WASHINGTON, D.C. - In the end, and just barely, the
Congress of the United States decided to act like grown-ups,
creating or expanding about 100 pieces of national parkland around
the country, as they intended.
But because so
many of its members had acted like children, they also "passed' -
well, they caused to be created - a much larger area of natural
protection, which they did not intend. Thereby hangs a tale, with a
moral.
Generally speaking, mature behavior can
be good policy and good politics. As an example, consider one of
the provisions in that parks bill, the inclusion into the National
Park System of some islands in Boston Harbor.
Rep. Gerry Studds of Massachusetts said he managed to get and to
keep these in the bill because of his "real friendship with Don
Young," the chairman of the House Resources
Committee.
Now, Gerry Studds is not only a
liberal Democrat, he is also one of only four gay members (so far
as we know) of the House. Don Young is not only a conservative
Republican, but one whose staff aides bedeck their office with a
bumper sticker reading, "Heterosexuals have rights, too."
Grown-ups do not let such things bother them.
They keep their cool and they get islands put into the National
Park System.
This congressional comity was never
universal. But it was once common. In the 1940s and 1950s, Hubert
Humphrey was the Democratic Party's leading advocate of civil
rights. Sen. Richard Russell of Georgia was its leading
segregationist. Their disagreements were intense, but never
personal. Had they gotten personal, passage of civil rights
legislation might have been even more difficult than it
was.
Comity, alas, is incompatible with
ideology, and perhaps with television and its sound bites. In
natural resources, one can argue that environmentalists were the
first ones to get personally nasty and childish. When you assign
your opponent to a sound-bite category called "the dirty dozen,"
you come perilously close to calling him dirty. This is not
analysis. It is insult.
Lately, though, most
ideological fervor has come from the right. This became more
evident after their side took control of Congress. "We're in
charge," proclaimed Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas, the Majority Whip. "We
don't have to compromise." Delusion of grandeur is one sign of
childishness. And so is snide wise-guy-ism, as when Rep. Sonny Bono
suggested that the way to deal with endangered species was to "give
them all a designated area and then blow it up."
The parks bill is a good example of
congressional childishness because there was no logical reason why
its passage was so difficult. So broad was its support that it
passed the House by a vote of 404-4, and the Senate without
dissent.
Now, anyone who wonders how it is that
a bill with such broad support could come so close to failure
labels him- or herself a naif in the ways of Washington. This is no
disgrace. Nonetheless, an explanation will be
offered.
The parks bill, also known as the
Presidio Bill, became the vehicle of choice for congresspersons who
wished to attach proposals unpassable on their
own.
For instance, New Mexico Republican Sen.
Pete Domenici's bill to give ranchers even more control over public
grazing land (HCN, 9/16/96) was added to the parks bill. As were
measures gutting the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation
Act and prohibiting the Forest Service from maintaining in-stream
flows in Colorado.
These provisions were
appended less to be enacted than because the very act of appending
them pleased certain lawmakers and some of their friends and
contributors. So as Congress approached its final weeks, the
solution seemed obvious. The bill included more than 100 provisions
no one opposed, and about 20 which most members (and their
constituents) hated. In such a case, grown men and women drop the
controversial few and adopt the agreed-upon
many.
But that isn't what happened. One lawmaker
after another, almost all of them the Western Republicans (not
Domenici, who is a real grown-up and apparently does not plan to
re-introduce his grazing proposals next year) pouted. If my goodie
isn't part of the final bill, they said, I'll block the whole
thing.
The final practitioner of pediatric
petulance was Sen. Frank Murkowski, the Alaska Republican who is
chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Murkowski
had proposed an amendment which would have extended for 15 years
the contract by which a timber company chops down the Tongass
National Forest. When the House-Senate Conference Committee dropped
that provision from the final bill, Murkowski threatened to scuttle
the bill, risking even the displeasure of his boss, Majority Leader
Trent Lott of Mississippi, who wanted to pass a
bill.
Murkowski got something for his
intransigence - a commitment by the Clinton administration to allow
logging in the Tongass for at least two more years while a final
plan is worked out. With this deal, Murkowski stopped pouting and
let the bill pass.
From the point of view of
Western environmentalists, the Tongass deal was a small price to
pay for the Parks Bill, which created a Tallgrass Prairie National
Park in Kansas, protected valuable watershed land in the Northeast
and added scores of rivers, trails and historic areas to the
system.
Some environmentalists weren't
particularly happy with the land swap for the Snowbasin ski resort
near Ogden, Utah (HCN, 6/24/96), or the Sand Hollow land exchange,
under which a reservoir will be built near (but not in) Zion
National Park. But neither were they all that unhappy about
them.
In fact, they weren't unhappy about much,
especially not after President Clinton invoked the 1906 Antiquities
Act to preserve 1.7 million acres in southern Utah as the Grand
Staircase-Escalante National Monument. And who enabled him to do
that?
Murkowski and DeLay and Bono and Richard
Pombo and Dick Armey and, yes, the (somewhat) more adult Newt
Gingrich. Only by constantly proposing extreme policies in
intemperate language - two characteristics of childhood - did they
create the political climate which allowed Clinton to set aside the
Utah monument. Having whined and screeched for two years, their
complaints would only seem like more whining and
screeching.
That's the problem with acting like
a child. There's usually some bigger kid on the
block.
Jon Margolis observes
the Washington scene for High Country
News.





