Remarks Following a Meeting of the Cabinet Committee on the Environment and the Council on Environmental Quality in Chicago, Illinois

Ladies and gentlemen:

We have just completed the first meeting of the Environmental Council. And this meeting was in conjunction with the Cabinet Committee on the Environment and also was being held, as you know, for the first time outside of Washington, in the city of Chicago, where four Governors, who are standing here on the platform, participated in the meeting.

We found on our part, from the standpoint of the Federal Government, it was a most useful meeting. It was particularly useful to hear, from the Governors d each of these States, the programs that they have instituted in the environmental field, and I believe that it can be said that these four States have programs that are in the forefront among the States of this Nation in the environment.

We learned a lot from what they are doing, and I hope that what we have been trying to do at the Federal level will provide them with some new ideas and some new views as well.

Now, to be specific on just two or three points before turning the meeting over to the Governors, because you will want to ask them about the reactions, and also to Russ Train, who is the Chairman of the Environmental Council, for any questions you may have to him, or to Dr. DuBridge, who is our Science Adviser.

Our specific point of discussion--and it was my view that in having a meeting, rather than just talking in generalities, we should take a specific subject and do something about it---our specific point of discussion was Lake Michigan.

Lake Michigan, as all of you know, is the largest body of fresh water in the United States. Lake Michigan, at the present time, is still not labeled as, and does not deserve the title of, being polluted. But unless something is done now with the potential pollution of Lake Michigan, it could become like Lake Erie, which at this time could be classified as a dead sea, an inland sea. We do not want that to happen. And the time to act is now.

In order to deal with this problem, it is going to require total mobilization. And I think that is the term I would like to apply to all of the efforts of the Federal and State governments as well as municipal governments in this field---the total mobilization of the Nation, the mobilization of the Federal Government, the State governments, the local governments, of industrial producers, and of also the individual citizens. Only through total mobilization can we deal with the problem of water pollution, air pollution, and the other problems that affect our environment.

Turning now to Lake Michigan, what the Federal Government can do, and what we are doing immediately, is to deal with the two major sources of pollution, which happen to be Federal facilities-Fort Sheridan and the Great Lakes Training Station. Five years ago, those two facilities were directed to stop polluting. Unfortunately, however, as is often the case--and this, we found, was a common refrain we heard from the Governors-when Washington authorized funds, it did not provide the funding in the appropriations for those actions.

For example, we found that since 1966, when the act was adopted by the Congress, in the field of water pollution, the Clean Waters Act, the authorizations for projects-in other words, the promises for projects--have been three times as great as the appropriations for projects.

So one decision we made today is that we are going to close the action gap. We are going to authorize funds, but we are also going to appropriate funds. We are not going to make promises for action and not keep those promises.

As far as Lake Michigan is concerned, in terms of the Federal facilities, while the $2 1/2 million for Fort Sheridan, and the $ 12 ½ million far the Great Lakes does not seem like a large sum when we think of the total problem, that will stop pollution of these facilities, and it will accomplish it before the end of 1972. And Mr. Train has the responsibility to see to it that that is carried forward.

Now, related to this specific problem, of course, the States also have programs dealing with that-part of the lake which happens to abut on their various States. And in addition, we will, in our environmental message, cover various new restrictions and regulations which will be laid down for industrial users who happen to be adjacent to the lake, and therefore, are a major form of pollution.

Our environmental message will come out on Tuesday. We will not, of course, and should not disclose all of the provisions of the message. But just to give you two or three indications of its approach, it will cover water pollution, air pollution, and also the acquisition through new innovative financing as well as through other methods of open space for the future generations.

In terms of water pollution, you already know that we have announced in the State of the Union Message a $10 billion program which, according to the latest intensive survey by the Department of Interior, is the amount that is needed to provide all of the sewage disposal plants that this country needs. We are going to provide that over a period of 5 years.

How are we going to do it? It will be on the basis of our $4 billion Federal grant, supplemented by a $6 billion matching program on the part of the States and the municipal districts.

There is, however, this difference: As far as the $4 billion Federal grant is concerned, we are not talking about authorization and then not have funding. As a matter of fact, we have decided that that $4 billion should be appropriated and made available and be committed at the rate of $1 billion a year in the first 4 years of the 5-year program, so that by the time the 5 years is completed, the facilities will have been funded and, therefore, will have the time to be completed.

The other point with regard to the State and local communities that we found in talking with the Governors was that many times, when the Federal Government does make funds available, there are some districts and some States, not these States, but some States and some districts, which do not have the credit rating which will enable them to sell the bonds to meet their commitment.

So the message will provide an innovative new method to take care of this situation, a method through which we will provide a secondary mortgage market, whereby the Federal Government will guarantee obligations for such districts or States so that we can be sure that the entire $10 billion, 60 percent from the States and local communities, and 40 percent from the Federal Government, will be committed and spent so that the facilities will be completed in the 5-year period.

One final note and I will leave you to the other participants in the conference. I have taken notice of the fact, as I note many of the members of the press have, of some disagreement as to whether the funds that we have asked for in the field of sewage disposal are enough. We believe that they are. And Mr. Train will be able to answer specific questions, because he made the survey in the Department of Interior on this point. But whatever it costs, we are going to do the job, but $10 billion is the best estimate of what it will cost.

But related, of course, to the criticism with regard to costs, which are certainly to be expected and welcomed in terms of finding the right answer, there has also been, it seems to me, a rather sterile discussion as to who really deserves the credit for discovering the issue of pollution and dealing with it.

I am aware of some of the criticisms that have been made in that respect, that this administration found pollution late, and that the credit really should go to others who recognized it earlier.

Let's just get right to the fundamentals. The fundamental question is this: There is pollution of air, there is pollution of the water. We do have a major problem with regard to recreation areas in this country. If we don't act now on all of these problems, we are not going to have an environment that is fit to live in in the United States within 10 to 15 years.

We recognize the problem. We are going to deal with it. As far as clean air and clean water and recreation areas are concerned, they don't have a Republican label or a Democratic label. There is no partisan gain, I think, to be derived by either party by making this basically a political issue.

What we need is the cooperation of the Federal Government, the State governments, of both parties, and of private individuals to deal with the problem. And it is in that spirit that we are going to totally mobilize the resources of this country to deal with this problem in which the American people are very vitally interested.

I finally would like to say that I want to congratulate the members of the press in the Chicago area. I noted, for example, the articles that have been appearing in the Chicago Tribune in this field, and the fact that the Tribune named .an environmental editor.

I know that the other papers in the area, the Sun Times, the Daily News, and others as well, that they have showed very great interest, and that the television stations and others have indicated an interest in this problem.

It seems to me that what is needed is a national education program with regard to how big the problem is, so that we can see that it gets the priority, the high priority that it needs, when we allocate funds among a number of causes, all of which are worthy, but some of which have to come first.

The reason why the environment must come first is that it is one area that, unless we do it now, it won't make any difference what we do later.

Finally, with regard to the political credit, I will only say that if we succeed in initiating a program that is effective in cleaning up our air and in cleaning up our water and in saving our recreation lands, there will be plenty of credit for everyone. If we don't succeed, who is to blame isn't going to matter. And that is the spirit of our meeting this morning.

Thank you.