[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 97 (Thursday, July 12, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7577-S7580]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXECUTIVE SESSION
______
NOMINATION OF J. STEVEN GRILES OF VIRGINIA TO BE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF
THE INTERIOR
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will now
proceed to executive session to consider the nomination of J. Steven
Griles to be Deputy Secretary of the Interior, which the clerk will
report.
The legislative clerk read the nomination of J. Steven Griles of
Virginia to be Deputy Secretary of the Interior.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Carper). The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise tonight to discuss my opposition to
the nomination of J. Steven Griles as Deputy Secretary of the
Department of the Interior. In my view, Mr. Griles' past record and
recent statements, both public and private, indicate he is lacking the
single most important quality needed for this key position; that is,
the ability to bring people together despite very disparate and
differing views on natural resources issues.
We have learned in the West--and I see my good friend Senator Craig
from Idaho. He and I, again and again, sat in hearings in the forestry
subcommittee, and we have seen how difficult these natural resources
issues are. I am proud we have come together on issues such as the
county payments bill which the Forest Service said was the most
important law in the last 30 years, and Senator Craig and I teamed up
to get that law passed because we recognized how important it was to
bring people together.
What has troubled me about Mr. Griles' past record--and I will
discuss that--and his recent statements, both public and private, is
that record indicates he really isn't much interested in the kind of
work that Senator Craig and I have spent many years pursuing.
One of the things that struck me earlier this year was that Mr.
Griles told the Washington Post, in effect, that he had changed. He
said he had matured, he had learned from his past experience. When I
read about these statements, I was very encouraged. I don't oppose
people on philosophical grounds; I don't think that is right. I read
these statements and I got the distinct impression that Mr. Griles was
going to work to be more inclusive, collaborative, and more creative in
looking at the difficult natural resources issues.
He said he was going to be a problem solver who would try to listen
to all the parties involved and try to take a balanced approach to any
and all issues.
Again, I was encouraged by these comments. Mr. Griles came to my
office. I told him about my concerns about his past record, and given
his statements I was hoping he had, in fact, changed, and if he would
give me some examples. He really didn't have any that day. I said: I
will ask you about this when you come for your confirmation hearing.
When he came for his confirmation hearing, he was not any more
forthcoming. I said after the hearing my door would still be open to
him and that I hoped he would give me some examples in areas such as
the Endangered Species Act that require so much cooperation, that he
would come forward with some specific ideas. He has not. He has not
been willing on three separate occasions to show some evidence that he
would take a more collaborative, inclusive approach, and that he would
be more balanced in his approach to natural resources issues.
My concern is that as of now the record indicates the J. Steven
Griles of the past is going to be back in action after the Senate
confirms him.
I will talk for a few minutes about that Jay Steven Griles' track
record over 20 years. Over 20 years, again and again, he has placed the
interests of powerful special interests above the public. This includes
the support for environmentally unsound drilling for oil off the coast
of California and looking the other way when powerful corporations were
fined for breaking the environmental laws.
It is one thing to try to figure out ways to ensure compliance with
the environmental laws; however, it is another thing to not follow
through when these powerful interests have actually been fined for
violating the law.
I was troubled about those past positions. I told Mr. Griles about
that. It is certainly his right to hold those views. I have not made it
a habit of opposing candidates with whom I differ on substantive
issues. Given those past positions, given his public statements and his
private statements to me that, in fact, he was going to change, it is
troubling we have not seen any evidence of it.
His record is important. I will give a few examples of that record.
During his service with the Reagan administration, Mr. Griles is
reported to have single-mindedly pushed for an oil lease sale off the
coast of California, despite objections from his own Fish and Wildlife
Service biologists. In 1988, he wrote a memo to the Assistant Secretary
advising him to change the tone and conclusions of a Fish and Wildlife
Service report citing the specific environmental damage that could be
caused by a proposed northern California offshore oil lease. Mr. Griles
concluded that memo by stating:
[[Page S7578]]
The memorandum is part of the public record and could prove
very damaging to this lease sale.
