> American Land Rights Association - Land Rights Network
> PO Box 400 - Battle Ground WA 98604
> Phone: 360-687-3087 - Fax: 360-687-2973 - Email: <msn://@mail.mar@/compose.htm?NW=true&mailto:alra@pacifier.com> -
> http://www.landrights.org/
> Legislative Office: 508 First St SE - Washington DC 20003
> Phone: 202-210-2357 - Fax: 202-543-7126 - Email: msn://@mail.mar@/compose.htm?NW=true&mailto:landrightsnet@aol.com
>
>
>
> Competitive Enterprise Institute - "Son of CARA"
>
> See "Son of CARA" by Allison Freedom of CEI Below
>
>
> ACTION ITEMS:
>
> -----Have you called your Congressman to get his or her schedule for the
> next month.? It is vital that you do. Make plans to see him personally
> when he or she is home for an event. Or ask for an appointment at his
> local office to discuss the CONDEMNATION AND RELOCATION ACT.
>
> Every Congressman and Senator may be reached at the Capitol Switchboard at
> (202) 225-3121. There is a temporary FREE NUMBER of (800) 648-3516. That
> will also get you every Congressman.
>
>
> CARA VOTE RECORD - Don't miss this
>
> -----The American Land Rights Association has a color vote chart that
> summarizes the vote record of each Republican Congressman at the recent
> CARA Mark-Up. All the Democrats voted no on every amendment.
>
> Look how the Resources Committee members voted on the amendment that would
> have prevented any CARA funds from being used to condemn your land.
>
> See: http://www.landrights.org/OCS/House.ResCom.01-07-25.htm
>
> Don't forget you can follow CARA through the process by looking at the
ALRA
> Congress tab: http://www.landrights.org/OCS/tab2.congress.htm
>
>
> -----Take "NO CARA" posters and "NO CARA TESTIMONY QUESTIONNAIRES" to
your
> local county fair or other public event during August and September. Hand
> them out. Urge people to fax them to your Congressman.
>
> An easy fax to send is the NO CARA, NO LAND GRABS poster available on the
> following website. Just print it out off the website, and fax it to the
> Congressmen who are on the Committee from your state. Go to
> http://www.landrights.org/
>
> You can also print out an updated TESTIMONY QUESTIONNAIRE to fill out and
> fax to your Congressman. Go to http://www.landrights.org/ Hand copies
> out to people at your local county fair.
>
>
>
> Son Of CARA
>
> by Allison Freeman
> Competitive Enterprise Institute
> msn://@mail.mar@/compose.htm?NW=true&mailto:afreeman@cei.org
>
>
> >From the August 2001 Edition of CEI Update
>
> Summer is here! Load the station wagon with the kids, sunblock, coolers,
> floaties, and sand toys for the family beach vacation. White sand, palm
> trees, blazing sun, lapping waves, shimmying dolphins. This year, we're
> going to ... Ohio!
>
> Yes, of course, Ohio! If the Ohioan "coast" is good enough for 6.7 million
> federal dollars for "coastal impact assistance," it should be good enough
> for a little family fun in the sun-right? Millions of dollars for the
Ohio
> shore is just the tip of the terrible iceberg that is H.R. 701, the latest
> incarnation of the Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA).
>
> Congressional appropriators successfully squelched CARA last year, but it
> is rearing its ugly head again this summer in the House Resources
> Committee. And when I say ugly, I mean hideous. For the next fifteen
> years, CARA, if passed, would funnel into an off-budget trust fund $3.1
> billion a year from federal oil and gas royalties, money that was
> previously deposited into the general treasury.
>
> A third of this money would go towards coastal impact assistance
(including
> the aforementioned $6.7 million a year to Ohio!), another third would go
> toward Land and Water Conservation Fund land acquisition, and the
remainder
> would be artfully scattered among urban parks, historic preservation, and
> wildlife conservation.
>
> A lot of legislation is terrible, but CARA is especially horrendous in
> myriad ways. Ridiculous money distribution schemes, environmental
> degradation, private property usurpation, and fiscal irresponsibility ride
> forth from CARA like the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.
>
>
> Terror #1: The balmy beaches of Minnesota
>
> Title I of CARA provides $1 billion for Coastal Impact Assistance. The
> purpose of these funds is in large part to mitigate the environmental
> impact of drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), but OCS oil and
> gas leasing currently only impacts Louisiana.
>
> Nevertheless, to garner support, CARA doles out funds to any state within
> spitting distance of a sizable body of water. So, not only do all the
> coastal states get a piece of the pie, but the Great Lakes states are
> thrown in as well, getting their "fair share" and then some. The formula
> for distribution defies reason. Oregon gets $5.9 million a year for its
> long and lovely coastline, while Pennsylvania gets over $6.6 million a
year
> for its measly border with Lake Erie.
