|  |  | 
| | | | | | Legislative Issues Index | | | National Forest Counties & Schools Coalition | In 2000 the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (PL 106-393) was passed to stabilize funding for schools. Based on the old formula, all the Tuolumne County schools (divided among the schools) received about $100,000. Under the Act, funding increased to about $1,000,000. County roads benefited as well from this increased funding. The Act will expire at the end of 2006 and must be reauthorized. Two bills, HR 517 and S 267, have been introduced to reauthorize this Act. The challenge will be to convince Congress that reauthorization is supported by a large segment of the population and worthwhile. At the present time there are 51 co-sponsors of HR 517 in the House and 16 co-sponsors of S 267 in the Senate. If we want to ensure success this fall, we must significantly increase the number of bill cosponsors in both the House and the Senate. In California, over $57,004,978 will be lost if the Act is not reauthorized. With the state of our economy, we can’t afford for this to happen. TuCARE members are asked to write to their representatives who have not joined in the fight for this reauthorization. Senator Barbara Boxer is one such representative. Please write to her asking her to help save California’s schools. She needs to actively support this. She can be contacted at: Senator Barbara Boxer, United States Senate, 331 Hart Building, Washington, DC 20510 P – 202-224-3553 F – 202-228-2382 In developing the original Act a coalition was formed across the nation. The members of the coalition are working to expand this list to include as many businesses and individuals as possible. If you are not a member (no cost to you) of the National Forest Counties and Schools Coalition, please join. We have enclosed a form for you to fill out and fax it in or you can add your name to the list online at forestco@tcde.tehama.k12.ca.us Please take a moment to do this. It is important. | | | | Did You know? | | Most people are unaware that in October of 1992 the Endangered Species Act expired. Congress has continued the Act through annual appropriations (funding), but fundamental reform has been blocked by conflicting political pressures. | | | | Lawsuits Compel Status Reviews of Endangered Species Act | On March 22, 2005 the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), representing CCA, California Forestry Association, and the California State Grange, filed litigation seeking status reviews for nearly 200 species listed in California under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). Section 4(c)(2) of the ESA requires the Secretary of the Interior to review, every five years, the status of all species listed as threatened or endangered. After the review, the government must determine whether the listed species should have its status changed (i.e., either lowered from endangered to threatened or raised from threatened to endangered), or if the species should be removed from the list because protection is no longer needed. However, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) has been unable to conduct status reviews for two-thirds of the 298 species listed in California. As a result, the compliant filed by PLF states, the USFWS has no way of knowing if listed species require more or less protection, or if they have been recovered and can be removed from the list of endangered or threatened species. “The environmental community is very adept at using the courts and environmental protection laws like the ESA to restrict our property rights,” says CCA President Mark Nelson. “It’s our hope that this lawsuit will play a small role in centering the pendulum, by forcing the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to operate under the constraints of the ESA, but to the benefit of ranchers, farmers, and landowners.” (A copy of the complaint, including a list of species in need of a five-year review and affected counties, is available at http://www.pacificlegal.org/ or by contacting the CCA office.) | | | | Members Outline New Approach To Endangered Species | | Recently in Washington D.C. a new approach to improve and update the Endangered Species Act was presented at a news conference with House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo (R-California) and Representative Greg Walden (R-Oregon), along with Senators Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) and Lincoln Chafee (R-Rhode Island), the chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Water. The members signaled the start of a House-Senate partnership approach to addressing the issue. What they had to say: Pombo: "The ESA desperately needs an update and a renewed focus on species recovery. Its one-percent recovery result over the past thirty years has failed to live up to the Act's noble intent and our intrinsic values as Americans. These are vital statistics that no individual can support. As such, I am eager to continue the work that is being done between our chambers and optimistic that we can breathe new life into this law for the 21st century." Walden: "It is critical that we modernize and strengthen the 30-year-old ESA so that it can become a more effective tool for recovering threatened and endangered species. As the hard-working people in Oregon's Klamath Basin will tell you, and the National Academy of Sciences will confirm, this well-intended law simply isn't working as it should. Not only should the health of species throughout the nation be demonstrably improved by the ESA, but the health of communities and local economies should also be carefully addressed as they too are directly impacted by the policy decisions driven by the Act. For the sake of these communities, imperiled species, and the environment that is habitat for these species, I am confident we can make positive strides toward improving the results of the ESA and bringing it into the 21st century." Crapo: "The Endangered Species Act is one of our most important laws and Congress will soon begin seeing proposals concerning it. We have agreed to work together with bill sponsors and I am determined to achieve this ESA improvement with bipartisan support for a consistent approach in both chambers. Our goal is to strengthen the ESA by improving habitat conservation and recovery, providing more and better incentives, and enhancing the role of states where appropriate. Overall, we believe the ESA can be less contentious and more effective." Chafee: “Since 1973, the Endangered Species Act has worked to protect thousands of species and the habitats upon which they depend. Across the nation, there are new and innovative approaches to advancing species conservation and recovery. We will be taking a hard look at ways to improve the Act in the subcommittee this year by holding hearings that involve a broad