The subsequent final report on the sale, from Fish and Wildlife, did
not refer to any potential environmental harm that could result from
the lease sale. Within the year, as Americans know, the Exxon Valdez
disaster occurred and, by 1990, the first President Bush declared a
moratorium on offshore oil leases, so this lease sale was never
completed. But it is certainly troubling to me that Mr. Griles wanted
Federal researchers not to report accurate conclusions but to prop up a
decision, regardless of the environmental facts.
This, in my view, would have been an ideal issue that Mr. Griles
could have raised with me and with colleagues and said: Look, there are
a variety of ways that I treat these oil sales differently now, having
learned from some of the controversy in the past. Yet he was unwilling
to say that or anything resembling that.
He has also, as far as the public report, indicated that he has no
interest in cracking down on the illegal behavior of polluters and
special interests. Of course, that would be a task that he would be
expected to perform in this position.
Between 1984 and 1987, the House of Representatives reviewed, for
example, the internal workings in the Office of Surface Mining. They
found that, under his leadership, this office collected only $6.8
million of an estimated $200 million due in civil penalties for those
who broke the environmental laws.
Again, I have tried to single out just the areas of the record that
concern me the most. There is not a Member of the Senate who is in
favor of breaking the environmental laws. Yet this was an instance
where there were violations and they were not followed up. I think that
is troubling and, in fact, in successive years the percentage of
collection of the civil penalties that were owed continued to go down.
I am concerned about the past public record, but I would not be here
making the statement that I am tonight if Mr. Griles had said: Look,
all of us change and here are some approaches that I would take in the
days ahead to ensure that we could do the kind of work that Senator
Craig--I see my friend Senator Burns here as well--that the three of us
have sought to do.
These natural resources issues are extraordinarily difficult. The
American people want what I call the win-win. They want to protect our
treasures and at the same time they want to be sensitive to local
economic needs. It is a lot easier said than done. But Senator Craig
and Senator Burns and I have teamed up to do just that.
I had been hoping that Mr. Griles would offer some specifics, given
that he said he had changed, and would indicate he would want to do the
kind of bipartisan work that we Westerners have done on some of these
particularly contentious issues. Unfortunately, on three separate
occasions, in both public and private, Mr. Griles was unwilling to back
up his public statements about how he had changed, how he would take a
more collaborative approach. So tonight I want to make clear I am
opposed to the nomination of J. Steven Griles to be Deputy Secretary of
the Department of the Interior. My questions have not been answered. My
reservations about the nominee's commitment to finding common ground
have not been resolved.
I tell my colleagues, I do not think we can get on top of these
natural resources issues without a collaborative approach. Mr. Griles
has said he is in favor of it but has not offered any evidence that he
will actually do it. With that, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I ask for a couple of minutes. Let me also
ask unanimous consent that Senator Frank Murkowski, who is coming to
the floor, be allowed to speak for a period of time prior to the
action. I believe Senator Nelson is here to do the same.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I join with my colleague, Chairman Ron
Wyden, tonight to visit about Steven Griles and the reality that Steven
is about to become a major operative in the Department of the Interior.
I stand tonight in full support of the decision of George W. Bush to
nominate him to become Deputy Secretary. I do that because I know
Steven Griles and I know he will do it when he looks me in the eye and
he looks Senator Wyden in the eye and says he will work in the
character of the new Secretary, Gale Norton, as it relates to the four
C's that she has so clearly laid out over the time of her confirmation
hearings and as, I think, she has clearly demonstrated in the period of
time in which she has served our country as our new Secretary of the
Interior. That is one of consultation, cooperation, and communication
that results in conservation of our natural resources to benefit all of
the interests of our country. I believe Steven Griles will do that
following the direction of the Secretary of the Interior.
