[House Report 107-408]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
107th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 107-408
======================================================================
NATIONAL MONUMENT FAIRNESS ACT
_______
April 15, 2002.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Hansen, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 2114]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 2114) to amend the Antiquities Act regarding the
establishment by the President of certain national monuments
and to provide for public participation in the proclamation of
national monuments, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill
as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``National Monument Fairness Act''.
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW OF NATIONAL MONUMENT STATUS AND
CONSULTATION.
Section 2 of the Act of June 8, 1906, commonly referred to as the
``Antiquities Act'' (34 Stat. 225; 16 U.S.C. 431) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Sec. 2. That the'' and inserting ``Sec. 2.
(a) The'';
(2) by adding the following at the end of subsection (a) (as
so designated by paragraph (1)): ``A proclamation of the
President under this section that, during one calendar year,
creates a national monument that is more than 50,000 acres or
that, during one calendar year, adds more than 50,000 acres to
an existing national monument may not be issued until 30 days
after the President has transmitted the proposed proclamation
to the Governor of the State or States in which such acreage is
located and solicited such Governor's or Governors' written
comments, and any such proclamation shall cease to be effective
on the date 2 years after issuance of the proclamation unless
the proclamation has been approved by an Act of Congress. Land
and interests in land that were subject to a proclamation
issued after the date of the enactment of the National Monument
Fairness Act that ceases to be effective under the preceding
sentence shall revert to the land use status such land and
interests in land had immediately before the proclamation was
issued.''; and
(3) by adding after subsection (a) (as so designated by
paragraph (1)) the following new subsections:
``(b)(1) To the extent consistent with the protection of the historic
landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of
historic or scientific interest located on the public lands to be
designated, the President shall--
``(A) solicit public participation and comment in the
development of a monument proclamation; and
``(B) consult with the Governor and entire congressional
delegation of the State or territory in which such lands are
located, to the extent practicable, at least 60 days prior to
any national monument proclamation.
``(2) Before issuing a proclamation under this section, the President
shall consider any information made available in the development of
existing plans and programs for the management of the lands under
consideration for proclamation as a monument, including such public
comments as may have been offered.
``(c) Any management plan for a national monument developed
subsequent to a proclamation made under this section shall comply with
the procedural requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969.''.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of H.R. 2114, is to amend the Antiquities Act
regarding the establishment by the President of certain
national monuments, and to provide for public participation in
the proclamation of national monuments.
Background and Need for Legislation
In 1906, Congress passed the Antiquities Act (Act of June
8, 1906, codified at 16 U.S.C. 431) in response to a national
movement to stop vandalism and looting that was occurring on
public lands with landmarks of prehistoric, historic or
scientific interest and value. Using this authority, President
Theodore Roosevelt established 18 national monuments, including
the Grand Canyon. Many of these monuments, and subsequent
monuments, have become a part of the National Park system.
While the intent of the Antiquities Act was to allow the
President to act quickly to preserve archeological sites, the
language was broad enough to also allow the President to
withdraw sites of scientific and historic interest such as
paleontological and geological sites. The Act specifically
stated, however, that the President should not withdraw more
land than was necessary to protect the named specific objects.
Since 1906, Congress has passed numerous laws which give
the Congress and the Executive Branch different tools to
protect public lands and resources, including legislation
creating the National Park System, the Wildlife Refuge System,
the National Wilderness Preservation System, the National
Historic Preservation Act, the Wild and Scenic Rivers System,
the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, the Federal Land
Policy and Management Act, and the National Environmental
Policy Act.
On September 18, 1996, President Bill Clinton established
the 1.7 million acre Grand Staircase-Escalante National
Monument in Southern Utah. According to testimony and documents
received in previous Congresses by the Committee on Resources,
this Presidential action was accomplished to appease some in
the environmental community and timed accordingly to the
November Presidential election. Some of these documents make it
clear that this action had very little to do with protection of
lands but was focused on political advantage. For example, an
E-mail dated March 22, 1996, from Linda Lance in the Clinton
White House to the Council on Environmental Quality and the
Office of Management and Budget staff discussing a draft letter
from the President said:
I realize the real remaining question is not so much
what this letter says, but the political consequences
of designating these lands as monuments when they're
not threatened with losing wilderness status, and
they're probably not the areas of the country most in
need of this designation. Presidents have not used
their monument designation authority in this way in the
past. * * *
President Clinton's creation of the Grand Staircase-
Escalante National Monument is a prime example of the need for
more public input in national monument decisions. Additional
documents obtained in previous Congresses by the Committee show
that this particular monument was being planned for months, yet
the Governor of Utah and Utah's Congressional delegation were
not informed of the Presidential decision until 2 a.m. the
morning that the proclamation was signed. These documents also
demonstrated that the monument proclamation was kept secret
until just before the announcement to avoid public input and
Congressional scrutiny, in addition to avoiding the
environmental analysis otherwise required for public land
designations under the National Environmental Policy Act. [For
further information on this topic see the November 7, 1997,
House Committee on Resources Majority Staff Report, ``Behind
Closed Doors: The Abuse of Trust and Discretion in the
Establishment of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National
Monument,'' (Committee Report 105-D), and the October 16, 1998,
Committee on Resources Report, ``Monumental Abuse: The Clinton
Administration's Campaign of Misinformation in the
Establishment of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National
Monument'' (H. Rept. 105-824)].
