262 



• the growing importance of EPA and of environmental issues, 



• the interrelationship of environmental protection issues and other issues repre- 

 sented by Cabinet departments, and 



• the ability of the proposed elevation to Cabinet status to meet other recognized 

 criteria for elevation, such as improving the agency's oversight and accountability. 



We would like in this testimony to review these reasons as well as organizational 

 and management issues that, in our view, have an important bearing on the legisla- 

 tion before this Committee. 



Growing Importance of EPA and of Environmental Issues 



It is important to understand how different the EPA of 1993 is from the EPA of 

 1970. Today, the agency administers a dozen or so major environmental statutes. 

 Most of these statutes had not yet been enacted when EPA was created. Even those 

 that were on the books, such as the Clean Water Act, were completely revamped in 

 the 1970s. From first-year expenditures of $384 million, EPA's annual outlays have 

 risen to almost $6 billion. As a percentage of total Federal outlays, EPA's share has 

 more than doubled since 1970. Furthermore, EPA spends about as much each year 

 as the Department of the Interior — and more than the Departments of State and 

 Commerce. 



Of greater significance than the size of Federal outlays for environmental protec- 

 tion, however, is the effect of EPA's programs on our national economy. Environ- 

 mental control measures have cost the Nation approximately $1 trillion thus far. 

 We now spend about $115 billion a year, or about 2 percent of our gross domestic 

 product (GDP), on controlling and regulating pollution. In fact, a whole new sector 

 of the economy has grown around pollution control. In the early 1970s, Federal pro- 

 grams controlled the most visible types of pollutants — what comes out of smoke- 

 stacks or goes into sewers. Since then, the Federal Government has assumed respon- 

 sibility for regulating less visible, but more pervasive, sources of pollution: toxic 

 chemicals, hazardous waste disposal, and chemically contaminated lands and water. 



In the future, the Federal role in environmental protection is likely to grow 

 larger, especially as environmental problems become increasingly international. Al- 

 though we have reduced air and water pollution, we have not solved these problems. 

 The cleanup of hazardous waste sites is clearly going te continue well into the next 

 century, as are efforts to reregister pesticides. And even as we move to try to solve 

 old problems, we discover new ones, like global warming and indoor air pollution. 

 Moreover, resolving some of these problems — like global warming and the depletion 

 of the stratospheric ozone layer — will require unprecedented international coopera- 

 tion. To sum up, the number, scope, and persistence of environmental problems 

 argue strongly in favor of representing environmental issues in the Cabinet. 



Interrelationship of Environmental Protection and of Issues 

 Represented in the Cabinet 



As our awareness of environmental problems has increased and EPA's role has 

 expanded, environmental policy has increasingly shaped other domestic and foreign 

 policies. "The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, for example, which called for switeh- 

 ing to cleaner fuels and cleaner coal-burning technologies, are directly linked to the 

 Nation's energy policies. The United Stetes' participation in the international agree- 

 ment to phase out production of chloroflourcarbons (CFCs) illustrates the integra- 

 tion of our environmental policies with our trade and foreign policies. As we begin 

 to address global climate change, we will have to examine interrelationships among 

 policies in many areas, including energy, agriculture, overseas assistance, foreign 

 trade, and national security, among others. 



Because EPA is the Federal organization responsible for identifying and repre- 

 senting environmental interests before the rest of the government, EPA interacts 

 regularly with the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Interior, Stete, 

 Transportation, and so on. Elevating EPA to Cabinet status would ensure that the 

 head of the agency is able to deal as an equal with his or her counterparts both 

 within the Federal Government and the international community. Compared with 

 many other Federal departments' interests and responsibilities, EPA's are equally 

 wide-ranging. 



Moreover, numerous GAO reviews have demonstrated that other Federal agencies 

 do not always provide the support and cooperation necessary to further environmen- 

 tal policy goals. Instead, roadblocks are often created by jurisdictional conflicts, or- 

 ganizational structures, and cultures that are not conducive to cooperation with 

 EPA or that place a low priority on environmental protection. In some cases, the 

 effect of these roadblocks has been serious. We see, for example, that years of ignor- 

 ing environmental consequences at Defense and Energy Department facilities have 

 jeopardized the health of neighboring communities and are likely to cost the Feder- 



