Backsliding on environment?

December 30, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
One of the most curious developments underway in state government is the moves by the Department of Environmental Management to back peddle on its mandate to keep an eye on polluters.

Environmental groups are aghast at IDEMâ??s plan to slap penalties on polluters after â??actualâ?? or â??significantâ?? harm has occurred. On the surface, the change seems to make sense; after all, the rest of us arenâ??t penalized until after weâ??ve broken a law.

But pollution and the problems it causes often arenâ??t discovered until years after the dump or emission. Thatâ??s why some of the nationâ??s regulatory agencies were established â?? to prevent problems.

The agency is undertaking several other changes, such as breaking up the Office of Enforcement and spreading its personnel throughout its air, water and land quality offices.

The changes are curious because they seem to run counter to the Daniels administrationâ??s moves to drag the state into the 21st century.

Hudson Institute President Herb London once said Indianaâ??s reputation outside the state is so bad that images of heavy metal contamination come to mind about as quickly as positive traits. Ironically, Hudson is the same think tank where Daniels once was executive vice president.

How do you feel about the changes at IDEM and Danielsâ?? environmental record?
  • It's pretty shitty if you ask me. Daniels is a solid govenor but his main weakness is his environmental track record. It's quite pathetic.
  • Unfortunately, despite many credible studies and some media exposure, most office holders in Indiana have chosen to ignore the nexus between environmental quality and quality of life and economic vitality. In Daniels' case, he has been virtually contemptuous of the need to move forward and effect positive change in this area. But we have a great business-friendly climate, as he crowed in his media interview yesterday. Hoosiers really are backwoods rustics to let him devalue our state and its citizens in this way.
  • There's more than enough work for one governor to do in 8 years. I have to wonder why Evan Bayh, Frank O'Bannon and Joe Kernan didn't clean up the state.
  • If we believe in the rule of law and due process, and most people say they do, then the change seems to be fair. Perhaps what is needed is a limit on the time frame, such as in statute of limitations. With today's ability to measure contaminants in parts per billion, there is almost nothing that cannot be determined today. Also, how much harm has been done to our economic well being by over-enthusiastic, self-appointed environmentalists?
  • Okay, wake up people. Indiana is the state MOST dependent upon manufacturing and coal-fired electric generation. When you calculate the environmental impact (i.e. reported waste streams and discharges) over our population base, of course it's going to be higher than almost every other state.

    The governor can't do a darned thing about that, and neither can IDEM.
  • Clearly Mitch and IDEM don't take this responsibility seriously and take pride in rubber stamping permits with blanket exceptions while touting they have eliminated a backlog of permits.

    One would think that the failures of the SEC to do its job properly leading to the current financial crisis would be a wake up call to them.

    Apparently not:

    In the last week IDEM announced they are pulling $2 million of funding for hazardous waste recycling from local communities along with funding for air pollution monitoring. It also will stop enforcement actions against government agencies.(i.e. INDOT gets off with serious water pollution violations at rest stops)

Post a comment to this blog

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
  1. PJ - Mall operators like Simon, and most developers/ land owners, establish individual legal entities for each property to avoid having a problem location sink the ship, or simply structure the note to exclude anything but the property acting as collateral. Usually both. The big banks that lend are big boys that know the risks and aren't mad at Simon for forking over the deed and walking away.

  2. Do any of the East side residence think that Macy, JC Penny's and the other national tenants would have letft the mall if they were making money?? I have read several post about how Simon neglected the property but it sounds like the Eastsiders stopped shopping at the mall even when it was full with all of the national retailers that you want to come back to the mall. I used to work at the Dick's at Washington Square and I know for a fact it's the worst performing Dick's in the Indianapolis market. You better start shopping there before it closes also.

  3. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  4. If you only knew....

  5. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.