[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 137 (Saturday, September 28, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S11709]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            STERLING FOREST

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, within the last hour or so I have had 
several calls in my office from various media, including the New York 
Times, asking for comments on why the Senator from Alaska would insist 
on killing the passage of the Sterling Forest --that is that issue that 
affects both New Jersey and New York, with a purchase of private lands 
with Federal funds--by insisting that my Tongass provision prevail? And 
how could I possibly take such an action and stop this process?
  First of all, I think it is important for the Record to note the 
circumstances, as I understand them, that occurred in the House among 
the leadership at approximately 6:30 this morning, or thereabouts, 
because I think it reflects on the process around here. Some of it does 
need some airing. At that time, it was the intent of the leadership on 
the House side to include in the CR, to accommodate Senator Hatfield 
and his contribution to this body, the so-called Mount Hood Parks 
package, and other incidental considerations.
  Then, there was a communication from the White House that there 
should be an accommodation on another issue as well, and that was the 
San Francisco Bay cleanup proposal, a proposal that is worthy, a 
proposal that is in the omnibus parks bill, as well as the Sterling 
Forest, which is in that bill, which I support.
  Now, there was no effort in that dialog to suggest that the San 
Francisco Bay was added anymore than to complement the accommodation on 
Mount Hood; and to suggest that we were in some way responsible for 
removing Sterling Forest from that legislative structure is absolutely 
incorrect and misleading, to say the least. Sterling Forest was subject 
to a point of order in the House under a blue line, for technical 
reasons, and that was of no concern to this body.
  So, I would say to my colleagues, as some begin to point the finger 
of blame, that while it had been understood that the leadership was 
going to attempt to accommodate the Sterling Forest, initially, to 
complement the Mount Hood and Hatfield package, that the Tongass matter 
did not enter into that consideration under any terms or circumstances. 
And if the leadership and those attending that meeting saw fit to 
remove the Sterling Forest from that deliberation, that was entirely 
their own accord. They may have felt it may have been more politically 
expedient to add the San Francisco Bay cleanup to the CR, rather than 
the Sterling Forest. I guess it is fair to say that is beyond my pay 
grade.

  But I want the Record to reflect that, as chairman of the Energy and 
Natural Resources Committee, we stand ready to continue a dialog on the 
126 sections that are in the parks-Presidio package. We have indicated 
a willingness to work with the administration, by letter which was sent 
down there last night.
  So that we can all understand the current posture, it is my 
understanding that in the CR, there will be two items now. There will 
be the Mount Hood and the San Francisco Bay cleanup as a consequence of 
the leadership action taken in the House. There will not be the 
Sterling Forest, there will not be the Tongass, there will not be the 
Utah Snow Basin, nor the other 123 very important items that we 
reported out of our committee.
  So, if any of the House Members are suggesting that the chairman has 
stood in the way of trying to pass this omnibus legislation, the record 
should reflect otherwise and should reflect specifically that my 
initial interest was a 15-year extension for the Ketchikan sawmill, 
which I withdrew after the administration threatened to veto that. That 
was a pretty significant sacrifice, but nevertheless, it was made.
  I think that should provide an adequate explanation for those who 
suggest that somehow we stood in the way of the leadership action, in 
moving on the CR accompanying the Mount Hood package, that we stood in 
the way of the Sterling Forest. We did not.
  I thank the Chair. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________