Another day, another name floated from the Obama transition about the leading candidate. And it is now Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO).
From Reuters:
He is also close to naming a secretary of the interior -- the federal department that leases public lands for oil and gas drilling. Sen. Ken Salazar of Colorado, who once practiced as an environmental lawyer, is the leading contender, sources close to the transition said.
A blog posting with purported inside information suggests that John Berry, Director of the National Zoo, is the favored candidate.
Neither Ken Salazar nor John Berry has as good an environmental record as Rep. Raul Grijalva, as I'll detail below, but the interesting question is why the transition keeps leaking new frontrunners. This isn't a matter of discipline, these names are meant to get out. Why?
We'll get to the politics below, but first let's look at today's frontrunners.
Ken Salazar as an Interior Candidate
For background, here's a summary of Salazar as a potential VP pick:
Prior to narrowly winning his 2004 senatorial election against Republican beer magnate Pete Coors, Salazar had a diverse career -- serving as Colorado's attorney general for six years, working a four-year stint as the head of Colorado's Department of Natural Resources, not to mention owning a Dairy Queen franchise and several radio stations. Salazar grew up in a ranching and farming family, and protecting Colorado's stunning natural beauty was one of the key promises in his Senate campaign. This year, he pushed for stricter environmental standards for the mining industry. But like Barack Obama (and unlike Hillary Clinton), Salazar voted in favor of the 2005 energy bill, choosing to overlook its handouts to polluting industries.
As befits a former attorney general, Salazar has made his name in the Senate primarily on issues such as judicial appointments and the fight over the Bush administration's abuse of wiretapping. A moderate, Salazar was a member of the Gang of 14, which sought to avoid Democratic filibusters of Bush's judicial nominees by ensuring Democratic senators a voice in the process. During the long Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act debates over warrantless wiretapping, Salazar supported stronger civil libertarian amendments to the proposed legislation.
If anything can keep Salazar off a V.P. short list, it might be his propensity for picking the wrong allies. Shortly after arriving in the Senate, Salazar introduced Alberto Gonzales at his confirmation hearing to be attorney general, though it was already public knowledge that Gonzales had authored reports supporting the torture of detainees. Salazar also endorsed Joe Lieberman over the anti-war Ned Lamont in the Connecticut Democratic senatorial primary of 2006. Lieberman, of course, went on to campaign on behalf of John McCain. Oops.
After the election,. Salazar did not evince particular interest in the Cabinet (11/6/08).
While Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar’s name has generated conjecture as a possible Interior Department secretary in a new Barack Obama administration, the first-term Democrat said Wednesday, “It’s highly doubtful that I would serve in the Cabinet.” Salazar said he likes his current job in a conference call with reporters.
His name was on various lists of potential candidates, but his views on gun control were seen to be excluding him from contention. For example, he supported the recent rule change to allow concealed weapons to be carried in National Parks:
Federal officials started their examination of possible rule modifications earlier this year in response to letters from 50 state senators, including Ken Salazar, asking for change. Salazar said through his Washington, D.C., office that the new rule was “sensible.” Outgoing Senator Wayne Allard, R-Colorado, also sought the rule change.
Because of this position, he was seen as out of step with the President-elect, but today's article suggests that he is back in the running. He is more in favor of gun control than his predecessor in the Senate, but this is by Colorado standards.
So on to his environmental record. Ken Salazar had a great year in 2008 for environmental votes, rating 100% from the League of Conservation Voters. But his lifetime rating is 81% and he scored 73% in 2007. Here is the record:
2007
Voted against:
[A]n amendment requiring the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to consider the long and short-term effects of global climate change and to use the best available modern climate science in planning water projects.
Voted against:
[C]reating an independent commission that could assess and prioritize these [water projects by the Army Corps of Engineers] and direct funding away from “pork barrel” projects toward projects of real value and importance.
Voted against:
[An] amendment to make the farm subsidy system more equitable and to boost conservation funding by $1.2 billion.
Voted against:
[A]n amendment to cap farm subsidies and to channel nearly $100 million of the resulting savings into the Grasslands Reserve Program and the Farmland Protection Program. The amendment would have closed loopholes that allow industrial-scale megafarms to collect seven figure government checks.
