any need for regard of that.

I have heard lots of comments especially after Earth Day, April 22, of which I think you are probably all well aware, concerning population, for instance. People were saying, "I can have as many kids as I want, if I can afford them." And this is certainly not true, I do not think.

Mr. REID. What would you recommend on that?

Miss CITRON. On population?

Mr. REID. Yes.

Miss CITRON. Well, I would recommend that we must-I'm trying to put this in a way that is very clear, and it is difficult because I am extracting, thoughts. It is important that, first of all, we have some kind of population studies to determine what population growth is like for homo sapiens.

We understand, biologically, there are two forms of growth, one which grows up to a peak and uses all of its environmental available resources. In using them all up, there is nothing for them to subsist on again, so it drops off. This is called a J-shaped curve.

There is another kind which gets up and levels off on an equilibrium. We do not know about man. There is a possibility we could get up to the J-shaped curve and be dead, having no more resources.

I support the tents of zero population growth. In actuality two and seventenths children per family, for the number of people that can reproduce, and do so, will actually level population growth. Not only must we instill committment to this idea, but provide incentives, i.e. by tax means, to promote it.

Mr. REID. Thank you.

Miss CITRON. I think, to sum up the first part of what I am saying, simply that we have got to look very carefully at which I call a politico-cultural ethic and turn to a kind of responsibility that is individual and collective for homo sapiens, in terms of a stewardship not only of the earth, but of our part within it.

And then, regarding the bill itself, I think it is a step in the right direction. I think it has a lot of potential. I think we have to provide it with as much potential as feasibly possible. This is one of the areas where we need to spend a lot of money.

We do not have all the answers. We have some of them. And we have just got to do as many things as possible to see what is going to work. People just have not been working very long at it.

Ecology itself is a very young science. People throw the word, "ecology," around very loosely. We have to look at what is the difference between ecology and environmental problems.

There are two points in the present bill to which I would like to address attention. Lines 24 and 25 on page 4, through line 5 on page 5, seem to provide the States a power which one would choose to deny them, if the Federal Government is earnest in its commitment to effecting major solutions to our environmental problems. The political concept of States' rights must not become an issue in this discussion. Under this description, should the State choose to deny funding to a worthy project, the Federal Government would have stipulated its disinterest in aiding such a program. The Federal Government must be ready to aid pertinent environmental pursuits regardless of State commitment. Under present wording, the State is empowered to stymie any project by removing financial support. We are all too familiar with the products of interests conflicts and self-interest motives. In our own collective best interest, we must offer as many viable alternatives to environmental problem solving as is creatively possible.

Secondly, it behooves Congress to define clearly and without reservation its interest in obtaining and encouraging effective educational

programs. It should be prepared to reward programs demonstrating ability in achieving change with continued support. Evaluations, as designated in lines 6 to 13 on page 3 must be made with further action the goal. All too often, program evaluations are made and laid to rest in some forgotten file. Evaluations must be made with goals of defining improvements and continuations of laudable projects.

We must recognize that most of us are fledglings and ingenues in this area of prime importance. My suggestion is that in both of the above-mentioned areas, the wording of the bill is weak. Clearly, the bill is a strong step in the right direction, but it does not go far enough.

National attitudes reflect the attitudes of the national leaders. They must be bold enough to confront the issue with force and clarity. The quest for environmental responsibility in attitude and action is beyond the scope of political faction and self-aggrandizement.

Should we choose to negate these ideas, we will have chosen to negate our continuance on this planet. This is a unique moment in time, in both its occurrence and in that it is not being ignored. For centuries, we have denuded our life support system. Today, we occupy the threshhold of our mutual and often neglected responsibility for mother earth. If there is anything which we can still proclaim of the Christian ethic, it is not to give up a worthy fight until it is won in our favor. To our legislators is entrusted the responsibility to act wisely in our behalf.

It is evident that no one has all the facts or even, perhaps, half of them.

Thus it is mandatory that we act in such a way as to offer as many rational choices as is possible by supporting programs at all levels of personal involvement.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Thank you very much, Miss Citron, for a very thoughtful statement.

Mr. Marienthal.

Mr. MARIENTHAL. May I have 4 minutes. I am sorry I do not have copies but

I salute, greet, praise, applaud, cheer, hail, the implication of the Environmental Quality Education Act, but I approve of it as only a beginning, an introduction, as to what our Government must really do. That beginning step is always the most difficult. For this reason, I will give the bill all the acclaim it deserves.

