House Speaker Nancy Pelosi asked Walt Minnick what it would take to get him to vote for a climate bill that would cap greenhouse gas emissions and allow industries to trade pollution credits.

The vote was expected to be close and Pelosi was willing to make sure Minnick, the congressman from Idaho's First District, got what he wanted for his constituents or state businesses. Several other Democrats in the room got what they wanted - including more for farmers, and changed their votes.

"She asked me if I was able to vote for it now," Minnick said. "I said 'No Nancy, I don't believe in cap and trade.' "

But saying no to Pelosi was far easier than telling his friends and former environmental colleagues Rick Johnson, executive director of the Idaho Conservation League, and Bill Meadows, president of the Wilderness Society, that he would oppose the bill.

"I told him a no vote was a mistake, because this is one of the most important issues for the state, the nation and the world," Johnson said.

The bill passed the House June 26, 219-212. Minnick's opposition could be considered a savvy political vote in his conservative district, where many voters are skeptical whether human activity is changing the world's climate.

Opposition to this measure comes easy for Idaho Republicans - the rest of the delegation has steadfastly opposed this way to combat climate change.

But as the lone Democrat, Minnick's vote threatens to undercut the support of a major part of his core: environmentalists. Many of the people who manned the phones, gave money and went door-to-door to help the former businessman get elected in 2008 were environmentalists.

The League of Conservation Voters' executive director, Gene Karpinski, told Minnick that his group will not endorse anyone who voted against the bill.

Johnson, too, said it could have an effect come election time - and when Minnick needs help to get things done for Idaho.

"It just makes me less helpful," Johnson said.

Minnick's ties in the conservation community run deep. He was a member of the Wilderness Society's governing board for more than 20 years and was a board member of the Idaho Conservation League since its inception in the 1970s. These groups share his view that climate change is serious and requires immediate action.

"I don't like to tell my friends in any community, especially my friends in the environmental community, I would not be with them in the most important vote of the Congress," Minnick said.

He said politics was not a part of his consideration for opposing the bill, which would set up a new Wall Street market for carbon credits, which Minnick thinks would be easy to manipulate and provide huge giveaways for the coal industry and others in the East and Midwest.

"Cap and trade is not the best way to control greenhouse gas emissions nor is it the right solution for Idaho," Minnick said.

"I believe firmly that we do need to protect consumers from higher prices while giving business predictable costs and positive incentives."

Cap and trade is a program to cap carbon emissions and allow companies to trade their rights to pollute as a way to reduce carbon with as little impact on the economy as possible.

Minnick's position has changed since he ran against former Republican Rep. Bill Sali for his seat.

Minnick supported cap and trade while Sali opposed it.

"Cap and trade is dumb," Sali said at a forum in Meridian.

"We need to adopt to cap and trade to wean ourselves off of fossil fuels," Minnick told the same group in 2008.

Johnson said he understands Minnick's position and could even agree with it on the merits except that it sends a message that the United States is not serious about climate change. Had the bill been rejected, it would have undermined greenhouse gas reduction measures worldwide, he said.

"I might agree with him on the policy, but I disagree on the symbolism," Johnson said.

Minnick said that the U.S. must lead the world in addressing climate change and that he believes it will help the economy. He said the federal government should tax the biggest polluters and rebate the proceeds to their customers.

"That will create market stability, and will help business know their costs," Minnick said. "There will be less greenhouse gases, but consumers will avoid higher prices at the pump and in their monthly electric bills."

Idaho Republican Rep. Mike Simpson doesn't have the same political problem Minnick does. His vote against the bill was expected, and he's not ready to say that climate change is definitely caused by burning fossil fuels.

He questions how Democrats can say climate change demands bold action when they are unwilling to tap low-carbon nuclear power to replace fossil fuels.

"The mere fact that Democrats would not even allow a vote on nuclear energy proves this bill is not really about combating climate change. It is about establishing an energy economy that punishes activities and industries they don't like," Simpson said.

Boise State University political science professor John Freemuth said Minnick and his constituents must recognize that his independence comes with costs.

Minnick's relationships with national environmental leaders, for instance, could have helped the state's forest towns benefit from a restoration program and a new biomass industry.

He may have lost his capital with this vote, Johnson said.

"At some point he's going to need the support of other Democrats and the president for Idaho," Freemuth said. "He may regret his vote."

Rocky Barker: 377-6484