The line at Denver’s “TATTERED cover” bookstore snaked down the stairs and past the espresso bar. House Speaker Newt Gingrich was signing copies of his best seller, “To Renew America,” and among the 500 people waiting was Kaija Gibbs, a 27-year-old Gingrieh fan and “pretty conservative Republican.” But she has one huge problem with her party: as a hiker who loves Rocky Mountain National Park, Gibbs objects to GOP attacks on environmental regulation. “This is something,” she says, “you can’t fix once you’ve messed up.”
Democrats used to worry that emphasizing the environment would tie them to elitist tree-huggers. But when House Republicans moved to weaken clean-water standards and slashed in half the budget for policing polluters, the politics changed dramatically. Strategists in both parties now believe that the Democrats, if careful, could use the issue to lure moderate suburbanites or even conservatives like Gibbs. That’s why Bill Clinton, on vacation last week in Yellowstone, announced a moratorium on new mining near the park and blasted proposed funding cuts for public lands, which, he said, would force the government to “sell some of our national treasures off to the highest bidder.” Republicans fear Clinton’s aggressive new posture may work: Gingrich, sources say, believes the GOP is mispositioned. “The public is more tolerant of environmental regulations than conservatives think,” warns conservative polltaker Frank Luntz. His findings show that 62 percent of voters believe environmental protections are more important than cutting regulations.
Acid rain: Democrats saw a political opening when Republicans seemed to cede too much influence to oil and chemical interests last spring. House GOP leaders invited lobbyists into internal planning sessions, even allowing them to draft legislation. Judiciary Committee aides were dumbfounded when lawyers for the utility industry presided over a staff meeting on the GOP’s new bill making it easier for companies to challenge regulations.
Republicans are actually deeply divided over how to handle the environment. Moderates from the Eastern Seaboard and Great Lakes states, with their smokestack industries, resent being pushed around by their conservative colleagues from less-polluted states. “There are still some who are convinced that acid rain is a figment of the imagination,” says GOP Rep. Sherwood Boehlert of New York.
Early on, Clinton appeared to be mishandling green politics, focusing on marginal issues like spotted owls and ancient-growth forests. Now he emphasizes protecting the safety of food, water and air. “Owls are not our best selling point,” says a Democratic official. “Water and air work for us.” This summer, for instance, Clinton issued an executive order requiring government contractors to disclose the release of any chemicals into the atmosphere or water.
But if Clinton doesn’t play it carefully, he could be seen as just pushing more big government. Meanwhile, Gingrich is moving to find a Republican middle ground. This month he will convene a task force to smooth over the differences between the pro-environment and anti-regulation wings of his party. “The speaker understands that our heritage is as the party of Teddy Roosevelt,” says GOP Rep. Rick Lazio. The question is whether enough modern Republicans will view conservation as compatible with their brand of conservatism.
