Presidential Vetoes: Eisenhower and the Clean Water Act
President Dwight D. Eisenhower used his veto powers 181 times. He was overridden by Congress only twice. One of Eisenhower's most famous vetoes concerned the subject of pollution and clean water. It wasn't that Eisenhower was against such things. Ike's concern was about the division of responsibility between the federal government and state governments and whether the states were looking to the federal government to (literally) clean up a mess that they should have been looking after themselves.
The Clean Water Act was passed by Congress in 1956, near the end of Eisenhower's first term in office. The bill was inspired by a 1956 cruise down the Mississippi River taken by Minnesota Democrat John Blatnik, who was then the chairman of the House Public Works Committee's Rivers and Harbors Subcommittee. Blatnik was touring the river to assess its locks, dams and levees, but what hit him the hardest was how filthy the river was. An aide to Blatnik said: "The Mississippi was just a cesspool, and he came back to Washington determined to do something about this."
Blatnik also drafted the Federal Pollution Control Act of 1956, designed to provide research on the causes and treatment of pollution, funding for wastewater treatment plants, and a conference mechanism for states along major water bodies to agree on pollution limits and cleanups.
In 1956, Congress had passed the Federal Pollution Control Act and Eisenhower duly signed the bill into law. But as time passed, federal agencies found the pollution problem to be significantly worse than previously thought. In 1960 Congress passed a Bill To Amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. It was intended to strengthen federal powers to deal with pollution and polluters. But Eisenhower rejected this bill.
In his veto message, Eisenhower stated:
"The bill would authorize an increase in Federal grants to municipalities for assistance in the construction of sewage treatment works from $50 million to $90 million annually, and from $500 million to $900 million in the aggregate. Because water pollution is a uniquely local blight, primary responsibility for solving the problem lies not with the Federal Government but rather must be assumed and exercised, as it has been, by State and local governments. This being so, the defects of H.R. 3610 are apparent. By holding forth the promise of a large-scale program of long-term Federal support, it would tempt municipalities to delay essential water pollution abatement efforts while they waited for Federal funds.
"The rivers and streams of our country are a priceless national asset. I, accordingly, favor wholeheartedly appropriate Federal cooperation with States and localities in cleaning up the Nation's waters and in keeping them clean. This Administration from the beginning has strongly supported a sound Federal water pollution control program. It has always insisted, however, that the principal responsibility for protecting the quality of our waters must be exercised where it naturally reposes--at the local level. Polluted water is a threat to the health and well-being of all our citizens. Yet, pollution and its correction are so closely involved with local industrial processes and with public water supply and sewage treatment, that the problem can be successfully met only if State and local governments and industry assume the major responsibility for cleaning up the nation's rivers and streams."
Eisenhower went on to suggest four measures that the federal government could take to address the problems of pollution. These were:
1. Convening a national conference on water pollution to help local taxpayers and business concerns to realize the obligation they have to help prevent pollution. Eisenhower said "It is unconscionable for one town or city deliberately to dump untreated or inadequately treated sewage into a stream or river without regard to the impact of such action on the lives of down-stream neighbors. Local taxpayers should be willing to assume the burdens necessary to bring such practices to a halt. Businessmen and industrialists must face up to the expenditures they must make if industrial pollutants are to be removed from the nation's waters."
2. Giving the Federal Government authority in cases where pollution was an interstate problem. Eisenhower recommended strengthening the enforcement provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
3. Continuing "modest financial assistance" for programs by States and interstate water pollution control agencies.
4. Research by the Federal Government on "water pollution--its causes, its extent, its impact and methods for its control."
When John F. Kennedy took office a year later, he listed addressing the water pollution program was one of his goals. Congress delivered a new version of Blatnik's bill to Kennedy in July of 1961, and Kennedy signed it into law.
The Clean Water Act was passed by Congress in 1956, near the end of Eisenhower's first term in office. The bill was inspired by a 1956 cruise down the Mississippi River taken by Minnesota Democrat John Blatnik, who was then the chairman of the House Public Works Committee's Rivers and Harbors Subcommittee. Blatnik was touring the river to assess its locks, dams and levees, but what hit him the hardest was how filthy the river was. An aide to Blatnik said: "The Mississippi was just a cesspool, and he came back to Washington determined to do something about this."
Blatnik also drafted the Federal Pollution Control Act of 1956, designed to provide research on the causes and treatment of pollution, funding for wastewater treatment plants, and a conference mechanism for states along major water bodies to agree on pollution limits and cleanups.
In 1956, Congress had passed the Federal Pollution Control Act and Eisenhower duly signed the bill into law. But as time passed, federal agencies found the pollution problem to be significantly worse than previously thought. In 1960 Congress passed a Bill To Amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. It was intended to strengthen federal powers to deal with pollution and polluters. But Eisenhower rejected this bill.
In his veto message, Eisenhower stated:
"The bill would authorize an increase in Federal grants to municipalities for assistance in the construction of sewage treatment works from $50 million to $90 million annually, and from $500 million to $900 million in the aggregate. Because water pollution is a uniquely local blight, primary responsibility for solving the problem lies not with the Federal Government but rather must be assumed and exercised, as it has been, by State and local governments. This being so, the defects of H.R. 3610 are apparent. By holding forth the promise of a large-scale program of long-term Federal support, it would tempt municipalities to delay essential water pollution abatement efforts while they waited for Federal funds.
"The rivers and streams of our country are a priceless national asset. I, accordingly, favor wholeheartedly appropriate Federal cooperation with States and localities in cleaning up the Nation's waters and in keeping them clean. This Administration from the beginning has strongly supported a sound Federal water pollution control program. It has always insisted, however, that the principal responsibility for protecting the quality of our waters must be exercised where it naturally reposes--at the local level. Polluted water is a threat to the health and well-being of all our citizens. Yet, pollution and its correction are so closely involved with local industrial processes and with public water supply and sewage treatment, that the problem can be successfully met only if State and local governments and industry assume the major responsibility for cleaning up the nation's rivers and streams."
Eisenhower went on to suggest four measures that the federal government could take to address the problems of pollution. These were:
1. Convening a national conference on water pollution to help local taxpayers and business concerns to realize the obligation they have to help prevent pollution. Eisenhower said "It is unconscionable for one town or city deliberately to dump untreated or inadequately treated sewage into a stream or river without regard to the impact of such action on the lives of down-stream neighbors. Local taxpayers should be willing to assume the burdens necessary to bring such practices to a halt. Businessmen and industrialists must face up to the expenditures they must make if industrial pollutants are to be removed from the nation's waters."
2. Giving the Federal Government authority in cases where pollution was an interstate problem. Eisenhower recommended strengthening the enforcement provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
3. Continuing "modest financial assistance" for programs by States and interstate water pollution control agencies.
4. Research by the Federal Government on "water pollution--its causes, its extent, its impact and methods for its control."
When John F. Kennedy took office a year later, he listed addressing the water pollution program was one of his goals. Congress delivered a new version of Blatnik's bill to Kennedy in July of 1961, and Kennedy signed it into law.