Faster horses
Well-known member
Worst-Case Scenario No Longer Hypothetical
I recently shared an article with you that outlined the worst-case scenario for the brazen abuse of the Antiquities Act. In it, the author makes the following case: If stiff public opposition hinders the plans of unelected Washington bureaucrats to set aside millions of acres in Montana, the President can (and should) act unilaterally to circumvent the public and Congress and designate the land as National Monuments. Not, some might say, unlike a king.
When this article was written, the Department of Interior was withholding important documents, including missing pages of a critical planning memo. I have since acquired some of these documents and posted them on my website. In newly revealed pages, the hypothetical worst-case scenario outlined above is a cold, hard reality. On pages 4 and 5 for example, the BLM recommends exactly the same kind of end-around contingency plan:
…the BLM proposes that the Administration:
1. Support Congressional efforts to expand the National Landscape Conservation System legislatively through the designation of new National Monuments, National Conservation Areas, Wilderness Areas, Wild and Scenic Rivers, and Historic Trails.”
2. Should the legislative process not prove fruitful, or if a nationally significant natural or cultural land resource were to come under threat of imminent harm, BLM would recommend that the Administration consider using the Antiquities Act to designate new National Monuments by Presidential proclamation. - (Pages 4-5, emphasis added)
This is an even bigger issue than millions of acres in Montana.
This is about reminding the federal government that its authority comes from the People. The Constitution gives legislative authority to Congress - the branch of the government most directly tied to the People. This wasn't an accident. The Framers didn't empower unelected judges or a single sovereign to act as a king because in order to preserve self-governance, the People must have influence. Plans to subvert that influence by removing Congress from the process is a dangerous abuse of power.
The Wyoming & Alaska Solution
In the states of Wyoming and Alaska, Presidential designations of large National Monuments must be ratified by Congress, preserving the Constitutional role of the People. Notably, while the "NOT FOR RELEASE" Memo lays out a course of action for the President to ignore popular opinion in 48 states, it makes a different recommendation for Wyoming and Alaska:
"The BLM also recommends that the Administration begin a dialogue with Congress to encourage the conservation of these areas." (Page 6)
That's how it should work everywhere, which is why I've introduced legislation that would protect Montana from unwanted federal meddling in our state, just like Wyoming and Alaska. H.R. 4754 would require Congress to approve any designation of new National Monuments in Montana.
National Monument Panel Discussion
I am hosting a panel discussion on public transparency and property rights in response to this situation, and you're invited to attend. It's set for Friday, August 20, at 3:00 p.m., at the Lewistown Civic Center, 309 5th Avenue South in Lewistown, MT.
The panel includes land owners, public officials, and other stakeholders from the areas under consideration for monument designation. It also includes stake holders involved in the Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument designation, which was a controversial federal land grab created by executive order in the last days of the Clinton Administration.
I hope you can make it.
----------------------------------
There is also a poll on Rehbergs website:
http://rehberg.congressnewsletter.net/mail/util.cfm?gpiv=2100062357.52750.436&gen=1
I recently shared an article with you that outlined the worst-case scenario for the brazen abuse of the Antiquities Act. In it, the author makes the following case: If stiff public opposition hinders the plans of unelected Washington bureaucrats to set aside millions of acres in Montana, the President can (and should) act unilaterally to circumvent the public and Congress and designate the land as National Monuments. Not, some might say, unlike a king.
When this article was written, the Department of Interior was withholding important documents, including missing pages of a critical planning memo. I have since acquired some of these documents and posted them on my website. In newly revealed pages, the hypothetical worst-case scenario outlined above is a cold, hard reality. On pages 4 and 5 for example, the BLM recommends exactly the same kind of end-around contingency plan:
…the BLM proposes that the Administration:
1. Support Congressional efforts to expand the National Landscape Conservation System legislatively through the designation of new National Monuments, National Conservation Areas, Wilderness Areas, Wild and Scenic Rivers, and Historic Trails.”
2. Should the legislative process not prove fruitful, or if a nationally significant natural or cultural land resource were to come under threat of imminent harm, BLM would recommend that the Administration consider using the Antiquities Act to designate new National Monuments by Presidential proclamation. - (Pages 4-5, emphasis added)
This is an even bigger issue than millions of acres in Montana.
This is about reminding the federal government that its authority comes from the People. The Constitution gives legislative authority to Congress - the branch of the government most directly tied to the People. This wasn't an accident. The Framers didn't empower unelected judges or a single sovereign to act as a king because in order to preserve self-governance, the People must have influence. Plans to subvert that influence by removing Congress from the process is a dangerous abuse of power.
The Wyoming & Alaska Solution
In the states of Wyoming and Alaska, Presidential designations of large National Monuments must be ratified by Congress, preserving the Constitutional role of the People. Notably, while the "NOT FOR RELEASE" Memo lays out a course of action for the President to ignore popular opinion in 48 states, it makes a different recommendation for Wyoming and Alaska:
"The BLM also recommends that the Administration begin a dialogue with Congress to encourage the conservation of these areas." (Page 6)
That's how it should work everywhere, which is why I've introduced legislation that would protect Montana from unwanted federal meddling in our state, just like Wyoming and Alaska. H.R. 4754 would require Congress to approve any designation of new National Monuments in Montana.
National Monument Panel Discussion
I am hosting a panel discussion on public transparency and property rights in response to this situation, and you're invited to attend. It's set for Friday, August 20, at 3:00 p.m., at the Lewistown Civic Center, 309 5th Avenue South in Lewistown, MT.
The panel includes land owners, public officials, and other stakeholders from the areas under consideration for monument designation. It also includes stake holders involved in the Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument designation, which was a controversial federal land grab created by executive order in the last days of the Clinton Administration.
I hope you can make it.
----------------------------------
There is also a poll on Rehbergs website:
http://rehberg.congressnewsletter.net/mail/util.cfm?gpiv=2100062357.52750.436&gen=1