through American multinational agreements, however, like an act of God. Acts of God in the United States are not contractual. People are responsible for their own damages, mostly associated with the weather, such as hurricanes and tornadoes.

Environmental Standards in the United States depend on representative government such as the United States Clean Water Act applicable to the issue of toxic pollution discharge, providing It is the national policy, that the discharge of toxic pollutants in toxic amounts be prohibited; 33 U.S.C. Section 1251 (a)(3).

http://taberlaw.wordpress.com/ united-states-environmental-la w-at-a-glance/the-clean-water- act-federal-water-pollution-co ntrol-act/.

Whether South Americans in Peru should adopt the environmental laws of the United States in their own country, depends on whether the United States can clearly support its own environmental laws and protect its own resources. Clean Water Act violations are litigated through the United States Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA). After reading for seven years about the dwindling monies, the Bush Administration, a pro oil and gas mining administration and family, allocated to support the Clean Water and Clear Air Acts. One of President Bush's speeches distinguishing mandatory and discretionary spending, gave me first a clue, then an answer. Our representative government environmental laws don't work because they are very under funded!

Spending for the Environmental Protection Agency is considered to be discretionary appropriation spending, through an act and not mandatory spending. Discretionary spending by the federal government is defined as non-entitlement spending, that is authorized through appropriations acts. http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts /RL34424_20080326.pdf As of 2001 or eight years ago, the an EPA budget statement indicated their outlays were a deficit of 94 million dollars. See generally, http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbud get/fy01/pdf/epa.pdf Since 1999, the United States Administration, sought large increases for defense spending. Op Cit at CRS-3

US standards also need to accommodate the United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights provisions, such as Article 1 Part 2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, See http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu 3/b/a_cescr.htm

Opposed to the idea of no international intervention, is the group UNESCO's World Heritage Cites. There are several Peru World Heritage cites, including two Peruvian national forests and Macchu Picchu. See, http://www.friendsofworldherit age.org/issues/traveling-respo nsibly/

Learn more about this author, Rosemarie Quintal.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

• << previous page
• 1
• 2

---

Add your voice

Know something about Should US environmental standards apply when multinational companies develop the petroleum resources of fragile ecosystems such as Peru's Amazon??
We want to hear your view. Write now!