Shifting Winds in the Public Lands Debate
In Southern Utah, officials suspect that could mean less momentum for President Barack Obama's policies on issues such as public lands development and more leverage when negotiating with federal agencies over access and management.
"I don't think there's any one thing or one issue you can point to and say this gives us a silver bullet, but I think it gives us hope that we can start finding common sense solutions," Washington County Commissioner Victor Iverson said, adding that he thinks the major change could come in the way environmental rules are handled - by legislative deliberation instead of administrative order.
About two-thirds of the total land area in southwest Utah is federally controlled, which area elected leaders argue has stunted economic growth and unfairly limited development.
"What we hope to see is better stewardship of the land," Iron County Commissioner Dave Miller said. "That includes better protection of resources, better conservation of resources, but also better access to resources and better productivity of resources."
Miller argued that local leaders would be better managers of the lands they know so well without heavy-handed federal influence.
"The president's egregious acts violating the separation of powers has been ridiculous," Miller said. "Bottom line for America is he better step back into his limited role and stay out of the business of making law through executive edict."
Backers of more stringent public lands protections are balking at those arguments, though, pointing out that because of low midterm turnout and often slim Republican victories, the election should not be interpreted as a mandate to "drill baby drill."
Environmental advocacy groups are soliciting supporters for more funding help, expecting to fight a variety of bills aimed to chip away at regulations and relax the rules for public lands access.
"There's no question that the shift in the political landscape will have consequences for the landscape we all love," wrote Scott Groene, executive director of the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, in a letter to supporters. "The Senate will no longer act as the reliable counterweight to terrible anti-environment bills coming from the House — a role it has played since the 2010 election."
Republicans will control the Senate and have an even larger advantage in the House of Representatives, but Groene noted that they will not be able to count on the 60 Senate votes required to advance new policies past Democratic filibusters.
The fighting could be fiercest if the new Congress decides to attach those policies to spending bills, which are not subject to filibusters and are essential to the government maintaining its regular operations.
Environmental advocates are hoping the Congress works instead to find middle ground in key areas. In Utah, there is widespread support for more cooperative efforts like U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop's Public Lands Initiative, which is attempting to build consensus among local stakeholders in the eastern part of the state to designate some lands for conservation and others for development.
Bishop, who currently chairs the House Public Lands and Environmental Regulation Subcommittee, could be first in line to step in as chair of the more influential House Natural Resources Committee with the pending retirement of the current chair, Washington Republican Doc Hastings.
Bishop said natural resources involve a number of complex issues that will require complex solutions, but he hopes to start addressing some issues as soon as the Republican majority takes its place in January. He said he thinks Congress will take a more active role in deciding how public lands are managed. Throughout Obama's tenure, conservatives have argued that too many rules and regulations are passed down directly through administrative action without any debate.
"It's a much more expansive approach we're taking to try and make sure the legislative body plays its role," Bishop said.
Originally Posted By The Spectrum