H.R. 2114 would amend the Antiquities Act of 1906 by
ensuring it is used only for those purposes originally
intended. It would also strengthen the Act by ensuring that
state and local officials are consulted and provided a role in
the designation process. The bill would amend the Act as
follows:
(1) Require the President to transmit the proposed
monument proclamation to the Governor of the state(s)
in which a monument is located at least 30 days in
advance of the notification if the monument exceeds
50,000 acres, or enlarges an existing national monument
by more than 50,000 acres;
(2) Require Congressional approval within two years
of any national monument proclamation that creates a
national monument more than 50,000 acres, or enlarges
an existing national monument by more than 50,000
acres. If Congressional approval does not occur within
two years, the proclamation shall cease to be in
effect, and
(3) Require the President to solicit public
participation and comment, and to consult with the
Governor and congressional delegation of the state at
least 60 days prior to any national monument
proclamation.
Committee Action
H.R. 2114 was introduced on June 7, 2001, by Congressman
Mike Simpson (R-ID), and referred to the Committee on
Resources. On June 14, 2001, the bill was referred to the
Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands.
On July 17, 2001, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill.
On July 31, 2001, the Subcommittee met to mark-up the bill.
Congressman Mike Simpson offered an amendment requiring the
Secretary of Interior to revert the land uses and interests in
the land that were subject to a proclamation under the Act
should Congress not approve the proclamation within two years.
The amendment was adopted by voice vote. The bill, as amended,
was then forwarded to the Full Committee by voice vote. On
March 20, 2002, the Full Resources Committee met to consider
the bill. Congressman Mike Simpson offered an additional
amendment to clarify that land and interests in land that were
subject to a proclamation not approved by Congress and are
reverted back to their use prior to the proclamation will only
affect those proclamations issued after the date of enactment
of this Act, and not all prior proclamations under the
Antiquities Act. The amendment also clarified that
Congressional approval must be by an Act of Congress. The
amendment was adopted by voice vote. The bill, as further
amended, was then ordered favorably reported to the House of
Representatives by a roll call vote of 23 to 18, as follows:
Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations
Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Resources' oversight findings and recommendations
are reflected in the body of this report.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Article I, section 8 and Article IV, section 3, of the
Constitution of the United States grant Congress the authority
to enact this legislation.
Compliance With House Rule XIII
1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the
Rules of the House of Representatives requires an estimate and
a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be
incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B)
of that rule provides that this requirement does not apply when
the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted
cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2)
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this
bill does not contain any new budget authority, spending
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in
revenues or tax expenditures. According to the Congressional
Budget Office, enactment of this legislation would have no
significant impact on the federal budget and would not
significantly affect federal costs.
3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. This bill does
not authorize funding and therefore, clause 3(c)(4) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives does not
apply.
4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause
3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives and section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate
for this bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, April 5, 2002.
Hon. James V. Hansen,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2114, the National
Monument Fairness Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Megan
Carroll.
Sincerely,
Barry B. Anderson
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 2114--National Monument Fairness Act
CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 2114 would have no
significant impact on the federal budget. The bill would not
affect direct spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go
procedures would not apply. H.R. 2114 contains no
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on
state, local, or tribal governments.
The Antiquities Act of 1906 authorizes the President to
declare landmarks, structures, and other objects of historic or
scientific interest on federal lands to be national monuments.
H.R. 2114 would amend that act to require the President to
solicit public participation and comment and to consult with
governors and congressional delegations from affected states at
least 60 days before designing a monument of any size. H.R.
2114 would prohibit the President from designating monuments
exceeding 50,000 acres until 30 days after notifying the
governors of states in which the proposed monuments would be
located. Under the bill, designations of such monuments would
require Congressional approval within two years to remain in
effect. Finally, H.R. 2114 would require that management plans
for national monuments developed subsequent to a declaration
made under H.R. 2114 comply with the procedural requirements of
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
According to the Department of the Interior, the
Administration currently follows procedures for designating
monuments that would satisfy new requirements under H.R. 2114.
Hence, CBO estimates that implementing this bill would not
significantly affect federal costs.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Megan Carroll.
This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
Compliance With Public Law 104-4
This bill contains no unfunded mandates.
Preemption of State, Local or Tribal Law
This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or
tribal law.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
SECTION 2 OF THE ACT OF JUNE 8, 1906
CHAP. 3060.--An Act For the preservation of American antiquities.
