Bush eager to undo damage from environmental policy
Friday, April 20, 2001
By JODI ENDA and SETH BORENSTEIN
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON -- With Earth Day just around the corner, President Bush on Thursday said he would sign a global treaty intended to clean the world's air and water by curbing the use of a "dirty dozen" toxic chemicals.
Bush's announcement meant that for the fourth consecutive day, his administration was siding, at least symbolically, with some of its strongest critics: environmentalists.
The global treaty was passed during the Clinton administration, but has not been a major item for many environmentalists because the 12 chemicals -- most of which are pesticides -- are banned in the United States.
The Bush administration wants to improve an image fostered by many of its foes that it is hostile to the environment after decisions this year to scrap a global-warming treaty supported by Clinton and to reevaluate planned reductions in the level of arsenic in drinking water.
As Bush spoke in the Rose Garden, he was flanked by Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Christie Whitman and Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, two of his most prominent Cabinet members.
Whitman acknowledged that Bush is "very frustrated" by some people's view of him as as being anti-environment.
She said the administration's "overall" record on the environment is "really very good."
"His natural instincts are to do the right thing by the environment," she added.
As with three other announcements this week, Bush sought to appeal to environmental activists without angering some of his strongest supporters: business groups.
"These were not issues that we were fighting with Clinton on anyway," said Bill Kovacs, vice president for environment and energy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which regularly sued the last administration over issues that included more stringent air quality standards.
Jerry Taylor, natural resources director for the Cato Institute, a libertarian think-tank in Washington, said Bush is engaged in old-fashioned damage control.
"The administration is interested in getting good environmental press wherever they can these days," Taylor said.
Bush has done that every day this week, primarily by letting stand environmental regulations on wetlands and lead that were put in place during the waning days of the Clinton administration. The White House also backed off its most controversial environmental decision and agreed to reduce the permissible level of arsenic in drinking water, but not necessarily as much as Clinton intended to.
Environmentally, the consequences of Bush's moves this week are relatively minor.
Politically, they are not.
"If I were a political adviser to the White House, I would have suggested that it would be a good idea not to go into Earth Day with everyone talking about arsenic," said Rep. Jim Greenwood, a Pennsylvania Republican who often sides with environmentalists.
The White House contends that its daily dose of environmental announcements -- and their proximity to the 31st anniversary of Earth Day on Sunday, a day set aside to celebrate environmental causes -- is not politically motivated.
White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said Thursday that "the president's message to staff has been very straight and consistent, and that is, take actions based on science, not based on public relations."
Fleischer said Bush has taken these actions because he believes on the merits that they are correct.
Bush supporters say the president has found the right balance.
"I think Bush has taken a measured, positive approach to some of the excesses forced through the Clinton-Gore end days at the midnight hour, and they are now giving ample attention to environmental policy and pro-growth policy," said Kenneth Duberstein, former chief of staff to President Ronald Reagan.
But critics suggest Bush's latest environmental decisions are small-bore and reactive, particularly those that do nothing more than uphold regulations signed by Clinton.
"I think they just need little pronouncements to seem somewhat balanced on this [environmental] issue," said Paul Wapner, director of environmental policy at American University. "But my reading is that they are rhetorical rather than substantial ones."
Environmental groups weren't mollified by the week's spate of announcements.
"This is blatant Earth Day window dressing," said Phil Clapp, president of the National Environmental Trust.
Coming into this week, Bush had been criticized by some environmentalists for reneging on a campaign promise to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants -- a global warming issue -- and setting aside a Clinton rule to slash by 80 percent the allowable levels of arsenic in drinking water.
A group of Republican members of Congress raised the arsenic issue during a lunch with Vice President Dick Cheney, said Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich. "I got the impression they would reverse themselves on that," he said.
Bush also had angered environmentalists by killing U.S. ratification of a 1997 treaty crafted in Kyoto, Japan, to cut greenhouse gas emissions -- a treaty that was a top priority for environmental groups and Europeans.
On the flip side, Fleischer noted Thursday, the president scorned businesses by requiring reductions in diesel emissions and limiting the use of pesticides. "[That] set a tone right from the beginning that the president, when he thought it was appropriate, was going to take steps that protected the environment in a manner that business did not like."
Design copyright Scars Publications and Design. Copyright of individual pieces remain with the author. All rights reserved. No material may be reprinted without express permission from the author.
