[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 171 (Thursday, September 30, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6830-S6831]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Nomination of Tracy Stone-Manning
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, the Senate should emphatically oppose
the nomination of Tracy Stone-Manning to lead the Nation's Bureau of
Land Management.
It is hard to believe, but she has colluded with ecoterrorists, plain
and simple. She stonewalled a criminal investigation for years. She
lied to the Senate, and she still holds radically dangerous views; and
yet she is still the nominee of the President of the United States for
this very important post. It is outrageous.
Let's begin with her ties to ecoterrorists. We worry about terrorism
in this world and in this country. By her own admission in her court
testimony, when she was in graduate school, she collaborated with
ecoterrorists who had hammered hundreds of metal spikes into trees in a
national forest. It was in Idaho.
Tree spiking involves hammering a metal rod, like this one, into a
tree trunk. This can do serious damage. They put about 500 pounds of
these in tree trunks in a national forest. If a logger or firefighter
cuts this rod--you say, Why would a firefighter be there? They have
chainsaws and they work to clear areas to try to fight fires, or a
logger taking down trees--the saw will shatter, shrapnel will fly in
every direction, and the user of that saw could become terribly injured
or even killed. If a sawblade comes across a spike like this in a
sawmill, the saw can explode. The results could be catastrophic to both
life and limb.
Well, ecoterrorists who spike trees absolutely know what they are
doing. It is always premeditated. Even the Washington Post has labeled
tree spiking as one of the most vicious tactics of the ecoterrorists.
That is what we are dealing with President Biden's nominee to be the
Director of Bureau of Land Management.
You say: What is her connection to this horrible, horrible practice?
Well, she has admitted that she edited, typed, and then anonymously
sent a threat letter to the U.S. Forest Service on behalf of known tree
spikers. She and her Democrat defenders have claimed this letter was a
warning so no one would get hurt. That is false.
Here are just a few quotes from the letter she typed and she mailed
to the U.S. Forest Service:
You bastards go in there anyway and a lot of people could
get hurt.
And:
I would be more than willing to pay you a dollar for the
sale, but you would have to find me first and that could be
your WORST nightmare.
Think about these lines. Think about what it must be like if you had
received such a letter. She mailed this threatening letter to the
target of the tree spiking--and that was the U.S. Forest Service--
because she didn't want any trees in that area to be harvested.
She and her circle of friends were investigated for their involvement
with this ecoterrorist network and the attack. She was subpoenaed. She
had to give hair samples, palm sample, handwriting, fingerprint samples
to investigators.
All this time, she knew who the tree spikers were. She could have
gone to the authorities to identify them, but she refused, didn't
cooperate with investigators. The lead investigator on the case wrote a
letter to Chairman Manchin and to me after she had testified in the
Senate to the Energy Committee, and he referred to her as the
``nastiest of the suspects.''
He also said she not only had knowledge of the plan to spike the
trees with spikes like this, she was one of the planners. She was a
ringleader. The lead investigator in the criminal case wrote:
It became clear that Ms. Stone-Manning was an active member
of the original group that planned the spiking of the Post
Office timber sale.
Now, he wasn't the only one who said she knew about it in advance. In
an interview recently, within the last couple of months, with the E&E
News, one of the convicted tree spikers, one of those who went to jail
for doing this, he also confirmed that Tracy Stone-Manning, the
President's nominee to run the Bureau of Land Management, to be in
charge of the national forests--that Tracy Stone-Manning knew of the
plan to spike the trees well in advance. This was premeditated.
So who have we heard from?
We heard from the criminal who is in jail--went to jail. We heard
from the cop who prosecuted the case. Both the cop and the criminal
agree that she was involved and she knew about the plan to spike the
trees.
According to the investigator's letter, Ms. Stone-Manning's lack of
cooperation would set back the investigation for years. From 1990 until
the end of 1992, the case went cold. Remember, she knew who spiked the
trees. She was protecting the ecoterrorists' identities the entire
time.
Eventually, Ms. Stone-Manning was identified, and she received an
investigation target letter to let her know she was being targeted as
part of the investigation. The lead investigator said she only agreed
to testify after she was caught and after her lawyer negotiated an
immunity deal to testify.
Her defenders have said she helped put the bad guys away. In fact,
President Biden's nominee is one of the bad guys. She helped plan the
tree spiking. She covered up the terrorist activity for years. She did
not cooperate with the authorities, and she only testified after she
was caught and received immunity.
After all of this, she lied to the Committee about the incident. On a
sworn affidavit in her Committee questionnaire, she said she was not
the target of any investigation. We know that is a lie. We know she
received a letter that she was a target of the investigation.
She complained in the press about how degrading it was to be
investigated. Then why did she tell us she was never investigated and
told the press how bad it was and degrading to be investigated?
She also admitted to the press that she could have been charged with
a crime if not for her immunity deal.
She also lied about her involvement in the tree spiking. I asked her
directly:
Did you have personal knowledge of, participate in, or in
any way directly or indirectly support activities associated
with the spiking of trees in any forest during your lifetime?
And she replied ``no.''
She sent their letter. She knew the plan in advance. She knew their
identities, and she refused to tell the authorities.
How is that not supporting activities associated with ecoterrorism
and tree spiking?
Finally, Senate Democrats are very quick to say this tree-spiking
episode was decades ago, can't be relevant anymore, in spite of the
fact that it is a Federal crime--as if collusion with terrorists is
just a youthful indiscretion. But she lied this year when she came to
testify to the U.S. Senate. She lied to our committee and she lied to
this institution.
It is clear to me that her radical views have not changed. In
September of 2020, 1 year ago, she tweeted an article written by her
husband that calls--because she would be in charge of areas related to
the forest--retweeted an article by her husband that calls for homes in
forests to be left to burn during wildfires.
