House Republicans in Washington opened an investigation into President Obama’s recent designation of three new national monuments, including Route 66’s Mojave Trails National Monument, in the California desert.
Obama used his authority under the 1906 Antiquities Act for the designation, doubling the amount of land he previously set aside and setting a record.
The San Francisco Chronicle reported:
“The broad and frequent application of the Antiquities Act raises questions about the lack of transparency and consultation with local stakeholders,” wrote Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight Committee; Rob Bishop, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee; and Hal Rogers, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee.
The letters request “all documents and communications referring to or relating to the selection or designation of national monuments under the Antiquities Act” from January 2009 to the present, the letter said, setting a deadline of 5 p.m. April 12. Neither the Oversight Committee nor the White House responded to a request for comment.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who requested the designation from Obama after similar legislation stalled for six years in Congress, retorted she and her staff held “hundreds of hours” of meetings with dozens of types of stakeholders about the monument proposals. In fact, about 1,000 people attended a public hearing about the proposed Mojave Trails National Monument in October.
The allegation of a lack of transparency also irritated a prominent Route 66 advocate:
“I put probably 20,000 miles on my car — just my car — going around the desert for the last 10 years” talking with people about protecting the lands, said Jim Conkle, a retired Marine who championed the inclusion of Route 66. Conkle said the letters from Chaffetz and Bishop, who represent districts in Utah, and Rogers, from Kentucky, suggest that “we were land grabbers, but we didn’t take any more land than was already under the stewardship of BLM anyway.”
The story also cited David Lamfrom of the National Parks Conservation Association. who said he spent seven years building ground support for the monuments.
That ground support must have worked. According to an November poll commissioned by Vet Voice Foundation, the proposal for Obama to declare the California national monuments enjoyed a 75 percent approval rate in California. Even 62 percent of Republicans in California supported the proposal. On the other hand, an alternate monuments proposal by U.S. Rep. Paul Cook (R-Calif.) was opposed by 66 percent of Californians.
And the notion Obama was abusing his authority doesn’t wash in the light of history. Fourteen of 19 presidents — including his Republican predecessor — used executive authority to declare national monuments since the birth of the U.S. parks system.
This announcement of the investigation by Chaffetz and his colleagues contains all the signs of “look busy” action — especially when the Congress holds a recent history of failing to pass laws and near-record-low approval ratings.
If you want to tell this committee to politely back off, here are the contact forms for Chaffetz, Bishop and Rogers.
(Image of the U.S. Capitol undergoing repairs by Ron Cogswell via Flickr)
Thanks for this story Ron. Given the popularity of our highway with the rest of the world, carryings on like this one are really embarrassing — not to mention dumb.
Good for them. Let them look into it. Clinton did the same thing in my area, and it did nothing but restrict land use. If it’s the people’s land, let the people decide. The fact that the Mojave was already a preserve, and that BLM already was a steward for the others, why was Obama’s executive action necessary if so many were for it? Bunch of bunk. Those links you have are only for the people in the districts of the Congressmen. I know a lot of people from Utah that will be writing to make sure they do look into it. Utah wants it’s land back too. Is this the new Route 66 political website? I said it was going to get political and I was correct.
Washington Times: In three weeks, Utah intends to seize control of 31.2 million acres of its own land now under the control of the federal government. At least, that’s the plan.
In an unprecedented challenge to federal dominance of Western state lands, Utah Gov. Gary Herbert in 2012 signed the “Transfer of Public Lands Act,” which demands that Washington relinquish its hold on the land, which represents more than half of the state’s 54.3 million acres, by Dec. 31.
I doubt that’s going to work, especially with the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution still very much in effect.
That’s not the point if it works or not. It’s the idea that the government has taken over half the states lands and it’s time to rethink this government grab. I remember the article you had on a certain person back in 2011: Some of the post you wrote:
”
His quest to create another festival and awards event seems spiteful. Advancing the cause of Route 66 and its preservation should be the goal. Instead, this seems to be retaliation, and little else. If Conkle truly has the welfare of Route 66 in mind, he needs to drop this idea and move in a more constructive direction for the Mother Road” . Maybe Conkle isn’t correct on this matter either.
Maybe the same could be said about the executive action of land that already has been set aside and preserved.
To point, does the government truly have preservation in mind (already in place) , or is it spite and retaliation and more control against the people that are rethinking this is not such a good idea. My husband and I just returned from a Mojave preserve trip, including Amboy..etc… We asked the people ( rangers, shop owners…what was the reason for this executive action. Answers: “I’m not sure”,, “More preservation”… “It’s ridiculous” .. “and isn’t it great”.
Here’s an example of what can happen. Remember the Caffee family?
