The strong environmental sentiments that led to Earth Day yielded dramatic changes in American legislation and reflected an expanded set of priorities. In 1964 the Congress of the United States passed the Wilderness Act in an attempt to set aside, in the words of the act, "an area where earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man"; the lands designated as wilderness areas were to be "affected primarily by nature." In 1968 Congress adopted the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to ensure that at least some of the scenic and recreational value of the country's rivers was preserved in the face of a growing number of dams and riverside development. In 1970 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was established, and attention began to shift toward pollution control and the establishment of national environmental quality standards. The EPA was responsible for the environmental well-being of the country as defined through numerous specific pieces of legislation. One of these, the Clean Air Act of 1970, became the model for future measures. The act established national air-quality standards, gave states the responsibility for developing and enforcing plans to use these standards, and set up compliance schedules. Additionally, the act made federal funding available to states to assist in their efforts. The National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), also enacted in 1970, required an environmental assessment of all federally funded projects. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) was formed in 1970 as well, although it was placed under the control of the Department of Labor rather than the EPA. Reflecting Theodore Roosevelt's belief that human health was a natural resource worthy of protection, OSHA's mission was "to assure so far as possible every working man and woman in the Nation safe and healthful working conditions." In 1972 Congress passed the Clean Water Act, designed to do for the nation's water supply what the Clean Air Act accomplished for the atmosphere. The Endangered Species Act was passed the following year and has been described by the Supreme Court of the United States as "the most comprehensive legislation for the preservation of endangered species ever enacted by any nation." The most important aspect of the legislation is its reliance on scientific rather than economic data. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) was adopted in 1976 with the twin goals of protecting human health and the environment and conserving valuable natural resources. Through this act, the federal government took a more active role in controlling solid and hazardous waste, as well as in promoting recycling. Despite the good intentions of RCRA, numerous hazardous waste sites were created throughout the country. To combat the dangers posed by these sites, Congress passed the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980. Known as Superfund, the act created a $15 billion fund of public money, to be increased by taxes on polluting industries. As huge as this fund is, it is inadequate to deal with the thousands of hazardous sites in need of cleanup. The vast majority of these sites occur on federal military reservations. Of the 35,000 sites screened since the passage of CERCLA in 1980, the EPA has chosen or is considering 1295 sites for its National Priorities List and estimates that 3000 sites eventually could be given this status. The body of federal environmental legislation has been under increasing attack since the election of Ronald Reagan as president in 1980. Conservatives have argued that too much public money is being spent on the environment and that the federal government should play a much-reduced role in environmental regulation. In addition, some people believe that most restrictions on the use of private property are forbidden by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which prohibits the taking of property "without just compensation." When environmental laws limit use, the argument goes, property values decline and the government has "taken" or reduced the worth of private holdings. The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed with this reasoning and ruled that some environmental protection laws have placed unfair burdens on property owners. As each piece of environmental legislation is modified or comes before Congress for reauthorization, battles are fought between those who believe industry and development are being unnecessarily stifled and those who contend that the environment is being irreparably damaged. Environmental advocacy groups have regularly taken to the courts in defense of the environment. Suits have been filed against the federal government in the hope of compelling its various agencies to enforce congressionally mandated acts. Additionally, advocacy groups have sued corporations directly for failing to follow various environmental laws.
changes concerns countries ecology extinct home location movement problems radiation snes roms
