According to most analysts, voters will decide the 2004 election based on the records and stances of President Bush and Senator John Kerry on the key issues of the economy and terrorism. Such analysis is backed by five different national public opinion surveys taken in the last six months, wherein registered voters were given a list of issues and asked to identify the one most important to them. All of the polls, depending on their wording, concluded that the two broad issues most important to voters are Terrorism/National Security/Iraq and Economy/Jobs. However, none of the five polls contained an option to choose for environmental concerns. As the nation experiences a difficult job market, a growing insurgency in Iraq, and a seemingly endless "War on Terrorism," both the media and the public have focused less and less on environmental issues.

During the 2000 election, the United States was at peace, had a surplus and had lower unemployment figures. Consequently, the environment was featured far more prominently in the campaigns, as former Vice President Al Gore, the author of Earth in the Balance, struggled to gain an edge over Bush, the Texas oilman and self-proclaimed friend of the environment. But the lack of voter attention to the environment in 2004 is very convenient for the reelection prospects of President Bush.

In less than four years, Bush has compiled an absolutely atrocious environmental record. The head of the Environmental Protection Agency under fomer President Bill Clinton, Carol Browner, declared the Bush Administration to be "simply the most anti-environmental ever." The Sierra Club, one of the country's most influential environmental lobbying organizations, displays on its Web site a description of Bush's environmental record, entitled "More Than 300 Crimes Against Nature." The list, compiled by the National Resources Defense Council, another leading environmental group, is disturbing to say the least.

To name a few: The Bush administration, under the guise of preventing forest fires, has allowed unprecedented logging in national forests. As a result, millions of beautiful acres of America's forests have been damaged, and some have been clear cut and destroyed completely. Bush is also seeking to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, one of the last remaining truly pristine areas on Earth, to oil drilling. Most likely, such drilling would only increase America's oil supply by two percent over the next 20 years while causing untold destruction to the natural scenery and the wildlife.

Similarly, in coordination with the Republican-controlled Congress, Bush has rejected attempts to cut our excessive consumption of fossil fuels with tougher emission standards on automobiles. Vice President Dick Cheney set much of America's energy policy in secret meetings with industry lobbyists, and is able to seal the records of the meetings due to the Supreme Court's postponement of a lawsuit that would have made them public.

Bush has also pulled America out of the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty that seeks to lessen global warming. According to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the author of Crimes Against Nature, he has even questioned the existence of global warming, a notion that scientists find outrageous and laughable.

While global warming is a serious long-term threat to the health of Americans, many of Bush's other decisions regarding the environment have put the health of Americans at more immediate risk. After being in office for only two months, Bush disposed of a rule that placed tougher standards on arsenic in drinking water.

In addition, Bush's EPA has weakened pollution standards for 17,000 power plants, a move that could cause an increase in serious health problems, such as asthma and heat attacks. The EPA has even failed to properly address the concern of mercury, a deadly chemical often emitted from power plants. Mercury seriously harms the neurological development of young children and babies are likely to be harmed if their mother possesses a high level of mercury in their blood while pregnant. According to a study by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, eight percent of pregnant women have too much mercury in their blood. It is interesting that a president who opposes abortion would allow the unborn to be at an increased risk of mercury exposure.

In doing these things, President Bush has undermined the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act, effectively doing away with three decades of environmental progress.

He has filled administration posts with former oil and timber lobbyists. He has stacked the EPA with staunchly pro-business administrators, completely undermining its purpose of protecting the environment and instead using it to do just the opposite. Democratic Senator Joseph Lieberman recently mused that Bush's EPA would be more appropriately called the EDA, or "Environmental Destruction Agency." Clearly, Bush's record on the environment is terrible beyond belief, but the question becomes whether or not voters will hold him to account for it on Election Day.

Largely due to the lack of media coverage on environmental issues and Bush's shrewd campaigning as an environmentalist, a Gallup poll from six months ago found that a whopping 59 percent of Americans believe that under Bush, environmental protections are being either strengthened or kept the same.

The Kerry campaign cannot allow this misperception to remain. Kerry must constantly attack Bush's environmental record until the media and the public pick up on it. Another Gallup Poll from 2001 demonstrates a strong environmentalist streak among voters, with 75 percent or more supporting higher pollution standards for industry, more stringent enforcement of environmental laws, and increased funding for the development of alternative energy sources. The Bush administration is way out of touch with the pro-environmental public. While the economy and national security are very important issues, voters must not forget to consider the environment when making their choice.