G. New Approaches in Government

Senator Henry Jackson argued that new approaches to environmental management are now required, and urged the Colloquium to provide thoughts on the possible "action-forcing" processes that could be put into operation.

Secretary Udall pointed out the difficulty of reorganizing the executive branch on a strictly environmental basis:

Let no one suppose there is any organizational panacea for dealing with environmental problems at the Federal level *. To combine all programs affecting the environment in one department would obviously be physically impossible.

Each agency should designate responsible officials and establish environmental checkpoints to be sure they have properly assessed this impact.

Whether or not new institutional arrangements are accepted, the Bureau of the Budget and the Office of Science and Technology must play a central role in collecting facts, anticipating impacts and providing an early warning system for environmental protection (p. 18).

Secretary Cohen outlined existing patterns of agency leadership: In certain discrete, well-defined areas activities have been organized under the "lead agency" concept ***. The second pattern involves multiple rather than single agency leadership, primarily because it must accommodate a variety of interests, no one of which takes precedence (p. 38.)

Dr. Donald Hornig stressed the power of the Presidency to coordinate and translate policy into action:

The principle, the authority for oversight and coordination-and in fact, Executive responsibility for management— is vested in the President; it is exercised through the Executive Office of the President, particularly by the Office of Science and Technology and the Bureau of the Budget in this respect. We have been working very hard on this problem of coordination, and we have made much progress. But, if our efforts turn out to be insufficient, further steps will surely be necessary and new organizational forms may be needed in the Executive Office (p. 32).

Assistant Secretary Baker related early experiences of the USDA with the systems approach:

We [Agriculture] are developing a Department-wide systems analysis capability for evaluating and interpreting the on-going programs. *** We seek to organize our efforts in ways that will make them compatible with efforts that may be undertaken by other agencies (p. 26).

Secretary Weaver warned of the difficulties in obtaining a regiona or "problem-shed" management of environmental quality:

There is a serious problem of stubborn resistance to change in our political institutions. This is true at the local and State level, where the term "metropolitan government" is a spark to the tinder, and where needed cooperation among neighboring local governments is sometimes resisted for fear it will lead to metropolitan government * * *. This means that at the Federal level, we should and we have helped create institutions for metropolitan subsystems that can handle problems affecting the environment of whole areas (pp. 20 and 21).

Mr. Laurance Rockefeller stressed the value of a commission comprising legislative, executive, and private sector members:

I suggest to you that an effective means of proceeding might be a Commission on Environmental Policy Organization.

It may be that this task can be done by some entity less formal than a Commission. The Citizens Advisory Committee on Recreation and Natural Beauty plans to make the environment subject one of its major interests during the coming

year.

The Committee is, of course, directed to make its recommendations to the President and the President's Council on Recreation and Natural Beauty. (pp. 6 and 7.)

The Congress was discussed in terms of its own organizational confusion in treating environmental issues.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. The layman is confused by the organization of Congress in the environmental field. (p. 6.)

Secretary UDALL. There is still a lack of overview. (P. 13.) *** I think Congress ought to be much less bashful about spending more money on strengthening its staff so it can provide the kind of oversight that is needed. (p. 54.)

Secretary COHEN. We recommend that the Congress examine its own organization in order to improve its ability to deal in a comprehensive and coordinated manner with the total problem of environmental quality. (p. 40.)

Senator ALLOTT. *** Congress has abrogated its responsibilities to a great extent with respect to legislative oversight. (p. 54.)

Mr. PRICE. Congress too might have an eye to its own organization in these matters: How far it would be possible to go on from this kind of occasional informal exchange of views toward either special nonlegislative committees like the Joint Committee on the Economic Report, perhaps in conjunction with some development within the President's Office; how far pieces of jurisdiction could be carved out for legislative committees; how far the burden of coordination could be forced on the Appropriations Committee

(p. 69.)

PART II. ALTERNATIVES FOR CONGRESSIONAL ACTION

An impressive number and variety of legislative proposals for improving the quality of our environment have been set before the 90th Congress (see appendix). Support for action has come from diverse segments of American society: from the scientific community, from business, and from public affairs groups.

The Congress should move ahead to define clearly the desires of the American people in operational terms that the President, government agencies at all levels, the courts, private enterprise, and the public can consider and act upon.

The ultimate responsibility for protecting the human-serving values of our environment rests jointly with the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of our Government. The Congress, as a full partner, has the obligation to provide comprehensive oversight of all environment-affecting programs of the executive branch, and also to participate in the overall design of national policy, thus serving both as architect of environmental management strategy and as the elaborator of goals and principles for guiding future legal actions.

Under the present organization of the Congress, varying aspects of environmental management (including air and water pollution control, strip mine reclamation, outdoor recreation, housing and space planning in urban areas, highway construction, atmospheric research, oceanography, and rural conservation) are committed to different committees. While there has been a steady expansion of independent committee interest in specific environmental problems, the Congress so far has not evaluated this field in its entirety with a view toward evolving a coherent and unified policy for national environmental management.