group from the environmental and business communities. I look forward to working with Senator Crapo, Chairman Pombo and Representative Walden to craft legislation that enhances recovery of species and the conservation of habitat." Presidential ESA Reform Efforts The recent Present’s Cooperative Conservation Executive Order may provide some reform opportunities. The order gives authority for agencies to adjust how rules are implemented. Field personnel must comply with measures that are designed to protect private property rights. The current Administration is also attempting to change the attitude and culture within the Department of Interior. During the Clinton era that agency was packed with environmental activists, who because of civil service rules can’t be replaced. To counter this unsettling situation, as mid-level management positions open, Assistant Secretary Craig Manson is only granting approval to individuals who support the Administration’s philosophy. Write On . . . The Grass Roots Coalition Suggests A Better Way To Communicate in Congressional Debate Taken from The Grassroots ESA Coalition email update- Congress is likely to consider substantial changes to the Endangered Species Act this year. It's time to get in gear to update and repair the Endangered Species Act. The Endangered Species Act has not been successful at recovering species at risk over the past 30 years. With a success rate of less than one percent, the ESA is not effective in saving threatened and endangered species. At the same time, the corresponding rules and regulations have, in many cases, strangled local economies causing severe repercussions that impact everything from school funding to jobs to economic development -even hampering important environmental protections. . The Grassroots ESA Coalition will work across the country to promote common sense, balanced and scientifically supported changes to the ESA, which will update and modernize the Act to make it more efficient and effective in recovering threatened and endangered species while also protecting landowners. These principles rest on two facts we have come to recognize over the 31-years existence of the ESA: no law has hurt communities, strangled landowners, and, at the same time, actually done less to improve the environment than the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Yet the purpose of the act, to save and recover endangered species, is widely supported and is a good idea. The key to winning the battle in Congress is to talk about Restoring the Endangered Species Act and Actually Recovering Species. Now is the best time ever to modernize and update the ESA so we can actually recover endangered species. Never before, in the history of the Endangered Species Act has there been a better opportunity to pass legislation to actually recover species, while at the same time, changing the act to one that offers incentives to landowners to protect species instead of punishing them with onerous penalties. Today, we have many supporters, both on Capitol Hill and in the Administration. Generally they are likely to be more favorable now to those who want to make the ESA actually work and recover species while protecting the needs of families and communities. The committees in Congress that have jurisdiction over the ESA have chairmen who want to see a people-friendly and species-friendly ESA emerge from this year's debate. It's time to bring balance into protecting our species as well as humans. We must do a better job of recovering endangered species without endangering the jobs and livelihoods of American families. We cannot protect species at the expense of our fellow Americans and their jobs as was done most dramatically in Oregon's Klamath River basin when we failed both the environment and the many residents who lost their jobs, their businesses, even communities. If the ESA is going to be improved, we need the latest information to adapt to the changing political environment. We need to know what works to communicate to Congress and the public . . . and what doesn't. We are working on how to convey these messages in a productive and sensitive way. The goals of protecting people and species have not changed. How to talk about them has. Some words, like Reform, have built up a meaning in public use and debate that, if used now, do not allow our message to be received positively, the way we want. For example, some have tried to label the word "Reform" as a code word for gut or weaken. Those who oppose improving, updating and modernizing the ESA will always seek to twist certain words and ideas to place us in an unfavorable light. The research says "Sound science" has also become a politically impacted negatively perceived statement. It appears that the public will more clearly understand our message if we refer to "independent scientific review" instead. Likewise, we should avoid phrases such as: "Radical environmentalists", "bureaucratic red tape", "ESA is to blame for.. ." The public will be more receptive to positive rather than negative terminology. It's good to talk about ESA's affect on people's livelihood, but not about lifestyles. For example, the loss of jobs and the closure of mills ring true. Talking about lost beach access or lost access for Off-Road Vehicles in the context of the ESA is not a combination that is believed by people. We don't want to offend our allies in the ORV community, but unfortunately the general public does not yet fully understand their concerns. This is just an example to illustrate that in most cases the public does not buy the fact that ORV's are being limited because of the Endangered Species Act even though they often are. Additional key points as we communicate our ideas: Updating a 30-year old law -----It's been 30 years since the Endangered Species Act became law. The Act is well intended but its 99 percent failure rate in recovering species is unacceptable. Now's the time to improve and bring more current how we recover and save endangered species.