Anchorage Daily News – September 11, 2000

YOUNG'S BILL IS IN TROUBLE
TIME ON FOES' SIDE IN FIGHT FOR CARA

By David Whitney Daily News Washington Bureau

Washington -- As Congress races toward a mid-October adjournment, supporters of a showcase conservation bill sponsored by Alaska Rep. Don Young and Sen. Frank Murkowski say it is in grave risk of withering.

The legislation, called the Conservation and Reinvestment Act, would reroute about $3 billion a year from offshore oil drilling into land conservation, wildlife protection and parks programs. It does so by creating 15-year entitlements that largely would be beyond the control of congressional appropriators or the White House.

The measure has won the endorsement of a virtually unprecedented coalition of sports groups, park authorities, wildlife agencies, environmentalists, mayors and governors because it would pour money into all 50 states -- in Alaska's case, $164 million a year.

But private property rights groups hate it, and powerful congressional budgeters bristle over losing $3 billion a year in spending power. Even Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said he is "ambivalent" about the bill his two fellow Republicans are pushing.

The bill's first big test came in May when the House approved it by 3-to-1 margin. Murkowski, chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, then squeezed a reshaped version out of his deeply divided committee in July, capturing support from just four of the panel's 11 Republicans.

Now, though, there is virtually no time in the Senate to devote to a conservation package that is certain to bog down under a string of filibusters. The only other option is for Young and Murkowski to cut a deal between the House and Senate and then try to attach the compromise to a last-minute spending bill. Even then, congressional appropriators opposed to the legislation will be in charge of the show.

Neither Murkowski nor Young would agree to interviews on their strategies last week. Murkowski's press aide, Chuck Kleeschulte, said that while the two lawmakers have had preliminary discussions about a compromise, Murkowski remains hopeful that the measure will come to a vote on the Senate floor. Assuming filibusters can be beaten back, an overwhelming vote of support is expected.

Young is not prepared to wait long, however. Steve Hansen, press aide to the House Resources Committee that Young heads, said that if there aren't signs of action by the end of this week in the Senate, Young will turn for help from the Clinton White House to tack the measure onto a spending bill.

"Time is getting very, very short," Hansen said. "If the Senate doesn't do anything by the week of Sept. 18, we'll be making a full-scale effort to attach the bill (to a spending measure), with the president's help."

That prospect -- turning to Clinton for help in passing their conservation bill -- would make the bill's strange journey even more bizarre. Both Young and Murkowski are renowned in the Congress as anti-environmentalists and for their attacks on the administration over everything from roadless forest policies to national monuments.

But for Young especially, a little political fudging is essential for him to save the centerpiece legislation of his six-year chairmanship of the House Resources Committee. Because of term limits, he will lose the chairmanship next year even if Republicans retain their majority grip on the chamber in the November elections.

In addition, California Rep. George Miller has announced that he will step down as the senior resources Democrat and instead take over the top Democratic spot on the House Education and Workforce Committee next year. Miller was a key player in forging the House bill with Young.

Advocates of the conservation act regard the convergence of interests and timing as a rare opportunity to secure the stable source of parks and wildlife funding.

"Congress cannot go home without this," said Jim Lyon, congressional liaison for the National Wildlife Federation. "If we don't do this this year, the bill dies and the entire political structure that put this together will change."

"This is not something you start over with in the next congressional session," said Naomi A. Edelson, wildlife diversity director at the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. "The momentum is now. I don't know if you can restart this next year."

Critics of the bill are wary about what lies ahead, even though the dicey political situation probably favors their side.

"But it's not dead," sighed Mike Hardiman, lobbyist for the American Lands Rights Association that regards the legislation as a taxpayer rip-off and an assault on private property rights because it authorizes $450 million a year in new federal land acquisitions.

"I think it will be fought right down to the last ditch," he said.