I hope to hasten the acceptance of this bill by telling the subcommittee, from the inside, about the absence of education in matters concerning the quality of our environment. As a high school student, I see not only what is missing; I feel it when I find that my friends have little or no understanding of the magnitude of ecological problems. I have read many books, magazines and pamphlets on environmental issues. I have also been to several ecological fairs and have had personal talks with a variety of experts dealing with ecology. I am appalled at the lack of knowledge my peers display on topics of air, land, water and noise pollution. Even more frightening is that they still think such concepts as abortion to be dirty. They know little about imminent food shortages facing the world, including the United States. They don't realize that overpopulation is the root of such problems. These very issues will decide the future existence of mankind.

Before I attempt to pass judgment on the ignorance of many fellow students, I must quickly reexamine the school system where it breeds. Dr. Robert Maynard Hutchins, of the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions in Santa Barbara, sums it up

With an educational system that does not educate and a system of mass communication that does not communicate, we have become incapable of the discussion by which political issues are determined.

A political document leading to an increased ineffectiveness of the Los Angeles school system is California Senate bill 413 introduced by Schmitz and Walsh (Sex Education Act to add section 8506 to Education Code).

Such bills like this, distributed throughout the Nation, advocate that sex education can be taught only in classes where students have parent approval forms.

Abortion and overpopulation are subjects not allowed to be discussed openly.

Protecting students from unnecessary "no-no's" is one thing, but to deprive them of vital information during these perilous times is a step toward genocide.

Laws such as this do not serve the public well and are not in the American spirit of free inquiry.

Even if the Schmitz bill were to be repealed, this would not guarantee that factual materials or worthwhile classes would become available to deal with these most urgent issues facing my generation.

A law requiring that conservation classes be taught in the schools was researched by Rudolph Shafer, but no funds were provided to put the law into effect.

It was like dangling food in front of a starving person with hands tied behind his back.

Many students are moved toward rebellion and riots by such gaps in education.

Those not so attuned will sit back until destruction is upon them. As H. G. Wells put it: "Human history more and more becomes a race between education and catastrophe."

My fellow students are distressed that $80 billion are being spent on military defense and only $16 million on population control, the defense of our enviromnent.

They have lost faith, and distrust most of the current policy which controls their destiny.

The tide could be reversed by the passage of the proposed Environmental Quality Education Act.

As technology keeps pace with the population, the need to change existing laws and to understand the laws of nature has become acute. Previous generations were not faced with this urgency.

It is up to the students of today to relate them in detail to their elders.

Thus, the very survival of the human race is directly dependent on the effectiveness of our educational systems.

I had generally assumed that funds needed for environmental education would surely become available.

Until they are, the most forceful step led to the formation of a network of student groups designed to relate ecological problems to the community.

47-238-70-47

So, together with dedicated helpers, I formed ACT, Attack Contamination Today.

While such ecology groups have been started elsewhere, ACT advances their concept by unifying separate secondary school elements and enthusiastic forces into a powerful whole.

They can then take on grassroots work so desperately needed.

Grassroots means reaching into the community and starting proj ects such as recycling, passing on information about the need for population control, matters relating to rapid transit and many vital aspects of our endangered environment.

Let me summarize what ACT is doing and what more it hopes to accomplish in the future.

I would like to relate how a group of more than 150 students was organized at my high school.

The following committees and their responsibilities were created:

A. PROGRAM COMMITTEE

1. Objectives: To produce presentations in an effort to educate and inform students and community of ecological problems.

2. The committee member's responsibility: To bring forth or create speeches, tapes, films or other materials for presentation. Also to find speakers for assemblies or individual classes.

B. PUBLIC RELATIONS COMMITTEE

This committee has the most interest and support.

1. Objectives: To activate people of the community to do their part in the fight against contamination.

2. The committee member's responsibility: To create and find literature and petitions to be circulated throughout the community.

C. SCHOOL AWARENESS COMMITTEE

1. Objectives: To turn the student body on to the subject of ecology and make them an aware and active group in the fight against pollution.

2. The committee member's responsibility: To design posters and write fliers and speeches to be presented to homerooms, assemblies and other student body gatherings.

D. LETTER WRITING COMMITTEE

1. Objectives. To promote action by Government and industry to halt unnecessary pollution-producing activities.

2. The committee member's responsibility: To write letters to influential Government bodies, groups and people concerning specific environmental problems. The committee's duties are expanded upon by the need for original letters, researchers for important people to write to and newly arising problems.

The results of this organization plan are as follows:

Groups of students have set up tables with literature and petitions to inform the public about overpopulation and pollution.