259 



plants, and about the biology of the bay and the wetlands. But, more imix)r- 

 tantly, scientifie training is a discipline where you look for the facts, put up 

 certain propositions, and then test them to see if they make sense. You get 

 trained in how to go about solving problems. And I'm convinced the longer I'm 

 Governor, that exactly the same approach is needed in this ofBce. It's really 

 what applies in management in many fields. Most of my career in the Du Pont 

 company, the last ten years anyway, was in management, and I think the 

 background and experience were helpful. There are some other areas — being 

 acquainted with the political forces at work, for example — that my background 

 didn't provide. So I got clobbered a few times. 



Do you think that in the future some form of scientific training might become 

 a prerequisite for high elective office? I think that what's primarily needed is 

 a good general education. I would not recommend that everybody running for 

 oflSce to get a Ph. D in chemistry. But I certainly think that anyone who is going 

 to be a leader in the community ought to have an appreciation of the many 

 scientific and technological factors that are involved. I don't want to be disre- 

 spectful to lawyers but I think we have a disproportionate number of them in 

 Congress and in Governors' oflSces around the country. Their training is very 

 valuable in their area, but other areas are equally important. I think a well- 

 rounded education would be best for someone who wants a job like mine. 



Your statement in connection with the Delaware coastal zoning biU that "jobs 

 are important but so is the quality of our environment" has been widely quoted. 

 Was the real issue, as you saw it, jobs versus environmental protection? No. It 

 wasn't a question of either jobs or maintaining our natural environment. It was 

 a question of whether to use the same piece of land for recreation and tourisms 

 or for one of the most rapid industrial explosions anyplace in the world. The 

 nub of the argument was whether we should make blanket rules outlawing cer- 

 tain industries, like refineries, in certain areas, or whether the decision on zoning 

 should be based on guidelines and the merits of the individual case. We say that 

 you cannot have heavy industry in certain areas ; you cannot have certain in- 

 stallations along the coastline. They are incompatible with other valuable uses 

 of the land. All you need to do is drive north from AVilmington to Philadelphia 

 up around the Marcus Hook [Pennsylvania] area, and you see a collection of 

 storage tanks, pipes, towers, and waste-treatment lagoons. Even if you assume 

 that this section is completely free from pollution, the question arises : "Is this 

 compatible with the kind of environment we've built in Delaware, the kind of 

 recreational open country we have here?" And obviously the answer is no. We 

 have a unique setup here, a relatively unspoiled countryside. It's an asset to 

 millions of people, not just Delawareans. In fact, tens of thousands of people 

 from Washington and Baltimore and Philadelphia come here every year to use 

 it, enjoy the hunting, the fishing, the swimming, the boating, the sunbatliing 

 close to the ocean. It's a tremendous asset. I therefore look upon Delaware as 

 having a responsibility to the region — to hang on to what we have here. 



At the time you made the decision to promote that bill did you consider that 

 a political risk was involved? Oh, absolutely. Most of the reaction that I got 

 in this ofiice for the first few months was against me. From the state Chamber 

 of Commerce and the oil companies directly, law firms that represent the oil 

 companies, farmers who had sold land to the oil companies and who hor>ed to 

 profit from the increased value of the land they still have, developers. They went 

 right through to the very end fighting. It took the general public months before 

 they began to tune in on the significance of this. Then I got more and more sup- 

 port for the bill. But my training and background are not such that I would 

 weigh things on the basis of the number of votes that I thought a decision would 

 bring. 



How were you able to withstand the combined pressure of all those higlily or- 

 ganized interest groups when the bill was under discussion? We were just per- 

 sistent. Fortunately, we had a majority of the votes in both houses. They did 

 a lot of talking and a lot of arguing about it. After the bill got through the House, 

 we had a major problem in the Senate. There was a whole bunch of attempts to 

 amend it. But each amendment was voted down, some of tJhe critical ones by 

 just one vote. The bill finally went through with a few votes to spare. But the 

 pressure wiU be on for a long time to come. For many, many years. One of the 

 people in the oil companies has been quoted as saying, "We will be around here 

 a lot longer than Peterson will." [Delaware Governors are limited to two four- 

 year terms.] 



