By Jack N. Gerard (NAPSA)}—There is an important fundamental issue raised by the current administration’s review of President Clinton’s “midnight regulations”: the need to rules, which govern hardrock mining on public lands. The potential negative impacts of these proposals on minerals mining, jobs and ultimately, the envirorspental and natural resource development objectives. When locked at from this perspec- analysis and study, and weallknown to industry proponents and opponents alike. sensibly balance our economic, tive, the true intent of the admin- istration’s actions becomes clearer, and the contrast with previous policies more stark. In the end, we are left with this basic question: Which approach offers the best chance for achieving success in ail of these important areas—-the economy, environment, energy uli- lization, and the supply of raw materials that provide the foundation for our way of life? To auswer this question, let’s look—not at perceptions—but at what the Bush administration actually did in some of these major policy areas during its first few weeks in office, and why they felt such action was necessary. Consider the “Section 3609” economy, were not just matters of hyperbole, but of thoughtful Recognizing that more than one national objective was affected by these rules, the Bush Administration's Bureau of Land Management sensibly decided to review them and seek additional public comment on the potential effect in all areas. in a similar way, administration decisions to not regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant, and to reject the economically devastating Kyoto Protocol, were clearly choices of balance. A balanced approach to these and otherissues offers the best opportunity to bot protect the environment and preserve economic growth. Mr. Gerard is President of the National Mining Association.
