published August 14, 2003 in the San Francisco Chronicleand on August 20, 2003 (as "Deeds and Words") in the Dallas Morning News
President Bush is visiting Western states this month, talking about the environment.
A hundred years ago, President Theodore Roosevelt did the same thing. He explored Yellowstone, hiked Yosemite and marveled at giant redwoods. At the rim of the Grand Canyon, he said: "Keep it for your children, your children's children and for all who come after you."
Bush, who professes to admire Roosevelt, has used similar rhetorical flourishes in speeches in Arizona, Colorado, and California, and he will likely use them again as he visits Oregon and Washington state. But the question on the minds of conservation-minded Republicans is not what he will say, but whether his deeds will ever match his words.
Roosevelt uttered powerful words; then he lived up to them. National parks, forests and wildlife refuges that we enjoy today are the fruit of his expansive vision.
Will future generations say the same about Bush? We conservation-minded Republicans aren’t optimistic at this point. Peel away the administration’s feel-good language, and its record shows a depressingly narrow vision for America’s public-lands heritage. Its vision is dominated by commodity extraction, often at taxpayers’ expense and always with reduced public input and oversight.
Whether the issue is opening Alaska’s Tongass National Forest to unprofitable timber sales, drilling for oil on the Rocky Mountain Front and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, ending protection of "prairie pothole" wetlands, or letting snowmobile noise and fumes sully Yellowstone, the administration’s agenda usually matches the agendas of the same selfish special interests that Roosevelt fought throughout his career.
Conservation-minded Republicans despair at an administration so willing to cede the moral high ground to the Democrats, caring for nothing but the way environmental concerns will play in the next election. GOP pollster Frank Luntz’s now-infamous leaked memo teaches GOP candidates to spin environmental issues with empathetic language that won't scare off voters. The apparent goal is to advance former Interior Secretary James Watt’s agenda without using Watt’s crude, off-putting language, which at least had the virtue of being honest.
Take Luntz’s pet word "balance" for example. Broadly speaking, balance is a good thing. But Luntz’s script encourages GOP politicians to use "balance" to falsely imply that efforts to conserve nature have gone to wild extremes. With 95 percent of America’s ancient forests long gone, why would any conservative consider it "balanced" to destroy the 5 percent that remain?
Luntz’s memo may be a sophisticated tactical primer, but it is a poor substitute for conservation leadership. Republican leaders—including the president—who adopt its lingo are doing the American people a disservice.
Overwhelming numbers of Americans say they want our nation’s land, air and water protected. Americans believe the federal government should play a focused but substantial conservation role. If they cared to, Republican leaders could make political hay with positive, pro-environmental actions. But the American people know fakery when they see it. They are looking for honest, meaningful efforts, not cynical photo ops.
We conservation-minded Republicans see Bush’s Western tour as a rare chance for him to set things straight. With a few well-chosen words and subsequent actions to give the words substance, Bush could begin returning conservation to an honored place at the Republican table.
We call on Bush to dedicate the rest of his term to strengthening and expanding protection of parks, forests and wilderness lands—for their intrinsic practical value, if nothing else. Wildlands produce clean water, block the spread of invasive species, offer unparalleled recreation opportunities and hold a treasure trove of flora, fauna and scientific knowledge. Wildlands are a stock of capital. Managing capital conservatively produces a steady flow of benefits. Depleting capital is a fool’s path to a spurious, fleeting prosperity.
We call on Bush to open his eyes and see the wildlands he visits this week for what they truly are: not just a source of commodities to be extracted but an intrinsic part of this nation's patriotic heritage—a symbol of our national vigor and freedom and an irreplaceable trust for our future.
So, Mr. President, throw away the Luntz lingo. You’ll get far better advice from Roosevelt. Dig out a few of his books. Soak up his love for the West’s breathtaking beauty. Reflect on his amazing insights about the land’s central importance for maintaining a strong, secure America. During your Western trip, look around and appreciate how much we benefit today from his foresight.
Think legacy, Mr. President. Protecting the last American places that are still largely free of man’s imprint would be a gift for the ages. We conservatives ought to conserve such things.
