+menu-


  • Category Archives Cut Federal Funding
  • Obama Plus the LWFC Land Grabs

    OBAMA’S PUBLIC AND PRIVATE LAND GRABS PLUS THE LWFC?

    Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) is a Federal program

    AS OF OCTOBER 2015, DESCRIBING IT (LWCF) AS A “SLUSH FUND”, ROB BISHOP (R) OF UTAH, CHAIRMAN OF THE HOUSE NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE, HAD BLOCKED A VOTE ON REAUTHORIZATION.

    The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) has been America’s most important conservation “SLUSH FUNDING” tool for nearly 50 years. Since 1964, the fund has …

    For nearly 50 years taxpayers income has been diverted to fund the (LWCF)?

    Who knew?

    THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF INCOME TO THE FUND IS FEES PAID TO THE BUREAU OF OCEAN ENERGY MANAGEMENT, REGULATION AND ENFORCEMENT BY COMPANIES DRILLING OFFSHORE FOR OIL AND GAS.

    ———————————————————————

    THE GOOD NEWS WAS…

    Oct 1, 2015

    Congress lets sun set on Land and Water Conservation Fund

    www.hcn.org/…/congresslets-sun-set-on-land-and-w
    High Country News

    Oct 1, 2015Congress lets sun set on Land and Water Conservation Fund … The sunsetting of the LWCF was greeted with dismay by conservationists and …

    CONSERVATIVE Sen. Daines (R)  told the breakfast meeting that reauthorization has “a higher probability if we attach it to another piece of legislation,”

    so they’ll be looking for some piece of must-pass legislation before the end of the year, like the omnibus spending bill or a HIGHWAY and transportation bill.

    ——————————————————————–

     CONSERVATIVE Sen. Daines (R) has also lent his vote to bailout the HIGHWAY Trust Fund, despite ample evidence the Fund is only “bankrupt”

    Hmmm…  Sen. Daines (R) said….
    because of Congress’ appetite for spending on projects completely unrelated to HIGHWAY
    ——————————————————————-
    Oct 1, 2015 ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE,
    CONSERVATIVE?   CONSERVATIONIST?  Sen. Daines (R) SAID…
    ATTACH THE LWCF RE AUTHORIZATION TO A  MUST-PASS LEGISLATION BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR….  The like the omnibus spending bill or a HIGHWAY and transportation bill.
    ———————————————————
    THE BAD NEWS IS..
    UPDATED Dec 16, 2015….Thanks to Sen. Daines (R)
    The NEW spending bill also gives the LWCF fund $450 million for the coming fiscal year, a near 50 percent increase over the previous level.
    ——————————
    CONSERVATIONIST? Rep. Grijalva (D) and CONSERVATIVE Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R) co-sponsored a LWCF permanent reauthorization bill

    Rep. Grijalva (D)  said…We should make it permanent, avoid prolonged budget battles and get back to the business of protecting our natural spaces.

    ————————————————————————–

    Find Your Park – Centennial (U.S. National Park Service)

    www.nps.gov/subjects/centennial/findyourpark.htm
    National Park Service

    Go to FindYourPark.com to share your heritage. Find Your Park logo … Find Your Park is about more than just national parks! It’s about the National Park Service …

    ————————————————————————-

    THIS IS ABOUT THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE…

    Land and Water Conservation Fund – National Park Service

    www.nps.gov/ncrc/programs/lwcf/funding.html
    National Park Service

    Oct 26, 2015 – find LWCF in your neighborhood … Current Funding for GrantsSally Jewell signed the 2015 Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) …

    ———————————————————–
    Some CONSERVATIVES, complain that THE LWCF  FUNDING allows the federal government to expand its reach by buying up private land and that it helps fund environmental groups that sell land to federal officials.
    INDEED… TO NAME JUST FIVE…
    National Parks Conservation Association, Environment America, The Wilderness Society, the Land Trust Alliance, and the Nature Conservancy.
    ————————————————————————
    Sen. Daines (R) has been a member of the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee as well as the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. He has also been a member of both the Commerce and Indian Affairs committees.   – See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/members/steve-daines/#sthash.WxWSWNP3.dpuf

    —————————————————————

    HOW THING WORK ON THE HILL

    With Bipartisan Support

    Americans’ current 11% job approval rating of Congress is its worst rating so far this year

    ————————————————————

    UPDATED Dec 16, 2015

    Conservation fund gets 3-year lifeline in spending bill | TheHill

    thehill.com/…/263424-conservation-fund-gets-3-year-lifeline-in-…
    The Hill

    Dec 16, 2015The reauthorization of the Land and Water Conservation Fund … is a sign of the ineffectiveness of this Congress and deep dysfunction in …

    The NEW spending bill also gives the LWCF fund $450 million for the coming fiscal year, a near 50 percent increase over the previous level.

    ——————————————————-

    WE ALL KNOW HOW OBAMA’S PUBLIC AND PRIVATE LAND GRABS WORK

    REFLECTED IN THE ANTI-PUBLIC-LAND AND ANTI-FEDERAL SENTIMENTS AFOOT IN SOME QUARTERS OF THE WEST.

