Washington — It took President Bush little more than two weeks to go from being ready to crack down on carbon dioxide emissions to junking the idea altogether.
His abrupt about-face is the latest in a series of recent missteps and conflicting signals from the administration after his presidency's smooth first six weeks.
Secretary of State Colin Powell was out of step with Bush on administration policy toward Iraq and North Korea. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill sparked brief turmoil in global financial markets by suggesting he was not committed to supporting a strong dollar. And the White House was forced to retreat this week on its initiative to encourage faith-based charities by opposition from religious conservatives and their supporters on Capitol Hill.
How Bush changed his mind on his campaign commitment to restrict carbon dioxide emissions, and why, is more than just a simple case of promises made, promises broken. It is a story that illustrates the age-old game of Washington power politics, with winners, losers and real-world implications for Americans. By revoking his earlier commitment, the president pleased his conservative allies along with utility and mining interests that contributed heavily to his campaign.
He also seriously undercut his Environmental Protection Agency chief, Christine Todd Whitman, who had steadfastly promoted Bush's campaign position on carbon dioxide.
The president defended his decision Wednesday, saying, "We're in an energy crisis now."
"This is just plain old-fashioned Washington lobbying," said John Grasser, vice president of the National Mining Assn. The association opposed cracking down on carbon dioxide emissions, saying it could cripple the coal industry. Grasser's group and others initiated a lobbying effort Feb. 26 that paid off Tuesday, when Bush scrapped the plan.
"I would say it undercuts (Whitman) very badly," said Frank O'Donnell, executive director of the Clean Air Trust, a Washington environmental group. "There's certainly been speculation that she might resign. This raises the question of who is deciding the environmental policy in the administration. If she's not, who is?"
No comments
Commenting is turned off for this story.