Young move excludes Alaska from environmental program

Some Democrats on the House Natural Resources Committee are frustrated over a move by Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) to exclude his state from a federal program designed to preserve coastal land.

Young’s effort to carve out an Alaska exception from the program also had the effect of excluding Oregon, Maine and Minnesota.

{mosads}That surprised members from those states, who wanted to take advantage of a program that provides federal matching grants to coastal and Great Lakes states so that they can purchase environmentally sensitive land.

Young, who has a history of opposing environmental bills, worked with retiring Rep. Jim Saxton (R-N.J.) and the Democratic chairman of the committee to carve out the exemption.

“Don Young and Nick Rahall [W.Va.] worked out some kind of a deal that would prohibit states from participating that want to participate,” said Rep. Peter DeFazio (D), a member of the Natural Resources panel whose district includes the majority of the Oregon coast. “We have a problem, because unless it’s changed, we can’t apply for the grants.”

Saxton’s bill, the Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Program (CELP), creates a formal grant program for saving coastal land. Funds previously were allocated through individual earmarks. Federal law requires the grants to be matched dollar-for-dollar with non-federal funds.

The amendment backed by Young stipulates that only states with coastal populations “with at least 85 people per square mile” can apply for the grants. It was approved by voice vote last week during a committee markup after Rahall told Saxton he would support the change.

Members only learned of the amendment at the markup, and are trying to figure out its impact during the July 4 recess. DeFazio said he and other members did not realize how it would affect their states when they voted.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which administers the program, only determined this week that it would exclude not only Alaska, but Oregon, Maine and Minnesota.

Andrea Geiger, the Coastal States Organization (CSO) director of government affairs, said the move unnerved her organization and several states and territories, which initially thought they could be excluded from the program.

“Both Republicans and Democrats in the affected states have been upset, as have the governors’ offices,” said Geiger, whose nonprofit represents the interests of governors of 35 coastal states and U.S. territories.

“It was a surprise and a shock. No one was really prepared for the language or understood the language enough to know what they were passing. That led me to believe that no one had seen the language prior to the markup.”

Members were unaware of the amendment partly because it was not included in information packets handed out in advance of the markup. It wasn’t included because Saxton did not think he would offer it.

Initially, Saxton had told Young he would offer the amendment himself. Days before the markup, however, Democratic staffers told Saxton that Democrats on the larger panel would not support any amendments aimed at limiting state participation, according to several sources on both sides of the aisle.

Without Democratic support, Saxton saw no way to pass the amendment and decided not to offer it or include it in the packets of information. The next day, however, Rahall surprised Saxton by agreeing to vote for the change Young wanted.

Young’s spokeswoman, Meredith Kenny, acknowledged that the amendment was not going to be offered as of Tuesday night, but said Saxton changed his mind after a meeting with Young and Rahall.

“The decision to insert it was made after a brief members’ meeting between Mr. Saxton, Mr. Rahall and Mr. Young directly before the markup, as happens quite frequently in any committee,” she said in a written statement. “Nothing nefarious went on here. If the Democratic staffers have an issue with the way this amendment was introduced, they should take it up with their chairman, who gave it the go-ahead.”

Rahall has since assured angry lawmakers that the provision excluding these states will be changed before any further action is taken on the overall measure.

A committee spokeswoman would not say how this would be done or whether Alaska still would be excluded. She also said Rahall offered his support for the amendment out of courtesy to Saxton, but declined to comment when asked whether it was really a favor for Young, who was pushing it behind the scenes.

“As a courtesy to Mr. Saxton, the chairman accepted the amendment; however, we understand that there are problems with that amendment,” she said. “Those problems will be worked out before there is any further action on the legislation.”

Saxton, who wants to see CELP passed and signed into law before he leaves Congress at the end of the session, would not discuss private negotiations on the bill.

“My hope was to get the bill reported out of committee, and there are only two working months to do it,” he said.