On the recordMarch 19, 1997
The clean air debate cannot be reduced to a simple cost-benefit analysis that ignores the effect of pollution on human health and separates the economic from the human. We should not face the 21st century locked into the old paradigm that gives us the false choice between jobs and clean air. Being proenvironment should not mean one is antibusiness. It is time for new thinking on the issue of pollution, thinking that promotes both economic growth and human health and supports environmental regulations that encourage efficiency and nonpollution. Nineteenth century thinking focused on pollution control, at the end of the tailpipe or at the end of the chimney. Such an approach requires a great deal of energy and money and is generally insufficient to protect the environment. New thinking looks at pollution prevention, inventing ways to stop pollution from being created. New thinking views pollution as resources that are distributed in the wrong place. Wasted resources mean lost profits. Environmental protection can be equated with fiscal conservatism. Application of more enlightened environmental management processes can increase profits. Such an approach will require that government and industry leaders work together to further the development of new communities; new technologies in energy; efficient industrial protection and transportation; new industries; and the unfolding of a new economic order based on profit and human progress.
Source
govinfo.gov