Cabinet Makers

Environmental Protection Agency | Who's in Charge?
By Christine Todd Whitman

In the fall of 2000, I traveled down to Washington for a final job interview with the president-elect at the hotel where the transition team had set up its offices. Before accepting his offer to head up the EPA, I wanted to know who would ultimately be responsible for the administration's environmental policy. In the end, I asked, would the EPA or the Council on Environmental Quality have the final say? "What's CEQ?" he replied, laughing it off.

It took less than a year for an issue to arise over which Jim Connaughton, the head of CEQ, and I disagreed. I don't recall what the issue was precisely, but I certainly recall that when I raised my concern with the White House, I was told that Jim spoke for the administration.

The ill-defined distribution of authority between the EPA and CEQ has led to tensions with the White House in the past, and that's understandable—up to a point. But I note this episode because I believe it illustrates how important it is that the next EPA administrator have a serious conversation with the president-elect about such issues at the outset. A new administrator should clarify decisively with the president-elect who is going to be determining environmental policy: either the EPA or the Council on Environmental Quality. There will always be a need for administrationwide coordination, but it should be clearly delineated that the EPA administrator speaks for the administration on the environment.

To that end, the next administration should move a bill early on that would make EPA a cabinet department. While it won't change how the agency functions day to day, it will send a strong message to the nation and the world about how seriously the new president takes environmental issues. The United States is the only developed country that does not have a "minister" of environmental issues. We accord the EPA administrator cabinet status, and that person is treated as if he or she was a minister on the world stage, but the semantic change would be a strong signal to the world that the United States will be focusing on environmental issues in the years to come.

In addition, the new administration will want to take a close look at all the pending regulations that were moved out in the last few months of the Bush years. Listen closely to the career staff in analyzing these and make sure that the work that led to them was complete and not rushed. Spend as much time as possible getting to know the EPA staff. There are many highly talented people whose skills, ideas and extensive institutional knowledge should be cultivated. There are some tremendous public servants at the EPA and their contribution should be welcomed and encouraged.

Finally, I would ask the president-elect and his advisers for flexibility in making political appointments. There are always "must-hires" when a new administration takes over, and having the flexibility to place those specific people in the departments where you believe their efforts would be most helpful can make an enormous difference. This cross-fertilization of public servants and political appointees will go a long way to ensuring that policy and politics will work together, not in opposition.

There is no doubt that the next four years will present significant environmental challenges. For the sake of our climate and our nation, I wish the next EPA administrator all the best.
—Christine Todd Whitman served as administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency under President George W. Bush

 

---

James A. Baker III, Treasury

Richard Thornburgh, Attorney General

Edwin , Attorney General

William S. Cohen, Defense

Lawrence Eagleburger, State Department

James A. Baker III, State Department

Christine Todd Whitman, Environmental Protection Agency

Sandy Berger, National-Security Adviser

Brent Scowcroft, National-Security Adviser