Naming Norton may come at a price

By Lana Pollack

February 2, 2001

In 1981, Michigan's senior U.S. senator, Carl Levin, had the good sense to vote against James Watt, Ronald Reagan's fabled anti-environmental secretary of the interior. When Watt subsequently proved he was supremely unfit to carry out his responsibilities, Levin had no reason to be embarrassed.

This week Levin voted against another interior secretary nominee with a documented record of extreme environmental hostility, Gale Norton. With his collegial reputation secure after 22 years in the Senate, Levin's vote was important but not surprising.

Michigan's newly minted U.S. senator, Debbie Stabenow, was a bit more of an uncertainty. Everyone recognized she was under more pressure to go along with the Bush crowd than the seasoned, avuncular Levin. In her recent campaign, Stabenow had earned the endorsement of the League of Conservation Voters. She had done a good job protecting the environment when she was in the House of Representatives.

Conservationists in Michigan and across the country feared that protection of America's natural resources could be traded away for Beltway courtesies. Taking nothing for granted, leaders and volunteers laid bare Norton's record, from her fight against the Endangered Species Act to her enthusiasm for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Did Norton's position - no place is too pristine for drilling - portend slant drilling in the Great Lakes and further mining in Michigan's lakeshore sand dunes? Would Norton's extreme views on private property rights mean she would be helpful to business interests that want to divert Great Lakes water to distant markets?

Joining a national groundswell of opposition, concerned conservationists advised senators of Norton's record: She had worked for the Mountain States Legal Foundation, representing loggers, miners, cattle ranchers and water developers in fights against public land protections. She had co-founded the Coalition of Republican Environmental Advocates, a "green scam" group whose transparent mission was to fool voters who care about environmental protection. Norton's six hours of clever Senate testimony in which she tried to transform herself into a moderate environmentalist could not erase her 20-year anti-environmental record.

While it was apparent Norton's confirmation could not be defeated, this fight became the first real test of will and strength for both sides. The environmental advocates did not have to win, but they needed to show oil drilling, logging and mining interests, the president and Congress that they are prepared to fight state by state on the bigger battles yet to come.

When the votes were counted, Sen. Stabenow stood on the side of protecting the country's natural resources and on the side of an overwhelmingly pro-environmental constituency she represents in Washington. She and Levin were two of 24 senators who voted not to confirm Norton. When the infamous Watt faced confirmation, only 12 senators had opposed him, and he didn't survive long. Twenty-four votes against confirmation were the most that had been cast against any Cabinet nominee since the Senate rejected Sen. John Tower's nomination for secretary of defense in 1989.

Bush opened his presidency with a shot at the public lands protected by Clinton's executive orders. If the Norton nomination sailed through the Senate, surely it would have been a green light for further transgressions against broader conservation measures. The president won his fight to appoint an anti-environmentalist interior secretary; however, it came at a price to him, and he may yet loose his threatened war against our public lands.

Michigan residents who cherish our Great Lakes environment owe Sens. Levin and Stabenow a big thank you - and a full measure of public support for protecting our environment in the fights to come.