Post came in early this morning from Dale Bevington, National Forest
Protection Alliance.
/d
A number of forest activists and teachers woke up this morning to phone
calls from NEA president Bob Chase or NEA lobbyist Randy Moody. That�s
good news. It means that our calls are having an impact. The bad news is
that Chase and Moody appear to be doing their best to obscure and
sidetrack the discussion of this issue.
For those who have not yet called the NEA, or for those who may getting
a call back from the NEA, let me share my some of my experiences from my
conversation with Mr. Chase and what I�ve hear from other people�s
calls:
1. He may claim that H.R. 2389 is a good bill that doesn�t promote
logging. This is simply incorrect. I�m including a helpful short
synopsis on H.R. 2389 at the bottom of this message. As you will see,
H.R. 2389 has traded increased federal payments to rural schools in
exchange for big chunk of federal money being redirected away from
schools and into community-managed logging and other projects on
National Forests. As the synopsis summarizes,
�HR 2389 is not about decoupling counties from national forests, and
only incidentally about providing secure funding for schools and roads.
HR 2389 is about coupling national forests and the Forest Service to
counties by giving counties control over the Forest Service�s budget.�
The NEA is making �a deal with the Devil� here and they need to STOP.
Mr. Chase may try to convince you that you and the environmentalists
don�t understand the bill. Don�t let him divert you this way. If you
want to look at the text of the bill, the link is included at the bottom
of the synopsis. You will see that the bill matches the synopsis.
Whatever you do, don�t let Mr. Chase get way with saying that we don�t
understand the bill.
2. He may claim that S. 1608 is going to be revised into a bill that
simply decouples school payments from logging. He has said to me that
the environmentalists simply don�t understand the legislative process.
This is ridiculous! Groups like the Sierra Club have been actively
involved in the legislative process for over a century, long before Mr.
Chase came to Washington. S. 1608 is a very bad, destructive bill being
championed by one of the biggest proponents of the timber industry in
the Senate, Larry Craig. One would have to be incredibly na�ve to think
that S. 1608 will not continue to include language that promotes logging
on National Forests. The NEA is either being dangerously na�ve about the
influence of the timber industry over the legislative process, or they
are simply willing to accept this harm to our National Forests to
advance their own interests. S. 1608 is rotten to the core, and the NEA
shouldn�t be biting into this apple!
3. When challenged on these points, Mr. Chase alluded to me that the
environmental groups may actually have �ulterior motives� on which he
would not elaborate. Such a claim by Mr. Chase is utterly offensive. The
NEA should not be denigrating the environmental movement as the NEA
plays footsie with the timber industry. If he tries this line on you,
make sure he knows that such statements are offensive and completely
inappropriate.
4. In summary, the NEA leadership will probably try to obscure the issue
when you talk with them. The best way to avoid this is to keep your
message simple and on target. The NEA should only be supporting pure
decoupling legislation, not mixing school funding up with new schemes to
boost logging on National Forests. H.R 2868 is an example of a good,
pure decoupling bill. The NEA should be putting their support behind HR.
2868, rather than supporting a pro-logging bill like H.R. 2389.
Likewise, S. 1608 is rotten to the core. The NEA must withdraw their
support from this destructive bill and instead work on decoupling
legislation that is no way connected to logging interests.
Remember. We are having a big impact. The NEA Board of Directors is
meeting today and tomorrow. PLEASE CALL THE NEA TODAY. Bob Chase's
direct phone number is 202-822-7389. The fax number for the NEA�s
government liaison Mary Teasley is 202-822-7741.
***************************8
Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics
Following the Money in HR 2389
Executive Summary: HR 2389, the Secure Rural Schools and Community
Self-Determination Act of 1999, will have a
profound effect on the U.S. Forest Service�s budget and who controls
that budget. Ultimately, the National Forest System will
become self-financing with every spending decision subject to local
county approval. The role of federal appropriations in the
National Forest System budget will diminish over time to near zero.
How HR 2389 Works
H.R. 2389 guarantees to counties a payment equal to their share of the
state�s three highest recent years� payments under the
25 Percent Fund. The county payment derives first from 25 percent of
national forest receipts, primarily timber, with any
difference between those receipts and the guarantee made up from annual
appropriations.
