There are many ways to skin a cat, and there are even more ways to
pass a bill in Congress. One way to do it is to have a voice vote
when virtually all members of Congress are absent.
The "Utah Schools and Lands Exchange Act of 1998" sounds
uncontroversial, and that is the apparent reason no one objected to
it. The story of how this bill passed the House and is now ready to
be slipped through the Senate without debate is a lesson on how the
game of politics is played.
In September 1996, President Bill Clinton, running for re-election,
stood on the edge of the Grand Canyon in Arizona and with the stroke
of a pen signed an executive proclamation making 1.7 million acres
of land in Utah a new national monument. His actions were clearly
political, and were orchestrated by former Clinton political
consultant Dick Morris.
Reaction from Utah Republicans and Democrats alike was immediate.
Clinton had acted without prior notice and without public hearings
as required by law, echoed every Utah politician. Elected officials
from Republican Gov. Mike Leavitt all the way down to the local
leaders in the area of the monument banded together. Before long
lawsuits and other efforts to reverse the action were under way.
TRENDING: Jihad against Christians is due to … climate change?
On June 24, 1998, the outrage ended when Rep. James Hansen, R-UT,
presented H.R. 3830 before only a handful of House members for
approval under unanimous consent. There was no debate. There was no
quorum. No one asked for a roll call vote. By voice vote of those
present the bill was passed and sent to the Senate without any
objection. If only one congressman opposed the action it would have
been stopped. Preparations are under way for a similar vote in the
Senate virtually any moment.
House members were told there was nothing controversial about the
bill. Senate members are being told that everyone in Utah wants the
bill passed. Formerly outspoken opponents are now mysteriously
silent, and some have spoken in favor of the bill.
When Clinton declared the southern Utah wilderness area a national
monument in 1996, controversy raged over the methods used to make
the designation. Clinton claimed to take the action based on the
1906 Antiquities Act, but opponents claimed he had not followed the
requirements of the act.
Further investigation revealed there was more to the action than
just political opportunism prior to Clinton's re-election. The land
in question contained the largest deposit of high-compliance coal in
the world. That coal was now in high demand because of environmental
concerns over pollution from coal-fired power plants.
In fact, the EPA has just announced stricter requirements for power
plants in 22 eastern states. Requirements which could be achieved if
they burn high-compliance coal because it emits virtually no
pollution.
The agreement exchanges all of Utah's claims to lands within
national parks, monuments, forests and federal areas for a total of
139,000 acres formerly held by the federal government. Utah
also receives mineral rights for 160 million tons of coal, 185
billion cubic feet of coal bed methane gas, rights to some oil, gas,
limestone, and tar sands, as well as a payment of $50 million.
The 1.7 million acres given up by Utah contains the Kaiporowitz coal
field, which is the largest, undeveloped mine in the United States.
It has approximately 62 billion tons of low sulfur, clean burning,
high-compliance coal. It is one of the premier coal fields in the
United States, perhaps the world, according to Dr. Lee Allison, Utah
state geologist.
It is super-compliance coal because it burns so cleanly that it
beats the requirements of the Clean Air Act -- a fact that should make
environmentalists very happy. It also has a high BTU rating making
it very powerful.
There is one other source of high-compliance coal. It is being
aggressively mined on the island of Kalamantan in Indonesia. The
mine is reported to be owned by the Red Chinese army and the Lippo
Group. James and Mochtar Riady, partners in the Lippo Group, have
been implicated in the growing Clinton campaign election scandal.
The Tampa Electric Company in Florida is under strict regulation by
the EPA and has been importing coal from Indonesia because there is
no domestic source to obtain it from. Other power plants are
expected to do the same.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said previously the land designated as the
Grande Staircase of the Escalante is the "Saudi Arabia of coal,"
because it contains the largest coal and mineral reserve in the U.S.
The coal now locked away in the monument has a value estimated to be
$1 trillion. The area containing the coal is ordinary desert with no
scenic vistas and could have easily been left out of the designation
for the monument, according to opponents.
