A recent Register article (“Officials: EPA Rules Hurt Growth,” Sept. 11) repeats the now-popular misperception that all rules and regulations are damaging to the economy and job growth.
Discussion of regulations only in light of their assumed threat to job creation, while ignoring their role in protecting lives, public health and the environment, is deeply misguided. And ignoring the potential for regulations to actually create jobs is a costly mistake.
A 2011 report from the University of Massachusetts predicts that two environmental protection air quality rules, which will reduce toxic mercury from coal and the movement of fine particles and ozone across state lines, will create 20,000 construction, engineering and management jobs in Iowa over a five-year period, mostly in the private sector.
Conservative analysis of Clean Air Act programs show a four- or five-to-one monetary benefit, compared to cost. In other words, for every dollar spent, four to five dollars are saved. Most savings are in public health and avoided medical expenses.
The acid rain program, launched in the 1990s, was considered necessary to protect the environment and public health despite concerns about costs to coal-fired facilities and the national economy. In reality, the program has cost pennies on the projected dollar, resulting in considerable health and environmental benefits.
A more accurate accounting of the impact of rules is needed from our state and national leaders. They need to look beyond the up-front cost of compliance and include all health, environmental and economic benefits before regulations are summarily dismissed as bad for business.
— Leland Searles, Iowa Environmental Council, Des Moines