It should be recognized that the declaration of a national environmental policy will not alone better or enhance the total man-environment relationship. The present problem is not simply the lack of a policy. It also involves the need to rationalize and coordinate existing policies, and to provide the means by which they may be reviewed continuously, made consistent with other national policies and ranked in reasonable priority.

The proper development of such a far-reaching body of policy raises many difficult organizational, economic and legal problems. Some individuals who were present at the July 17 colloquium suggested that a congressional mandate on the subject of environment, which would necessarily encompass a very wide range of problems and issues, would be impractical and ineffective. Yet others pointed out that equally broad mandates and satisfactory organizing concepts for managing our economic welfare and for guiding the development of atomic energy have been tested over a period of years, with effective machinery now operating both in the executive and legislative branches to evaluate the extent to which national goals and activities in these fields are meeting public expectations and needs.

In any event, to those involved in the colloquium and recent hearings on this subject, it is clear that two functions must be served: coordination and information gathering. Environmental problems cut across so many existing operational organizations that coordination in both the executive and legislative branches must be improved. Further, an effective channel of information exchange and overview must exist between the Congress and the administration. If, for example, an environmental council were established in the Executive Office of the President, as has been proposed, it should be complemented with a corresponding joint congressional committee for purposes of efficient and continued interaction.

The acquisition and evaluation of information specifically for the Congress must be improved. Raw facts and data from ecological and economic studies must be interpreted to be useful in the legislative process. This function should be performed in an organization reporting directly to the Congress; for example, a strong joint committee staff or an expanded Legislative Reference Service environmental unit. Congress (regardless of present or future executive branch approaches) may exert a meaningful influence on the formulation of national environmental policy by embarking on one or a combination of the following steps: 1

A. A concurrent resolution could be introduced declaring the strong interest of the Congress in establishing national environmental policy. This would represent a firm expression of concern on the part of the Congress about environmental deterioration, but would not be a direct confrontation with the task of defining national policy. The resolution might urge the creation of an appropriate body to investigate all matters relating to environmental management; to analyze the means and methods whereby the organization, administration, and funding of government programs affecting the environment may be improved; and, to determine the ways whereby nongovernmental entities could be encouraged to participate in overcoming further deterioration of the environment in the national interest. Hearings on the resolution could provide a forum for a wide range of opinion.

B. A joint resolution calling for an amendment to the Constitution on the subject of environmental values could be introduced.

This would require approval by two-thirds of the Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the States. The amending process is both slow and cumbersome. Moreover, acceptance would require a tremendous groundswell of support. However, a proposed amendment would generate wide discussion and involve the State legislatures which are vitally important in achieving environmental quality goals. The advantage of constitutional amendments lies in the unanimity of national commitment. Such an amendment for the environment could place expanded emphasis on the judicial process as an instrument of controlling future abuse of environmental values.

1 This white paper deals with action alternatives for the Congress. Obviously the spectrum of organizational and administrative alternatives for policy in the executive branch is equally important. These range from definition of rights with court defense, to regulation by Federal agency, to standard setting, to incentives for voluntary conformance, to subsidy of technology for restoration and maintenance.

C. A joint committee or committees on environmental management could be established to provide across-the-board oversight on Federal programs, to conduct studies with the assistance of professional staff, and to recommend legislation. Alternatively, select or permanent committees could be established in each House.

Such committees could draw membership from existing legislative committees involved with environmental matters, and perhaps focus primarily on the review of policy and coordination matters dealt with by such groups as the Office of Science and Technology, Water Resources Council, the Council on Recreation and Natural Beauty, and various interagency coordinating committees.

D. A new environmental surveillance unit to conduct research and information-gathering services for the Congress could be organized. In the past, Congress has shown reluctance to add new appendages of this sort to the legislative branch. An alternative might be an expansion of the functions of the General Accounting Office to make continuing studies of environmental conflicts and to prepare appropriate reports for transmittal to the Congress. New staff positions and additional funding would be required.

E. The Congress could establish a nongovernmental task force to carry out in its behalf a special study of environmental policy needs. Such a task force could engage the services of private research organizations and draw its membership from the finest talent available in the academic community. The task force could be administered directly by the Congress or made the responsibility of some arm of the Congress such as the Legislative Reference Service, Library of Congress, which has the authority to employ experts on short-term assignments.

F. A temporary environment management council could be organized.

Such a council might be similar in organization and operation to the National Council on Marine Resources and Engineering Development. Its purposes could be to identify all unmet needs and opportunities in the environmental field, to study impediments to sound environmental management, conflicts of interest and gaps in existing agency and congressional activities, and to develop recommendations for legislative action within a specified period of years.

The Congress would retain an overview of the council and would control the budget for its operation. Establishment of a policy planning group in the Executive Office of the President forces the generation of proposals to the Congress. A receiving committee should be set up to correspond to this Council, similar to the Joint Economics Committee and the Council of Economic Advisers.

G. A governmental commission could be established for the same purposes.

The commission could be composed entirely of Congressmen, perhaps the chairman of key committees which deal with environmental matters. Or it could be a Joint Commission including representation from the executive branch and the public at large. A third type would