2006
Voted to open up offshore drilling in two votes:
1 & 2. Offshore Drilling
Like most of America’s coasts, Florida’s Gulf of Mexico coastline has been protected by the 25-year bipartisan congressional moratorium on new offshore oil and gas drilling. In 1991, President George H. W. Bush instituted a separate set of protections on new coastal drilling near the Florida Keys, which President Bill Clinton extended through 2012 for most of Florida’s Gulf Coast.
S. 3711, the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act, ended protections for Florida’s Gulf Coast and opened up 8 million acres off the coasts of Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana for oil and gas drilling. And, for the first time ever, 37 percent of the revenue from drilling would go to Gulf Coast states rather than the federal treasury — a precedent that could encourage more states to support drilling off their coasts and cost federal taxpayers billions.
Although many senators have introduced bills that would truly address our nation’s energy problems, such as raising fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks, Senate leaders ignored clean-energy solutions and brought S. 3711 up for a vote on the Senate floor. Opponents of the bill mounted a filibuster and urged that the Senate consider faster, cheaper, and cleaner energy proposals, but on July 31, 2006, the Senate voted 72-23 to end debate on the bill (Senate roll call vote 218). NO is the pro-environment vote. The next day, the Senate approved the bill by a 71-25 vote (Senate roll call vote 219). NO is the pro-environment vote. At press time, the bill had not been reconciled with the House’s more sweeping drilling legislation.
2005
Voted for an Energy Bill conference report that:
weakened key environmental protections for oil and gas drilling, added billions in new subsidies for coal, oil and nuclear power, allowed harmful underwater oil and gas testing in currently protected coastal areas, and stripped states and local governments of the authority to site liquefied natural gas facilities and transmission lines.
Obama voted for this as well, but it was his only non-environmental vote that year.
Salazar voted for an amendment that would have allowed automakers make fewer high-mileage cars in return for making dual fuel ethanol cars even though the Administration's analysis was that this would increase oil dependence. In a related vote he opposed an amendment to "to raise the CAFE standard for cars, SUVs, and minivans to 40 miles per gallon by 2015."
He then voted against an amendment from Senator Feinstein that would have removed a tax break for ExxonMobil and other major integrated oil companies.
Before coming to the Senate, Salazar was Attorney General in Colorado, where he showed a disregard for science and federal law when it came to prairie dogs:
Colorado has demonstrated a profound lack of tolerance for the black-tailed prairie dog. State policies continue to allow and encourage the decimation of this animal. The black-tailed prairie dog is still designated by Colorado's Department of Agriculture as a "pest" species that needs to be eradicated. Political opposition has been and continues to be intense, most visibly stemming from Governor Bill Owens, his Department of Natural Resources Director Greg Walcher, the Colorado Department of Agriculture, Colorado Attorney General Ken Salazar, and the Colorado Division of Wildlife. All of those individuals and agencies contradict the U.S. Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) finding that the black-tailed prairie dog is biologically imperiled. Instead, these individuals and agencies assert that prairie dogs are common, widespread and undeserving of federal protection. In fact, Greg Walcher, Ken Salazar, and the director of Colorado's Department of Agriculture, Don Ament, threatened legal action if the USFWS listed the black-tailed prairie dog as a threatened species. The audacity of this threat is apparent when one remembers that the USFWS is required to base its decision solely on scientific, biological considerations. In other words, these Colorado policy makers do not care that this species is biologically threatened and are, in fact, demanding that the USFWS violate the Endangered Species Act and base its listing on political considerations.
Just to spell it out, as Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar would be in charge of the Fish and Wildlife Service.
My guess is that this record will raise a few hackles and combined with Ken Salazar's support of NRA positions (even if not all of them), he would be opposed by wide swaths of the coalition that worked so hard for the President-elect.
***
John Berry as Interior Candidate
Other sources have John Berry as the leading contender. Berry's name has garnered the following response from an anti-mining advocate:
John Berry is almost certainly the candidate favored by the ANTI-environmental American Recreation Coalition — the lobby group that worked with Interior’s Paul Hoffman in an effort to weaken National Park policies and to open the parks to increased motorized recreation.