Senator Sullivan talked about the fires in Alaska. We have had fires
in Wyoming. We have firefighters in there protecting structures and
human life.
Her husband says: Let them burn.
Her husband wrote:
There's a rude and satisfying justice in burning down the
house of someone who builds in the forest.
``Rude and satisfying justice in burning down'' someone's home.
Tracy Stone-Manning isn't responsible for the views of her husband,
but a year ago--not as graduate student decades ago--we are talking
now, as wildfires burn across the country, she actually endorsed her
husband's views on letting the houses burn. In a tweet, she called her
husband's writing a ``clarion call.''
Well, clarion call, if you look it up, means a call to action.
As the Director of the Bureau of Land Management, Tracy Stone-Manning
would be in charge of firefighting operations on public lands. Yet her
husband and the things she retweets say: Let it burn.
[[Page S6831]]
Apparently, she is comfortable leaving the houses and homes of our
constituents in the Rocky Mountain West to burn because they built
their homes in the forest. I have constituents who have homes in the
forest. I am sure almost every Senator does. This tweet wasn't 30 years
ago. This tweet was 1 year ago.
Who actually thinks her beliefs are different today?
Her views on firefighting are just the tip of the iceberg. In her
graduate thesis, she actually argued that Americans need to have fewer
children. You know why? Because she says children are a threat to the
environment. She actually called children ``environmental hazards.''
Can you find the environmental hazard in this photo?
She told her readers to ``stop at one or two.''
She even made ads like this one to promote these ideas, the child as
an environmental hazard. And she is the nominee of the President of the
United States for an important position in this government.
She answered her own question by saying: Oh, yes, you can find the
environmental hazard, ``that's right, it's the cute baby.''
This thesis isn't the only time she argued for human population
control. In an essay in the High Country News, she said Americans were
``breeding our weapons'' in the war on the grizzly bear. She concludes
that essay by saying: ``We should wage war on overpopulation.''
These are ideas you hear in communist China, not from the nominee to
be the Director of the Bureau of Land Management in the United States.
Mr. President, there are many qualified Democrats who could run the
Bureau of Land Management and do a fine job of it. We should reject
this nomination, and the President can nominate someone else.
It is astonishing to me to see Democrats digging in to defend a
proven liar, an ecoterrorist collaborator who still holds very
dangerous and threatening beliefs.
Bob Abbey was the BLM Director under President Barack Obama. He said
her actions ``should disqualify her'' from leading this important
Agency. One Biden administration official admitted on NBC News her
nomination was a ``massive vetting failure.'' So Obama's BLM Director
said she should be disqualified--her actions should disqualify her--and
a Biden administration official calls it a ``massive vetting failure.''
And when our Committee asked the Interior Secretary, Deb Haaland,
about Stone-Manning's views, her response was: ``I didn't nominate
her.''
Well, no, she didn't. The President of the United States did. This is
clearly not a rousing endorsement coming from fellow Democrats--the
White House, former BLM Director under President Obama, and now the
Secretary of Interior.
If she is confirmed, Senate Democrats will be held wholly
responsible. They should consider carefully if they want their name
associated with Tracy Stone-Manning. Tracy Stone-Manning should never
be the Director of the Bureau of Land Management.
I strongly oppose her nomination. Every Republican--every
Republican--strongly opposes her nomination, and Senate Democrats
should do the same.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
Mr. TESTER. I want to thank you, Mr. President, the fine Senator from
Georgia, for the recognition.
Look, I have been listening to the debate here, or the conversation--
however you want to say it--on the floor for the last hour and a half
about Tracy Stone-Manning.
I will tell you that I take advice and consent that the United States
has, and the Members of this body has, very seriously. That means not
just picking up talking points the leadership might give you and
reciting them back on the floor time and time and time again--which, by
the way, I heard the same talking points time and time and time again
for the last hour and a half. But it is to find out what is going on
with this person because it is our duty to make sure there are good
people in these Agencies.
I wish we had taken that same kind of thought with some of the folks
President Trump put forth, but it seems, though, the rules have
changed.
Now we are going to take a good woman--a good woman--the State of
Montana knows well. In fact, she was vetted in the State of Montana.
They said all these accusations have no merit. We are going to run her
through the ringer here--character assassination like I have never seen
before.
But let's be honest. What is this really about? Is this about Tracy
Stone-Manning? No. This is about the Republicans in the Senate trying
to make Joe Biden look bad. That is what this is about. Make no mistake
about it--that is what this is about.
So let's get back to the issue at hand, and that is the person who
has been nominated to run the BLM, Tracy Stone-Manning--somebody I have
known for the last 25 years; somebody I have worked with for the last
20 years; somebody who, when she was on my staff, worked with the wood
products industry, worked with recreation folks--worked with everybody
out there--to write a bill on how we could better manage our national
forests with Montana input.
She is somebody who lives by the statement ``You have two ears and
one mouth; act accordingly.'' She is somebody who knows the value of
collaboration. She is somebody who can listen, who can reason, and who
knows our public lands and has recreated on our public lands for her
entire life.
She is somebody who will run the BLM in a hell of a lot better way
than this dude by the name of Pendley, who sat in that office,
unconfirmed, for months after months after months in the previous
administration, and nobody on the Republican side of the aisle said a
thing about him. He is somebody who wanted to sell off our public
lands, somebody who really didn't care about access to them.
But we have a person today we can confirm who can, once again, make
the BLM the Agency it needs to be; somebody who understands multiple
use; somebody who understands that the BLM needs to be run by a
professional. Tracy Stone-Manning is a professional. I would encourage
everybody to vote for her.
I thank the Presiding Officer.