-----Only 10 species in North America have been recovered out of more than 1300 that were listed in the last 30 years. This rate is unacceptable. Repair and balance -----We must do a better job of recovering endangered species without endangering the jobs and livelihoods of American families. Landowners and the ESA -- Providing Incentives to recover species -----The future of conservation lies in establishing an entirely new foundation for the conservation of endangered species - one based on the truism that if you want more of something you reward people for it, not punish them. Throughout American history, if the government wanted more of something, providing incentives to achieve those goals worked most effectively. Landowners who lose property rights under the Endangered Species Act should be properly compensated. Landowners who participate in efforts to recover species should be compensated for those efforts. -----Protecting habitat should require an economic impact statement that accounts for the impact on landowners and communities. We must allow the use of land, as well as provide habitat, when land use is determined to not threaten endangered species. -----Allowing active management of both land and habitat is important, especially when it can prevent or manage forest fires. Independent scientific review -----To assure effectiveness, independent scientific review is needed when listing species as endangered and developing recovery plans. Independent scientific review of recovery plans will help assure that the plans are effective or necessary. State and local input -----Species recovery plans must be flexible and friendlier, and allow for local input and involvement to be truly effective. -----Local and state authorities need to be. -----We need to allow state and local authorities to be involved in helping save our species with more flexibility when designing recovery plans. -----We cannot protect species at the expense of our fellow Americans and their jobs. We can and must protect both endangered species and people. Improvements to the Act -----The Act should require a plan to help a species recover before it is listed. The current Act doesn't require such a plan. -----It is not enough to merely list a species as "threatened" or "endangered. " We want to help species recover so they can come off the list. -----Updating legislation should be called something like "Repairing The Endangered Species Act." When you write your Congressman and Senators, as well as allies and friends, please consider the language ideas above. (The Coordinator for the Grassroots ESA Coalition is Chuck Cushman. Contact him at the American Land Rights Association at ccushman@esacoalition.org or phone (360) 687-3087.) | | | | Kelo v. New London – Private Property Rights | In this commentary by Congressman Ron Paul (R-14 th-TX), we are reminded that we should not take our freedoms for granted, nor should we rely on the discretion of others to determine what freedoms we are allowed. Lessons from the Kelo decision By Rep. Ron Paul July 15, 2005 One week after the Kelo decision by the Supreme Court, Americans are still reeling from the shock of having our nation's highest tribunal endorse using government power to condemn private homes to benefit a property developer. Even as we celebrate our independence from England this July 4 th, we find ourselves increasingly enslaved by petty bureaucrats at every level of government. The anger engendered by the Kelo case certainly resonates, on this holiday based on rebellion against government. The city of New London, Connecticut, essentially acted as a strongman by seizing private property from one group of people, for the benefit of a more powerful private interest. For its services, the city will be paid a tribute, in the form of greater taxes from the new development. In any other context, what's happening in Connecticut, properly, would be described as criminal. However, the individuals losing their homes understand that stealing is stealing, even if the people responsible are government officials. The silver lining in the Kelo case may be that the veneer of government benevolence is being challenged. Kelo has several important lessons for all of us. We are witnessing the destruction of any last remnants of the separation of powers doctrine, a doctrine our Founders considered critical to freedom. The notion that the Judicial branch of government serves as a watchdog, to curb Legislative and Executive abuses, has been entirely exposed as an illusion. Judges not only fail to defend our freedoms, they actively infringe upon them, by acting as de facto legislators. Thus, Kelo serves as a stark reminder that we cannot rely on judges to protect our freedoms. It is folly to believe we will regain lost freedoms, if only the right individuals are appointed to the Supreme Court. Republican Presidents, including conservative icon Ronald Reagan, have appointed some of our very worst Supreme Court Justices. In today's political context, it frankly matters very little, whom President Bush appoints to replace Justice O'Connor. Even the most promising jurist can change radically, over the course of a lifetime appointment. We are supposed to be a nation of laws, not men, and the fixation on individuals as saviors of our freedoms is misplaced. America will regain lost freedoms only when her citizens wake up, and reclaim a national sense of self-reliance, individualism, and limited government. A handful of judges cannot save a nation from itself. The Kelo case also demonstrates that local government can be as tyrannical as centralized government. Decentralized power is always preferable, of course, since it's easier to fight City Hall, than Congress. But, government power is ever and always dangerous, and must be zealously guarded against. Most people in New London, Connecticut, like most people in America, would rather not involve themselves in politics. The reality is that politics involves itself with us, whether we like it or not. We can bury our heads in the sand, and hope that things don't get too bad, or we can fight back, when government treats us as its servant, rather than its master. If anything, the Supreme Court should have refused to hear the Kelo case, on the grounds that the 5 th Amendment does not apply to states. If Constitutional purists hope to maintain credibility, we must reject the phony incorporation doctrine in all cases - not only when it serves our interests. The issue in the Kelo case is the legality of the eminent domain action under Connecticut law, not federal law. Congress can, and should, act to prevent the federal government from seizing private property, but the fight against local eminent domain actions must take place at the local level. The people of New London, Connecticut, could start by removing from office, the local officials who created the problem in the first place.” | | | | Taking Liberty | | We have spent the past six months working with the American Land Foundation and Dr. Michael Coffman to create this powerful program “Taking Liberty: How Private Property is being Abolished in America.” The web based program looks at the lower 48 states, region by region, through a narrated program with animated maps. It shows how the environmental movement is well on its way to locking up over 50% of our nation from any human use. You will now be able to visualize how much land is being controlled and how much more is desired. It will shock you. This is a wake up call to everyone, especially those helping to implement these policies that have no idea of the bigger agenda they are fulfilling. You need to see this for yourself. | | | | Political News Archives | | | |