While Ron Wyden and I will disagree a bit, we also understand the
critical nature of cooperation, as he has so clearly spelled out, in
the collaborative process. The models under which we must make
decisions on our public land resources have changed from the days in
which Steven Griles served the Reagan administration and in which
Steven Griles will now have the privilege of serving the Bush
administration. We have tried to pioneer with the concept of a
collaborative process. Clearly, the effort Senator Wyden and I launched
last year that is now law incorporates within it the idea of bringing
all of the principals together to sit down to resolve conflict over
resource issues at the local level and ultimately we believe we can
aspire to that at the national level.
Therefore, I stand in favor of Steven Griles becoming our new Deputy
Secretary at the Department of the Interior and I think he will at the
end serve us well and I think the record will demonstrate that.
Let me say in closing, and I say it in all fairness to our majority
leader, Tom Daschle, I thank him and I thank Harry Reid for the
cooperation they have offered to all of us tonight in moving
expeditiously some of the nominees that were at the desk or other
nominees who were just moved out of committee today, both the Armed
Services Committee and the Interior Committee.
It is absolutely critical that the President of the United States be
allowed to nominate and have people of his choice to serve him in the
administration of our Government at the executive level. Tonight we
move a great number of people, probably the largest number we have
moved to date at one time. That has been because of a cooperative
effort on the part of the majority leader, Tom Daschle, and all of us
working together to make that happen.
I hope to achieve our goal that the some 173 who are now before the
authorizing committees across the Senate can be brought to hearings,
heard, voted out of committee, brought to the floor and I hope many of
them could be moved before the August recess.
A lot of these fine people who have been asked to serve our
Government are men and women who have families and who need to make
decisions over whether to leave their families and their children in
the schools where they now are or whether they are going to be allowed
to get them in Washington in time to enroll them in school as it would
start in late August or early September. Surely this Senate can operate
in a reasonable and responsible fashion to do the appropriate hearings,
to find out if these men and women are clearly qualified, as the
President believes they are, to serve our country at the executive
level, bring them from the committee, bring them to the floor, and
allow to happen what is happening this evening.
When disagreements arise, as they do--as with Senator Wyden and Mr.
Griles--they are either voted on or are spread upon the Record as a
template from which to judge the people who will serve in the executive
branch, and to hold before them as a constant reminder of what they
pledged to us in their confirmation hearings before the committee. That
is fair and responsible, and it is the job of the Senate to respond in
that fashion.
I am extremely pleased that we are able to move expeditiously on a
good number tonight to give our President the tools by which to operate
the executive branch of Government and to
[[Page S7579]]
allow him, as the citizens of this country have chosen, to govern our
Nation.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, let me congratulate the floor manager
for offering the conclusion associated with the Interior appropriations
bill. It has been a difficult battle, and it has been really tough with
the many issues that are subject to rule XVI which often come up in
this process.
I thank the Senator from Montana and his colleagues on the other
side. They have done an extraordinary job.
My purpose in rising is to recognize an injustice that has been done
to Steven Griles. The injustice was not on the merits of whether Mr.
Griles is qualified or not. It is the manner in which his nomination
was delayed.
I think it is appropriate that the Record note that the intent to
nominate Mr. Griles occurred on March 9. The nomination was received on
May 1. Hearings were held May 16. He was reported favorably by the
Energy Committee, which I happened to chair at that time, 18 to 4. I
repeat--18 to 4 on May 23, 2001.
All of this, of course, occurred before the switch of Senator
Jeffords and, as a consequence, the control of the Senate.
Mr. Griles was cleared on the Republican side on May 23. In executive
session on May 23, we moved one nomination. On May 24 we moved 19
nominations. On May 25 we moved 33 nominations. On May 26 we moved 8
nominations. In each case, Mr. Griles was cleared on our side and was
objected to by the Democrats, which they have every right to do.
But during this period, a unanimous consent agreement was offered to
allow for 2 hours of debate, and a vote on which the Democrats
indicated, according to the Record, that they needed 2 hours, with
consideration the week we returned from that recess. That was rejected
by the Democrats, as was the modification that then deleted the time
certain and only included the time limitation.
At that point, it was clear that we would no longer as Republicans
control the floor, and hence the timing on our return.
