SALT LAKE CITY – Lawmakers
who want to seize control of federal lands are pushing a legal battle
they insist is winnable despite multiple warnings their effort is highly
unconstitutional and almost sure to fail in court.
Utah is poised to become the first state to
pass a package of bills that demand the federal government relinquish
claims to huge sections of public land. A proposal that advanced
Wednesday demands that by 2014 the federal government cede control of
nearly 30 million acres -- nearly 50 percent of the entire state.
A bill setting an identical deadline is also moving in the Arizona Legislature.
Rep. Ken Ivory, who is leading the effort in
Utah and helped draft model legislation for use in other states, said
the federal government doesn't treat states like equal partners in land
management.
"If sovereignty means anything, it means not having to say pretty please, or mother may I," Ivory said.
Driving the legislative frustration is an
ongoing anger over missed opportunities to develop and mine lands
managed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service.
There is also concern that access to
state-owned or private lands will be increasingly restricted by Congress
or even with the stroke of a president's pen, which happened in 1996
when President Bill Clinton created the 1.9-million-acre Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in southern Utah.
"In our area, we feel that we have federal
land management policies that ignore the needs of state, county or local
residents," said Dirk Clayson, a commissioner in rural Kane County,
Utah, which has less than 10 percent privately-owned land. "Even
well-meant efforts from federal officials seem to get tied up with
policy decisions ... that are not responsive to local needs."
While Clayson doesn't think state control
will solve all the issues, he said it would give the counties a more
accessible partner.
"There's risks, but there's a general
feeling that we will have a much more effective working relationship
with the state," Clayson said. "After all, they're only a four-hour
automobile drive away from us."
Critics, however, argue the bills are almost
all unconstitutional and amount to nothing more than chest-thumping
political statements that waste taxpayer money. Even Utah's legislative
attorneys have warned the bills will likely not withstand a court
challenge.
"This bill is likely unconstitutional and
will engage us in a legal battle with the federal government," Utah
Senate Minority Leader Ross Romero, D-Salt Lake City, said. "We're
likely to eventually lose in this endeavor ... Simply inviting a lawsuit
where we'll be spending time and energy to lose is not the best
policy."
But the fight is worth it for many Western
lawmakers because they see the potential for millions of dollars in
revenue from taxes, development rights or even the sale of lands.
Pressing the federal government to resolve
the issue politically or take it to court is the goal, said Utah state
Sen. Wayne Niederhauser, R-Sandy.
"This is not a tanks, swords or horses issue," Niederhauser said. "There is a peaceful way to do this."
No comments:
Post a Comment