The night before President Clinton stood on a Virginia mountain top and issued a public lands edict, I had a telephone conversation with the Chief of the Forest Service, Mike Dombeck. I asked him what the President's plan was going to include. He responded, "Larry, I don't know." In fact, that same day forty other Members of Congress and I sent a letter to the Administration asking them to talk to Congress before any announcement was made. The Administration refused.
About two o'clock the next day, we would learn together that the President would propose designating 40 million acres of Forest Service lands as defacto wilderness, essentially fencing it off to the public. Most of the 40 million acres will come from the West, and the total land mass surpasses that of many states, including Arkansas, North Carolina, Iowa, Illinois, and Georgia.
Outrage at the President's high-handedness isn't restricted to Republicans. Senator Ron Wyden, the Democratic senator from Oregon, had this to say: "This is really unprecedented . . .I've been working on forest issues in the House and Senate for 20 years, and I've never seen an administration that keeps people in the dark like these people do." With the stroke of a pen, the Administration bypassed the people's representatives and indeed, his own Cabinet and stole 40 million acres of public land (a quarter of our national forests) from American citizens.
President Clinton is acting more like King William, and it should send chills up the spines of everyone who uses public lands. By side-stepping Congress, the intent of the 1964 Wilderness Act, and the forest planning process mandated in the 1978 National Forest Management Act, Clinton is sending the message that states, local governments, citizens, and his own experts in the Forest Service are incapable of making intelligent decisions on the use of forest land.
The fact that this policy was developed at the White House and leaked to the media before it was discussed with Congress or his own Forest Service tells me two things. First of all, it is a giant leap in the methodical steps we have seen during this Administration to remove the public from the lands they own. King William wants to revert to feudal Europe, where citizens had to ask the King for permission to walk on the lands and use the roads. Our country, in the spirit of freedom that it was founded on, rejected that notion. The Clinton Administration and the preservationist movement is trying to ensure that we step back to the days when the land was locked up to all but an elite few.
Second, it tells me this is an overt political move to shore up support for Prince Albert. The timing is such that this cannot be completed before President Clinton leaves office, thus giving the preservationists another reason to vote for Al Gore to ensure the Clinton "legacy" will continue. To ignore science and the Constitutional process in the name of politics is unacceptable and cannot be tolerated.
I've heard from many Idahoans regarding this proposal. My position is clear, but the Clinton Administration needs to hear from you, either for or against the proposal. In fact, the most important thing for you to do to bring common sense to this proposal is to offer comments on the Notice of Intent (NOI), which the President released when he announced this policy. You can comment on it until December 20th. Comments can be sent to USDA Forest Service-CAET, Attention: Roadless Areas NOI, P.O. Box 221090, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84122 or roadlessareasnoi/wo_caet@www.fs.fed.us. After the NOI's comment period ends, a draft rule will be released by the Administration. Until then, your voice has the biggest impact on shaping this policy.
This policy is an attack on everyone's opportunity to use our public lands. To hold this fundamental liberty hostage to Presidential politics is shameful. As chairman of both Senate subcommittees with jurisdiction over the Forest Service, I will do all I can to reverse this trend of keeping the public off of the public's land.