PUBLIC LANDS: Senate defeats dueling amendments on parks, monuments
Phil Taylor, E&E reporter: Friday, January 23, 2015
Senators yesterday defeated a pair of dueling public lands amendments by Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), taking sides in a contentious debate over the conservation and expansion of the federal estate.
The vote tallies were nearly identical -- 55-44 for Boxer and 54-45 for Fischer -- but neither measure won the 60 votes needed to amend S. 1, a bill to approve the Keystone XL pipeline.
The amendments touched on roiling controversy in Congress over whether the government should acquire more lands for hiking, hunting, fishing and recreation, and whether the president enjoys too much power to designate some lands as national monuments.
The votes came as the Senate's newly ascendant Republican majority debates whether, or how, to reauthorize the expiring Land and Water Conservation Fund, a 50-year-old program that facilitates the purchase and conservation of federal and private lands, as well as whether to curb President Obama's powers under the Antiquities Act.
Boxer's amendment, a mostly symbolic measure, would have affirmed that presidents of both parties have used executive power to protect iconic lands including the Grand Canyon, Maine's coastline and Utah's sandstone arches. It would have acknowledged findings by the Outdoor Industry Association that outdoor recreation generates $646 billion in direct spending and supports 6.1 million jobs, as well as by the Bozeman, Mont.-based research group Headwater Economics that protected federal lands are associated with healthy economies.
The measure garnered unanimous support from Democrats and picked up Republican Sens. Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker of Tennessee, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Susan Collins of Maine, Ted Cruz of Texas, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Dean Heller of Nevada, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Rob Portman of Ohio and Marco Rubio of Florida.
Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) opposed the measure in part because she felt Congress does not support the Antiquities Act and that some of the economic figures were "inflated at best," said spokesman Robert Dillon.
"It's not true that all communities benefit from public lands. Look at King Cove," he said, referring to the Alaskan city that has battled the Interior Department to build a road through a federal refuge. "There are benefits to public lands. No one's denying that. But this amendment just didn't pass muster."
Fischer's amendment sought to put senators on record about the fiscal burdens of acquiring and showcasing new lands and national parks. It would have required the Interior secretary to perform an analysis of how new federally protected lands would affect the government's ability to manage existing lands.
Fischer said federal lands agencies face a maintenance backlog exceeding $20 billion, which Republicans warn has led to a deterioration of national parks.
"We want to keep these resources and parks open for our children and our grandchildren to marvel at and enjoy," Fischer said. "We here in Congress have the responsibility to care for the natural resources of our country."
Boxer said the amendment would throw new bureaucratic roadblocks in the way of protecting additional lands and would invite new lawsuits.
"Can you imagine America without Yosemite, Yellowstone, Grand Canyon, the Statue of Liberty, Natural Bridges in Utah, Scott's Bluff in Nebraska, Muir Woods in California, Glacier Bay in Alaska?" she said. "These were all protected by Republican and Democratic presidents, and in many cases by Congress."
Boxer added that Fischer's amendment "is so vague that I think it's going to lead us right to the courthouse door."
Yet Democrats Tim Kaine of Virginia, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, and independent Angus King of Maine, who caucuses with Democrats, backed the Fischer amendment.
Four Republicans broke ranks to oppose it: Ayotte, Collins, Graham and Richard Burr of North Carolina.
Conservation and sportsmen's groups lobbied hard against the Fischer amendment, particularly after an earlier draft emerged that would have placed tighter restrictions on land designations.
Conservationists yesterday saw positives in the Boxer vote.
"We're glad to see a majority of the Senate voting to acknowledge the value of public lands to communities," said Ryan Bidwell, national monument campaign director for the Conservation Lands Foundation.
Bidwell said he's not reading too much into the Fischer amendment because its impact in its modified state was not clear.
Matt Lee-Ashley, a senior fellow at the liberal Center for American Progress, said the defeat of Fischer's measure shows that "the public doesn't like the idea of Congress throwing up new barriers to the protection of public lands."
He added, "It was a little surprising that [the amendment] was brought out so early in the legislative session, given how controversial it was."