See http://www.nytimes.com/...
John Berry was recently appointed to the ARC’s Outdoor Resources Review Group. Having Berry appointed Interior Secretary would be a phenomenal coup for the ARC.
See http://www.funoutdoors.com/...
John Berry was the Department of Interior’s Recreation Fee Demonstration point-person. In that capacity Berry worked closely with the ARC’s President, Derrick Crandall. Crandall was a chief proponent of this immensely unpopular and contentions program. See Congressional testimony by both Berry and Crandall http://www.wildwilderness.org/...
John Berry is the ONLY candidate now in the running who would be receptive to the pressures exerted by the American Recreation Coalition — and those pressures promote the privatization, commercialization and motorization of recreational opportunities in the National Parks and other public lands.
ARC, I might add, was a highly visible and staunch supporter of the nominations of Interior Secretaries James Watt, Donald Hodel and Gale Norton. No one who loves the great outdoors should accept as Interior Secretary any nominee favored by the ARC.
Berry doesn't have a voting record to confirm these positions, but his public statements and actions as head of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation under the Bush administration show that there isn't anything he won't put a happy face on, even helping to greenwash Wal-mart or ExxonMobil.
Here is his statement about ExxonMobil in 2001, while they were appealing the Exxon Valdez verdict:
"It took courage for ExxonMobil to initiate the Save The Tiger Fund in 1995 in the face of predictions that tigers would be extinct by the year 2000. But their vision and commitment have made all the difference -- wild tigers are still with us and their future is brighter because of ExxonMobil's leadership," said John Berry, Executive Director of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. "They have put their money, talent and passion on the line and, in doing so, have made space in our crowded world for the mystery, grace and wildness that tigers epitomize." (Business Wire, March 16, 2001)
About Wal-mart:
""We are very excited to partner with Wal-Mart to build a premier land stewardship model for the next generation," said NFWF Executive Director John Berry. (US Fed News, April 12, 2005)
From another article about Wal-mart's land conservation initiatve:
"Wal-Mart is the first company to tie its footprint to land conservation," Berry says. "That means more wildlife and natural areas for everyone." (Ad Week, April 13, 2005)
About the Southern Company, a huge coal energy producer:
"We commend Southern Company's leadership in helping conserve the birds and habitats that are unique to this part of our country. These grants will also enhance recreational opportunities for thousands of people who enjoy outdoor activities," says John Berry, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation's executive director. (PR Newswire, April 14, 2003)
Now, taking money from donors is NFWF's job, but being so completely oblivious to the other harms these companies cause is not a good sign.
Also, he is from the East Coast, which will mean he will not get a good reception in the West, even among people who might in concept agree with him on an issue. There is a reason Interior secretaries are traditionally from the West and a map of public lands explains it pretty quickly.
He seems to raise money and run a smooth ship (Washington Post, October 29, 2000), but I don't see what recommends him to this position and indeed there is quite a bit that suggests some serious baggage.
UPDATE: From the comments, JustOneGuy knows John Berry and posts a rousing endorsement:
While John Berry was running the budget shop for Interior, he was able to increase the budget from $7 billion to $10 billion in only three cycles. Behind the scenes he was pushing for even larger increases to take care of our parks and refuges, indian schools, marine areas and other national treasures. If anyone reading this has ever heard of Clinton's Lands Legacy or the Conservation and Recreation Act (CARA) then they should also know that there was no stronger advocate for these things than John Berry.
John is the kind of person that everyone should want to hold a cabinet level post. He's honest and humble and hard working. Here's a few analogies for all of you to better understand what you'd be getting with John Berry as Secretary of the Interior. It would be like putting Patrick Fitzgerald in charge of Justice or Robert Hansen in charge of Climate Change policy or, a real life example, putting Eric Shinseki in charge of the VA. John is an effective administrator who understands how Interior works and who, like Obama, is interested in seeing postive changes made rather than just scoring political points.
Read the rest below.
