The United States - Comparing Environmental Policies in 16 Countries - page 38

the Clean Water Act had required in 1972. The electric industry was not
too happy to have the permits and limitations imposed. Its chief lobbying
organization was the Edison Electric Institute. Once the industry recog-
nized the inevitability of the amendments, however, it shifted to lobbying
for a maximum number of permits and the highest tonnage. It was quite
successful, and for the first years until the screws tightened a bit, it had
more allowances than it needed.
President Bush needed to determine the American stance at the Earth
Summit to be held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992. This was to be the suc-
cessor to the Stockholm conference 20 years before. Presidents and prime
ministers were coming from 140 nations. At Rio the delegates were to sign
two treaties. One was on biodiversity and the other was on global warm-
ing. For the previous 7 years, the scientific evidence was piling up such
that greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide, were causing the earth
to heat up like a greenhouse. Experts from all over the world had been
meeting at the United Nations headquarters in New York, preparing a
draft of the Framework Convention on Climate Change. It began a pro-
cess of limiting the amount of carbon dioxide each country could emit
into the atmosphere. Support was strong from nearly all the other indus-
trial democracies. Within the Bush administration, however, opinion was
divided. EPA and the scientific agencies believed the danger was serious,
but business-oriented ones like the Department of Commerce, the Office of
Management and Budget, and the Council of Economic Advisors opposed
signing. This reflected the pressure on these agencies from environmental
or business groups. Bush himself was torn between the two camps, but in
the end decided to fly to Rio. Although he gave an enthusiastic speech to all
the delegates, many thought US support was insincere, and the treaty was
already weakened by US pressure on the negotiators in New York.
By this time—June 1992—the presidential campaign was already
under way. Governor Bill Clinton, soon to receive the Democratic Party
nomination, attacked Bush for not doing enough for the environment.
For a Democrat to favor the environment, while the Republican favored
business, fit the pattern since the Reagan Administration.
With Clinton's election in November, a pro-environmental administra-
tion was back in power in the tradition of Nixon and Carter. For his run-
ning mate, Clinton chose Al Gore, the senator from Tennessee. As vice
president, Gore advocated for the environment, and personally directed
certain efforts such as global warming policy. EPA returned to enforcing