My boss at Michigan Environmental Council, Lana Pollack, has a brilliant and timely op-ed about the starvation diet for state government environmental programs in today's Detroit News. The key quote:
"Does the public know we're looking at losing four decades of environmental progress?"
http://www.detnews.com/2004/editorial/0410/08/a11-297222.htm
And then there's the State Chamber of Commerce and Michigan Municipal League, which teamed up on a nonsensical op-ed in yesterday's News.
"Two new water regulation schemes would threaten Michigan jobs."
http://www.detnews.com/2004/editorial/0410/08/a17-296179.htm
It's interesting how the Chamber in particular never referred to this as a scheme when their pal, Governor John Engler, trumpeted his Great Lakes commitment by signing the agreement in 2001 that started this process. Is this a partisan or substantive attack? There's a clue in the fact that the piece ends with a reference to gimmicks that have been touted by the Republican leadership in the Legislature...a dispute resolution process, a groundwater advisory council...study, study, delay, delay.
But the real point is that the op-ed completely distorts the issue. The Chamber has been an active advocate of Nestle Corporation, which is exporting Michigan water (in bottles) out of the Great Lakes Basin, despite the op-ed's assertion that "Great Lakes water diversions should not be allowed outside the Basin." And the idea that other states would control our water use, when the current draft proposal would probably not affect a single existing use and very few new ones (in other words, it's too weak) is the biggest distortion.
If Michigan business wants to endure, it needs to participate in drafting and supporting reasonable water conservation rules, not pandering to Great Lakes xenophobia.