Some of what Bush says does ring true, and Texas has had some success in reducing industrial pollution by encouraging compliance. But Bush can't exactly point with pride to his home state, either. Houston has surpassed Los Angeles as the nation's smoggiest city, and the Texas Center for Policy Studies ranks Texas 47th in per capita spending on water quality and resources and 46th on per capita spending on the environment. The sheer size of the Texas economy contributes to the problem, but state spending on pollution control is still disproportionately small. In defense, the Bush campaign legitimately points out that the problems predate their man's governorship and that air and water quality have improved under his administration.
Oil exploration is another area where the candidates are poles apart.
Bush has proposed exploration and drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to reduce dependence on the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, which, in general, is a worthwhile goal. Gore opposes opening the Alaska refuge to drilling because of the sensitive and pristine nature of the area, which, of course, is the very reason it was made a refuge. He strongly believes in fuel conservation instead. On another key environmental issue, Bush acknowledges that global warming is occurring but opposes the 1997 Kyoto Protocol to reduce global emissions. But he has been criticized for not doing enough to push that agreement through the Senate.