62 



Clinton's Fiscal Year 1995 PRO request from $963 million to $922 million, which 

 means that EPA will not be able to fully fund the contractor reform initiative in 

 Fiscal Year 1995. This issue deserves continuing attention from the Environment 

 and Public Works Committee. 



Friends of the Earth is proud to have organized a letter Sent in February 1992 

 from eight environmental leaders to Appropriations Committee leaders in favor of 

 full funding for EPA's salaries and expenses budget The letter stated, "we believe 

 it is important to distinguish the Salaries and Expenses account as an issue of vital 

 importance for EPA's efforts in every program and medium." 



Other material weaknesses identified by the EPA are the antiquated and obsolete 

 inventory of scientific equipment, and aging laboratory facilities. These are the 

 physical infrastructure of the agency, and it is essential that they receive increased 

 funding, as recommend by the SAB. 



Macro Budget Issues Will Have Big Impact on EPA R&D 



It is important to remember that the EPA R&D program may be less affected by 

 authorization levels stipulated by this Committee than by "macro" actions affecting 

 the entire Federal budget EPA R&D and virtually all other environmental programs 

 are part of the discretionary spending category of the Federal budget In order to 

 protect environmental spending programs, Friends of the Earth recommends the fol- 

 lowing measures: 



• protect discretionary spending from further cuts when the Senate considers 

 the Fiscal Year 1996 budget resolution next year; 



• cut defense in order to boost non-defense investments; 



• achieve tough health care cost containment and enact fair and responsible 

 entitlement spending reform to prevent unchecked growth in this category of 

 the budget that threatens to crowd out all discretionary spending in the future; 



• reduce the deficit by taxing pollution and :he use of natural resources, and 

 by obtaining fair return for taxpayer assets. 



Unless Congress is able to act on these items, funding for EPA R&D will never 

 be adequate to provide the information this nation needs to deal with threats to 

 human health and the environment 



No Easy Answers 



Finally, I would like caution those who would seize two easy answers to the cur- 

 rent funding shortfalls. First, risk reduction budgeting is not going to solve this 

 problem. It may help around the margins, but no list of priorities can make up for 

 the fact that we are failing to fund essential work. Second, forgoing new environ- 

 mental laws or weakening current laws will not solve funding shortfalls. Many envi- 

 ronmental research needs today are driven by increasingly complex scientific issues, 

 rather than enactment of new laws. It is vital that EPA perform the necessary re- 

 search to reduce uncertainty and allow formulation of solid policies, regardless of 

 congressional action on new environmental laws. 



Other Issues in Bill 



There are numerous minor provisions in S. 1545, and Friends of the Earth does 

 not have the expertise or time to comment on all of them. However, Friends of the 

 Earth believes that section 8 of the bill regarding long-term pesticide research is a 

 useful initiative that would help fill data gaps on an environmental health issue of 

 great significance. We urge the Committee to retain this section of the bill as intro- 

 duced. Dr. Richard Fenske has previously testified to this Committee that existing 

 pesticide research efforts are inadequate, and that "The health and environmental 

 issues posed by modern pesticide use can only be addressed through development 

 of a national strategy, and by establishment of a long-range planning and stable 

 funding for pesticide research and development." 



