Viewpoint. Punitive legislation is not needed - Environmental Science

---

viewpoint . Edgar B. Speer Presidenf, United States Steel Corp.

Punitive legislation is not needed The profit incentive has proved itself over and cm r again to be the best instrument extant for accomplishing effectively and eficienfly what, in the public interest, needs to be accomplished. For our profit-and- loss economy to do the job it is capable of doing in imp!.oving the nation’s physical environment, we must, of course, have some guidelines, as distinguished from the battlelines that have too often characterized-anc 1, 1 think, hampered-current efforts to make real he:adway against pollution. And I am confident these gu idelines can be brought into existence by the developrrLent of a cooperative attitude among all segments of our society, and most especially between industry and the agencies of government at every level that ex’er,cise jurisdiction in the environmental area. Our set of guidelines must embrace air and Wi .. . . . . . .. quality regulations or standards that are tair, fi clear-cut, and generally applicable to all actual potential sources of pollution, whether those be prix -._ enterprises, large and small, or whether they be operations of government. And I think it should be stipidated that, once a code of air or water quality regul:itions applying to a given political jurisdiction has bi2e1n put into effect, that code should remain in effect Lin til all who are subject to it have had a reasonable oppcXI:unity to fulfill its requirements. As matters now stana, re.. . quirements tor pollution suppression are too rrequently changed by regulatory bodies-sometimes after enterprises have made heavy expenditures to meet one code, they are confronted by a new and different one. That, to me, smacks of punitive legislation, and it is wasteful of money, time, and effort. In formulating guidelines to ensure steady progress against pollution, we must, by all means, avoid inchsion of the spurious notion that this progress can only be achieved by bringing the nation’s economic growth to a grinding halt. In order to accelerate the Ination’s efforts to curb pollution, we need to foster economic growth, for that is the way to generate new and additional capital to pay for the costly equipment fo1Ipollution abatement; that is the way to broaden the tlases of the various forms of taxation and help the variou,I vlyln..nlr .l of government ahate the pollution, such as untreated or inadequately treated sewage and pollution-producing disposal of solid wastes, for which they are responsible. Existing plant and equipment-when it was originally installed-conformed to pollution standard reI

quirements and the state of technology then existent. Subsequent advances in technology and changes in standards or regulations require large capital investment to make such equipment meet the revised standards. As a result, it should be recognized in federal tax law that such expenditures for air and water quality control projects are an operating expense as incurred. While the new tax law provides some relief for these projects, the continued progress that must be made in every industry requires at least accelerated write-off of all air and water quality-control expenditures. Those who are using the environmental problem as a platform for preaching a philosophy of anticapitalism and of pro-utopiauism will be quick to denounce suggestions such as these as “tax giveaways.” But they are not that at all; they represent a practical means of helping to provide the maximum possible dollars for solving a costly and complex problem: air and water pollution abatement. The accelerated write-off of thew rmtc d ~ ~ . . ..^_I_ _l”_l _n _e_~” not involve the principle of the subsidy. Write-off is simply a matter of advantageous timing for the purpose of tax deduction. The course that I am counseling- -one that I hope the scientific community, especially, c(sncurs in-is, I believe, a rational, scientific-economic approach to the ---LY.-. -c : :-- ..... .--, ~ L U U L C I UVI uupwvuig o u r prlyslcal cnvironment. This is the only approach that will, I am convinced, ensure meaningful and steady progress toward cleaner air, clearer streams, and less clutter-in short, progress toward a more comfortable, healthful, and esthetically pleasing environment for the Amel ~

~

___ __

~

~

I

Edgar E . Speer joined U S . Steel as a metallurgical observer in 1935.H e baame oresident in 1969

Volume 4, Number 10, October 1970 791 +Circle

No. 14 on R e a l a n ’ Service Card