***
Raul Grijalva as Interior Candidate
At this point it is easy to find positive reviews and endorsements for Grijalva, so I won't repeat them here. Just to be through, here are the League of Conservation Voters ratings for Raul Grijalva and his anti-environmental votes.
2008
88% -- Voted against reform of subsidies in the Farm Bill and missed the vote on No Child Left Inside (which is great legislation).
2007
90% -- Voted against reform of subsidies in the Farm Bill and missed another vote.
2006
100%
2005
94% -- Voted against an amendment that would have required the Army Corps of Engineers be required to show that river traffic was increasing before expanding locks on the upper Mississippi and Illinois rivers.
2004
100%
2003
100%
***
Politics
The interesting political question is why so many names have been leaked as frontrunners by the Obama team as they try to settle on an appointment. The only way to get full public scrutiny is to leak that someone is in the lead. Then thoughts, ideas, and research that might not otherwise get done or be shared gets out into the public discussion. That is certainly why I've written on Mike Thompson and David J. Hayes.
One possibility for the number of "frontrunners" is that the transition team is just playing games with the trial balloons and the President-elect will announce who he is going to announce when he's good and ready. That may be the case and there is no way to tell, but I doubt it.
Another possibility is that the transition team is finding this more difficult than they might have expected. The first two names floated as top contenders were Raul Grijalva and Mike Thompson. One a progressive, the other a blue dog democrat. One from the arid southwest, the other from northern California. Grijalva's gotten a lot of support from a diverse group of folks and Thompson has gotten quite a bit of opposition from environmental groups for, among other things, his support of the Healthy Forests legislation.
So even with pretty evident public support (although certainly fierce opposition behind the scenes from industry and people who disagree with him on the border fence), Grijalva ran into a "hiccup." I have no idea what this was, and the only thing that has been written suggests it was because he has an "abrasive"personal style. It could also be that they were surprised by the broad range of support he received when his name was floated -- it was not just Arizona constituents and Hispanics, but many other groups, individuals, and electeds throughout the country. When they figured out his style -- or his positions -- weren't to their liking the transition team was left in the awkward position of trying to avoid alienating the constituency that had formed around his "candidacy".
So we've had a parade of candidates: Gov. Gary Locke, Rep. John Salazar, Kevin Gover, John Berry, David J. Hayes, and Sen. Ken Salazar. And unless a decision has been made and the press conference tomorrow actually includes Interior (and it is starting to look like not), perhaps we can expect to hear Jay Inslee and John Kitzhaber as candidates again.
For those keeping score, John Salazar is worse than his brother Ken on environmental issues (lifetime LCV 71%) and is actually endorsed by the NRA. If this thing goes on another day, another whole diary could be filled with a full review. I'm happy to have him as a Democrat in a conservative area but wouldn't want to put him in a national position.
I think that the Obama team is finding that it isn't easy to get a consensus pick in this realm, and it may be more difficult than they imagined. With the exception of Eric Holder, his picks have avoided any rumblings of a conformation fight from the Republicans or wholesale denunciation from his base.
I am convinced that hearing from the grassroots matters, or I wouldn't have gone from lurking to writing on this site. At some point the President-elect will have to decide whether he wants a moderate to head Interior and alienate many liberals who thought that strong appointments to protect natural lands were part of the deal and conservationists who have been suspicious of him from the start, or he can nominate someone with a genuinely strong resource protection record and face resistance from the entrenched interests that have gotten used to exploiting the public lands for the past eight years.
Of the candidates so far I haven't done extensive research on Rep. Jay Inslee, Kevin Gover and Gov. John Kitzhaber because Kitzhaber essentially took himself out and Inslee and Gover haven't hit frontrunner status. Gover and Inslee could be good. Inslee, who has a voting record, earned a 90% lifetime rating from the LCV. But of the group identified as frontunners, I'm sticking with Grijalva and have communicated my opinion (and real name) to the transition that Interior deserves this strong advocate and laid out my varying levels of opposition to the remainder of the field documented above and in previous diaries. Who knows what came out in the vetting that isn't public information, but if there was some fatal flaw in Grijalva's style, how about floating someone who shares his respect for the natural world and real commitment to resource conservation as an alternative?