    ——————————————————–

    (THE CENTER FOR WESTERN PRIORITIES CREATED AN INTERACTIVE MAP SHOWING

    HOW LWCF HAS MADE NATIONAL PARKS WHOLE

    BY PAYING TO BUY INHOLDINGS FROM PRIVATE LANDOWNERS.)

    ——————————————-

    NATIONAL PARK SERVICE INHOLDER WILLING SELLERS (LWFC) PROGRAM.

    Using diverted taxpayers income to pay for INHOLDERS private property.

    Congress regularly diverts…..

    ———————————————————

    WHICH HAS CONSERVED MORE THAN SEVEN MILLION ACRES SO FAR. LWCF PURCHASES WILDLIFE HABITAT, BUYS PRIVATE INHOLDINGS WITHIN WILDERNESSES AND NATIONAL PARKS, PRESERVES

    But action on LWCF was derailed by far-right opposition, led by Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, House Natural Resources chairman.

    The United States’ Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) is a Federal program that was established by Act of Congress in 1965 to provide funds and matching grants to federal, state and local governments FOR THE ACQUISITION OF LAND AND WATER, AND EASEMENTS ON LAND AND WATER,

    for the benefit of all Americans
    THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF INCOME TO THE FUND IS FEES PAID TO THE BUREAU OF OCEAN ENERGY MANAGEMENT, REGULATION AND ENFORCEMENT BY COMPANIES DRILLING OFFSHORE FOR OIL AND GAS.

    Congress regularly diverts most of the funds from this source to other purposes, however. ADDITIONAL MINOR SOURCES OF INCOME INCLUDE THE SALE OF SURPLUS FEDERAL REAL ESTATE AND TAXES ON MOTORBOAT FUEL.

    The program is divided into two distinct funding pools: state grants AND FEDERAL ACQUISITION FUNDS.
    (THE CENTER FOR WESTERN PRIORITIES CREATED AN INTERACTIVE MAP SHOWING HOW LWCF HAS MADE NATIONAL PARKS WHOLE BY PAYING TO BUY INHOLDINGS FROM PRIVATE LANDOWNERS.)

    ———————————————————————————

    Mapping the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF …

    wilderness.org/mapping-land-and-waterconserva
    The Wilderness Society

    The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) has been America’s most important conservation funding tool for nearly 50 years. Since 1964, the fund has …
    WHICH HAS CONSERVED MORE THAN SEVEN MILLION ACRES SO FAR. LWCF PURCHASES WILDLIFE HABITAT, BUYS PRIVATE INHOLDINGS WITHIN WILDERNESSES AND NATIONAL PARKS, PRESERVES
    FUNDS FROM THE LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND HAVE BEEN UTILIZED OVER THE YEARS ON PROJECTS BOTH LARGE AND SMALL. LWCF HAS HELPED STATE AGENCIES AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES

    ACQUIRE NEARLY SEVEN MILLION ACRES (28,000 KM²) OF LAND AND EASEMENTS

    CONTROLLING FURTHER LAND

    Though LWCF is authorized with A BUDGET CAP OF $900 MILLION ANNUALLY
    THE PRESIDENT MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS TO CONGRESS REGARDING FUNDING FOR SPECIFIC LWCF PROJECTS.
    But action on LWCF was derailed by far-right opposition, led by Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, House Natural Resources chairman,

    REFLECTING THE ANTI-PUBLIC-LAND AND ANTI-FEDERAL SENTIMENTS AFOOT IN SOME QUARTERS OF THE WEST.

    AS OF OCTOBER 2015, DESCRIBING IT AS A “SLUSH FUND”, ROB BISHOP OF UTAH, CHAIRMAN OF THE HOUSE NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE, HAD BLOCKED A VOTE ON REAUTHORIZATION.
    CONGRESS FAILED TO TAKE ACTION TO REAUTHORIZE IT.

    THAT MEANS THAT OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS PRODUCERS WILL NO LONGER BE PAYING INTO THE CHEST THAT FUNDS THE PROGRAM —
    CONGRESS. INSTEAD, LAWMAKERS WILL BE DICKERING OVER HOW TO DIVVY UP FORMER LWCF APPROPRIATIONS, WHICH WILL NOW BE GOING INTO THE GENERAL TREASURY.

    ———————————————————-

    Land & Water Conservation Fund Grant – National Park …

    www.nps.gov/lwcf/
    National Park Service

    Nov 3, 2015 – The LWCF Program provides matching grants to States and local … protection and maintenance of recreation resources across the United States. … of $42.8 million from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to all 50 States, …

    The United States’ Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) is a Federal program that was established by Act of Congress in 1965 to provide funds and matching grants to federal, state and local governments for the acquisition of land and water, and easements on land and water, for the benefit of all Americans.[1]

    The main emphases of the fund are recreation and the protection of national natural treasures in the forms of parks and protected forest and wildlife areas.