Here is In part a letter written by J. Loren Caffee
Dear Senator Feinstein,
The purpose of this letter is to request your assistance to immediately reopen the operation of the Cima Cinder Mine located in the Mojave National Preserve (MNP). On August 10, 1999, the National Park Service (NPS) served us with notice of trespass and an order to cease and desist operations of the Cima Cinder Mine.
We pride ourselves on being a self-reliant family, however in light of this situation we feel very victimized by the inadequacies of the NPS. The closure of this mine is causing unreasonable economic hardship and burden (refer to provisions of 36 CFR Part 9, Subpart A at 9.10g) to us as it has been 78-90% of our income as well as seriously affecting the income of my elderly mother who is now 79 years old. Aside from our income, our faithful customers are being seriously affected by this unwarranted and in our view, unlawful action by the NPS.
***** In your support of the passing of the California Desert Protection Act (CDPA) you clearly stated that mining and grazing in the Mojave National Preserve would not be adversely affected. ********
The premise of the closing was based on a group that declared the desert tortoise was endangered.
Here was the finding:
The BLM also completed an Environmental Assessment (EA) in the same time frame. We want it to be noted that when the EA was performed by the BLM, there were neither signs nor indications that the desert tortoise represented a problem at or near the mine site.
So they lied? This is just one case
The entire case and the rest of the letter is available online. Please read the other side of the story and what can happen.
Thank you for all the wonderful articles that you provide on Route 66. It’s great, but don’t blame a certain political group for the way many Americans feel. Many people made a living on 66 over her course. They thrived, shut down and had rebirths. If the government takes over, it’s not going to happen anymore.
While I support the measures taken within the proposal to preserve this section of the Route 66 corridor, can you really blame Congressional republicans for being skeptical of this administration considering the precedents of overt power grabs and unconstitutional side steps democrats have helped Obama to achieve during his tenure in office?
Sure, in this particular aspect it seems the historical order of things has progressed as per the norm, which is totally fine. So I do think they are wasting their time looking further into this issue.
But, again, can you blame them for taking the cautious approach with all that has happened over the last 8 years? (Does anyone really need to be reminded with a list of scandals/events/lies that has plagued Obama and his cohorts?)
The Congressional approval rating is at historic lows, but it takes two to tango.
And, for the most part, the left never wants to follow; they always want to lead which is why they hardly ever agree to any compromises. It usually just ends with the right caving to their demands. So I can’t really blame the democrats either when they are so used to getting what they want.
However, when republicans show some spine, they get hammered for it.
In this case, though, you are right that there is a great amount of evidence there to support this popular bill and they should be more flexible. They should wait to show more spine in other, more pressing matters.
Having said that, I think you and I can see where each other stands, politically. (If I have the wrong idea about that, please let me know.) Though I know this is your own blog and you have the right to report the way that you see fit, my only request is if you would consider those of us whose views may be different from yours and offer a little more balance.
Other than that – Ron, thank you for all of the coverage you provide concerning The Mother Road. I love learning about it and all that is going on within the community. You really feed the Route 66 bug that I hope never leaves me.
Thank you for that Rob. Very well written and pointing out there are two sides to the story is a good thing. The 66 bug is a wonderful. I’ve traveled her many times. It won’t leave you and I hope you experience the many places and wonderful people along the Mother Road.
Thank you for this information. Apparently US Rep Jason Chaffetz doesn’t know what the “US” in his title stands for, and will not accept email from anyone not in his district. Maybe he should go back to being a state representative.
Ditto for Reps Bishop and Rogers.
The link given in the original post was the Utah state district link. They also have a Washington address that anyone can write to and a phone number also.
For Jason Chaffetz:
2236 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-7751
Hope that helps. The others are easy to find also.
I’m with Krissy. The Federal government destroys everything it touches. The site has sided with BLM, which they apparently haven’t noticed the recent landgrabs happening. If I’d known what a left wing site this was I wouldn’t have subscribed. Clinton stole a whole bunch of private land in the name of the Feds, too.
I’m very sad that this site has chosen this venue for taking sides. I know quite a few others that enjoy this Route 66 “news” site are very disappointed too. We all should know that reporting “news” should be unbiased, but since it’s gone there…. well anyway, I hope it will stop with this article so we can all enjoy and get back to trucking along the Mother Road.
This site is a Route 66 advocacy site. So, yes, there is a bias to taking a side to ensure Route 66 continues to thrive, since it’s the reason this site exists.
There are a lot of 66 “advocates” that don’t get political and take sides. I don’t think starting an article with how unpopular Congress is , then attacking Republicans in particular really is advocating anything. It’s a biased political opinion. An oversight committee is elected to do just that. Making sure there is no over reach. Why do that in that manner?
Route 66 has survived long before the internet and political advocates were invented by Al Gore. :), and she will long after political advocates no matter what side you are on are long gone.
Mom and Pop are being driven out by the “Hi, I’m from the government and I’m here to help” kind.
So sad.