Legislation currently pending in the U.S. Senate would, if allowed to become law, gut the Antiquities Act that so many presidents have used to preserve and protect valuable landscapes and historical settings, according to the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees.
The measure is being considered as an amendment to the Farm Bill on the Senate floor and should be opposed by anyone who cares about the special places that are part of the National Park System, according to the Park Service retirees.
The bill's language would gut the Antiquities Act, which was used by past presidents to set aside places such as Grand Canyon, Grand Teton, Olympic, Carlsbad Caverns and Acadia national parks.
“Some of this nation’s most loved parks were first set aside and protected as national monuments and were later legislated by the Congress into national parks," said Maureen Finnerty, chair of the Coalition's Executive Council. "The modification to the Antiquities Act would require that any presidential proclamation be approved by the governor and the legislature in the state in which the potential monument would be established. Such a requirement would essentially render the Antiquities Act meaningless as such accord rarely exists.
"Moreover, the president can only employ the provisions of the Act on lands already owned by the people of the United States. It cannot be used on state or privately-owned lands," she added.
Additionally, the group says, H.R. 4089 could open up many areas of the National Park System to hunting, trapping, and recreational shooting. Most national park sites are closed to such activities in the interests of public safety, visitor enjoyment and resource protection. The House defeated an amendment to the bill that would have specifically excluded all the 397 units of the National Park System from these activities, which are already legal and appropriate on millions of acres of other public lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management.
“NPS has long governed units of the National Park System based on the principle that hunting, trapping, collecting specimens and other uses that extract natural resources from park area ecosystems are not allowed, unless Congress has clearly authorized such activities," said former Glacier Bay National Park Superintendent Cherry Payne, a member of the Coalition's Executive Council. "This longstanding principle has been confirmed by the courts.
"H.R 4089 would eliminate this principle because it would recognize that hunting, trapping, fishing and collecting are to be affirmatively supported and facilitated on all federal lands," she added. "As a result, H.R. 4089 would stand NPS management policy on its head, creating a presumption that consumptive uses are the norm, and must be allowed unless expressly prohibited.”
Comments
Yes Lee - that is what it says. It can enact all laws necessary to carry out the the enumerated powers. Providing public education or regulating energy are NOT enumerated powers.
May I suggest you refer to Federalist Paper 41.
Obviously you didn't read it. The Federalist Papers were written by those in favor of the constitution. Federalist 41 was written by James Madision (the father of the Constitution). It was written in response to concerns that some language in the Constitition could be interpreted too broadly - i.e. giving the government too much power. Madison assured the public that was not the case and the powers were limted to those specifically listed in Article 1 section 8. Public education and regulating energy (among many others now being practice by the feds) were not part of the enumerated powers. In other words he did agree. The federal government was to be limited.
Riiiiggghhht. That's why they are still consitutional.
That's obviously not how constituionality works. It has to specifically violate the Consitution to be unconstitutional. So, where do these specifically violate the Consitution?
Which proves only that even our Founding Fathers didn't agree. One of the wonders of democracy is that we can disagree and yet still function. In fact, part of the genius of our Founding Fathers and our Constitution was that they were wise enough to realize that neither this document nor any other could stand the test of time without allowances for change. They provided mechanism for future generations to make decisions and to amend based on evolving conditions. The portion I cited above is evidence of their wisdom and genius.
Have a nice day.
And yes Lee the founding fathers were wise enough to provide a mechinism for future generations to amend. Its formulated in Article 5 and has been used 27 times. Never has it been used to put the government in the business of public education or energy regulation.
What did you teach? We know it wasn't math and it is increasingly obvious it wasn't history or social studies either.
The federal government was granted specific powers by the Constitution - and only those powers. A fact that was reiiterated by the 10th amendment. Anything it does outside of those specfic powers is unconstitutional.
It is amazing how oblivious so many of today's citizen are of the basic principles underwhich our nation was founded.
Right, that's how the Supreme Court operates. Because progressives are huge fans of Bush v. Gore and Citizens United.
Furthermore, conservatives have had plenty of opportunities to eliminate those departments wihtout even having to bring in the consitutionality of them. George H.W. Bush explicitly campaigned on eliminating the D of Ed! What happened?
The Department of Ed can be argued as consitutional on a variety of "bases," including even the Commerce clause. The point is, once again, that because a given law can be justified on a variety graounds, it must explicity violate part of the Consitution to be unconstitutional.