    The LWCF has a broad-based coalition of support and oversight, including the National Parks Conservation Association, Environment America, The Wilderness Society, the Land Trust Alliance, and the Nature Conservancy.
    The primary source of income to the fund is fees paid to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement by companies drilling offshore for oil and gas. Congress regularly diverts most of the funds from this source to other purposes, however. Additional minor sources of income include the sale of surplus federal real estate and taxes on motorboat fuel.

    Funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund have been utilized over the years on projects both large and small. LWCF has helped state agencies and local communities acquire nearly seven million acres (28,000 km²) of land and easements controlling further land, developed project sites including such popular recreational areas as Harper’s Ferry in West Virginia, California’s Big Sur Coast, and the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem in Montana, helped maintain Yellowstone National Park, and helped to build and maintain “thousands of local playgrounds, soccer fields, and baseball diamonds.”
    Though LWCF is authorized with a budget cap of $900 million annually, this cap has been met only twice during the program’s nearly four decades of existence.[citation needed] As of 2015 the program generated about $2.5 million a day from leases on offshore oil and gas drilling.
    The program is divided into two distinct funding pools: state grants and federal acquisition funds. The distribution formula takes into account population density and other factors.
    On the federal side, each year, based on project demands from communities as well as input from the federal land management agencies,

    THE PRESIDENT MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS TO CONGRESS REGARDING FUNDING FOR SPECIFIC LWCF PROJECTS.

    In Congress, these projects go through an Appropriations Committee review process. Given the intense competition among projects, funding is generally only provided for those projects with universal support.

    Initially authorized for a twenty-five-year period, the LWCF has been extended for another twenty-five years, its current mandate running until January 2015.

    As of October 2015, describing it as a “slush fund”, Rob Bishop (R)  of Utah, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, had blocked a vote on reauthorization.

    ————————————————–

    Congress lets sun set on Land and Water Conservation Fund

    www.hcn.org/…/congresslets-sun-set-on-land-and-w
    High Country News

    Oct 1, 2015 – Congress lets sun set on Land and Water Conservation Fund … The sunsetting of the LWCF was greeted with dismay by conservationists and …
    Oct 1, 2015 – But action on LWCF was derailed by far-right opposition, led by Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, House Natural Resources chairman, reflecting the …In July, Montanans celebrated the addition of 8,200 acres, known as Tenderfoot Creek, to the Lewis and Clark National Forest.

    MOST OF THE $10.7 MILLION COST WAS PAID FOR BY THE FEDERAL LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND, WHICH USES OIL AND GAS ROYALTIES FOR CONSERVATION AND RECREATION PROJECTS.
    But action on LWCF was derailed by far-right opposition, led by Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, House Natural Resources chairman,

    REFLECTING THE ANTI-PUBLIC-LAND AND ANTI-FEDERAL SENTIMENTS AFOOT IN SOME QUARTERS OF THE WEST.
    Bishop is floating his own reforms to the program, which include redirecting most of the money to state and local projects

    (IN THE 1970S, CONGRESS REMOVED A REQUIREMENT THAT STATES GET 60 PERCENT OF LWCF FUNDING).
    (THE CENTER FOR WESTERN PRIORITIES CREATED AN INTERACTIVE MAP SHOWING HOW LWCF HAS MADE NATIONAL PARKS WHOLE BY PAYING TO BUY INHOLDINGS FROM PRIVATE LANDOWNERS.)

    Congress lets sun set on Land and Water Conservation Fund
    The nation’s most successful conservation program is in jeopardy.

    Jodi Peterson Oct. 1, 2015 Web Exclusive

    In July, Montanans celebrated the addition of 8,200 acres, known as Tenderfoot Creek, to the Lewis and Clark National Forest. Most of the $10.7 million cost was paid for by the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund, which uses oil and gas royalties for conservation and recreation projects.
    But yesterday, the 50-year-old fund, widely viewed as one of the nation’s most popular and most successful land conservation programs, was allowed to expire completely. Despite broad bipartisan support, and despite a deadline that was no surprise to anyone, Congress failed to take action to reauthorize it.

    That means that offshore oil and gas producers will no longer be paying into the chest that funds the program —

    and now that the funding connection has been broken, reinstating it will be very difficult, especially given the tone of this CONGRESS. INSTEAD, LAWMAKERS WILL BE DICKERING OVER HOW TO DIVVY UP FORMER LWCF APPROPRIATIONS, WHICH WILL NOW BE GOING INTO THE GENERAL TREASURY.

    ————————————————–
    Earlier this summer, dozens of representatives on both sides of the aisle had signed a letter in support of the perpetually underfunded program, WHICH HAS CONSERVED MORE THAN SEVEN MILLION ACRES SO FAR.

    LWCF PURCHASES WILDLIFE HABITAT, BUYS PRIVATE INHOLDINGS WITHIN WILDERNESSES AND NATIONAL PARKS,

    PRESERVES cultural heritage sites, provides public access for fishing and hunting, and pays for urban parks, playgrounds and ballfields.

