|
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.
|