[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 75 (Wednesday, June 4, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H3434-H3435]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                THE AMERICAN HERITAGE RIVERS INITIATIVE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Idaho [Mrs. Chenoweth] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mrs. CHENOWETH. Mr. Speaker, one of the reasons for America's 
strength and her rise in economic ability is because of the wise use of 
her rivers and waterways for irrigation, travel, recreation, power, 
flood control, and all other uses.
  Mr. Speaker, through the wise use and allocation of our Nation's 
waters we have literally turned our deserts into gardens, but tonight I 
rise to alert my colleagues and inform our constituents of the most 
recent assault by the Clinton administration on private property 
rights, States rights, and western values. That is the administration's 
American heritage rivers initiative, created and tendered solely by the 
White House, and executed without congressional approval.
  Just before the Memorial Day work period the Council on Environmental 
Quality, an unauthorized agency existing on misappropriated funds, I 
might add, published this proposal in the Federal Register entitled 
``The American Heritage Rivers Initiative.'' It is in the Federal 
Register, May 19, 1997, page 27253. I urge my colleagues to read it.
  Although law requires a 90-day public comment period, this comment 
period ends June 9, 1997, a mere 3 weeks after its date of publication; 
3 weeks, not 3 months, as the law requires. This violates the 
Administrative Procedures Act and totally ignores the requirements of 
the National Environmental Policy Act.
  Fortunately, today, Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Alaska, Mr. Don 
Young, chairman of the Committee on Resources, and the gentleman from 
Oregon, Mr. Bob Smith, chairman of the Committee on Agriculture, along 
with myself and other Committee on Resources chairmen, have sent a 
letter to Katy McGinty strongly advising CEQ to extend that comment 
period to make it legal at least another 90 days. I am sure that the 
gentlewoman would be wise to follow this advice, and I will enter this 
letter into the Record.
  Mr. Speaker, I have grave concerns about this initiative. The 
American heritage rivers proposal is just one in a string of the 
Clinton administration's attacks on our Western public lands. This is a 
Nation of laws, but from the Utah Monument to ecosystem management 
projects to the BLM's law enforcement regulations, this administration 
has demonstrated an absolute lack of regard for our Nation's laws and 
regulations, including requirements of environmental law.
  I ask, where is the documentation required under the National 
Environmental Policy Act? Where is the notification and full public 
comment required under the APA? By the way, who is paying for this?
  Again, the President is attempting to foist a program upon us, 
without us. Mr. Speaker, the very nature of how this proposal was 
constructed raises many troubling questions. For instance, since the 
American heritage rivers initiative has never been authorized by 
Congress, exactly which land and water program funds were siphoned

[[Page H3435]]

to prepare this proposal? How does the administration intend to 
continue funding this unauthorized project if it is established? I 
suspect that the Committee on Resources will be holding hearings to get 
answers to these very troubling questions.
  Quite simply, this initiative will simply replace the long 
established and Constitutionally protected policies that govern the use 
of our waterways--which are critical to our economic survival, not only 
to the west, but to the entire nation. That is why for the past century 
the Supreme Court has held in case after case that in the west it is 
the States who control the use of water.
  Mr. Speaker, there is case after case in the Supreme Court that 
upholds the fact that the States own the water in the western States. 
Let me quote from one of the seminal Supreme Court cases on this very 
issue, the 1978 Supreme Court decision written by Justice Rehnquist 
entitled ``California v. U.S.''