Hatch was once one of the major critics of what he claimed was a
political stunt by Clinton. When asked about the possibility that
Clinton created the monument to close the mine and give the
Indonesian mine an advantage, Hatch was emphatic.
"If that's true, then my gosh. And if some of the other allegations
are true, that these people were giving special favors to foreign
lands for fund raising in a presidential campaign, I mean that would
be, that would blow any president out of the White House," remarked
Hatch on Talk USA Investigative Reports radio program. "I think
you're going to find great ties to the mainland Chinese, the
People's Republic of China, and I think you're going to find that
they (China) represent them (Lippo) in some way," Hatch predicted in
October 1996.
Morris claims he knew nothing of the Indonesian coal mine when he
helped create the signing of the proclamation. He says it was
purely political and designed to get the environmental vote for his
client.
Hatch and all other Utah leaders have since changed their criticisms
to compliments, and they have struck a deal with Clinton. Utah has
agreed to drop both pending lawsuits if Clinton will give Utah $50
million and a small amount of land now held by the federal
government within Utah borders.
"Unfortunately, a large share of this coal, not to mention the oil
and gas in the monument, belongs to the school children of Utah,"
said Hansen when he introduced his bill for unanimous consent.
"Thus, the pressure was on the administration to live up to the
promises made by the president to ensure the school children would
not suffer from the creation of the monument."
When Utah was made a state in 1896, certain land was set aside
intending to benefit the schools of Utah. Little benefit was derived
because much of the land was later enclosed in the many national
parks, national forests, national monuments and other federal land
holdings in the state. A battle between the state and the federal
government has been waged for decades over the unusable school trust
lands.
When Clinton signed the proclamation creating the newest monument,
he promised to exchange other federal lands for the lands that were
taken, including lands with coal. Hansen and Hatch were quick to
point out that would not be possible because there were no other
federal lands in Utah that contained the $1 trillion plus value in
coal and other minerals.
Despite their past concerns, Hatch and Hansen now actively support a
straight forward swap of land as defined in H.R. 3830. Hansen claims
the exchange is value for value, but others disagree.
Two Utah counties, Emery and Garfield, suffered a major loss when
their land was declared a new national monument by Clinton in 1996,
and they suffered another loss when Leavitt agreed to swap that land
for other federal property.
"We suffered a great loss. The people of Garfield County are feeling
betrayed," lamented Garfield County Commissioner Louise Liston.
"When the monument was created we were sacrificed, and with the
current land swap we feel like we were once again sacrificed. This
exchange has turned us into a federally owned territory. I don't
know how we can be happy with that trade."
The land swap is touted as the largest in the history of the U.S.
giving Utah 139,000 acres for the loss of 1.7 million acres to form
the monument. Utah's loss of 62 billion tons of coal on the
Kaiporowitz Plateau is to be offset by receipt of 160 million tons
of coal in the exchange. Critics say those numbers just don't
equate.
"It did not even come close to recognizing the loss of value at the
Kaiporowitz Plateau, absolutely that's true. The way they're (Utah
congressional delegation) perceiving it is that it was lost anyway
and this way they got something," explained Randy Johnson, Emery
County commissioner and board member of the Utah Association of
Counties.
The agreement also brings to an end a law suit filed by the State
Institutional Trust Lands. Formation of the monument impacted trust
lands that would have derived billions of dollars from the
Kaiporowitz coal. The suit was filed to protect the interests of
Utah school children.
The Utah Association of Counties also ended a suit intended to
protect financial interests and prevent a precedent from being set
in the way a monument can be formed by a president. Fears were
expressed by several officials that the federal government has been
considering the formation of at least three other monuments in Utah
for many years.
All of the 139,000 acres to be received by Utah's State
Institutional Trust Lands in the swap are lands that have been in
dispute going back 60 years. Those lands have been in negotiation
long before the formation of the monument. Obtaining those lands
compensates for some of the previous losses when other national
parks and monuments were formed, but not for the formation of this
latest one, agreed Liston, Johnson and Walsh.
