NATIONAL MONUMENTS: Battle lines drawn over Bishop bill to curb presidential powers
Phil Taylor, E&E reporter
E&E: Wednesday, March 26, 2014
The House today is set to vote on a controversial bill to restrict the president's powers to designate national monuments on federal lands, a measure that has sparked outrage among conservationists, historic preservationists, sportsmen and minority groups while garnering support from motorized recreation enthusiasts and ranchers.
Rep. Rob Bishop's (R-Utah) H.R. 1459 would require presidents to conduct a National Environmental Policy Act review before designating monuments more than 5,000 acres in size, while limiting presidents to one designation per state for each four-year term.
The president could issue emergency proclamations for smaller monuments, but those would still require either congressional approval or a NEPA review within three years.
The bill marks the House's first significant bid to curb the Antiquities Act since 2012, when it voted 223-198 in favor of an amendment by Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) to require the president to gain approval of a state's governor and legislature before designating a national monument.
The 1906 law gives presidents sweeping powers to protect at-risk federal lands from development. Republicans argue that power is too absolute, but Democrats and conservationists say it's a crucial tool in the absence of congressional action to conserve public lands.
"This is a simple bill that sends to this president and any future president a simple message," said Rules Chairman Pete Sessions (R-Texas) following a hearing yesterday afternoon to set parameters for floor debate on the bill. "If you're going to make vast lands off limits for job creators, you should allow the public to participate in the process."
While the Obama administration has engaged the public early and often in the creation of its 10 national monuments, Republicans have long pointed to the Clinton administration's designation of the 1.7-million-acre Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah, which occurred in 1996 with little public input, as a poster child for the law's potential abuse.
The Rules Committee voted to allow debate and votes on three amendments.
They include a proposal by Rep. Ron Barber (D-Ariz.) to ensure economic studies of monuments consider the tourism dollars they create and a measure by Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-Mass.) to preserve the president's ability to protect military sites regardless of their size.
The third amendment by Bishop seeks to clarify the bill's provisions.
Earlier this week, roughly 90 conservation groups sent a letter to House members warning that the bill would undermine the president's ability to "act swiftly to protect iconic historical, cultural, and natural sites that are the fabric of who we are as Americans."
"Efforts to prevent and undermine the protection of our lands and waters are out of step with public opinion, where there is overwhelming support for managing our country's public lands and waters in a way that will sustain local economies, enhance quality of life for our children and protect our rich conservation legacy," said the letter whose signatories included the Cesar Chavez Foundation, National Parks Conservation Association and National Tour Association.
The bill is also opposed by the NAACP, the Hispanic Federation, the Outdoor Alliance, the Small Business Majority and sportsmen's groups.
In a letter to colleagues this week, Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) and Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) said the bill would "eviscerate one of America's bedrock environmental laws, the Antiquities Act, allowing House Republicans to block the creation of any new monuments."
Bishop said he took "umbrage" to the letter. The former public school teacher issued a rebuttal in the form of track changes he publicized yesterday afternoon.
"What is so ironic is even today, in a different committee, the administration was condemning a bill because it would cut out public participation," Bishop said. "In this bill, the administration condemned it because it was demanding public participation."
Bishop's office yesterday released a list of supporters, including motorized recreation groups Americans for Responsible Recreational Access, the BlueRibbon Coalition and the American Motorcyclist Association, and ranching advocates National Cattlemen's Beef Association, the Public Lands Council and the American Farm Bureau.
While the bill is expected to pass the House, it's an open question as to how many Republicans may voice opposition.
Twenty-one Republicans opposed the Foxx amendment in 2012, and the League of Conservation Voters this week announced an online ad campaign to aggressively lobby more than a dozen Republicans who the group considers fence sitters or whose districts are near national monuments (E&ENews PM, March 24).
The bill is not expected to advance in the Senate.
