    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1997, Book II)]
    [November 14, 1997]
    [Pages 1565-1567]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Statement on Signing the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies
    Appropriations Act, 1998
    November 14, 1997

        I have signed into law today H.R. 2107, the ``Department of the
    Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998.''
        This Act provides funding for the Department of the Interior,
    various programs of the Department of Energy, the Forest Service
    (Department of Agriculture), the Indian Health Service (Department of
    Health and Human Services), the National Foundation on the Arts and
    Humanities, and several other agencies. It funds several of my
    Administration's priorities, which were highlighted in the Bipartisan
    Budget Agreement (BBA): priority Federal land acquisitions, National
    Park Service (NPS) operations, NPS base land acquisition, Everglades
    restoration, and Tribal Priority Allocations in the Bureau of Indian
    Affairs (BIA).
        The National Endowment for the Arts will continue to provide active
    and visible support to important American arts communities and is funded
    at $98 million, $1.5 million below the FY 1997 level. The Act also
    provides $111 million for the National Endowment for the Humanities. I
    remain concerned, however, about

    [[Page 1566]]

    the low level of funding for these agencies that provide important
    cultural, education, and artistic programs for communities across
    America.
        The $699 million provided in H.R. 2107 for priority Federal land
    acquisitions and exchanges is an extraordinary accomplishment agreed to
    in the BBA. These funds, in addition to the amounts provided for regular
    land acquisition, will allow the Secretaries of the Interior and
    Agriculture to protect nationally important treasures--including
    Yellowstone National Park and the largest privately held stand of
    ancient redwoods in northern California--from unacceptable environmental
    threats. It is important that the decision of the Congress to allow a
    portion of this appropriation to be used for critical maintenance
    projects and other purposes not be seen as a precedent for the
    allocation of moneys for such purposes from the Land and Water
    Conservation Fund in the future. These problems, while meriting
    attention, are not appropriate uses of the funds. Finally, the bill
    includes an unjustified transfer of millions of dollars of mineral
    rights to the State of Montana--I intend to use my line-item veto
    authority to cancel the dollar drain on the Treasury that would result
    from this unwarranted action.
        The Act provides $1.2 billion for operation of our national park
    system. This funding, an increase of more than 6 percent over the amount
    provided for FY 1997, will enable the NPS to improve on the high-quality
    service at existing national parks, including five new parks established
    in 1996. Funding is provided at my requested level for Everglades
    restoration. This will support our efforts to restore this rare and
    delicate ecosystem to environmental health. The Act also provides $1.3
    billion for operation of our national forest system (6 percent over FY
    1997), and full funding for other land management agencies that provide
    recreation, conservation, and development opportunities to all
    Americans.
        My Administration has moved away from past policies that primarily
    emphasized timber cutting at the expense of the environment and
    blatantly violated environmental laws. This Administration stands for
    protecting the environment as well as jobs. For example, my Pacific
    Northwest Forest Plan, in place for over 3 years, encompasses this new
    approach of managing our national forests based on sound science. This
    plan helps to ensure that these forests can continue to provide multiple
    benefits to the public for the long-term, including timber harvest,
    wildlife, fisheries, recreation, and clean water. Another approach we
    are proud of is employing Habitat Conservation Plans, such as that in
    the Headwaters Forest agreement, which are based on sound science and
    that fully comply with the Endangered Species Act. We can and do protect
    economic and environmental interests.
        Unfortunately, the Act includes several provisions that attempt to
    interfere with the responsible management of our national forests. These
    Forest Service riders in the bill reflect increasing efforts by the
    majority in the Congress to micromanage forest management decisions and
    to prevent the use of scientifically based information to guide land
    stewardship. These provisions clearly are an attempt to return to forest
    management by politics rather than science and full public
    participation. This is a grave disservice to the people of the United
    States.
        For example, the bill includes a provision to restrict the ability
    of the Forest Service to start new revisions of national forest land
    management plans to bring them up to date with new science, until the
    agency publishes new planning regulations. The Congress clearly seeks to
    force the Administration to release forest planning regulations that
    have not yet been finalized because of our concerns over the
    regulations' impact on the Forest Service's ability to improve its
    environmental performance. Instead, USDA has established an independent
    Committee of Scientists to review the regulations and provide
    recommendations for their improvement. I have directed the agency to
    proceed expeditiously with this scientific review and to use its
    findings to guide its effort in rewriting forest planning direction.
    Until the new regulations are published, the agency will proceed with
    protecting the environment by conducting the necessary environmental
    analysis and updating forest plans to continue the Administration's
    science-based management policy to the maximum extent allowed under the
    rider.
        The Congress also continues to interfere with the Administration's
    efforts to promote ecosystem management and a greater understanding of
    the natural resource management issues affecting areas like the interior
    Columbia River Basin--an area characterized by forest health, watershed,
    and endangered species problems. Cumbersome requirements to delay a
    science-based plan for the Basin could potentially shut

