THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Monday, November 14, 1994 TAG: 9411120013
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A6 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Short : 47 lines
When Democrats in Congress and former President George Bush approved a ``luxury tax'' on expensive boats a few years ago, liberal senators including George Mitchell of Maine and Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts gloated about how the rich would have to pay more for their useless luxuries and about all the money that would flow into the Treasury as a consequence.
A few years later, Sens. Mitchell and Kennedy quietly moved to repeal the measure. They hadn't counted on it devastating the boat-building business in their states and across the country. The luxury tax had caused the wealthy to stop buying expensive boats and shift their money to other areas. Boat-yard workers, managers, salesmen and others were left unemployed.
It's not a luxury tax, but the effect of what the Environmental Protection Agency is proposing could be very similar. In the name of pollution control, it wants to regulate the small-boat industry - as well as off-road vehicles, chain saws and weed whackers - with strict new emission controls on engines. This could make boats and other recreation vehicles and engine-powered tools far more expensive, which will likely hurt those industries greatly.
And all for a minuscule gain in cleaner air. Boats and other small engines are tiny contributors to pollution, and what they do contribute has been substantially declining over the past 20 years right along with automobile emissions. Even if the EPA took no measures against smaller engines, pollution would continue to abate due to improving technology and better environmental awareness.
The economic effect of the EPA's measures, though, would likely drive up engine costs enough so as to make a difference to average boaters. Ironically, many owners of older boats who are thinking about trading up might stick with their dirtier engines longer than they otherwise might have done because of the higher cost of a replacement.
One of the items on the agenda of the new Republican Congress will be cost/benefit analysis of proposed environmental regulations. Hopefully, the election will prove a wake-up call for the EPA, which always seems to give priority to employing first-class lawyers and regulators rather than scientists and economists. by CNB