House passes bipartisan public lands bill; next stop president’s desk

WASHINGTON — Major environmental legislation sailed through Congress Wednesday while the nation's political leaders were stuck in intense negotiations over the contours of a fifth coronavirus relief package.

The bill would provide $9.5 billion over five years to pay down the National Park Service's maintenance backlog and provide permanent funding at $900 million per year for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which supports natural areas and recreation activities.

It was sponsored by the late U.S. Rep. John Lewis of Georgia, a civil rights giant who passed away last week.

The U.S. House of Representatives approved the bill by a vote of 310-107. The bill had broad bipartisan support, with 228 Democrats and 81 Republicans voting for it. Voting against were 104 Republicans, two Democrats — Reps. Cedric Richmond of Louisiana and Peter Visclosky of Indiana — and one independent, Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan.

All five Arizona Democrats voted for the measure, as did one Republican, Rep. David Schweikert. The other three Republicans — Reps. Andy Biggs, Paul Gosar and Debbie Lesko — voted against it.

The U.S. Senate adopted the measure in June by a 73-25 vote. Both of Arizona's senators, Martha McSally and Kyrsten Sinema, voted for it.

President Donald Trump is expected to sign the bill when it arrives on his desk.

"I am calling on Congress to send me a Bill that fully and permanently funds the LWCF and restores our National Parks," Trump tweeted in March. "When I sign it into law, it will be HISTORIC for our beautiful public lands."

The legislation drew plaudits from environmental advocates in and outside of Congress.

Gene Karpinski, president of the League of Conservation Voters, called it a "huge step forward to ensuring that every community has access to nature" and a "testament to the power of grassroots activists and the enduring popularity of conservation."

Rep. Raul Grijalva, a Tucson Democrat who chairs the House Natural Resources Committee, called the legislation a "major win for the American people" on the House floor Wednesday.

Rep. Tom O'Halleran, a Democrat from Sedona who district includes several national parks, praised the measure.

"In passing this legislation, we are acting to preserve these historic and culturally significant places in our state and ensure that they are maintained and protected so my grandchildren can show them to their grandchildren one day, just as I have been able to," he said.

Gosar wrote on Twitter that the bill was "a demonstration of everything wrong with Washington" because it was written by lobbyists for special interests and was "being forced through without the opportunity" for amendments. He said he had bipartisan amendments to require construction adhere to existing "Buy American" provisions and to expand Native American education and health care.

This is permanent legislation, yet we can't take an extra hour in the House to consider amendments to make this legislation better? Are we not allowed to amend this bill because House Leadership is afraid to offend the Senate?

— Rep. Paul Gosar, DDS (@RepGosar) July 22, 2020

"This legislation isn't a victory for America, it is a win for special interests. It is a loss for American workers and counties and it is a clear example of everything that is wrong with Washington, contrary to the victory lap taken by members today," Gosar wrote.

Utah Rep. Rob Bishop, the top Republican on the House Natural Resources Committee, objected to the bill, in part because it would add $17 billion to the national debt amid a pandemic.

The legislation also drew stiff opposition from oil-state Republicans because it would draw funds from fees from oil and gas extraction on federal lands and offshore drilling activity.

In an earlier statement, U.S. Rep. Garret Graves of Louisiana called the legislation an "activist, thinly veiled money laundering scheme" that would "accelerate the destruction of four million acres of America's Mississippi River Delta coastal wetlands."

The most outspoken critic of the bill in the Senate was also from Louisiana. U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy, a Republican, said the bill diverts money away from the Gulf, where people live, and toward national parks, where they vacation — an indication of misplaced priorities. Our country has much greater priorities, he said, "than potholes and broken toilets in national parks."

The bill was seen as a way to boost the re-election chances of lead sponsor Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado and Sen. Steve Daines of Montana — two of the most vulnerable Republican incumbents running for re-election, as rated by the nonpartisan newsletter Inside Elections.

Overall, eight of the nine most vulnerable GOP incumbents backed the bill. Texas's John Cornyn was the exception.

Land Tawney, the president and CEO of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, a nonpartisan group based in Montana that advocates for conservation policies, strongly supported the bill.

Arizona sites need more than $500 million for deferred maintenance projects, according to a 2018 National Parks Service report that pegged the national backlog at $11.9 billion.

An analysis by the U.S. Department of the Interior estimated direct spending and related economic impacts of the bill would add 100,000 "job-years" to the national economy.

Polls show funding the National Park Service and the Land and Water Conservation Fund are overwhelmingly and increasingly popular. In a Pew Charitable Trusts poll last year, 82% of respondents said they wanted Congress to pay up to $1.3 billion to address the National Parks backlog, up from 76% in 2018.

Though popular, the issue may have little effect at the ballot box, said Barbara Norrander, a political scientist at the University of Arizona. Voters are focused on other issues and, in a presidential election year, are likely to base their votes for Senate on their party preference at the top of the ticket, she said.

"Even in normal times, most Americans do not pay much attention to what happens inside of Congress," Norrander wrote in an email. "[W]ith the current situation, most voters would be more concerned about COVID-19 and the economy."

Some environmental groups are still wary of the conservation records of some of the GOP senators who voted for the bill.

"They voted right on this one, but it won't erase their terrible environmental records," said Hannah Blatt, the communications manager for the Environmental Defense Fund's political advocacy arm, EDF Action. "They have done nothing to stop the administration's relentless attacks on our air and water.