    (The Center for Western Priorities created an interactive map showing how LWCF has made national parks whole by paying to buy inholdings from private landowners.) And if put to a straight-up vote, reauthorization would pass both the House and Senate with bipartisan majorities.
    The sunsetting of the LWCF was greeted with dismay by conservationists and by many of the legislators from both parties who have long supported it, including Republican Sen. Steve Daines and Rep. Ryan Zinke of Montana. At a Tuesday breakfast organized by the Backcountry Hunters and Anglers in support of LWCF, Daines said, “I personally don’t think Rob (Bishop’)s view, and others have said this, necessarily reflects probably where most of the conference is now.”
    Rep. Raúl Grijalva, D-Arizona had some scathing words for the House in a statement: “You can see just how extreme some House Republicans really are when a popular conservation program with a spotless, fifty-year history of bipartisan reauthorization expires thanks to their partisan games. They can’t pass a highway bill, they can’t fund the government, they’re still struggling with a defense bill, and now they insist that LWCF funding has to stop.”
    Congress is authorized to allocate up to $900 million annually to LWCF, not from taxpayers’ dollars but from royalties paid by energy companies drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf.

    It rarely gives the fund anywhere close to that, though, and in recent years has sent about two-thirds of the allocation to the general treasury. As a result, the program has accumulated a $20 billion IOU, which Rep. Bishop cites as a reason not to continue funding it. But that money isn’t just lying around waiting to be spent, explains Mary Hollow, executive director of Montana-based Prickly Pear Land Trust, in the Helena Independent Record: “This is a paper account with nothing in it — there are only cobwebs,” she said. “The $20 billion has already been spent — diverted to fund other things … it’s inaccurate and unrealistic to think that if LWCF expires and we lose our authorization and revenue source that it would be business as usual.”
    So what’s likely to happen next? “This is a sad day for everyone who cares about our national parks and outdoor conservation, recreation and wildlife.

    Congress has broken an enduring promise to the American people,” said Alan Rowsome, senior director at the Wilderness Society and co-chair of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Coalition, in a statement.

    But the coalition, the outdoor recreation industry, other conservation groups, and Backcountry Hunters and Anglers aren’t just mourning the program’s loss — they’ll be kicking efforts into high gear to get the LWCF reauthorized as quickly as possible.
    And Congressional supporters are looking for those opportunities. Sen. Daines told the breakfast meeting that reauthorization has “a higher probability if we attach it to another piece of legislation,”

    so they’ll be looking for some piece of must-pass legislation before the end of the year, like the omnibus spending bill or a highway and transportation bill. He and Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, have also cosponsored legislation introduced by Sen. Richard Burr, R-North Carolina, that permanently reauthorizes the program, and Tester cosponsored a bill that goes farther, locking in the full appropriation of $900 million so it can’t be siphoned off for other uses.

    Rep. Grijalva and Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick co-sponsored a permanent reauthorization bill as well. When introducing it, Grijalva said, “Drawing out the uncertainty over the program’s funding every few years serves no one, especially when our constituents so strongly believe in the LWCF’s mission and value to the country. We should make it permanent, avoid prolonged budget battles and

    get back to the business of protecting our natural spaces.

    Anything less is a disservice to the legacy of Teddy Roosevelt and the generations of Americans who gave us the many beautiful American landscapes we enjoy today.”
    Jodi Peterson is a senior editor at High Country News. Follow @peterson_jodi


  • Forget About Draining the Swamp

    Forget About Draining the SWAMP

    The Government alligators have taken over WA STATE WETLANDS

    When you’re up to your butt in alligators, it’s easy to forget that the initial objective was to drain the swamp.

    (idiomatic) When performing a long and complex task, and when you’ve gotten utterly immersed in secondary and tertiary unexpected tangential subtasks, it’s easy to lose sight of the initial objective. This sort of distraction can be particularly problematic if the all-consuming subtask or sub-subtask is not, after all, particularly vital to the original, primary goal, but ends up sucking up time and resources (out of all proportion to its actual importance) only because it seems so urgent.
    ————————————————————————–

    Wetland Program Plan (WPP)

    Final WPP Now Available

    In March 2015, Ecology and the Interagency Work Group finalized the state’s Wetland Program Plan. The plan is a strategic tool, developed and implemented by the state, to articulate what the state seeks to accomplish with the wetland program over time. A strategy is necessary for an effective program that protects wetlands and strives to meet the state’s goal of no net loss and an overall net gain in wetland resources.

    This plan is organized around six core elements: regulation, monitoring and assessment, voluntary restoration and protection, water quality standards, education and outreach, and sustainable financing. These elements are critical to the success of the program. This plan outlines work for a six-year timeframe and sets a longer-term vision for future actions.

    >More background information

    Download the Plan

    State Interagency Work Group

    Many agencies play a role in the protection and management of wetland resources in Washington State, in coordination with local governments and federal partners. Current state partners include the:

    Program Matrix

    During the development of the draft WPP, state agencies on the Interagency Work Group, as well as other agencies with a role in protecting and managing wetlands, were asked to identify aspects of their existing programs that fell within each of the EPA core elements.  The information was compiled into a wetland program matrix.  This matrix served as the baseline from which this plan was developed.

