The ozone's shot, the oceans stink - so what has the Monthly had to say?

• Author: Keisling, Phil

>;

Phil Keisling, an editor of The Washington Monthly from 1982 to

1984, is a member of the Oregon House of Representatives.

George Bush's "Ich bin ein environmentalist" speech at the Republican convention, and his infamous commercial blaming Michael Dukakis for the pollution in Boston harbor, left many Democrats livid. After all, Reagan-Bush gave us Anne Gorsuch and James Watt, and Bush helped cut funding for the very federal program Boston was relying on to speed its harbor cleanup. So where were

Duk >;akis's hardhitting commercials that laid out this sorry record for public ridicule?

It's especially puzzling when one considers Americans' overwhelming support for environmental issues. In poll after poll, Americans choose environmental protection over development, even when they're told the consequences would be reduced living standards and higher unemployment. Relatively new environmental horror scenarios-ozone depletion, the greenhouse effect, large-scale deforestation--have only strengthened such at >;titudes.

That's all the more reason to understand better Dukakis's failures-and our own. Indeed, examining The Washington Monthly from 1969-89, it would be difficult to discern the extent to which American attitudes towards the environment have undergone a sea-change in this period. Only the women's movement rivals the environmental movement for its impact on the values of an entire generation. Yet aside from articles on a few discreet environmental issues-strip mining, the energy crisis, toxic waste- >;the Monthly has done little to articulate what might be called an "environmental ethic," a broad philosophical foundation on which the Democrats could capitalize.

Such an environmental ethic would certainly appeal to the upscale, urban backpackers who frequent America's wilderness areas. But it would also include the vast numbers of suburban residents and blue-collar workers whose tastes run more to fishing and hunting. (Oregon is typical of most western states in that more residents have hunting and f >;ishing licenses than vote.)

These Americans certainly don't agree on everything; many of the latter voted for Reagan. But they do share some basic values-for example, a fierce desire not to see prime hunting, fishing, and scenic areas despoiled by oil derricks and condominiums.

Of course, it is easy to dismiss such notions as "love of the land," as gushy romanticism, and, in a sense, they are. But it's a romanticism that's quintessentially...