What the 2000 Election Means to PMPs
(PMPs is an acronym for pest management professionals)
Subject: For Whom The POISON Applicators Are Voting-----
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 15:54:49 -0400
From: Stephen Tvedten <steve@getipm.com>
Organization: Get Set Inc. (www.getipm.com)
In the Legislative Commentary, found in October 2000
issue of Pest Control magazine, there is an article entitled: What the 2000
Election Means to PMPs (PMPs is an acronym for pest management professionals).
Bob Rosenberg is director of government affairs and Gene
Harrington is government affairs manager for the National Pest Management
Association (NPMA), Dunn Loring, Va.
Pest Control:
From an Environmental issues standpoint, how would you handicap the 2000
presidential race?
Rosenberg:
On the face of it, Republican Presidential Candidate George Bush’s
record in Texas and Republican Vice Presidential Candidate Dick Cheney’s
record while he was in Congress lead us to believe they will be relatively
friendly to the industry. On the
other hand, Democrat Presidential Candidate Al Gore and Democrat Vice
Presidential Candidate Joseph Lieberman are among a handful of people in public
life who have been vocally antagonistic toward pesticides.
Gore’s book Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit has made
it pretty clear that he’s not exactly on our side.
In addition, while in Congress, Lieberman convened hearings
on lawn care chemicals in the early 1990s.
He also proposed legislation around that time that required universal
notification on pesticide applications, with seven days’ advance notice in
schools and universities. This past
year, he asked the General Accounting Office (GAO) to do a report on the school
use of pesticides. He co-sponsored
a bill with Sens. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Robert Torricelli (D-N.J.) that’s
basically an anti-industry universal notification bill for school pesticide use
and school pest management.
Pest Control:
Will campaigning give Lieberman less time to promote this issue?
Harrington:
On the campaign trail, I’m not sure that either Gore or Lieberman would
hesitate to say negative things about pesticide use.
In fact, they made a campaign appearance August 12 at Rachel Carson’s
birthplace in the Pittsburgh, Pa., area. I
doubt they did it to simply sightsee.
Rosenberg:
It’s pretty hard to imagine a ticket with two people who’ve been more
outspoken on pesticide issues than the Democrat nominees.
Having said that, however, politicians tend to run on certain issues, yet
govern very differently. A lot of
people fear that it will be a catastrophe if Gore wins and a godsend if Bush
wins. I suspect that neither group
is exactly right. People tend to govern toward the middle.
There are all sorts of political constraints that actually force
Democrats to be less environmentally prone and Republicans to be more
environmentally prone. specifically,
because the public expects Republicans to be against the environment, they have
to make a special effort to appear to be interested in environmental issues.
Plus, there’s a lot of institutional things going on,
such as the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA).
If Bush and Cheney are elected, for instance, and there’s a Republican
Congress, it’s not clear that the first thing they want to do when they’ve
taken control of both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue for the first time in a long
time, is to strip environmental and public health provisions.
Pest Control:
With the House and Senate majority also up for grabs this elections, is
there a “best” combination, such as a Republican-held White House, Senate
and House, for the pest management industry’s interests?
Harrington:
My first guess is that would be the best scenario, but it’s really hard
to predict which individual is going to be running the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It’s
hard to speculate how much benefit industry would garner from either a
Republican or Democrat Congress.
Rosenberg:
Here’s a good example. With
a Republican congress and with 300 Congressional co-sponsors on FQPA relief
legislation, the reason why it has not moved up until now is because the
Republican chairman of the House Commerce committee, which has jurisdiction over
the issue, said “We’re not going to do it.
We don’t want to subject our members to a recorded vote that could be
characterized as gutting environmental protection.”
I think that’s where the political dynamic will continue to be in play.
Harrington:
Another thing we should point out is, we need to remember our place in
the world, so to speak. We’re not
going to be dealing with the president or vice president on pest management
matters. We’re going to be
dealing with the people they appoint. Sometimes,
the people they appoint take on politics of their own.
That’s been borne out numerous times in previous presidential
administrations. So at this point,
we’re going to be dealing with people we might not even know.
PC
Editor’s Note:
Every other month, in an exclusive Pest Control magazine interview, Bob
Rosenberg and Gene Harrington discuss legislative and regulatory issues that are
pertinent to the pest management industry.
Steve's comment:
"Hopefully this election will not be 'For whom the bell
tolls!'" |
