Clinton's Land Designations Likely to Stand
The Washington Times
www.washtimes.com

THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Ralph Z. Hallow
Published 2/22/01

President Bush is unlikely to try to overturn his predecessor's 11th-hour 
designations of millions of acres of federal land as national monuments.
"No decision has been made by the Interior Department on whether or not to 
try to overturn Clinton's national monument designations at this point," a 
spokesman for Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton told The Washington Times 
yesterday.

Many conservatives were upset with the way former President Bill Clinton 
removed huge tracts of federal land from commercial and recreational use without 
first consulting with the governors of the affected states and local residents.
Mr. Clinton made all but one of the national monument designations after 
the presidential elections in November. He expanded by at least 1 million acres, 
or 25 percent, the amount of land designated as national monuments, which 
precludes mining, logging and recreational activities on the land.

Many conservatives, however, did not expect Mr. Bush to unilaterally roll 
back Mr. Clinton's actions, believing it to be unfeasible — both politically and 
legally.

Under the law, once a president designates federal lands as national 
monuments, that designation cannot be removed by another president. In that 
respect, congressional legal experts said, national monument designations are 
not the same as executive orders, which can be reversed by a new president.
Mr. Bush said he would review Mr. Clinton's end-of-term executive orders, 
but the national monuments designations are of a different nature and will 
require congressional action.

However, Angela Antonelli, Heritage Foundation director for the Roe 
Institute for Economic Policy, noted, "No president ever rescinded designations 
made by a previous president."

There appeared to be little concern among conservatives that the Bush 
administration probably will not attempt to unilaterally overturn Mr. Clinton's 
designations. This suggests — to some conservatives at least — that the 
property-rights movement is reflecting a political savvy and maturity indicative 
of the larger conservative movement.

"One of the mistakes [Reagan administration Interior Secretary] James Watt 
and his Interior Department made was being too direct and confrontational, and I 
think Gale Norton understands political strategy better than Watt did," said 
Clark Collins, executive director of the Blue Ribbon Coalition.

"We need to make some changes in these monuments, but we don't need to have 
a lot of political bloodshed over it," added Mr. Collins, who said his coalition 
represents more than 1,000 off-highway recreational users and businesses that 
would be denied use of national monument lands.

While the president and the interior secretary may be legally barred from 
acting without the consent of Congress in the case of national monuments, an 
attempt to do so might have played well in the past with a Republican president 
seeking to shore up his conservative political base.

But many conservatives say their movement has gained a considerable degree 
of sophistication and moderation, especially after eight years of being out of 
the White House during the Clinton era.

"People who understand it takes an act of Congress to get rid of these 
designations won't be angry if Bush doesn't rescind them, and people who don't 
understand are probably very angry," said Myron Ebell, international 
environmental director of the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Although Congress has the legal authority, most political observers believe 
it is unlikely to move to rescind the national monument designations Mr. Clinton 
made in his last three months in office.

Copyright © 2001 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.