The real meltdown isn’t in the air-conditioning industry, it’s in Bush’s standing on environmental issues. Rove portrayed the AC decision as a Solomonic compromise; a trade group, after all, had sued to block any higher standard. Environmentalists were not impressed. They accused Bush of ignoring energy-starved California and of accepting a standard that, over 30 years, would require a dozen extra power plants. “We’re very disappointed,” said Fred Krupp of the Environmental Defense Fund. “The country has to save more energy, and the industry can help.”
Next Sunday is the 31st anniversary of Earth Day, but for the administration it is not likely to be a joyful occasion. Never mistaken for a green, Bush is being vilified as the most anti-environmental president since Ronald Reagan.
In a series of moves the administration has declined, for now, to toughen standards for arsenic in drinking water; reneged on a campaign pledge to require power plants to control emissions of carbon dioxide; withdrawn from talks on a global-warming treaty; imposed a ban on private lawsuits to add new entries to the endangered-species list; suspended a rule controlling toxic runoff from mining sites; decided to consider allowing the construction of new roads through 58 million acres of forest land; floated a plan to drill oil wells in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; proposed cutting the EPA budget by 6.4 percent and taken steps that could abolish the White House Council on Environmental Quality.
Other actions are in the works, sources tell NEWSWEEK. Among them are rules that would allow dredging for gravel in protected wetlands, the continued use of snowmobiles in Yellowstone, more noisy overflights of the Grand Canyon and “boundary adjustments” to allow drilling and mining near new national-monument sites. Then there’s the energy plan, soon to emerge from a committee led by Vice President Dick Cheney. Environmentalists expect it to stress production over conservation. “The worst is to come,” said Perry Plumart of the National Audubon Society.
You don’t have to be a tree-hugger–or a Democrat–to be concerned. In the latest NEWSWEEK Poll, Bush gets his most tepid job-approval marks for his handling of the environment (a 39-42 percent positive rating) and energy policy (38-41 percent). Only 41 percent think he is “committed to protecting the environment.” A survey by Lake Snell Perry found 61 percent of independents support strict enforcement of existing laws.
Republican strategists generally applaud Bush’s first at-bats, but worry that his anti-green image will jeopardize their chances in suburban areas of the East and West Coasts, which the GOP generally lost in 2000. “Environmental issues matter most in the suburbs,” said Rep. Tom Davis, who heads the GOP’s House campaign committee. “People see a clean environment as part of the good life they moved to the suburbs to find.”
Bush is a risk-averse pol who doesn’t like to make enemies. So what’s up? For one, he’s been knocked off stride in a regulatory minefield left behind by Clinton. The former president approved dozens of stringent last-minute rules designed to burnish his own reputation and create havoc for Bush, who’s been required to act quickly to “suspend” them if he wanted to review them at all.
The administration wasn’t ready to deal with the collateral damage. Only now, for example, has it begun to make the scientific case on arsenic. There is, in fact, widespread disagreement about the justification for Clinton’s decision to reduce the allowable levels in drinking water from 50 parts per billion to 10. But even environmentalists predict Bush will eventually approve a reduction, probably to 30ppb. In the meantime, he’s become the guy who wants to put arsenic in your water.
Bush (and Rove) may have a case of political myopia on environmental issues. Texas is hardly a hotbed of environmental activism. Being green isn’t a requirement to get elected governor, or to live with the legislature. Much better to have come out of the Oil Bidness, which Bush and his vice president did. Corporate contributors to the GOP generally despise the EPA more than any other agency.
Bush worked the energy-producing states with abandon. He won in part by adding (often Democratic) West Virginia, Louisiana, Kentucky and Tennessee to the GOP column. Some GOP critics fear the White House wants to win with the same map in 2004. “They’re drawing to the same inside straight,” said John Weaver, Sen. John McCain’s consigliere. “But Florida is at risk–environmental concerns are rising there–and they’re limiting options elsewhere.”
While Democrats attack (“Their actions are extreme,” says Sen. John Kerry), Rove remains calm. He points to a number of pro-environmental measures in the Bush budget, including an increase in funding for national parks. Bush is focused on the budget and taxes (and the China Sea) but will soon turn to selling and explaining his stands on environmental and energy issues. Though the administration abandoned the Kyoto Accord, sources tell NEWSWEEK that the president–prodded by Secretary of State Colin Powell–is likely to find a way to endorse some kind of action on global warming. Indeed, Cheney last Thursday called a Seattle newspaper to say that the administration was “concerned” about the problem.
And then there will be a charm offensive. As proof, Rove took note of a story in that morning’s USA Today, describing Bush’s new ranch home in Crawford, Texas, as an “eco-friendly” haven. “What matters are his actions over time,” said Rove. “The public will see that he is an outdoorsman who cares about clean air and water and has innovative ideas.” In fact, the new home is a model of green efficiency, with a water-recycling system and a geothermal heat pump. The cooling system is far more efficient than traditional central-AC units. But don’t look for the Bush administration to require anyone to use it.