Liston's county has a total population of only 4,000 and 98 percent
of the land is tax exempt because it is owned by the federal
government or the state. With very little tax base, Garfield County
can barely survive.
Emery County is 92 percent state or federally owned and has a population of
11,000. Coal-fired power plants and coal mines are the primary
source of revenue. The land swap will eliminate 75 percent of the
coal that can currently be mined in that county.
"What was once a 100-year supply of coal in Emery County is now a
25-year supply at the outset. They've traded here and traded there,
so we end up using all our coal now, which is good now but what do
we do in 25 years when we have no economic base left," complained
Johnson
Clinton was very clear about his motivations for locking up the coal
mine in the middle of 1.7 million acres of Utah desert. "I am
concerned about a large coal mine proposed for the area. Mining jobs
are good jobs and mining is important to our national economy and to
our national security. But we can't have mines everywhere and we
shouldn't have mines that threaten our national treasures," said
President Clinton shortly after he signed the proclamation in 1996.
"You do not need to create that monument to preserve the land.
There's almost 200 state and federal laws protecting it; thousands
of federal regulations; law suits that dictate what happens on
federal lands. You did not need to create this national monument to
preserve that land," said Liston
As many as 1,000 direct jobs are lost, plus a vast number from
support services that would have been attracted to the area.
Additionally, the school trust lands on which the mine is located
will never produce the much needed revenue that would have
contributed to the state's school children. Liston also pointed out
that the nation now suffers with the loss of billions in tax
revenues, and a further unnecessary dependence on foreign energy
resources.
"It would be terrible if the country with the most coal reserves on
earth walked its way into a situation where we had to go around the
world and protect our resources of coal. It borders on being
immoral," said Gen. Richard Lawson, U.S. Air Force (Ret.). The
potential is now even greater that the U.S. might need to send
troops to foreign countries to protect coal and oil, he added.
The Utah legislature was completely left out of the deals that were
made, and many were left with the feeling that the state was first
blindsided by Clinton and then blindsided by Leavitt and the
congressional delegation.
"There was no one else involved," confirmed Utah Speaker of the
House Mel Brown. "There were some double signals that went out.
First we heard this was something that happened quick over just a
few weeks. We also heard this was in the making for years. So which
version do you believe," Brown asked as he expressed his frustration
of being left out of the loop.
"It takes a real commitment on both sides for negotiations to work,"
said Rep. Maurice D. Hinchey, D-NY, when he spoke in favor of the
bill. "Above all it takes a willingness to face the realities of the
situation and to give up dreams of an ideal solution."
Hansen has a great deal of respect in congress, and used all his
political capital to assure passage of H.R. 3830. The bill was filed
in May, and news reports in Utah claimed it had no chance to be
voted on during the current session of Congress because it was filed
so late.
"We will do what we have to to get this one passed," said Allen
Freemyer, Hansen staff member. It was clear from the beginning that
Hansen had all his ducks in a row. No objections were raised at
committee hearings, and no amendments have been tacked onto the
bill. Somehow everyone got the message that this bill was not to be
messed with.
Opponents fell mysteriously silent. Shortly after the bill was
introduced in the House, a notice appeared in Utah papers that the
counties impacted by the new national monument would receive large
federal grants for several projects.
"The president's promise to negotiate in good faith has been kept.
It is now up to Congress to deliver the legislation without
substantive change to the president's desk," said Bruce Babbitt,
secretary of the Interior who negotiated the deal with Leavitt.
Hansen's staff said the message was delivered to Congress that
Clinton will not sign the bill into law if any amendments are made
to it, or if anyone attaches any other bill to it.
The bill has been sent to the Senate where it has been quickly
passed through committee and is now waiting to be called for a vote.
It is expected that the same quiet tactic that was used in the House
will be applied again. A motion will be made to bring the bill
forward for approval by unanimous consent at a time when very few
members of the Senate are present.
"We are not aware of anyone who objects to the bill being passed,"
said a staff member in Hatch's office. "It's really pretty simple to
understand and senators have a lot more to worry about."
Â