Bush's three D's.

Byline: The Register-Guard

President Bush's approach to global warming has been aptly described as a "three D strategy" - dissembling, denial and delay. So, it's hardly surprising that the governors of California, Washington and Oregon have taken matters into their own hands and announced a new three-state partnership aimed at reducing greenhouse gases.

Faced with reams of solid scientific data on global warming, Bush has refused to acknowledge that Earth's temperature is rising and greenhouse gases are at least partly responsible. Since becoming president, he has refused to join most of the world's nations in signing the international Kyoto accord to control carbon dioxide emissions. He has dismissed the findings of major global warming studies produced by or for his administration and now has commissioned a 10-year research project that he hopes will produce the "right answers" - the ones he and his supporters in industry want to hear.

Meanwhile, the White House has loosened a broad range of environmental controls on industrial pollution. It has steadfastly opposed higher gas mileage standards on cars and SUVs, has called for more subsidies for oil and coal production, and has fiercely resisted mandatory caps on greenhouse emissions, while supporting only voluntary compliance by polluters.

Enter Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski, California Gov. Gray Davis and Washington Gov. Gary Locke. The three announced this week that the administration's failure to move decisively against global warming has prompted them to begin crafting their own strategy.

It's unclear how far the three states can - and will - go in the effort to reduce greenhouse gases. A sour economy may make the governors reluctant to push for initiatives that might limit industrial production and energy use. Preliminary steps call for coordinated actions to purchase fuel-efficient vehicles, develop renewable sources of energy and create standardized methods to account for emissions.

Such steps fall short of the recent agreement by governors of nine New England states to reduce greenhouse emissions to 1990 levels by 2010. But it's a start - and a good one.

Oregon, California and Washington already have taken significant steps on their own, ranging from carbon standards for new power plants to energy-efficient building codes. Of the three states, California has gone furthest. For example, Davis signed a law last year requiring 20 percent of California's electricity to come from renewable sources by 2017, a move that the White House has resisted at the national level.

Cynics will no doubt dismiss the announcement by the three governors, all Democrats, as political grandstanding that is unlikely to have any real impact on global warming. Yet the three states account for nearly 2 percent of global emissions - with California representing all but a small portion.

While some political hot air is no doubt involved, the creation of a regional strategy by West Coast states is a welcome development, as are similar efforts in the Northeast. But regional initiatives are no replacement for decisive action at the national level. Although this nation has less than 5 percent of the world's population, it produces more than a fourth of the world's carbon dioxide. Any meaningful response to global warming must take the form of national, and not merely regional, strategies.

Congress has an opportunity to take a huge step in that direction in the coming weeks when it considers legislation introduced by Sens. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., and John McCain, R-Ariz. The Climate Stewardship Act of 2003 would set a nationwide emissions limit for the utility, industry and transportation sectors, which produce 80 percent of U.S. global warming emissions. It would cut back carbon dioxide by a "cap and trade" formula that would allow companies to lower their own pollution or buy emission allowances from firms with lower reduction targets. (A similar formula has been successful in reducing sulfur dioxide emissions that cause acid rain.)

Despite the president's bogus claims that more study is needed, it is time for federal lawmakers to impose a comprehensive national policy to cut greenhouse emissions. The emergence of regional strategies, first in the Northeast and now in the West, should shame - and spur - Congress into action.