    >Download the Program Matrix

    If you have questions about an agency program, please contact the agency. If you have questions about the matrix in general or the Washington Wetland Program Plan, please contact the plan coordinator (see below).

    Update on Past Planning Efforts

    State Wetland Integration Strategy and Mitigation that Works Forum Report

    There were two major planning efforts in the past that provided direction and context for developing this plan: the State Wetland Integration Strategy (SWIS, 1994) and the Mitigation that Works Forum report (2008). These guiding documents have shaped the state’s wetland program and demonstrate the importance and value of long-term planning and agency coordination. We will be posting an overview of the recommendations and implementation actions of SWIS and the Making Mitigation Work Report on this web page. For each action, we will include an update on the status, current priority, and if and where it is included in the Wetland Program Plan action tables. In progress, please check back.

    Contact

    Susan Buis
    (360) 407-7653
    susan.buis@ecy.wa.gov

    ————————————————————————————————-

    This is a major policy change especially with the NEW “all wet areas are connected” science synthesis proposed by EPA.

    ————————————————————————————————–

    Meanwhile, the ABSOLUTE WETTEST PLACES IN THE CONTINENTAL United States are located in the Pacific Northwest, with Washington State’s Aberdeen Reservoir taking the top spot with an average yearly precipitation of 130.6 inches (3317mm).

    http://usatravel.about.com/od/Weather/ss/Wettest-Places-in-the-USA.htm

    SO? IF YOU LIVE IN WA STATE, THE  ABSOLUTELY WETTEST PLACES IN THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES? AND  YOU’VE GOT ALL OF YOUR MUD PUDDLES, CONNECTED TO ALL OF YOUR WETLANDS AND THEY ARE ALL CONNECTED TO ALL OF THE WET AREAS ON YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY?

    WHEN ARE OUR WA STATE  ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES GOING TO START ACTING, REACTING AND OBJECTING TO THE FAIRNESS OF THE EPA WASHINGTON WETLAND PLAN FOR THE  ABSOLUTELY WETTEST PLACES IN THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES?

    Washington State Senate

    APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS DOCTRINE — LIMITATIONS … 42.36.080, Disqualification based on doctrine — Time limitation for raising challenge. 42.36.

    • Municipal Research and Services Center

      Feb 5, 2015 – Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs), The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine in Washington State, MRSC Report no.11 Rev., April 2011.

    ————————————————————————————————————–

    SO? THE EPA FUNDED/GRANTED (taxpayer money) FOR THE WASHINGTON WETLAND PLAN?
    WHO IS GOING TO FUND THE ECONOMIC DISASTER THAT FOLLOWS?

    Washington State Wetland Program Plan – Access Washington

    https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/…/1406005.html
    WorkSource

    Washington State Wetland Program Plan … VIEW NOW: Acrobat PDF format (Number of pages: 115) (Publication Size: 4391KB) Core Elements Action Tables

    ———————————————————————————-

    Summary of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Quick Links

    2 USC §1501 et seq (1995)

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) was enacted to avoid imposing unfunded federal mandates on state, local, and tribal governments (SLTG), or the private sector. Most of UMRA’s provisions apply to proposed and final rules:

    • for which a general notice of proposed rule making was published, and
    • that include a Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure of funds by state, local, or tribal governments (SLTG), in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year.

    If a rule meets these conditions, the agency must:

    • Prepare a written statement that includes:
      • the legal authority for the rule,
      • a cost-benefit assessment,
      • a description of the macro-economic effects, and
      • a summary of SLTG concerns and how they were addressed.
    • Consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and select the least costly, least burdensome, or most cost-effective option that achieves the objectives of the rule, or explain why the agency did not make such a choice.
    • Consult with elected officers of SLTG (or their designated employees with authority to act on their behalf) to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of proposed rules containing significant federal intergovernmental mandates.

    Section 203 of UMRA applies to all regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Before establishing a requirement that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments, §203 requires federal agencies to develop a plan to:

    • provide notice of the requirements to potentially affected small governments;
    • enable officials of small governments to provide meaningful and timely input for any proposal containing significant federal intergovernmental mandates; and
    • inform, educate, and advise small governments on compliance with the requirements.

     


  • $14.8 Billion for Restoration

    Sent to Representative Derek Kilmer,

    The bottom line?

    100% of the MARYLAND $14.8 Billion Dollars in storm water runoff tax dollars are MANDATED  to be spent on the “RESTORATION” of the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.

    IS WA STATE GOING TO FOLLOW MARYLAND’S LEAD? AND LEGISLATE AND MANDATE ALL OF OUR STORMWATER RUNOFF TAX DOLLARS TO  THE RESTORATION OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT?

    RESTORATION OF SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT? vs: NATURAL ENVIRONMENT?

    WHEN ARE OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE GOING TO PRIORITIZE AND START FUNDING THE RESTORATION OF AMERICA’S “SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT.”

