House GOP Wants to Make It Nearly Impossible for Obama to Create New National Monuments

The House won’t let President Bartlet — er, President Obama — get away with this one.

The Grand Canyon's North Rim on July 22, 2013.
National Journal
Sarah Mimms
Add to Briefcase
Sarah Mimms
March 26, 2014, 10:43 a.m.

The House will vote Wed­nes­day night to as­sert its au­thor­ity over the ex­ec­ut­ive branch, likely passing a bill that would re­vamp a 108-year-old law that would make it harder for Pres­id­ent Obama to de­clare na­tion­al monu­ments on fed­er­al lands.

The situ­ation re­minds us of an early epis­ode of West Wing (Sea­son 1, Epis­ode 8, “En­emies,” to be ex­act). Just as the Bart­let ad­min­is­tra­tion is on the cusp of passing a sweep­ing bank­ing-re­form bill, two sen­at­ors on the Bank­ing, Hous­ing, and Urb­an Af­fairs Com­mit­tee at­tach a rider that would al­low strip min­ing on fed­er­al lands that cov­er half the state of Montana. After ar­guing wheth­er to swal­low the min­ing pro­vi­sion or veto the en­tire bank­ing bill, Bart­let’s deputy chief of staff, Josh Ly­man, finds the per­fect solu­tion to pro­tect Big Sky: the An­tiquit­ies Act.

The 1906 law, used so clev­erly in West Wing, al­lows the pres­id­ent to uni­lat­er­ally de­clare large swaths of fed­er­al lands as na­tion­al monu­ments. Not long after the bill passed Con­gress, Theodore Roosevelt used the An­tiquit­ies Act to es­tab­lish the Grand Canyon Na­tion­al Monu­ment, which later be­came Grand Canyon Na­tion­al Park (seen in all its glory here). The le­gis­la­tion has since been used to cre­ate the Statue of Liberty Na­tion­al Monu­ment and dozens of oth­ers.

But the law is far too sweep­ing, House Re­pub­lic­ans ar­gue, be­cause it al­lows ad­min­is­tra­tions to pro­tect fed­er­al lands without con­sid­er­ing the wishes of loc­al cit­izens and gov­ern­ments, not to men­tion Con­gress.

The ad­min­is­tra­tion on West Wing is hardly the first to use the An­tiquit­ies Act to cir­cum­vent the wishes of Con­gress. The up­roar that fol­lowed Roosevelt’s es­tab­lish­ment of Jack­son Hole Na­tion­al Monu­ment in 1943 res­ul­ted in con­gres­sion­al up­roar and even­tu­ally a 1950 law pre­vent­ing the pres­id­ent from cre­at­ing any na­tion­al monu­ments in the state of Wyom­ing without ex­press ap­prov­al from Con­gress. There’s a sim­il­ar law on the books per­tain­ing to Alaska, en­acted after former Pres­id­ent Carter de­clared 17 monu­ments there total­ing 56 mil­lion acres on a single day in 1978.

Now the House is push­ing le­gis­la­tion that would sig­ni­fic­antly curb it. The En­sur­ing Pub­lic In­volve­ment in the Cre­ation of Na­tion­al Monu­ments Act, sponsored by Rep. Rob Bish­op, R-Utah, would re­quire fed­er­al agen­cies to do an en­vir­on­ment­al study and in­ter­view loc­al cit­izens who would be af­fected by any na­tion­al-monu­ment de­clar­a­tion be­fore the pres­id­ent can take ac­tion. It would also lim­it the pres­id­ent to cre­at­ing just one na­tion­al monu­ment per state in a four-year term and re­quire a study on the eco­nom­ic im­pact of turn­ing such land in­to a na­tion­al monu­ment.

Sig­ni­fic­antly, the law does provide an “emer­gency ex­emp­tion” that would al­low the pres­id­ent to pro­tect less than 5,000 acres of land in areas that face “an im­min­ent threat to an Amer­ic­an an­tiquity.” But the pro­vi­sion would only last for three years, un­less Con­gress ap­proves it for per­man­ent pro­tec­tion.

The bill’s op­pon­ents have dubbed it the “No More Parks Act,” not­ing that the qual­i­fic­a­tions for pro­tect­ing fed­er­al lands are so high as to be pro­hib­it­ive. Pro­ponents note that only Con­gress can cre­ate a na­tion­al park. This le­gis­la­tion deals with na­tion­al monu­ments, which are sim­il­ar, but have dif­fer­ent fund­ing and man­age­ment and lack the amen­it­ies of na­tion­al parks. They’re also, gen­er­ally, much smal­ler.

