youknow, we ain't) ( had ittoobadt (T SUB ZERO A THE VOICE OF BUSINESS Does everyone wani clean air? By Richard L. Lesher, President Chamber of Commerce of the United States Does everyone want clean air? Numerous pollsters have told us yes. but I'm not so sure There exists a constituency of harping voices that has done every thing possible to delay the enactment of a streamlined Clean Air Act that can work better than the one that expired last Sept. 30. Am I talking about businessmen. Secretary James Watt's Interior Department, of job-conscious labor unions1 No. Ironically, the individuals who seek to preserve the unworkable status quo in clean air regulation call themselves environmentalists. A recent Opinion Research Survey conducted for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce pinpointed more specifically than previous polls the objective of Americans on the subject of clean air. First, we want clean air. Second, we are willing to pay for it. Third, we don't want to spend more than is necessary. We do not want to waste our money or needlessly sacrifice economic growth with red tape bureaucracy and overlapping, contradictory requirements We support changes in the current Clean Air Act to make it work better. Since the enactment of the original act in 1970. the first two objectives unearthed in our survey have been answered First, as a result of the Clean Air Act. technological improvements and an encouraging environmental consciousness on the part of the BP - T zLn Decreasing tire pressure doesn't increase traction; it just speeds up tire wear. business community, great proes has been made toward cleaning up a air. Second, we surely have paid dear for this progress. Best estimates p the cost to businesses and consune thus far at $200 billion. However, our third objective topi as much as we have to but not ma than we have to. has not been m Since the Clean Air Act expired oc Sej 30. an impressive coalition i businesses, labor unions, stale a local governments and a bipe.ta group of Congressmen have made sincere effort to reenact the GeasA Act. but to pass a law that cuts cat streamlines regulations and eiEh! to better pursue our tw in goals i healthy environment and a kj economy. This coalition, echoing the feeLfi. a vast majority of Americans, beiei that the current law can and cstl adjusted to take account of the pnet that has been made, without retreaj from the strictest health standi.-. That 's not eood enough for many a styled environmentalists. They is that any changes whatsoever in I current law amount to an at;er.3 cut it They have turned this tech.- issue into a political football, reia it to a few jingoistic slogans for A lucrative fundraising letters. The; l shown example after example . contradictory and confusi regulations, some of which acta cause delays in cleaning up the air 1 they do not bulge from their advM of the status quo. I .ast December. Rep. Thorti3sLii an Ohio Democrat introduced a Oe Air bill 1 1I R. 525;) that would meet t major objectives of a vast majority Americans. It has been cosponsored a bipartisan group of 36 House me bers. and is supported by ksl business, labor and govensnrt representatives. It proposes extersil from 1SS2 to 1S7 on a case-b basis, of deadlines for states and dustries which are sincerely tempting to meet air quality and h standards. It would ease existing limits on emissions but without lessening t overall air quality standards fa particular ar?a. It would one permit job-creating businesses expand and modernire in areas tr have yet to attain clean air gosfc, Kng as the new facilities are eqmff with the best available technology' the community has met. or iU meet its clean air givils. The supporters of this legislation.'' advocates of a tough, efficient vironmental policv for the 1- ( the true friends of the American vironment nn environment in the people want to include ck healthy air, common sensf economic opportunity. Opponents ' simply blowing smoke.