    THE EVERYDAY, DAY AFTER DAY, VIOLENT HORRIFYING  “SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT” THAT AMERICAN CITIZENS AND THEIR FAMILIES ARE BEING FORCED TO  LIVE WITH  IN THEIR CITIES AND TOWNS ACROSS THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

    Is anyone in congress addressing the Restoration of “Law and Order” to stop the 2014 epidemic of violent crimes against People across the United States Of America?

    Please ask CONGRESS to legislate  American RESTORATION tax  dollars wisely, in a country of the people, by the people, FOR THE PEOPLE.

    Pearl Rains Hewett
    Just a concerned American Grandmother

    ————————————————————

    $14.8 Billion for Restoration
    Posted on June 10, 2014 9:12 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    In the state of Maryland, their elected representatives, legislators, passed a $14.8 BILLION DOLLAR UNFUNDED, EPA MANDATED Rain Tax. (for storm water runoff)

    100% of the $14.8 Billion Dollars in storm water runoff tax dollars are MANDATED to be spent on the “RESTORATION” of the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.

    The federal government and, every state legislature, provides restoration funding for the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, spending and granting billions of our American tax dollars.

    —————————————————————————————————-

    WA STATE STORMWATER RUNOFF LEGISLATION AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS?

    2009-2014 IT’S TIME TO PLAY CATCH UP.

    WHO KNEW?

    SINCE 2009 our legislators, elected representatives have been busy, busy, busy.

    THEY HAVE LEGISLATED, ECOLOGY (DOE) AND A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION TO BE IN CONTROL OF  THE TAXPAYERS FATE, FOR THE FUNDING AND COST OF WA STATE STORMWATER RUNOFF

    Stormwater Technical Resource Center

    The 176 PAGE REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE

    Water Quality Program

    Washington State Department of Ecology

    Olympia, Washington

    http://apwa-wa.org/Uploads/CommitteeFiles/Stormwater/1110009.pdf

    The passage of House Bill 2222 in 2009 set in motion the creation of THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER (Center)that would focus RESOURCES on protecting Washington’s waters through improvements in regional stormwater management.

    The Bill, codified in RCW 90.48.545, directs the state Department of

    Ecology(Ecology)“as funding becomes available… to create a stormwater technical resource center in partnership with a university, nonprofit organization, or other public or private entity to provide tools for stormwater management.

    TO PROVIDE SEED MONEY FOR CREATION OF THE CENTER, ECOLOGY SOLICITED GRANT PROPOSALS

    for a Center that would benefit stormwater management programs across Washington and support NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) stormwater permit programs.

    In late 2009, ECOLOGY AWARDED FUNDING to the City of Puyallup and its two primary associates: Washington State University (WSU) and the University of Washington(UW). Their charge was to convene an advisory committee to consult on the development and the overall administrative strategy of  a Stormwater Technical Resource Center.

    The ADVISORY COMMITTEE includes representatives from state agencies, local governments, the business community, the environmental community, tribes and the building and development industry.

    ——————————————————-

    THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER

    The Center has been established AS NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION.

    Center staff created a 5-Year Business Plan, (Appendix C), and has started to deliver the following services

    http://apwa-wa.org/Uploads/CommitteeFiles/Stormwater/1110009.pdf

    Ecology (DOE) is working on Funding?

    During the past year, Ecology (DOE) has met with staff from THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER, the Center, and the Advisory Committee to identify FUNDING strategies. While there is still a need for base-level support to grow the Center,

    FUNDING mechanisms for THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER, the Center, include COST REIMBURSEMENT for technical reviews, trainings, MONITORING and other technical resource services. In addition, donations, endowments, BONDS, conferences, membership dues, GRANTS and support from in-kind services and DEDICATED ACCOUNTS are all evaluated in the Business Plan.

    ————————————————————————–

    The bottom line

    100% of the MARYLAND $14.8 Billion Dollars in storm water runoff tax dollars are MANDATED  to be spent on the “RESTORATION” of the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.

    IS WA STATE GOING TO FOLLOW MARYLAND’S LEAD? AND LEGISLATE AND MANDATE ALL OF OUR STORMWATER RUNOFF TAX DOLLARS TO  THE RESTORATION OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT?

    RESTORATION OF SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT? vs: NATURAL ENVIRONMENT?

    WHEN ARE OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE GOING TO PRIORITIZE AND START FUNDING THE RESTORATION OF AMERICA’S “SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT.”

    THE EVERYDAY, DAY AFTER DAY, VIOLENT HORRIFYING  “SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT” THAT AMERICAN CITIZENS AND THEIR FAMILIES ARE BEING FORCED TO, LIVE WITH  IN THEIR CITIES AND TOWNS ACROSS THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

    This entry was posted in Bang for their buck? Restoration, Controlled by Non-Profits?, Cut Federal Funding, Diverting Our Tax Dollars, Economic Impact, Elected Officials, EPA Clean Water Act, EPA UNFUNDED MANDATES, Follow the Money, Goliath’s Restoration Consortium, Government Accountability, If it’s Federal IT’S LOCAL, Learning From History?, Legislated Economic Oppression, Politically Motivated, Senate Hearings on EPA, Taken by the “GRANTED”, The Money’s All Gone?, The We’s who WANT, WA State Dept. of Ecology. Bookmark the permalink.Edit
    The “RESTORATION” Shell GameIn the state of Maryland, their elected representatives, legislators, passed a $14.8 BILLION DOLLAR UNFUNDED, EPA MANDATED Rain Tax. (for storm water runoff)

     100% of the $14.8 Billion Dollars in storm water runoff tax dollars are MANDATED to be spent on the “RESTORATION” of the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.

