A green for Treasury?

Byline: The Register-Guard

Here's a puzzle: Why are global warming skeptics doing a slow burn, excuse the expression, over the nomination of Henry Paulson as the Bush administration's next Treasury secretary?

A hint: It isn't the three-decade Wall Street veteran's investment credentials. Nor is it Paulson's hobby of bird watching, although that activity provides a clue to the unhappiness of ultraconservatives who would rather be broiled on a rotisserie grill than sit through a screening of "An Inconvenient Truth."

The explanation is that Paulson is an avid environmentalist in addition to being chairman of Goldman Sachs, one of the nation's premiere investment banks. Suffice it to say that environmentalists are in scarce supply these days in the Bush administration.

Make no mistake, Paulson is a strong proponent of tax cuts and free trade, qualities that no doubt will endear him to many Republican lawmakers. But his environmental views are likely to produce some interesting moments during confirmation hearings - and perhaps some even more interesting moments in Cabinet meetings if Paulson is confirmed, as expected.

Paulson's interest in nature and the environment has roots in his upbringing in a Christian Scientist family on an Illinois farm. Before choosing a business career and getting his MBA from Harvard, he planned on becoming a forest ranger.

Since 2004, Paulson has served as chairman of the Nature Conservancy, where he helped clean up the organization's questionable land sale and tax break practices. The organization strongly supports the Kyoto Protocol, the international accord on global warming that President Bush rejected after pledging to support it during his 2000 presidential campaign.

As chairman and chief executive of Goldman Sachs, Paulson oversaw the issuance of a position paper that embraced the growing scientific consensus that global warming poses one of the greatest threats in the century. The statement also took issue with the Bush administration's unswerving opposition to mandatory caps on greenhouse gas emissions.

The prospect of an environmentalist, especially one with deep concerns about global warming, having such direct access to the Oval Office has unnerved some supporters of the administration's retrograde environmental policies.

When rumors of his nomination first surfaced several weeks ago, the Land Rights Network issued an online alert that read: "DANGER!!! The United States Treasury Department may be taken over by The Nature Conservancy's Chairman, Mr. Henry Paulson!!!" The alert also called the conservancy "the world's most powerful and scandal-plagued group."

Such hand-wringing is probably unnecessary, since Treasury chiefs have little input on the administration's global warming policies. Paulson's critics should take solace in the precedent of Paul O'Neill, a former administration Treasury secretary who publicly disagreed with Bush on global warming and came away with nothing but his walking papers.

A compelling argument can be made, however, that global warming should be part of the Treasury portfolio. All one need do is reflect on the department's mission statement:

"The mission of the Department of the Treasury is to promote the conditions for prosperity and stability in the United States and encourage prosperity and stability in the rest of the world."