In executive session on June 14, under Democratic control, we cleared
three additional nominations, but the Democrats would not agree to
Griles. It wasn't agreed to as an issue of the debate on the merits, it
was simply an effort to deprive--that is the only conclusion one can
come to--the Department of Interior of his services, and hence to the
public of this country.
As of today, Mr. Griles has been pending 51 days. Again, I refer to
the fact that he was reported out of the committee 18 to 4. He is going
to be voted out tonight on a voice vote. But I think it is appropriate
to note the manner in which it was handled.
I am very disappointed. I, as chairman under the former
administration, felt the obligation to respond to the development of
the precedents and the officials within the various Cabinet
departments. Under no circumstances had we had a situation similar to
this where a nominee was delayed for such an unreasonable amount of
time.
Who suffers? Perhaps this body suffers in self-examination.
Again, I am not arguing the merits concerning issues that my friend
from Oregon or my friend from Florida may have, but clearly, the way
this was handled was delay, delay, delay. The public suffered. The
Department of the Interior suffered. Up until a short time ago, the
Department of the Interior had one confirmed position. That was the
Secretary of the Interior.
I think all of us have a responsibility to work together, in spite of
our political differences, to serve the country.
I think it is appropriate that the Record note the reality associated
with this nominee. It is my hope that situation is not repeated again
because I think this body bears the responsibility.
I am happy to yield to my friend from Florida.
I wish the Presiding Officer a good evening, and the rest of my
colleagues, and in particular the staff. I hope we get out at a
reasonable hour.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, the administration's policy is
to try to drill its way out of an energy problem--and that is clearly
reflected in their nominee for the number two position at the Interior
Department, J. Steven Griles.
I have expressed my opposition to Mr. Griles prior to today, in the
form of an objection to a Senate vote on his nomination.
However, based on assurances I received today from Interior Secretary
Norton--specifically that the agency's upcoming 5-year plan contains no
new drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, beyond the disputed area in
lease sale 181--I have withdrawn my objection to proceeding to a vote.
I also met with Mr. Griles this morning. While I respect his
commitment to public service, I cannot vote for his nomination.
He has a history of advocating for oil and gas exploration off the
coasts of both Florida and California.
In fact, his record as a former Reagan administration official and an
oil- and gas-industry lobbyist reveals his aggressive support for
expanded oil drilling in sensitive waters.
Mr. Griles' support for drilling is so forthcoming that in
biographical information he supplied the Senate for his confirmation he
emphasizes his record for helping lease ``more Federal offshore oil and
gas acreage during 1984-1989 than in any prior period of federal
leasing activities.''
His position is clear. Unfortunately, this position presents a
serious risk to Florida's economy and environment.
I thought I would take this opportunity to clear up for the Senator
from Alaska some of the things he said.
The Senator from Alaska should know that this Senator from Florida
did not place a hold on the Griles nomination until June 19. That is
just a matter of some 2\1/2\ weeks ago. It became apparent to me--and
it didn't have anything to do with personalities or politics--on the
substance of the matter that this was something of such importance to
Florida on whether or not we were going to have drilling off the coast
of Florida which would threaten the economy of Florida because of its
beaches. I think Florida has the longest coastline of any State in the
country. So much of our economic lifeblood comes from those pristine
beaches.
When I looked at the substance of the nominee's background I saw that
he had been an advocate for offshore oil drilling not only over a
decade ago in California but where he stated in his testimony that he
was in favor of drilling for the entire 6 million acres of the lease
sale 181 and what that represented as a threat to Florida in that
original lease sale coming to within 30 miles of Perdido Key, which is
the westernmost beach of the State of Florida.
It became very clear as a matter of substance to me that it was going
to be something that was perceived to be--and he was perceived to be--a
threat to the economic lifeblood of the State of Florida.
Only on June 19 did I write a letter to the majority leader asking
him to honor my request, which was a hold on the consideration of the
nomination.