    The federal government and, every state legislature, provides restoration funding for the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, spending and granting billions of our American tax dollars.

    —————————————————————————————————-

    WA STATE STORMWATER RUNOFF LEGISLATION AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS?

    2009-2014 IT’S TIME TO PLAY CATCH UP.

    WHO KNEW?

    SINCE 2009 our legislators, elected representatives have been busy, busy, busy.

    THEY HAVE LEGISLATED, ECOLOGY (DOE) AND A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION TO BE IN CONTROL OF  THE TAXPAYERS FATE, FOR THE FUNDING AND COST OF WA STATE STORMWATER RUNOFF

    Stormwater Technical Resource Center

    The 176 PAGE REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE

    Water Quality Program

    Washington State Department of Ecology

    Olympia, Washington

     

    http://apwa-wa.org/Uploads/CommitteeFiles/Stormwater/1110009.pdf

    The passage of House Bill 2222 in 2009 set in motion the creation of THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER (Center)that would focus RESOURCES on protecting Washington’s waters through improvements in regional stormwater management.

     

    The Bill, codified in RCW 90.48.545, directs the state Department of

    Ecology(Ecology)“as funding becomes available… to create a stormwater technical resource center in partnership with a university, nonprofit organization, or other public or private entity to provide tools for stormwater management.

     

     

    TO PROVIDE SEED MONEY FOR CREATION OF THE CENTER, ECOLOGY SOLICITED GRANT PROPOSALS

     for a Center that would benefit stormwater management programs across Washington and support NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) stormwater permit programs.

     

    In late 2009, ECOLOGY AWARDED FUNDING to the City of Puyallup and its two primary associates: Washington State University (WSU) and the University of Washington(UW). Their charge was to convene an advisory committee to consult on the development and the overall administrative strategy of  a Stormwater Technical Resource Center.

     

    The ADVISORY COMMITTEE includes representatives from state agencies, local governments, the business community, the environmental community, tribes and the building and development industry.

     

    ——————————————————-

     

    THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER

    The Center has been established AS NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION.

    Center staff created a 5-Year Business Plan, (Appendix C), and has started to deliver the following services

     

    http://apwa-wa.org/Uploads/CommitteeFiles/Stormwater/1110009.pdf

     Ecology (DOE) is working on Funding?

    During the past year, Ecology (DOE) has met with staff from THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER, the Center, and the Advisory Committee to identify FUNDING strategies. While there is still a need for base-level support to grow the Center,

    FUNDING mechanisms for THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER, the Center, include COST REIMBURSEMENT for technical reviews, trainings, MONITORING and other technical resource services. In addition, donations, endowments, BONDS, conferences, membership dues, GRANTS and support from in-kind services and DEDICATED ACCOUNTS are all evaluated in the Business Plan.

    ————————————————————————–

    The bottom line

    100% of the MARYLAND $14.8 Billion Dollars in storm water runoff tax dollars are MANDATED  to be spent on the “RESTORATION” of the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.

    IS WA STATE GOING TO FOLLOW MARYLAND’S LEAD? AND LEGISLATE AND MANDATE ALL OF OUR STORMWATER RUNOFF TAX DOLLARS TO  THE RESTORATION OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT?

    RESTORATION OF SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT? vs: NATURAL ENVIRONMENT?

    WHEN ARE OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE GOING TO PRIORITIZE AND START FUNDING THE RESTORATION OF AMERICA’S “SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT.”

    THE EVERYDAY, DAY AFTER DAY, VIOLENT HORRIFYING  “SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT” THAT AMERICAN CITIZENS AND THEIR FAMILIES ARE BEING FORCED TO, LIVE WITH  IN THEIR CITIES AND TOWNS ACROSS THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

     


  • Crack Down on Paramilitary Units

    GOP rep wants to cut funding for federal ‘paramilitary units’ after BLM dispute

    A Republican congressman wants to crack down on the proliferation of armed law enforcement units within the federal government, on the heels of the standoff last month between supporters of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and a federal land agency.

    Both sides of that standoff — agents with the Bureau of Land Management, and states’ rights protesters who streamed into Nevada — were armed, leading the BLM to back down for fear of violence.

    But Utah GOP Rep. Chris Stewarttold the Salt Lake Tribune that the BLM doesn’t need an armed unit in the first place. He’s reportedly looking at ways to cut funding for what he calls “paramilitary units” and require them to rely on local law enforcement instead.

    “There are lots of people who are really concerned when the BLM shows up with its own SWAT team,” he told the newspaper. “They’re regulatory agencies; they’re not paramilitary units, and I think that concerns a lot of us.”