    [[Page 1567]]

    down every forest in that region, hurting communities and families
    dependent on these forests for their livelihood. This action may benefit
    a few special interests, but it injures both the environment and the
    economy.
        In addition, the Conference Report for this Act directs the Forest
    Service to continue the use of so-called ``purchaser road credits'' for
    commercial timber roads on national forests. I have proposed to
    eliminate these credits, which amount to an unneeded subsidy for
    companies buying public timber. Contrary to the views expressed in the
    Conference Report, many in the Congress have acknowledged the adverse
    environmental impact that decades of timber road building have caused to
    our land and water. Therefore, I will again propose elimination of
    purchaser road credits next year while holding counties and small
    businesses harmless and have asked the Secretary of Agriculture to take
    the necessary administrative steps to be prepared to implement the
    Administration's proposal in FY 1999. Further, the Forest Service is
    developing a scientifically based policy for managing roadless areas in
    our national forests. These last remaining wild areas are precious to
    millions of Americans and key to protecting clean water and abundant
    wildlife habitat, and providing recreation opportunities. These
    unspoiled places must be managed through science, not politics.
        The Act contains funding of $612 million for energy conservation
    activities. While I am pleased that this includes modest increases for
    mitigating global climate change and for the Partnership for a New
    Generation of Vehicles, it is still a $96 million reduction from our
    request that will slow our planned progress in both of those areas.
        The Act provides $757 million for reservation-level BIA Tribal
    Priority Allocation programs as agreed to in the BBA. This will enable
    Tribes to allocate funding for essential programs, such as social
    services, law enforcement, housing improvement, scholarships, and road
    repair.
        While I am pleased that the Congress has funded the Tribal Priority
    Allocation programs at the level I requested, I am concerned that
    provisions in the Act will limit the ability of sovereign Alaskan tribes
    to exercise their self-determination as to how health services are
    provided. These provisions contradict my Administration's longstanding
    support of self-determination for tribal governments set forth under the
    Indian Self-Determination and Education Act. It is my understanding that
    the Secretary of Health and Human Services can review any proposal
    submitted to the Indian Health Service for contracting primary care
    services against the statutory declination provisions in section 102 of
    the Indian Self-Determination Act.
        Section 129 of the Act prohibits the Secretary of the Interior from
    approving new class III tribal-State gaming compacts without prior
    approval of a State. This section properly construed, clarifies that
    State approval is governed by State law. I am advised that this section
    does not prohibit the Secretary from conducting a rulemaking to
    establish a process to govern situations in which a tribe and a State
    cannot agree on a tribal-State compact. This section is acceptable
    because it is not inconsistent with the established national policy set
    forth in the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.

                                                          William J. Clinton

    The White House,

    November 14, 1997.

    Note: H.R. 2107, approved November 14, was assigned Public Law No. 105-
    83.