![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Statement Of Nick Herbold
Environmental Protection Agency
Aging Initiative Public Listening Session
Iowa City, Iowa
April 15, 2003
Nick Herbold
2002 Student Body President
University of Iowa
2002 Student Body President
University of Iowa
Hello, my name is Nick Herbold. I appreciate the opportunity to talk to you today. I am glad that you are not going to use any "senior discount." I would like to speak on this issue anyway so that I can be sure nothing like this will ever be considered in the future.
Obviously, I'm not a senior citizen. However, I do know many seniors, including family members, residents of Iowa City and people I have worked with around the state. As last year's University of Iowa Student Body President, I know many seniors are looking out for me, as a student, and now I would like to take some time to speak in support of them. The seniors I have been in contact with have had an impact on my life that far exceeds any arbitrary dollar figure. I can't possibly fathom how their lives could be valued less than mine. Their contributions to my family, my community, my state, and my country are much greater than mine and grow more valuable every day.
Another reason why I am here is that I do anticipate becoming a senior in Iowa, eventually. that is, if Iowa's air and waters are kept clean and safe. Hopefully my talking to you today means in 50 years I won't need to be talking to you about the same thing as I'm gasping through an oxygen tank while polluters are damaging our environment and health because the EPA decided to lessen regulations.
I strongly feel that a policy to lessen the dollar value of a human life in any capacity is irresponsible and only an excuse to lessen regulations on polluters. Is it not obvious that less regulation on pollution will lead to more pollution? More pollution in turn will lead to an unhealthy environment. An unhealthy environment will lead to critical health problems, particularly for those more susceptible to them, like seniors. Why then, would the EPA even consider reducing the value of a senior?
Even more troubling to me is the slippery slope we start falling down if these types of policies are further utilized by the EPA and other federal entities. If this type of decision is made, who draws the line between an economic policy and ageism, racism, sexism, or any other "ism" that quantifies one life more valuable than another. Isn't this the same mentality behind these problems from our past? Are we making progress with this type of thinking?
If the EPA ever moves ahead and further implements this "fuzzy math" into your regulatory controls, I would not think of it as progress, but instead a regression.
If the EPA is an agency set up to protect the environment, it will never implement this policy.
If the EPA is concerned about the health of seniors, here in Iowa and across the nation, it will never implement this policy.
If you want to give me an opportunity to live a healthy life in a healthy environment, it will never implement this policy.
Please consider all Iowans; children, students, adults and seniors; at one hundred percent of their worth - at least, today, next year, and for my personal benefit, 48 years from now. (I am 22)
Thank you.