Environmental Justice Issue Of Environmental Discrimination Into The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative

Today we’re faced with multiple forms of inequalities and injustices. None of them are in no way, shape or form are okay or justifiable. While we as a people are striving to deal with the obvious forms of injustices, there is another form that is a real quiet one, but it can be heard throughout the world that we are living in and is a severe problem that needs to be addressed. The type of injustice that I’m speaking on is called: Environmental Racism. This has been a definite issue that not only affects the environment, but it also has effects on communities, individuals and it effects the economic system in the long run as well. Environmental Racism needs to be brought up in conversations within our communities as well as our local governments, so they will not forget their remains a problem.

One of the first influences on the deliberation on Environmental Justice was The Civil Rights Movement in the United States of America. Leaders like Martin Luther King, Jr. fought hard to ensure that social transformation and power be established for African Americans, especially those in the southern states as well as those in the northern inner-city parts. Activists like King altered the philosophy on Environmental Justice arguing that there was a lopsided effect that proved that environmental hazards were not accidental. What environmentalists advocated instead was that environmental dangers resulted from racial segregation that placed power plants, nuclear plants, and other potential ecological hazards in areas with a high concentration of minority and low income groups. Several activists defined this as “environmental racism.”

With the well-being of future generations in mind, environmental concerns have begun to establish a permanent residence atop the priority ladder for a vast array of Americans. Consequently, writers and political pundits alike are seizing this opportunity to capitalize on advocating their stance on the issue. Information, representing all positions, pours in at an unrelenting and unfathomable rate. For the average American it can be an arduous process sifting through all the rhetoric in attempt to find the real truth regarding our impact as humans on the environment; one such example is Susan Brown’s article The EPA’s Mercury Problem. In this article Brown attempts to expose hypocrisy among progressives by paralleling the Environmental Protection

In the book, Sacrifice Zones, Steve Lerner takes readers through twelve separate stories of communities in the United States that have been unwillingly exposed to high levels of environmental toxicity. In each of these cases, citizens of those communities reacted to and pushed back against being exposed to toxic chemicals, sometimes successfully and sometimes less so. In every case, the people most heavily exposed to these health hazards were minorities and low-income citizens, which, Lerner argues, is why government officials and corporate decision-makers chose knowingly to risk exposing them. This paper will outline Lerner’s book and argue that despite a long history of protests, lawsuits, media attention and nationwide outrage, willing exposure of low-income and minority Americans to toxic chemicals in the pursuit of government and corporate interests is still a major problem today.

Environmental justice issues are not solely about disparate health or economic effects; it also applies when the cultural and historical resources of protected groups are potentially affected by a federally funded transportation project. Native American Tribes are different than other minority groups affected by the environmental impacts of transportation projects. Interactions among tribes, the FHWA, and State DOTs should be structured as a government-to-government relationship. Consultation with tribes is therefore different from traditional public involvement outreach. Reaching out to tribes is still crucial if Federal and State agencies want to be sure that environmental justice concerns are understood and addressed.

Environmental justice links a number of social movements—anti-racism, Aboriginals rights, and the mainstream environmental movement—and addresses the problem of environmental racism (Gosine & Teelucksignh, 2008, p. 11). The concept of environmental justice in the U.S was associated with the struggles over toxic waste sites and the call for equal treatment of all communities, radicalized or not (p. 9). It was about looking at human health rather than preserving areas deemed as “playgrounds for the rich.”

In Jan. 2011, the EPA decided to veto the dumping of waste from the Spruce No. 1 Mine. But the agency’s efforts have so far been rebuffed by the courts as an overreach: Under the weird legal regime that governs mining, it’s the Army Corps of Engineers, not the EPA, which has the ultimate say-so over those permits. In 2012, the D.C. district court ruled that EPA lacked authority to veto the permit after the Corps had issued it. However, in fact EPA's decision is based on evidence from scientific research on serious environmental harm from mining. In May 2013, a coalition of Appalachian and environmental groups petitioned the EPA to set a numeric water quality standard under the Clean Water Act to protect streams from pollution caused by mountaintop removal mining . They claimed that “State politics and industry pressure have so far failed to end this pollution without such a standard and more and more streams and communities who rely on those waters are left vulnerable. We need EPA to act now.” The EPA’s authority over the Clean Water Act in respect to Spruce Mine No. 1 was finally affirmed by the Supreme Court in March 2014.

