WASHINGTON -- It was partly sunny at the White House Wednesday as dozens of the nation's television weather forecasters, invited by President Clinton to broadcast the dangers of global warming, went live from its lawn. Inside the White House, however, it has been stormy for weeks.
Mr. Clinton publicly has been sounding strong environmentalist notes, but his administration is roiled by differences between economic and environmental teams over just what U.S. policy for reducing carbon emissions should be. The teams' daily deliberations amount to a disaster, as some officials see it: behind schedule, buffeted by domestic and foreign pressures and unlikely to please anyone in the end.
Final diplomatic negotiations are just weeks away for an international treaty against global warming to be signed in Kyoto, Japan, in December, and a White House decision on the detailed U.S. position is due by Oct. 20.
Big industries have mounted a costly media campaign, anticipating that Mr. Clinton will call for strict emission cutbacks; the president meets with representatives of the Big Three auto makers Thursday. The Republican-controlled Senate has served notice it won't accept anything that's too tough and doesn't require developing countries such as China to meet pollution targets. But allies in Europe and Japan, which have staked out more aggressive targets and timetables for cutting pollution, warn that a weak U.S. position, and U.S. demands that developing countries be included, threatens the treaty.
Meanwhile, many environmentalists, while uncertain about Mr. Clinton's commitment, are hoping he will want to leave his mark with strong action on global warming. The president Wednesday told the weather forecasters: "We must embrace solutions that allow us to continue to grow the economy, while we honor our global responsibilities and our responsibilities to our own children."
Threat for 21st CenturyAt the White House, all sides say they agree that activities ranging from driving to manufacturing, by belching carbon dioxide that is trapped in Earth's atmosphere like a greenhouse, are warming the globe and threatening devastating climate changes in the next century.
But the president's economic team -- including Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin; Deputy Secretary Lawrence Summers; Janet Yellen, who heads Mr. Clinton's Council of Economic Advisers; and Gene Sperling, head of the president's National Economic Council -- is urging a go-slow approach for the economy's sake. Privately, some raise the specter that ambitious targets for reducing carbon emissions, say, to 1990 levels by 2010, could trigger economic upheaval and energy-price increases greater than the 1970s oil shocks.
"There is a compelling scientific and economic case for action on global warming," Mr. Summers says. "What we have to do, what we're all working to do, is find the best way to meet environmental objectives along with meeting strong economic growth."
The greens -- notably Mr. Clinton's chief environmental adviser, Kathleen McGinty, and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Carol Browner, both former aides in Al Gore's Senate office; former Colorado Sen. Tim Wirth, now at the State Department; and Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt -- mainly see the environmental urgency to act. They are confident the economy can not only adapt but also thrive as U.S. companies, such as Enron Corp. and technology companies, rush to meet a global need for more energy-efficient houses, vehicles, utilities and factories, while others save on energy costs over time.
Ms. McGinty sees "tremendous opportunity in leading the world's charge on this," with "an incredibly rich market for environmentally sound" products and energy sources. Joseph Romm, an acting assistant secretary at the Energy Department, adds: "We're the technology optimists, and history has proved us right -- with reducing sulphur dioxide emissions from utilities, eliminating chlorofluorocarbons and removing lead from gasoline."
It is something of a replay of the year's earlier White House debate that resulted in strict Clean Air Act regulations. But this issue is even bigger, with global stakes. As in the clean-air debate, the canyon between the administration's economists and the environmentalists over global warming can't be bridged -- except by Mr. Clinton.
Thinking LegacyAnd if Mr. Gore is the administration's "Mr. Green," the president himself has emerged in environmentalists' eyes as their best ally. The vice president is distracted by campaign-finance probes and concerns about a 2000 election in which he will need manufacturing states' votes. Mr. Clinton, with no more elections ahead, is thinking legacy.
"The president would like to come out of Kyoto with a strong agreement. That, I think, is our biggest hope at this point," says Adam Markham of the World Wildlife Fund. Dan Becker of the Sierra Club agrees: "I think he's ahead of his administration. I think he's ahead of Al Gore."
When Mr. Clinton vacationed at Martha's Vineyard in August, he was pictured holding the book, "The Heat Is On," investigative reporter Ross Gelbspan's attack on industry claims against global warming. That prompted skeptical environmentalists to joke that they shouldn't get too encouraged: "He's just carrying the book." But after meeting with Mr. Clinton at the White House in mid-September, environmental leaders were convinced he has read that and more -- and taken it to heart.
The president didn't commit to specific, binding levels of emission reductions by a target date -- the objective for the Kyoto treaty. But he did tell the environmentalists that climate change is already evident, that continued warming would be catastrophic and that promoting energy efficiency would be good for the economy in the long run. He said he's confident the public is already aware of the need for action. "People can tell," he said. But the Senate, Mr. Clinton said, would be a tougher sell.
"The president made it very clear he regards this as one of the most important decisions he will make in his time in office," said Philip E. Clapp of the Environmental Information Center here. Mr. Clinton plainly has raised environmentalists' expectations, by his public statements as well, but they know they could be disappointed. Interior Secretary Babbitt predicted at the White House meeting they won't be totally happy with the ultimate decision.
Nonetheless, the president wondered at that meeting what his daughter Chelsea's grandchildren would say if he didn't act forcefully now. Mr. Gore, who had arrived late, pointed out to him the increased involvement of the religious community -- with a nod to Paul Gorman, executive director of the National Religious Partnership for the Environment. The president invited Mr. Gorman, who had been silent, to speak. Mr. Gorman said religious leaders are concerned for future generations, and quoted Deuteronomy: " 'I have set before you life or death, blessing or curse. Choose life, therefore, that you and your descendants may live.' "
The table was silent. Mr. Clinton looked down for moments. Then he turned to Mr. Summers, inviting the economist's response. Mr. Summers, who is facetiously known as Darth Vader among some environmentalists, was uncharacteristically unable to make a clever retort: "I don't know what I could add from my economically constrained soul."
Material presented on this home page constitutes opinion of the author.
Copyright © 1997 Steven J. Milloy. All rights reserved. Site developed and hosted by WestLake Solutions, Inc.