I'm a latecomer to the environmental issue which for years seemed to me like an excuse for more government regulation. But I can see that in rich societies voters are paying less attention to economic issues and more to issues of the spirit including the environment.

I am going to confront the old-fashioned negative thinking which says that all government needs to do to generate growth is cut worker and environmental protections cut taxes on the rich and stroke 'fat cats' until they purr with pleasure. I'm completely repudiating the idea that government has to get out of the way.

Nature is not simply a technical or economical resource and human beings are not mere numbers. To suggest that one can somehow align all the squabbling institutions of science environmental management government and diplomacy in an alliance of convenience to regulate the global climate seems to me optimistic.

If the federal government had been around when the Creator was putting His hand to this state Indiana wouldn't be here. It'd still be waiting for an environmental impact statement.

Why has it seemed that the only way to protect the environment is with heavy-handed government regulation?

The government should set a goal for a clean environment but not mandate how that goal should be implemented.

I think the government has to reposition environment on top of their national and international priorities.

It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment.

State governments generate less revenue in a recession. As state leaders struggle to make up for lost revenue legislatures tend to cut funding for higher education. Colleges in turn answer these funding cuts with tuition hikes.

All school districts receive funds from the federal government through the Department of Education to support anti-drug education efforts.