“Environmental racism is real…so real that even having the facts, having the documentation and having the information has never been enough to provide equal protection for people of color and poor people” “It takes longer for the response and it takes longer for the recovery in communities of color and low-income communities.” (Bullard, 1994:36)

The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe currently fights to save its only water source from natural gas and oil contamination. This troubling current event has a somewhat forgotten historical analogue where very similar themes presented themselves. The Kinzua Dam Controversy, which took place in the 1950’s and early 1960’s, resulted in the displacement of over 600 Seneca Indian families and the acquisition of a large tract of traditional Seneca Land for dam building. Additionally, the acquisition of Seneca land represented a breach of “The Treaty with the Six Nations of 1794,” which explicated prevented such action by the US Government. The dam and its construction, which primarily benefitted Pittsburg, inspired a heated discourse concerning the ethics of native relocation.

Robert Bullard defines environmental racism as “any policy, practice, or directive that differentially affects or disadvantages individuals, groups, or communities based on race or color” (Bullard 98). Racism basically creates differences in environmental quality in white and black communities. Governmental policies and industry practices often provide benefits to the white communities while shifting environmental costs onto people of color.

When one discusses acts of racism, slander or the stereotyping of a group of people may come to mind. However, the concept of environmental racism is rarely considered. This form of racism positions dominant environmental framing as racially driven, in which people of color (i.e. minorities) are affected disproportionately by poor environmental practices. Communities of color throughout the United States have become the dumping grounds for our nation’s waste disposal, as well as home to agricultural and/or manufacturing industries that pollute the land. Government regulations and cultural practices have all contributed to environmental racism. The government’s policies have also negatively impacted low income groups as well as people of

Environmental justice “is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies” (www.epa.gov.). The case of Navajo-Hopi Struggle to Protect the Big Mountain Reservation provides evidence of an environmental justice framework.

Looking at the glistening waters of our streams and rivers, it may be hard to believe that approximately 5,300 miles of streams in Pennsylvania are so polluted they are currently classified as "dead". Due to loopholes in the Clean Water Act, more than half of the streams in the Keystone State are vulnerable to pollution. This affects an approximate 8 million Pennsylvanians who are served by public drinking water systems that draw from surface water. Only recently has the EPA taken action to restore protection to waterways in the United States. Unfortunately, it will take time for our streams and rivers to be truly clean again. Clearly, it is time that we act to preserve these waterways. Most people,

Hazards and pollutants are apparent in a variety of outcomes. Possible outcomes include asthma, cancer and chemical poisoning (Gee and Payne-Sturges 2004: 1647). Furthermore, “Although debated, the main hypothesis explaining these disparities is that disadvantaged communities encounter greater exposure to environmental toxins such as air pollution, pesticides, and lead” (Gee and Payne-Sturges 2004: 1647). Therefore, disadvantaged groups, such as people of color and the poor, experience greater environmental risks. Additionally, “Blacks in particular are exposed to a disproportionate amount of pollution and suffer the highest levels of lead and pesticide poisoning and other associated health problems” (Jones and Rainey 2006: 474). People of color, essentially, compete to live healthily. For example, African-Americans and Africans alike, struggle with the negative affects of oil refineries and unresponsive governments. The same can be said for Hispanics in California and the natives of Ecuador, who are forced to cope with the pollution of the Texaco oil refineries (Bullard 2001: 4). Environmental racism not only exploits natural resources, it abuses and profits from the communities involved. Governments and polluting facilities will continue to capitalize on the economic susceptibilities of poor communities, states, nations and regions for their “unsound” and hazardous operations (Bullard 2001: 23).

The placement of companies deleterious to the environment and well-being of humans is something that prosperous communities are not quite familiar with; in contrast, it is something well-known to less affluent communities. The imbalance of classification shows a lack of environmental justice in low-income and minority communities. According to the EPA, or Environmental Protection Agency, “environmental justice is the fair treatment… of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies,” (EPA, n.d.). However, the environmental justice, the EPA mentions is not prevalent in communities of color, but rather its counterpart is: environmental injustice. Environmental injustice, or environmental racism, being the excessive placing of perilous waste and contaminating polluters near communities of color (Cha, 2016). Although often overlooked, environmental racism is an extensive problem that negatively affects minority communities in Southeast Los Angeles.