Ecos' Jury Still Out On Smith
As Senate Environment Chairman

(Editor's note: This article, as with most in the popular press, is written from the environmental cheerleaders' point of view; that viewpoint assumes as gospel that "environmental protection" is actually what it claims to be, and that supporters of restrictive and intrusive laws are the good guys, everyone else some kind of rapacious fiend. As for political labels, a "moderate" is someone who agrees with Teddy Kennedy, and "liberal" is avoided entirely. We've chosen to run it just as it came off the wire, a reminder to our readers that this is what the national media considers "balanced" and "objective" journalism. It goes a long way toward explaining why the public can seem so deaf-dog ignorant about environmental matters.)

WASHINGTON —(AP)— Sen. Bob Smith's rise to the Environment and Public Works Committee chairmanship has raised concern and curiosity over whether he'll steer a sharply different course than his moderate Republican predecessor, the late John Chafee of Rhode Island.

Smith took over after Chafee — a hero to environmentalists — died suddenly last month from congestive heart failure.

Overall, the conservative Smith — a New Hampshire Republican who briefly broke with a party he thinks has grown too moderate and accommodating — is more pro-business and anti-government than Chafee.

But Smith is also from New England, a region with little land to spare and industries such as fishing and tourism that are heavily dependent on a clean environment.

That tends to make even anti-government conservatives more open to environmental protection than they might be in regions where the right of private property owners to be free of government intervention is a hot issue.

Given that, Smith's colleagues, and some environmentalists, are postponing judgment on whether he'll differ dramatically from Chafee in substance and style.

``He's proud of his conservative credentials, but he worked under the tutelage of Senator Chafee and has tremendous respect for his views,'' said Sen. John Warner, R-Va., a high-ranking committee member who was a close friend of Chafee's. ``Let's give him time.''

For his part, the blunt-spoken Smith says he likes clean air and fresh water as much as anyone.

But he also complains about excessive federal regulation and is more inclined than Chafee to allow businesses, state and local governments — instead of Congress and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency — a greater role in environmental matters.

Chafee was instrumental in the passage of the Clean Air Act in 1990 as well as hazardous waste laws and legislation dealing with water and coastal issues. He helped bury legislation that the House passed in 1995 that environmentalists derided as a ``dirty water bill.''

``I'm not an environmental extremist, that's for darn sure,'' Smith told The Associated Press in a recent interview. ``But I think there has to be a balance between the environment and reasonable growth and opportunity. I don't believe people should violate the pollution laws of our country.''

The League of Conservation Voters has given Smith a lifetime voting rating of 36 percent, well below Chafee's score of 70 percent but higher than all other Republicans on the committee.

In many cases, Smith's pro-environment votes were votes for fiscal conservatism. He scored points, for instance, for backing limited assistance to small and medium livestock farms, and for voting against sugar and grazing subsidies.

Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., who was next in line for the chairmanship, had a lifetime score of seven.

``We don't put Senator Smith in that category,'' said Greg Wetstone, director of advocacy for the Natural Resources Defense Council, a Washington-based environmental group. Still, ``We're going to be looking at this next year very cautiously.''

Chafee's influence, too, will be felt in the presence of his son, U.S. Sen. Lincoln Chafee, R-R.I., who was appointed to fill the 14 months left in his father's term. He is running for the seat next year.

Chafee, who is expected to continue his late father's support for an aggressive federal role in environmental protection, has a seat on the committee. At Smith's invitation, he met privately with the new chairman shortly after coming to Washington.

That sort of accommodation, senators say, is typical of Smith. He's no centrist but is willing to entertain other points of view, a trait that could prevent the committee from becoming fractious. Whether it'll help pass legislation remains to be seen.

``He's very easy to work with,'' said Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, the committee's top Democrat. Also, senators often become more compromising when they're in leadership posts, he said.

``To be effective, you have to work with the other side,'' Baucus said. ``When you're a senator but not a chairman, you're advocating your point of view.''

Next year's committee agenda, to be settled during the upcoming recess, will depend largely on Smith's priorities.

If the past is any indicator, overhauling the 1980 Superfund law governing cleanup of the nation's worst toxic waste sites will be among Smith's top concerns. House leaders have also indicated the issue will be a high priority next year.

Smith is among the critics who say too much money — both taxpayer dollars and funds collected from a now-expired tax on the oil and chemical industries — has gone for litigation and noncleanup activities.

Others, including many Democrats, worry that expedited cleanup schemes would provide unfair breaks to those who should be held responsible for pollution, lower cleanup standards and give too much authority to states.

For years, Smith and the late Chafee worked together on proposals to rewrite the law, advancing one bill, this year, that died in committee. Colleagues note that Smith, at least, tried to forge an agreement.

``He must have put hundreds of hours into trying to negotiate a compromise,'' said Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., a committee member. ``That's a hopeful sign.''