Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: MONDAY, October 23, 1995 TAG: 9510230143
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: DAN CASEY
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
John Henson, Roanoke
The background:
Compared with neighboring states, Virginia has been relatively reluctant to enact strict environmental controls on its waterways, with the possible exception of the Chesapeake Bay. Environmentalists, who mostly fall on the liberal end of the political spectrum, say this is a major lapse in state policy-making that later generations of Virginians will regret. Most vexing to environmentalists is a law that prohibits anyone downstream from a polluting industry from recovering damages from that industry, as long as the industry is complying with state water discharge permits. Conservatives and the business community, on the other hand, view the lack of stiff environmental regulations as a major lure for businesses seeking to expand operations in the state. They say adding more regulations will cost Virginia jobs.
The General Assembly's role:
The Virginia General Assembly has wide latitude in passing legislation barring pollution of waterways within the state.
The answers:
The question was directed to the candidates for the state Senate seat from Roanoke and most of Roanoke County.
Sen. Brandon Bell (R): ``The key right now is to enforce current laws when individuals are abusive, malicious or negligent with regard to our environment. I would also suggest the Department of Environmental Quality playing more of a partnership role, not a policing role, working with families and businesses to protect our environment, not against them. We must also strike the correct balance so that we maintain a clean environment and protect jobs that are often vital to families and entire communities."
John Edwards (D): ``I strongly favor protecting our waterways from pollution. One approach is to proceed with the implementation of the Tier III Program. This would allow certain streams to be designated as natural resources in order to prevent their degradation."
Also on the record:
At the time Edwards was endorsed by Roanoke Valley environmentalists in August, he issued a strong pro-environment statement: "Without protection against polluted water, dirty air and toxic soil, not only will our quality of life erode, but our chances for economic progress will decay."
Bell has been pegged by environmentalists as a generally "anti-environment" senator, a characterization that he disputes. He received a score of zero (out of a possible 100) for his votes on six key pieces of environmental legislation in the 1994 and 1995 General Assembly sessions that were tracked by three environmental groups: the Sierra Club, Clean Water Action and Citizen Action. Bell in 1994 voted for legislation that prohibited Virginia from implementing water quality programs on waterways west of Interstate 95. This year, he voted for legislation that gives immunity to polluting companies if they confess polluting to state authorities - and to keep pollution-related information on such companies secret. In 1992, he voted to allow oil and gas drilling in the Chesapeake Bay, and against efforts to fund a state program that would help waterworks owners meet stricter federal guidelines on drinking water. Nevertheless, his overall score as judged by environmentalists that year was 42 out of a possible 100.
What other candidates say:
Few other General Assembly candidates this fall have raised the environment as an issue.
Got a question for the candidates? Send it to Citizens' Agenda, The Roanoke Times, P.O. Box 2491, Roanoke 24010, or fax it to 981-3346 or e-mail dyanceyinfi.net. Please include your name, address, daytime phone number and specify which candidates your question is for.
Citizens' Agenda is your opportunity to get answers from this year's
General Assembly candidates.
Keywords:
POLITICS
by CNB