                              {time}  2230

  It states: To take from the legislatures of the various States and 
territories the control of water at the present time would be something 
less than suicidal. If the appropriation and use were not under the 
provisions of State law, the utmost confusion would prevail.
  Mr. Speaker, I agree. Idaho Code 42-101 states: All the waters of the 
State, when flowing in their natural channels, including the waters of 
all natural springs and lakes within the boundaries of the States, are 
declared to be the property of the State, whose duty it shall be to 
supervise appropriation and allotment to those diverting the same 
therefrom for any beneficial purposes.
  Mr. Speaker, this proposal by the President will be redefining 
communities. It will redefine watersheds and jurisdictional boundaries. 
It creates a governing authority called a river community which will 
redefine what the river and the entire heritage area is, which extends 
beyond State boundaries and jurisdictional boundaries.
  Mr. Speaker, this fictional entity, the river community, will then 
describe and define the designation which could be the length of the 
entire area, whether it be an entire watershed, the length of an entire 
river or a short stretch of river and, as I say, it may cross State 
boundaries.
  Mr. Speaker, we are just beginning to address this issue. We need to 
take immediate action. I will be here Tuesday night doing a one hour 
special order speech with a number of my colleagues on this very 
subject.
  We have a little thing in this country called the separation of 
powers. The legislative branch creates laws. The executive branch 
implements the laws, and the courts interpret the laws. I think the 
administration has forgotten about this in this particular move.
  When it comes to western resources issues, the Clinton Administration 
has once again usurped the Congress's lawmaking authority. Nowhere in 
law can one find the American Heritage Rivers program. This action is 
tantamount to tyranny, and must stop; or as the Supreme Court warns: 
``the utmost confusion will prevail.''
  Lastly, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to leave the Members something to think 
about. Perry Pendley, in his book ``War on the West,'' wrote:

       For the environmental extremists' vision of the West is of 
     a land nearly devoid of people and economic activity, a land 
     devoted almost entirely to the preservation of scenery and 
     wildlife habitat. In their vision, everything becomes a vast 
     park through which they might drive, drink Perrier and 
     munching on organic chips, staying occasionally in the bed-
     and-breakfast operations into which the homes of Westerners 
     have been turned, with those Westerners who remain fluffing 
     duvets and pouring cappuccino. They are well on the way to 
     achieving their objective.

  You'll be hearing more on Tuesday.
  Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the following:

                                    U.S. House of Representatives,


                                       Committee on Resources,

                                     Washington, DC, June 4, 1997.
     Ms. Kathleen A. McGinty,
     Chair, Council on Environment Quality, Executive Office of 
         the President, Washington, DC.
       Dear Ms. McGinty: This letter is in response to your May 
     19, 1997 letter to Chairman Don Young, House Committee on 
     Resources, concerning the Clinton Administration's American 
     Heritage Rivers Initiative. This Committee has strong 
     reservations about this unauthorized initiative, and we are 
     fully aware of the public outcry occurring over the Federal 
     Register Notice on this issue.
       We strongly advise that the comment period for the Council 
     on Environmental Quality (CEQ), American Heritage Rivers 
     Initiative be extended for 90 days, until at least September 
     9, 1997, to provide sufficient time for the American public 
     to express their concerns.
       Furthermore, as the Committee with jurisdiction over the 
     CEQ and the Department of the Interior (DOI), we request that 
     you prepare a detailed briefing for this Committee, and other 
     interested Members of Congress, to fully explain your 
     undertaking of this initiative. The committee is especially 
     interested in a full explanation of any reprogramming of 
     authorized funds involved in conducting the public hearings 
     throughout the United States in April and May, 1997; a full 
     accounting of all personnel involved from the DOI; and, a 
     comprehensive review of what budgetary reprogramming the 
     planned Federal Interagency Team will require in Fiscal Year 
     1998. This briefing should be provided as soon as possible, 
     but no later than June 27, 1997.
       Finally, this Committee has serious concerns about this 
     initiative to designate specific areas for special Federal 
     assistance without any authorization from the Congress. 
     Ironically, it would appear that CEQ has totally ignored the 
     requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
     in undertaking this ``major Federal action.'' We look forward 
     to your immediate response to this letter and especially to 
     our oversight responsibility concerning the short public 
     comment period CEQ has provided the American people.
       Please contact Mr. P. Dan Smith, Legislative Staff, 
     Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands at (202) 226-
     7736, to coordinate the briefing requested by this Committee.
           Sincerely,
     Don Young,
       Chairman, Committee on Resources.
     James V. Hansen,
       Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands.
     John T. Doolittle,
       Chairman, Subcommittee on Water and Power.
     Helen Chenoweth,
       Chairman, Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health.
     Robert F. Smith,
       Chairman, Committee on Agriculture.
     Barbara Cubin,
       Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.

                          ____________________