A Baffling Ozone Policy

George Bush has come under heavy fire for failing to live up to his promise to be the Environmental President. Last month he infuriated environmentalists by arguing that action against the threat of global warming should wait for more research. The man behind that go-slow position was John Sununu. An announcement by the U.S. delegate to a United Nations meeting in Geneva last week came as a further shock: the U.S. will oppose the creation of a new $100 million fund to help developing countries avoid using chlorofluorocarbons.

CFCs, used as refrigerants and solvents, are believed to be destroying the planet's ozone layer, and President Bush has joined in a worldwide call for a sharp cut in their use. But by refusing to supply additional funds to help Third World countries switch to substitutes, the U.S. would make reductions difficult. The White House argues that the money should come from existing World Bank funds and not from new contributions -- but also admits that the World Bank does not have the extra money available.

At least there is some legitimate controversy over the science of global warming. There is virtually none when it comes to ozone depletion. So why is the U.S. balking, when the country's share would amount to no more than $25 million over the next three years? Sununu and Budget Director Richard Darman contend that the economic costs of protecting the environment have been overlooked. They fear the precedent of turning money over to international bodies that may try to dictate how countries, including the U.S., respond to environmental problems.

Even with Sununu's and Darman's influence, such stances may in the end prove to be unsustainable. Predicts Senator Albert Gore of Tennessee: "If the Administration persists in its position, eventually it will be so isolated and so embarrassed that the President will have to reverse himself." Thus Bush's campaign pledge would be fulfilled, but against the President's will.