Page 12


owners should be fairly rewarded for incurring public environmenat least in environment, in Anderson’s words, “should bear the costs for what they’ve done.” Anderson has published some useful observations about the environmental devastation sustained by federal subsidies of massive western water projects for the benefit of private industry. His solution? Privatize all federal and state forests, parks, lands, waters, etc., etc., if eliminating the beleaguered public middleman in this private aggrandizement would somehow slow down, rather than accelerate, the economic and environmental destruction it has wreaked. \(The day before the PERC conference, Anderson had promoted these notions at yet another Austin conservative confab, this one sponsored by two PERC allies, the Texas Conservative Coalition Research Institute and the Washington-based Competitive Enterprise Institute. Also in attendance were TNRCC Chairman Barry McBee, and Texas State Representatives Warren Chisum and David Countsbe sure to look for PERC’s discounted doctrines on sale at a Legislature currently ,7108 AgEgv. ronmental education changing teaching r state level. Their message: e education has gone too far, isfull of onesided arguments and outright lies, and asks students to become activists. The real agenda behind this “reform” campaign, however, is to build enough key media coverage to derail reauthorization of the National Environmental Education Act. The NEEA, which passed the Senate by unanimous consent last year, is slated for action in the House. A look at the connections between these individuals and their respective organizational affiliations reveals ties to big industry, rightwing think tanks, conservative foundations and the religious right. This coordinated attack is conducted by groups financed by Chevron, Shell, Dow Chemical and other industrial polluters with a vested interest in undermining environmental education. While attempting to portray themselves as concerned about the peace of mind of America’s children, the true goal of the ruzin ‘!about environmental iss text books and environmental groups. Each chapter is reviewed by “experts” and is detailed in its approach, attacking issues statistic by statistic. Common beliefs about rainforests, endangered species, population, water and air quality issues are all rewritten. An advertisement claims that Facts Not Fear offers parents a balanced, sound-science alternative to the “exaggerated claims about the environ mental crises” that kids hear in school. Yet the authors resort to the same onesided arguments for which they criticize environmental education as a whole. For example, the book contends that rainforests are not really being deforested by forces commonly identified in textbooks \(i.e., agriculture, commercial logging and ing on the problems themselves.” A locally on s -chool ections. said Dan Barry of the Clearinghouse for Environmental Advocacy and Research. Moreover, Sanera and Shaw maintain deep ties with riv,htwing foundations and dirty industries. “We Are the NRA” Sanera directs the Center for Environmental Education Research at the Claremont Institute, a highly conservative think tank founded in 1979. Sanera is also president of the Arizona Institute for Public tions are members of Alliance for America, a nationwide network of more than 500 Wise Use groups. Alliance for America’s funders include the National Rifle Association and numerous industry groups, including the American Mining Congress, the American Petroleum Institute, the American Pulpwood Association, and the Chemical Manufacturers Association. The Claremont Institute and 10 THE TEXAS OBSERVER FEBRUARY 28, 1997