Bush offered the political world a minor surprise yesterday by announcing the nomination of Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt (R) to head the Environmental Protection Agency, replacing Christine Todd Whitman who resigned in May.
While Whitman’s moderation on environmental issues was often at odds with the administration’s policies, that won’t be a problem for Bush if Leavitt is confirmed by the Senate. Leavitt and Bush are on the same page — weaker federal environmental regulations and voluntary standards for industries.
Leavitt’s record isn’t great, but it’s not all bad. As Utah’s governor, he created an air-quality “partnership” to reduce haze in southwestern Utah, proposed creating a San Rafael Swell National Monument to limit some land development, and resisted efforts to store nuclear waste on a Native American reservation in Utah.
That’s the good news. The bad news is Leavitt wants to shift pollution regulations away from the strict standards required by the federal government, opposed Clinton’s efforts to expand federally-protected wilderness areas, fought aggressively for additional highway construction in Utah’s Legacy Nature Preserve, and has shown indifference towards Utah landfills with radioactive waste. Worst of all, according to the EPA, industries in Utah release more toxins into the air, water, and land than in any other state except Nevada.
With a record like this, it’s not a big surprise that Leavitt’s nomination has prompted criticism from the nation’s preeminent environmental groups. The Sierra Club has announced its formal opposition to the Leavitt nomination, saying, “Environmental enforcement has also been weak under Governor Leavitt’s Administration, and it’s unlikely he’d get the job done in a Bush Administration which already has a terrible enforcement record.”
Philip Clapp, president of the National Environmental Trust, told the New York Times, “I can’t think of too many governors more hostile to government regulations than Mike Leavitt.”
There was, however, one governor whose record is even worse — Idaho Gov. Dirk Kempthorne (R).
In fact, the reason Bush’s announcement yesterday was a bit of a surprise was because everyone — from some administration officials to Republicans in Congress — had been led to believe Bush would nominate Kempthorne to head the EPA, not Leavitt.
As a matter of policy, Kempthorne would have been the worst possible choice, with one of the least environmentally friendly agendas imaginable. But for politics, Kempthorne would have been perfect — for Democrats.
White House pollsters and Karl Rove realize that Bush is vulnerable on the environment. Important groups of voters, most notably “soccer moms,” care about the environment and trust Dems on the issue far more than the GOP. If Bush had nominated Kempthorne as expected, Bush would have been handing the Dems a campaign issue on a silver platter.
To be sure, Kempthorne was supposed to be the guy. Leavitt had been asked about the job earlier this summer and had supposedly withdrawn himself from consideration. The Idaho Statesman, Kempthorne’s hometown paper, had reported on several occasions that Kempthorne had not only interviewed for the job, but expressed interest in accepting the nomination if offered. The Wall Street Journal reported a month ago that Kempthorne had already been chosen by the White House but they were delaying the announcement until August.
So what happened? Why did the White House give every indication that they were picking Kempthorne and then make the surprise announcement about Leavitt? I blame Tim Noah.
Noah, a political writer for Slate, wrote a devastating piece last week describing Kempthorne as a “comically anti-environmental choice” and a “godsend” for the Democrats.
“During six years in the Senate in the 1990s, Kempthorne scored a ‘0’ on the League of Conservation Voters’ legislative scorecards every year except 1993, when Kempthorne scored 6 percent,” Noah explained. He added, “[A]fter Kempthorne became governor of Idaho, the state increased toxic emissions by 2 percent — this during a period when the national average declined by 9 percent. The chief of staff for Idaho’s Department of Environmental Quality told Borenstein that environmental inspections were at “a bare-bones minimum” aimed only at staying in compliance with a state court order. Kempthorne did battle with EPA Administrator Christie Whitman over an Idaho Superfund cleanup, at one point threatening to evict EPA officials from the state. All of this raises an obvious question: How did the Democrats get so lucky?”
How, indeed. Before Noah’s piece, Kempthorne’s nomination was a done deal and the Dems were going to hammer the administration on this for months. After Noah’s piece, the administration pulls a last-minute switch and taps the less-strident Leavitt.
Thanks for nothing, Tim.