Today, Mr. Griles came to see me. I find him entirely a delightful
fellow, an engaging fellow, and one with whom I shared exactly this
story. I asked him the question: Since the likelihood was that the
reduced lease sale 181 was in fact going to be approved--the
administration apparently had been working it very hard and had the
votes, as the vote earlier today showed--what was his intention with
regard to the drilling in the rest of the eastern Gulf of Mexico
planning area?
He said since he had not been confirmed that he could not speak with
the administration. But he offered that he thought he could get an
answer from the administration and get back to me before this vote
occurred.
Indeed, it was within a few minutes that a phone call came in that
Secretary Norton was requesting to come and see me, of which I gladly
received her. It is the first time I had met her --a very gracious
lady. And I asked her the same question. And she said: Senator, I want
to assure you that in the 5-year plan, which is going to be issued next
week, there will be no additional lease sales in the 5-year plan. And
the 5-year plan that will be issued next week is operative,
effectively, as law, since a lease cannot be offered for sale or lease
unless it is in the 5-year plan.
That was a little bit of good news. It was on the basis of that that
I additionally encouraged the majority leader that I thought he was
right. It is his
[[Page S7580]]
prerogative as majority leader to lift the hold.
I shared with Mr. Griles that I was going to vote against his
nomination because of his history. I am glad that I was in this Chamber
to hear my friend from Alaska so that he could hear from his colleague
from Florida as to exactly what my intention on the substance of the
matter has been.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on this nomination?
The Senator from Montana.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I am glad we are finally considering the
nomination of Steve Griles. It has been a long time. I can remember
going through the hearings on the Energy Committee and him being
reported out of that committee on the 23rd. It has been a long 40-some-
odd days. It has been too long.
It seems that we are asking our Cabinet Secretaries to do their jobs
by themselves. We are having a hard time getting them any help
downtown. I just think that is a wrong thing to do to any
administration.
I remember when President Clinton first came to town back in 1992,
1993; whenever we went through the process, I always took the position
that each President got his Cabinet members and the people he wanted in
his administration because he had been duly elected by the people of
this country. So he could move his agenda as he saw fit. We have been
holding up folks going downtown far too long.
Twenty-eight percent of Montana is public land. With the BLM and the
Forest Service and, of course, with the BIA and the Indian lands and
Indian country, this position is very important. Of course, with Mr.
Griles coming from a standpoint of multiple use, single use does not
work. I think that we can balance the use of our lands. We have had a
tendency in the last 10 or 15 years to redefine conservation.
Conservation is the wise use of any resource. That has been the driving
force on any of our resources found on our public lands and on our
private lands.
I have an agricultural background. This position in the Department of
the Interior requires a man of not only high integrity and high purpose
but also to have guts enough to make a decision. We have gone through
these situations where nobody wants to make a decision.
We had a situation on the Flathead Lake in just finding its level. We
had too many cooks in the kitchen and nobody knew who was in charge
when trying to make a decision on what level we wanted to maintain at
Flathead Lake in northwestern Montana.
I know there are some of my colleagues in this body who have some
real heartburn with Mr. Griles. In fact, I know there are many
colleagues in this body who have heartburn with the words ``multiple
use.''
But, nonetheless, we who come from the land and the resources--and
especially from a resource-based economy--think we understand just how
important renewable resources are. We realize that in oil and gas, it
is sort of finite--there may not be any more of it made. But on
renewables, we should be using conservation practices that consider
wise use.
Tough decisions will have to be made by the Department. We need
someone who is confident in making them and also basing the decisions
on science and common sense.
So the reason I support Steve Griles is because he brings outstanding
credentials to the job. He served at many levels, both inside and
outside of Government. I think everybody will find he will be an able
listener, and he will also show the cooperation in being a good Deputy
Secretary.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the nomination?
Mr. BURNS. Are we ready to vote?
Mr. MURKOWSKI. Yes.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I urge that this nomination be confirmed as
Deputy Secretary, and on a voice vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the nomination?
If not, the question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the
nomination of J. Steven Griles, of Virginia, to be Deputy Secretary of
the Interior?
The nomination was confirmed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to
reconsider is laid upon the table, and the President will be
immediately notified of the Senate's action.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Burns). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________