|
o
doubt if the American people were asked whether they supported specific
measures that might be necessary to actually follow through on this proposition
[of the U.S. using its position to get other countries to join together
to take action against world environmental problems], the results would
be quite different. In fact, almost every poll shows Americans decisively
rejecting higher taxes on fossil fuels, even though that proposal is one
of the logical first steps in changing our policies in a manner consistent
with a more responsible approach to the environment. But this pattern
is a common one: the American people often give their leaders permission
to take action by signaling agreement in principle while observing the
right to object strenuously to each and every specific sacrifice necessary
to follow through. A popular idea doesn't always spawn a popular plan:
the Marshall Plan is a fine example. Though the people and Congress supported
the notion of the United States leading a European recovery program, as
soon as President Truman proposed granting large sums of taxpayer dollars
to make the plan work, his approval figures in the public opinion polls
dropped substantially almost overnight. Similarly, there is no doubt that
several measures that would be necessary here in the United States in
order to meet these threats would be unpopular and carry enormous political
risk. But the American people are, nevertheless, beginning to give their
leaders permission to challenge the nation to take bold, visionary, and
even difficult steps to confront the environmental crisis forthrightly
and responsibly. At open meetings in communities throughout Tennessee,
I have found that voters are willing to go much further to meet the crisis
than most politicians assume is possible but they are waiting for
leadership. Indeed, I am convinced they are hungry to hear hard truths
and are ready to make the all-out effort necessary for an effective response.
|