The guaranteed payment to counties is made in two parts. First, 80
percent of the county�s payment is earmarked for roads and
schools, as provided by the 25 Percent Fund. Second, 20 percent of the
county�s payment (hereafter called the "20% fund") is
placed in a segregated county account for use exclusively to make grants
to the Forest Service to finance projects approved by
the county and a local 15-member committee.
HR 2389 also establishes nine "special accounts," one for each of the
Forest Service�s regions. As provided by HR 2389, and
"notwithstanding any other provision of law," the nine special accounts
receive all revenue that results from Forest Service
activities, e.g., timber sale, grazing lease, oil & gas lease, etc., in
which a county invested any sum, no matter how small, from its
20% funds. The nine special accounts are revolving funds; revenue from
projects financed in whole or in part by the special
accounts is returned exclusively to the special accounts.
In sum, annually counties will invest about $90 million in Forest
Service projects whose receipts will be deposited in special
accounts. In turn, the special accounts will finance further Forest
Service projects, subject to county and local committee
approval, whose receipts are also returned to the special accounts. In
addition, unobligated 20% funds will be deposited in the
special accounts. Special account funds may be spent without
appropriation authority from Congress, but counties and local
committees must approve every special account expenditure.
Effects of HR 2389
1. HR 2389 will diminish 25% percent payments to counties
When counties invest 20% funds in a project, all receipts from that
project go to the regional special account, "notwithstanding
any other provision of law." Thus, no project receipts will go to the
25% payment fund to counties. As a result, congressional
appropriations will be forced to make up an ever larger proportion of
the counties� guaranteed payments. However, this will
prove to be little hardship on the appropriations committees because the
Forest Service�s budget will be more than adequately
supplemented by the special accounts, as discussed in point 4.
2. Deposits to Forest Service timber trust funds will decline
Under current law, the Forest Service finances reforestation and other
post-logging activities from timber sale receipts deposited
in the Knutson-Vandenberg trust fund. Deposits made to the Forest
Service�s K-V and other trust funds will decline because
these funds will not be eligible to receive any receipts from timber
sales in which a county has invested 20 percent funds or in
which special account money provided any portion of the sale�s costs.
Unless counties authorize expenditure of special account
funds for reforestation the Forest Service will have to find
appropriated funds to replant trees.
Similarly, recreation fees, including fee demo receipts, will be
deposited to the regional special accounts insofar as counties
invest in recreation or fee demo projects. These fees may no longer be
spent, as promised, on providing recreation services to
those who pay the fees.
3. Counties can gain control over billions of dollars of receipts in
regional special accounts
HR 2389 permits counties to invest in on-going Forest Service projects.
If counties spread their 20% fund generously among all
Forest Service revenue-producing activities, then all Forest Service
revenues will be deposited in the regional special accounts.
Because counties exercise veto authority over expenditures from special
accounts, counties will effectively control billions of
Forest Service dollars. Insofar as hundreds of counties will be
experimenting with methods for investing their 20% funds, it is
virtually certain that at least one county will figure out how to
maximize its leverage in this manner. Other counties will soon
follow suit, particularly since there is no geographical limit to where
a county may invest its 20% funds.
4. As regional special accounts grow in size, congressional
appropriations to the Forest Service will decline
The Forest Service produces about $1 billion in annual receipts from use
of national forest lands. Half of these receipts result
from timber sales, with mineral leases, recreation fees, special use
permits, and grazing providing most of the remainder. It
would be a simple matter for counties to spread their 20% funds to cover
all or most of these activities, which will result in all or
most of $1 billion annually deposited in the regional special accounts.
In short order the special accounts could be acquiring and expending
sums comparable to the National Forest System $2 billion
budget. A predictable result would be the elimination of a like amount
from congressional appropriations to the Forest Service.
This will leave counties and local committees, who exercise veto
authority over expenditures from the special accounts, in
control of the National Forest System budget.
Conclusion
HR 2389 is not about decoupling counties from national forests, and only
incidentally about providing secure funding for schools
and roads. HR 2389 is about coupling national forests and the Forest
Service to counties by giving counties control over the
Forest Service�s budget.
A copy of HR 2389, as passed by the House, can be found at:
http://www.afseee.org/county/GOODLA_34F.pdf
The relevant provisions are found in Title II, especially Sections
206-208.