Obama is ex­pec­ted to veto the meas­ure if it reaches his desk, though the bill isn’t likely to pass the Sen­ate any­way.

Why House Re­pub­lic­ans are push­ing the bill now, more than 100 years after the law passed Con­gress, is in­ter­est­ing ques­tion. Many have poin­ted to Obama’s des­ig­na­tion earli­er this month of 1,665 acres of fed­er­al lands in North­ern Cali­for­nia as part of the Cali­for­nia Coastal Na­tion­al Monu­ment. But the House already agreed to that pro­pos­al on a un­an­im­ous vote. That bill was sponsored by Rep. Jared Huff­man, D-Cal­if., but had yet to gain any trac­tion in the Sen­ate, where the ad­min­is­tra­tion’s fed­er­al nom­in­ees and aid to Ukraine have taken a pri­or­ity.

The is­sue is not en­tirely about safe­guard­ing fed­er­al lands. Rather, the House vote is about the le­gis­lat­ive branch as­sert­ing its power. Obama de­clared in his State of the Uni­on ad­dress this year that he would “use [his] au­thor­ity to pro­tect more of our pristine fed­er­al lands for fu­ture gen­er­a­tions.” And as with many oth­er is­sues, House Re­pub­lic­ans are in­tent on pre­vent­ing the ex­ec­ut­ive branch from over­step­ping that au­thor­ity.

This post has been up­dated to cla­ri­fy the dis­tinc­tion between na­tion­al parks, which must be cre­ated by Con­gress, and na­tion­al monu­ments, which the pres­id­ent has the au­thor­ity to cre­ate.

What We're Following See More »
STAKES ARE HIGH
Debate Could Sway One-Third of Voters
5 hours ago
THE LATEST

"A new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found that 34% of registered voters think the three presidential debates would be extremely or quite important in helping them decide whom to support for president. About 11% of voters are considered 'debate persuadables'—that is, they think the debates are important and are either third-party voters or only loosely committed to either major-party candidate."

Source:
YOU DON’T BRING ME FLOWERS ANYMORE
Gennifer Flowers May Not Appear After All
5 hours ago
THE LATEST

Will he or won't he? That's the question surrounding Donald Trump and his on-again, off-again threats to bring onetime Bill Clinton paramour Gennifer Flowers to the debate as his guest. An assistant to flowers initially said she'd be there, but Trump campaign chief Kellyanne Conway "said on ABC’s 'This Week' that the Trump campaign had not invited Flowers to the debate, but she didn’t rule out the possibility of Flowers being in the audience."

Source:
HAS BEEN OFF OF NEWSCASTS FOR A WEEK
For First Debate, Holt Called on NBC Experts for Prep
5 hours ago
THE DETAILS

NBC's Lester Holt hasn't hosted the "Nightly News" since Tuesday, as he's prepped for moderating the first presidential debate tonight—and the first of his career. He's called on a host of NBC talent to help him, namely NBC News and MSNBC chairman Andy Lack; NBC News president Deborah Turness; the news division's senior vice president of editorial, Janelle Rodriguez; "Nightly News" producer Sam Singal, "Meet the Press" host Chuck Todd, senior political editor Mark Murray and political editor Carrie Dann. But during the debate itself, the only person in Holt's earpiece will be longtime debate producer Marty Slutsky.

Source:
WHITE HOUSE PROMISES VETO
House Votes to Bar Cash Payments to Iran
6 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"The House passed legislation late Thursday that would prohibit the federal government from making any cash payments to Iran, in protest of President Obama's recently discovered decision to pay Iran $1.7 billion in cash in January. And while the White House has said Obama would veto the bill, 16 Democrats joined with Republicans to pass the measure, 254-163."

Source:
NO SURPRISE
Trump Eschewing Briefing Materials in Debate Prep
6 hours ago
THE DETAILS

In contrast to Hillary Clinton's meticulous debate practice sessions, Donald Trump "is largely shun­ning tra­di­tion­al de­bate pre­par­a­tions, but has been watch­ing video of…Clin­ton’s best and worst de­bate mo­ments, look­ing for her vul­ner­ab­il­it­ies.” Trump “has paid only curs­ory at­ten­tion to brief­ing ma­ter­i­als. He has re­fused to use lecterns in mock de­bate ses­sions des­pite the ur­ging of his ad­visers. He prefers spit­balling ideas with his team rather than hon­ing them in­to crisp, two-minute an­swers.”

Source:
×