[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 16 (Wednesday, February 23, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: February 23, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
     INTRODUCTION OF THE ``PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS BILL OF RIGHTS''

                                 ______


                            HON. JACK FIELDS

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, February 23, 1994

  Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, 200 years ago, the people of this 
country declared their independence from a government that had 
forgotten it derived its powers from the consent of the governed. When 
the tyrant, King George, pushed the people around just a little too 
much--when he tried to destroy these rights--they rebelled.
  They replaced tyranny with a Constitution and a Bill of Rights that 
guaranteed each and every one of us our basic rights to life, liberty, 
and property. The protections embodied in these two masterpieces ensure 
that the Government cannot come in and take our property for public use 
without just compensation. These protections are supposed to keep the 
Government from forcing some people to bear public burdens that, in all 
fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole.
  But then came the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act, and 
just about blasted those protections apart. Of course, constitutional 
scholars might tell you that is impossible. But, most likely, their 
property has not been classified as wetlands and the Government has not 
spotted any spotted owls on their property.
  The history of wetlands regulation would be interesting if it were 
not so tragic. Back in 1972, Congress passed the Clean Water Act. One 
section, little noted but long remembered, prohibited the discharge of 
dredged materials into navigable waters without a permit. It was not 
until 1975 that the Corps of Engineers expanded the definition of 
navigable waters from waters that could be navigated to include 
wetlands--land that may only be wet occasionally. Since that time, 
bureaucrats and lawyers, not Congress have been ``writing wetlands 
law.''
  Many Americans have become increasingly alarmed about the arbitrary 
implementation of the Clean Water Act. I, too, am deeply concerned that 
the wetlands law, which is having such a devastating effect on American 
landowners, is the result of overly broad judicial and bureaucratic 
interpretations of the law. Today, landowners are being denied their 
basic constitutional right to use their land and to be compensated for 
the loss of that land. Let me share several horror stories about the 
current enforcement of wetlands regulations.

  A Pennsylvania family was prevented from selling their 127 acre 
ancestral farm, valued at $190,000, after it was labeled a wetland. The 
Federal Government offered the family no compensation.
  A Texas rancher had a man-made earthen stock tank for his cattle. 
When he moved his headquarters to the other end of the ranch, he dug a 
new tank, filling in the old one. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
cited him for converting a wetland.
  A Missouri farmer wanted to repair one of his farm's levees that was 
built in the 1930's. The land had been farmed for over 100 years. He 
was told that in order to repair the levee he would have to get a 
permit from the Corps of Engineers and maintain 25 percent of his 
property, without compensation, as a permanent wetland.
  And, a Minnesota rancher had two one-acre glacial potholes on his 
farm. To make farming around them easier, he filled one and expanded 
the other to two acres. The Corps of Engineers objected. The Federal 
Government fined him $5,000 and made him dig out the original pothole.
  There is little doubt that wetlands are an important habitat for many 
species that need protection. Regrettably, current Federal wetlands 
laws simply do not work. They neither improve our environment nor do 
they help our local communities. In short, our wetlands protection 
system must be improved in a comprehensive manner.
  Although the Endangered Species Act has a much more structured past, 
its impact has not been any the less burdensome and onerous on the 
private citizen. There is no shortage of stories of property owners 
being deprived of their constitutional rights to use their property, of 
landowners being harassed by Government officials, and of landowners 
being denied the peaceful enjoyment of their property continues to grow 
each day.
  Let me give you a few vivid examples.
  In Travis County, TX, property values have dropped $359 million since 
the Fish and Wildlife Service listed the golden-cheeked warbler and the 
black-capped vireo as endangered. The State of Texas will lose $2 
million in property taxes and the residents of the area are going to 
find it difficult, if not impossible, to sell their homes. An 80-year-
old woman has been told to stop brush clearing her land. The Government 
has warned her that failure to do so will subject her to fines of up to 
$50,000 and up to 1 year in prison.
  In Maryland, a couple was prohibited from preventing erosion on their 
property because the Government told them that it might destroy tiger 
beetles. Meanwhile, a 15-foot section of their property plunged into 
the bay. Their home is now the endangered species.
  In Idaho, the water level of the Granite Dam was decreased by 37 feet 
to test the physical impact of a plan designed to benefit the 
endangered sockeye salmon. Besides thousands of other fish stranded and 
killed, a marina went bankrupt, docks were destroyed, and a half 
million dollars in damage was done to neighboring Whitman County, WA. 
Physical damage amounted to almost $2 million and business losses 
exceeded $3 million.
  In Idaho, farmers have coexisted with the microscopic Bruneau Hot 
Spring snail for generations until the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
listed the snail as endangered. Now, the Service has told area farmers 
they can no longer share the water, and rural farming must be shut down 
so as not to the disturb the snail's habitat. Not only that, but the 
Service has also prohibited any cattle grazing. An entire valley of 
people was out of business. Fortunately, a U.S. district judge has 
declared the Service's designation as arbitrary and capricious and 
delisted the snail. But this case is the exception, not the rule.
  The abuse of private property rights cannot be ignored any longer. 
But now, we are told that reform of the Endangered Species Act will not 
occur in this Congress, and while wetlands reform is moving along, that 
is not enough.
  Today, we are taking our first step to taking back our rights--today 
we are introducing the private property owners bill of rights. This 
bill reaffirms our basic property rights and returns some balance to 
our legal system. This bill returns control of property to its owner. 
It ensures that if there is some public purpose to be served by 
conserving property and protecting species, the average citizen will 
not be forced to shoulder the entire burden. It gives the individual 
the right and means to expeditiously appeal decisions by unelected 
bureaucrats. And finally, it expeditiously appeal decisions by 
unelected bureaucrats. And finally, it provides swift and fair 
compensation to those property owners who happen to own land where the 
bald eagle likes to nest or the fountain darter likes to swim.
  Each day Government regulations trample over private property. The 
people are angry. We have new tyrants depriving us of our inalienable 
rights of life, liberty, and property--King George has been replaced by 
bureaucrats and kangaroo rats. This bill will take a first step to 
righting those wrongs.

                          ____________________