>
> Given that Minnesota, Indiana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania all receive funds
for
> conservation on their coasts, it's a surprise that Resources Committee
> Chairman Jim Hansen (R-UT) doesn't get funding for the shoreline of the
> Great Salt Lake. But this zany money disbursement is not, unfortunately,
> the end of the terrors of Coastal Impact Assistance. Money from this title
> can also go to special interest groups for "advisory" purposes or
> education. And the money is all carefully strained through the federal
> bureaucracy.
>
> States may use money only for 11 certain criteria and must write a plan to
> be approved by the Secretary of the Interior in order to receive any
> funding.
>
> Terror #2: Private property? What private property?
>
> Title II of CARA apportions $900 million for the Land and Water
> Conservation Fund (LWCF), half of which goes to the federal LWCF and half
> to states. This quadruples the Clinton Administration base-level funding
> for the LWCF. The majority of this money would be used to purchase private
> property.
>
> But the land acquisition does not end with Title II. Funds in the other
> titles ($350 million for Wildlife Conservation and Restoration, $125
> million for the Urban Parks and Recreation Recovery, $160 million for the
> Historic Preservation Fund, and $350 million for Endangered and Threatened
> Species Recovery) could also be used for land acquisition.
>
> Further, a state will not be apportioned any funds if it has not also
> "established a dedicated State land acquisition fund that is funded
through
> the State's budget process."
>
> The Founding Fathers said that to maintain liberty, private property is
> crucial. But government at all levels already owns at least 42 percent of
> U.S. land, and CARA will add to that. Where does it end?
>
> In Nevada, where the government already owns almost 90 percent of the land
> in the state, CARA apportions almost $13 million a year for LWCF
> acquisition. For the sake of adding to the federal fiefdom, CARA
threatens
> to throw liberty by the wayside.
>
> Terror #3: No Conservation, lots of Condemnation
>
> Along with throwing out liberty, CARA could trash some very precious and
> important resources. The bill calls for LWCF to target acquisition of
> private lands that are surrounded by federal lands. Such private lands are
> often the best or only providers of supplies and campgrounds for visitors
> to national parks, forests, and wildlife refuges.
>
> Agencies are likely to first target private landowners who have taken the
> best care of their property for acquisition, since such land will have the
> highest values for wildlife. Thus, CARA penalizes sound private land
> management by taking that land from the people who have been managing it
so
> well.
>
> CARA endangers that land, handing it over to those who cannot manage it.
> The Congressional Budget Office recommended a moratorium on new federal
> land acquisition by the Department of the Interior and the Department of
> Agriculture because of their need to improve the stewardship of the land
> they already own.
>
> Last summer's forest fires tragically illuminated the U.S. Forest
Service's
> inability to manage its land. The Forest Service rated over 60 percent of
> national forest and other federal resource lands as "very unhealthy" or in
> "deteriorating health." The estimate for the maintenance backlog, the
> amount that would have to be spent to get federal land into a healthy
> condition, ranges from $5 billion to $15 billion. CARA would not help the
> backlog, but compound it.
>
> Terror #4: Free Money!!
>
> CARA is poor fiscal policy. The bill creates off-budget, dedicated trust
> funds that are not subject to further congressional appropriation.
> Forty-five billion dollars would go toward this specific spending without
> future consideration of mismanagement, waste, or abuse.
>
> CARA is also new spending. The bill states that it is to "supplement, not
> detract from appropriations." States cannot receive funding when their own
> expenditures for the programs are less than in the preceding fiscal year.
>
> CARA will burden the American taxpayer. Although the money will come from
> offshore drilling, that money previously went to the general treasury,
> meaning that CARA would deduct $3 billion from the national budget every
> year.
>
> And the taxpayer will have to contribute to the state-matching funds as
> well. Furthermore, the acquisition of land will incur additional costs for
> maintenance and compensation that are not the focus of the legislation.
>
> Although taxpayers may say that several million dollars a year for parks
> sounds lovely, if they were given alternatives, they might opt to spend
the
> money elsewhere. But by setting aside a special fund for CARA, the
> government is stating that land acquisition is more important than
> education, social security, crime prevention, defense, and medical
> research.
>
> CARA sets a precedent for carving out un-reviewed, off-budget funds for
> certain interests. Who knows what special interest would demand similar
> treatment next.
>
> CARA attempts to please everyone, by throwing money in every direction.
> But the result is that it threatens everyone. So, spend a little money
and
> take this year's family vacation at a private ranch or campground while
you
> can because if legislation like this passes, in the future the sunny
shores
> of Ohio might be your best bet. Allison Freeman (msn://@mail.mar@/compose.htm?NW=true&mailto:afreeman@cei.org) is a
> policy analyst at CEI.
>
>
> CEI Website: http://www.cei.org/
>
>
> Please forward to your entire list. Thank you.