January 31st, 2007

Westerners take pre-emptive strike at land-sales-for-schools concept

A bipartisan group of Western lawmakers are working overtime to secure funding to reauthorize a multibillion-dollar program that compensates states and counties for the loss of logging-related revenue from national forests.

But they are also prepared to reject any attempt to resurrect a controversial effort to sell national forest land in exchange for those funds.

Last February, the Bush administration proposed selling up to 300,000 acres of national forests for an $800 million reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act, a proposal that outraged some members of Congress and drew attention away from the underlying program. As the administration prepares its fiscal 2008 budget rollout for Monday, sources on and off the Hill indicate a second land sales plan is in the offing.

Senators who support reauthorizing the county payments bill said a land sales plan would be dead on arrival, just like last year.

"It won't have any more support this time than last time," said Senate Public Lands and Forests Subcommittee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

"Last year's plan went over like a lead balloon," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the chairwoman of the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee.

"It might be an option in their mind but not in Congress' mind," added Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho). "You're not going to find any takers on the idea."

For his part, Agriculture Undersecretary Mark Rey declined to discuss the issue. "It's going to be part of the president's budget, so we'll talk about it Monday," Rey said yesterday.

Asked if the plan would be different from last year's, Rey said, "That would cause me to talk about the president's budget before it's released."

Despite the lack of popularity in Congress, the administration's proposal never officially disappeared. In fact, it remains on the front page of the Forest Service's Web site.

Mr. Smith threatens a filibuster

The 2000 bill came as a result of the dramatic decline in timber sales on federal lands beginning in the late 1980s. Historically, the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management paid counties 25 percent of forest product revenues from federal lands. Fewer timber sales meant less money, and counties suddenly were searching for funds for schools, roads and other services.

Two Oregon Republicans are attempting to draw attention to the potential effect the cutoff of funds -- the final checks went out last month -- would have.

Sen. Gordon Smith wants a one-year extension, and yesterday threatened to filibuster the continuing resolution for fiscal 2007 appropriations if the money, which could be up to $400 million, is not included.

"I cannot allow the continuing resolution to proceed from the Senate if a full, one-year extension of the county payments safety net is not included in it," Smith said in a letter to Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) yesterday. "If necessary, I will employ my right to filibuster the continuing resolution."

On the House side, Rep. Greg Walden is delivering 18 speeches on the House floor, one per Oregon county, to educate his colleagues on the merits of the program. Walden said he will vote against the CR if the county payments bill is not included.

"Many counties are faced with choosing between schools and law enforcement, between roads and libraries," Walden said in a recent statement. "The layoff notices are being prepared. The consequences of the federal government breaking its promise to timbered communities will be dire. They are facing an emergency in every sense of the word."

New formula?

Although Craig and Wyden cosponsored the original bill in 2000, and teamed up on a bill that would have reauthorized it in the 109th Congress, Craig did not join his fellow Westerners this time around. The Idaho senator is working on a new bill with a new funding formula, to address criticism most of the money goes to Oregon, Washington and California.

Craig said he is "repositioning the formula to broaden the voter base" in the Senate for county payments but declined to provide details on the potential allocations or funding source.

Paul Beddoe, associate legislative director for the National Association of Counties, said if lawmakers have a secret stash of funds, they are not going to share it publicly until they know it will succeed.

"If an offset were identified, they wouldn't want to put it out there too soon to attract the attention of people looking for offsets for other good and noble purposes," Beddoe said.

For instance, last year Wyden and Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) introduced a bill to close a tax loophole for government contractors. That suggestion was first opposed by Senate Republicans and subsequently used for another purpose.

Because time of the essence for supporters, Beddoe said he believes a one-year extension is the more likely option. "At this point, I think a one year is realistic because given the political inevitability of having a conversation about the formula, doing that at knifepoint is not something we'd like do to," he said.