Liberty Matters News Service
February 27, 2001
The Bush
administration will not seek to overturn any of President Clinton’s 22
national monument designations, most of which were done within the last
days of his administration. Interior
Secretary Gale Norton said, “I
certainly disapprove of the process by which those monuments were
generally created…[but] I have not yet heard any calls to repeal any
of the monument designations.” The
administration, western lawmakers and private property owners will
likely attempt to adjust the boundaries of the new national monuments
and alter the rules for commercial activities within them, but there
will be no organized attempt to roll back Clinton’s designations, she
added.
A 24-page
Heritage Foundation review of former President Clinton’s executive
orders and regulatory decrees charges “a disproportionate number of
these executive directives were either illegal or issued in the
furtherance of an improper policy or political objective.”
The memo termed Mr. Clinton’s dark of night, establishment of
the 1.7 million acre Grand Staircase-Escalante Monument in Utah, as the
most “outrageous” of his abuse of the Antiquities Act.
“History will show that President Clinton abused his authority
in a variety of ways and that his disrespect for the rule of law was
unprecedented.”
The Heritage
analysis concluded that President Bush has the authority to “rescind
any prior designation under the Antiquities Act.”
Others believe it will take an act of Congress to overturn the
presidential designations. Ralph
Hallow of The Washington Times said there appears to be little
concern among conservatives that the administration will not attempt to
unilaterally overturn 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.”
It appears that it is Washington politics, not property rights
“political savvy and maturity” that is preventing the president from
doing what is right on this issue.
Heritage Memo Calls Clinton's
Late Executive Orders 'Improper, Illegal'
Clinton's Land Designations Likely to
Stand
Not discouraged by
the administration’s reluctance to overturn Clinton’s monument
designations, House Resources Committee Chairman Jim Hansen, (R-UT), and
Rep. Mike Simpson, R-ID, have co-sponsored legislation to change the
1906 Antiquities Act. The
National Monument Fairness Act of 2001 would require Congressional
approval of any new monument within two years or it would be nullified.
The Act would require governors and congressional delegations be
given 60 days notice prior to any proclamation and governors must
receive 30 days notice if any new or existing monument designation
exceeds 50,000 acres. The
legislation is in response to Clinton’s 5.6 million acre monument
rampage, which enraged thousands across America.
Environmental groups reacted predictably. “It pretty much guts the president’s authority to protect
important cultural and environmental treasures on public lands,” said
David Alberswerth of the Wilderness Society.
Western Republicans Seek To
Alter National Monuments Law
Reauthorization
of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is nine years overdue and there is a
strong push to overhaul the badly designed law, but sources in
Washington are divided as to whether or not it will be a priority this
year. Jim Hansen (R-UT),
the new chair of the House Resources Committee, is said to be an
advocate for reform. He has
said that the act should focus more on recovering species rather than
listing them and that there should be more protections for property
owners, companies and local governments.
With the loss of several conservative members of Congress last
year to term-limits, reforming the act to a more landowner-friendly law
is going to be an uphill battle. So
far, two bills to reform the ESA have been filed.
George Radanovich (R-CA), filed H.R. 472 to exempt a bridge
renovation project in Washington, D.C. from the ESA, but also exempts
routine maintenance and operations projects nationwide from ESA reviews.
Sen. Craig Thomas introduced S. 347 to amend the ESA by improving
the processes for listing, recovery planning and delisting.
Nonetheless, doubts persist that reforms would get very far this
year with changing committee members, legislative priorities, the even
split in the Senate, and a Republican president who comes from a strong
private property state and is very sensitive to the views of private
landowners. Whatever
happens, the ESA should be repealed altogether, but short of that, it
should be an incentive-based, pro-private property law that compensates
landowners for the loss and value of their land.
H.R. 472
H.R. 347
Jim
Burling with the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) argued before the US
Supreme Court on February 26th in Palazzlo v. Rhode Island,
on behalf of a Rhode Island landowner who was halted from developing 18
acres of oceanfront wetlands, claiming the action constituted a taking
of private property for public use without just compensation. The case is considered important by court watchers because it
is expected to clarify when a taking has occurred, since in this case,
landowner Anthony Palazzo knew about the wetlands regulations before he
purchased the property. The
Rhode Island Supreme Court ruled that Mr. Palazzolo had no right to
bring a takings case since the regulations were in place before he
gained personal ownership of the property.
PLF commented that "under the theory adopted by the Rhode
Island Supreme Court, all your property rights that were subject to
regulation passed to the state when you thought you acquired the
property. Therefore, you
can never sue the government regulators for taking your land for a
public benefit because you were technically ‘on notice’ that the
government was planning to confiscate your rights.”
PLF To Argue Before U.S. Supreme
Court...(pdf)
Representative
Don Young is not about ready to give up on his land-grabbing bill, the
infamous Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA), which he first filed
in the 106th session of Congress.
Although a downsized version of his land acquisition bill was
added to the Interior Appropriations bill in the final hours of last
session, Young reintroduced his bill on February 14th, and
this time is asking for even more money and additional programs.
Refiled under the same bill number, H.R. 701, the new version
would take $3.1 billion per year from outer continental shelf (OCS) oil
and gas receipts for conservation programs which include land
acquisition, wildlife conservation and restoration, urban parks,
endangered and threatened species, among others.
Last year’s bill sought $2.8 billion for these programs.
While it passed the House, it never made it to the senate floor
and so proponents of the bill compromised with leadership and managed to
get “CARA Lite” added to the Interior Appropriations bill.
This “Lite” version put $1.6 billion each year for six years
towards land acquisition, historic preservation, national land
maintenance and PILT. While
environmentalists are pleased that Young has refiled the newly tooled
bill, only nine of his colleagues cosponsored the action with him.
Maybe, if we can keep those opposed to the CARA concept focused,
the property rights movement can keep this version from seeing the light
of compromise.
H.R. 701
CARA
Bill Funding Bumped Up This Time Around