Environment rules

Environmental programs require money. Tight budgets are causing states to cut back on such initiatives, which may prevent compliance with federal standards for clean air and water.

All but two states, Montana and North Dakota, have reduced funding for environmental programs, USA Today reports. Many are finding it hard to meet standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency.

States, for instance, are now required to regulate waste discharges from as many as 60,000 commercial ships in U.S. coastal waters.

"That's a huge undertaking ... and a lot of states are very nervous about how they're going to find money for it," said Steve Brown, who directs the Environmental Council of the States.

Soon there may be an EPA decision to regulate carbon dioxide emissions; states in the current fiscal environment would struggle to implement that as well.

The Environmental Council of the States has explored with the EPA whether federal grants might be available to help states meet environmental mandates.

Once the EPA has enacted a regulation, it is expected to be fulfilled. "These programs are often the difference between drinking clean or dirty water, or breathing clean or dirty air," said Elgie Holstein of the Environmental Defense Fund.

But Pennsylvania has reduced state funds for its Department of Environmental Protection by 30 percent; Massachusetts has cut back its environmental agency by 18.1 percent. California has trimmed or eliminated dozens of projects, according to USA Today.

Protecting the environment is important. But states may require federal assistance in the short run.