(Commonly referred to as the ``Antiquities Act'')
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 2. That the] Sec. 2. (a) The President of the United
States is hereby authorized, in his discretion, to declare by
public proclamation historic landmarks, historic and
prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or
scientific interest that are situated upon the lands owned or
controlled by the Government of the United States to be
national monuments, and may reserve as a part thereof parcels
of land, the limits of which in all cases shall be confined to
the smallest area compatible with the proper care and
management of the objects to be protected: Provided, That when
such objects are situated upon a tract covered by a bona fide
unperfected claim or held in private ownership, the tract, or
so much thereof as may be necessary for the proper care and
management of the object, may be relinquished to the
Government, and the Secretary of the Interior is hereby
authorized to accept the relinquishment of such tracts in
behalf of the Governmet of the United States. A proclamation of
the President under this section that, during one calendar
year, creates a national monument that is more than 50,000
acres or that, during one calendar year, adds more than 50,000
acres to an existing national monument may not be issued until
30 days after the President has transmitted the proposed
proclamation to the Governor of the State or States in which
such acreage is located and solicited such Governor's or
Governors' written comments, and any such proclamation shall
cease to be effective on the date 2 years after issuance of the
proclamation unless the proclamation has been approved by an
Act of Congress. Land and interests in land that were subject
to a proclamation issued after the date of the enactment of the
National Monument Fairness Act that ceases to be effective
under the preceding sentence shall revert to the land use
status such land and interests in land had immediately before
the proclamation was issued.
(b)(1) To the extent consistent with the protection of the
historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and
other objects of historic or scientific interest located on the
public lands to be designated, the President shall--
(A) solicit public participation and comment in the
development of a monument proclamation; and
(B) consult with the Governor and entire
congressional delegation of the State or territory in
which such lands are located, to the extent
practicable, at least 60 days prior to any national
monument proclamation.
(2) Before issuing a proclamation under this section, the
President shall consider any information made available in the
development of existing plans and programs for the management
of the lands under consideration for proclamation as a
monument, including such public comments as may have been
offered.
(c) Any management plan for a national monument developed
subsequent to a proclamation made under this section shall
comply with the procedural requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
* * * * * * *
DISSENTING VIEWS
We are strongly opposed to H.R. 2114. The bill is a
misguided legislative proposal that would undermine an
important law that has been used to protect significant aspects
of our national heritage.
Since its enactment 96 years ago, the Antiquities Act has
been used by 14 Presidents 122 times to protect unique and
vulnerable public lands from threats, both natural and man-
made. While the Antiquities Act of 1906 may sound outdated to
some, the importance of the resource protection the Act has
provided has only increased over time. Sprawl, development and
pollution have intensified the pressure on sensitive areas of
public lands containing significant natural, historical, and
scientific resources.
At the core of H.R. 2114 are unworkable provisions left
over from a divisive and unsuccessful monument fight back in
the 105th Congress. These provisions allow national monument
opponents to block new designations by stalling legislation in
Congress and use an arbitrary 50,000-acre threshold that has no
relationship to the protection of endangered resources on the
ground.
Not only are the bill's provisions unworkable but they are
unwarranted as well. Contrary to the assertions that have been
made, the Antiquities Act does not authorize ``land grabs.''
The Act clearly states that the President can only designate
public lands as national monuments. All our national monuments
were already owned by the American people before they were
designated. No private property has been or will be taken by a
monument designation.
But these claims are not the real reason proponents are
pushing this bill. The real reason is more disappointing.
President Clinton left office more than 14 months ago, but it
was obvious from the comments of the bill's supporters in
Committee that they are still fighting him. This legislation
appears to be more about revenge than developing sound public
policy. There are those who don't want to accept the fact that
the National Monuments proclaimed by previous Presidents are
supported and treasured by the American public. They dare not
attack those monuments head-on, so they resort to the backdoor
approach of H.R. 2114.
In their haste to punish a former President, however,
supporters of this bill send a clear message that they don't
trust the current President nor his Secretary of the Interior.
This distrust is ironic given that the only monument proposal
of which we are aware is one being prepared by Interior
Secretary Norton that will encompass 640,000 acres of the San
Rafael Swell in Utah; a proposal that was suggested by the
Republic Governor of Utah and is supported by the Chairman of
the Resources Committee.
There is nothing in either current law or the Constitution
that limits Congressional authority to pass legislation to
amend, modify, or repeal the designation of a national
monument. If there are problems with an individual designation
that is the process that can and should be used.
Last year the Administration proposed oil and gas drilling
in our national monuments. The Congress wisely passed
legislation preventing this exploitation of our national
heritage. H.R. 2114 is a new assault on the protection of
sensitive and pristine public lands. Congress would be wise to
bury this proposal as well. We urge the defeat of H.R. 2114.
Nick Rahall.
George Miller.
Jay Inslee.
Frank Pallone, Jr.
Rush Holt.
Hilda L. Solis.
Mark Udall.
Dale E. Kildee.
Ed Markey.
Tom Udall.
Betty McCollum.
Peter A. DeFazio.