Should the Clean Air Act be changed

Opposite views are taken on the question of amending the Clean Air Act even though both parties acknowledge its importance and accomplishments. Speaking in favor of amendment, H.H. Kehrl recommends streamlining air-pollution control to make it simpler to implement and enforce, less costly, and more effective. He points to the achievement in vehicular pollution control in spite of the imbalance in stationary and mobile requirements for cost-effectiveness. Taking a different view, R.E. Ayres points out that acid rain, fine particulates, and other toxic pollutants have not been addressed. Successful pollution control technology, he suggests, should continue to be seen as a goal rather than as a threat to energy independence, economic growth, or the quality of life. (DCK)