Wes Vernon
Friday, Aug. 24, 2001

As NewsMax has previously reported, two powerful committee chairmen, Reps. Don Young, R-Alaska, and Billy Tauzin, R-La., have been using strong-arm tactics to stifle dissent on CARA, H.R.701.

Small property owners see it as a threat to their livelihood and way of life and as a potential weapon in the hands of government bureaucrats and environmentalist left-wingers. The money would go to state and local governments to buy up private property for a perceived "public benefit,” as seen by leftist interest groups.

The measure has 220 sponsors, actually two more than Young and Tauzin would need to force the bill out onto the floor for debate, bypassing the House leaders, assuming it comes to that. They are using their clout as chairmen of pork-dispensing committees to corral the support of their colleagues. Their two states, Alaska and Louisiana, would derive a little more than half of the more than $45 billion to handed out over 15 years.

But House leaders are actively using their own clout to twist some arms too.

For one thing, they have reminded Young that they gave him the vote he wanted on another bill, the Railroad Retirement Act. Now they’re saying, in effect, he owes them one. Top leaders want the Alaskan to extricate them from this party-splitting keg of political dynamite. But of course, there’s more to it than that.

"This thing would be a blow to the budget,” a leadership staffer told NewsMax. And they are trying to get Young and Tauzin to back off, if nothing else, for the good of the president and the Republican Party, which is split down the middle on CARA.

President Bush can hardly vow to hold the line on "government waste” and chastise the Democrats as "big spenders,” as he is doing, and then sign on to a bill that would eat away at the so-called surplus. The Democrats are already blaming him for the "surplus" being smaller than projected, notwithstanding that it remains one of the largest surpluses, if not the largest in history (not taking into account, of course, the $5.7 trillion national debt).

The Democrats are united in support of CARA, largely in deference to their high-spending allies among left-wing special interests, including earth-worshippers in the "environmentalist” community. But that won’t stop them from blaming the president if the bill becomes law and reduces the money available for spending.

Further, the conservative leaders of the House have an ideological problem with CARA, believing its anti-property bias goes against the Republican grain. They fear that the huge red heartland "Bush Country” drawn on the maps of the 2000 election will be "Bush Country” no more. Not if angry farmers, ranchers and other rural property owners hang the results of CARA around the necks of the GOP establishment.

The GOP House leaders are pleased that CARA opponents are circulating a letter that Rep. Richard Pombo R-Calif. entered into the record of the July 25 hearing of the House Resources Committee. That was the session at which the panel voted to send CARA to the full House.

The letter was written by G. Ray Arnett, who served Gov. Ronald Reagan, first as director of the California Department of Fish and Game, and later in Washington as assistant interior secretary for fish, wildlife and parks in the administration of then-President Reagan.

Arnett says CARA is "a disaster for property owners,” recalling that Sen. Don Nickles, R-Okla., has referred to its claims of protecting property owners as "a head fake.”

"Every owner of a ranch, farm, woodlot or game preserve will be at risk of being targeted by government agencies working in tandem with environmental, anti-hunting and animal rights pressure groups,” Arnett predicts.

And hunters? The days of engaging in their favorite sport may be numbered under CARA, as the longtime Reagan aide sees it. Federal and state agencies will acquire "lands historically and currently used for sport hunting, fishing and trapping. This will subject the property’s sporting use to the whim of … bureaucracies that are increasingly hostile to sport hunting, fishing, trapping and firearms ownership.”

The latter consideration is one reason why there is considerable puzzlement over the National Rifle Association’s support for CARA. NRA spokesmen say it would be "good for the wildlife.” Arnett himself has served on the NRA’s board and is a former executive vice president of that gun-rights group. He is also a former president of the National Wildlife Federation.

Further, to add fiscal ammunition to the House leadership’s budget arguments against CARA, Arnett says it "will interfere with the Bush-Cheney administration’s plans to reduce the multibillion-dollar maintenance backlog in the National Park Service and other federal agencies.”

CARA includes a provision for "payment in lieu of taxes,” which Arnett sees as "the fiscal equivalent of a thirsty man drinking salt water.” It won’t come close to replacing lost tax revenue, he charges.

Young and Tauzin show no sign of backing down. "You don’t retreat when you’re winning,” a staffer with the pro-CARA forces told NewsMax.com.

So there will be a battle between the House leaders and two of their most powerful chairmen. A battle of the Titans. Capitol Hill watchers will want a front-row seat for this political show.

A product that might interest you:
Find out the truth about communists in America