    The bill could apply to a host of federal agencies, including the BLM, IRS and others.

    FoxNews.com previously reported, followed controversy over a separate armed raid by the EPA last year in Alaska, that 40 federal agencies have armed divisions. This includes nearly a dozen typically not associated with law enforcement.

    The agencies employ about 120,000 full-time officers authorized to carry guns and make arrests, according to a June 2012 Justice Department report.

    Though most would expect agents within the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Bureau of Prisons to carry guns, agencies such as the Library of Congress and Federal Reserve Board also employ armed officers.

    Among those with the largest armed units are the Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management and Park Service.

    A BLM spokeswoman told the Tribune that the BLM and Park Service had law enforcement on the scene in Nevada to ensure safety — and that, with just 300 officers covering millions of acres of public land, they already coordinate with local law enforcement.

    But Stewart says they should be able to rely on the local sheriff in these types of incidents.

    Other lawmakers, though, are focusing more on the armed militia members who showed up to protest agents taking Bundy’s cattle over a grazing fee dispute.

    KLAS-TV in Las Vegas reported that Sgt. Tom Jenkins, of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, said officers were concerned for their lives.

    “We didn’t show any fear that day, but I can tell you, we all thought in the back of our minds, we all thought it was going to be our last day on earth, if it went bad,” he reportedly said.

    Published May 01, 2014 Fox News


  • To Kilmer on Defense Budget

    Also sent to Senator Maria Cantwell.
    When things don’t make sense, I research them.
    I am asking that “You” as my representative will read and respond to
    my questions.
    Pearl Rains Hewett
    A concerned American Grandmother
    ———————————————————————————————–
    In Clallam County on Nov. 6, 2013 the Planning Commission received comments from Jim Podlesny and a Mr. Dunn representing the/a “Nature Conservancy Group?” in Olympia WA.
    Questions were asked
    ———————————————
    Mr. Dunn volunteered information.
    My understanding of Mr. Dunn’s comments…
    1. A military base in Calif. wanted to expand.
    2. Some action? taken by a Calif. based LAND TRUST
    3. Resulted in a NNL? settlement? agreement?
    4. When asked, Mr. Dunn denied that mitigation was part of the process.
    5. Federal grant money exchanged hands? for NNL? AND OR OTHER?
    6. The Calif. based LAND TRUST received a FEDERAL GRANT
    7. The money for the 150 acres in Clallam County is from a FEDERAL GRANT?
    —————————————————————————————————
    I verbally requested information from Clallam County (no response)
    ——————————————————————————————–
    That led to,
    “The Butterfly has Landed”
    Posted on November 9, 2013 3:41 pm by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment.
    On behindmyback.org
    ——————————————————————————————————-
    More research led to

    “Ask a Silly Question?”
    Posted on November 16, 2013 10:22 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment
    On behindmyback.org

    The Butterfly has landed? What does the expansion of a military base in Calif. have to do with designating 150 acres of Clallam County property to a WA State conservancy group as open space for an endangered Butterfly?

    THIS IS THE UNBELIEVABLE ANSWER.

    1.Compatible Use Buffer program proves powerful tool for Army …
    www.nationalguard.mil/news/archives/2013/04/042613-Buffer.aspx‎
    Apr 26, 2013 – However, a provision of the 2002 National Defense Authorization Act, later to be known as the Army Compatible Use Buffer program, debuted …
    ————————————————————————————————
    More research led to

    “Defense Grants Sue and Settle”
    Posted on November 18, 2013 12:23 pm by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment
    On behindmyback.org

    1. Under The Defensive Authorization Spending Bill
    2. To COMPLY with The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)
    3. Using the Army Compatible Use Buffer Program
    4. Under THE ARMY SUSTAINABILITY REPORT (ASR)

    5. THE US DEFENSE BUDGET GRANTS SUE AND SETTLE MANDATES

    http://www.klt.org/images/news/FtRileyPost_ACUB_103009.pdf
    ————————————————————

    “The Butterfly has Landed”
    Posted on November 9, 2013 3:41 pm by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment.
    Full text On behindmyback.org
    ————————————————————-
    “Ask a Silly Question?”
    Posted on November 16, 2013 10:22 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment
    Full text On behindmyback.org
    —————————————————————-
    “Defense Grants Sue and Settle” (complete text sent to Kilmer)
    Posted on November 18, 2013 12:23 pm by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment
    Full text On behindmyback.org


  • Reform on HR 3080

    REFORM OPTIONS FOR H.R. 3080 Congress should go through the Corps’ budget and cut out all those activities that could be financed and OPERATED BY STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS OR THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

    Given the agency’s long-standing mismanagement and misallocation of spending, it should be removed from those activities where federal involvement is not essential.
    ——————————————————————–
    CUTTING THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

    Chris Edwards
    March 2012
    Overview
    Two Centuries of Mission Creep
    A Pork-Barrel Machine
    A Legacy of Mismanagement
    Wasteful Projects and Faulty Analyses
    The Corps and Hurricane Katrina
    Reform Options

    – See more at: http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/usace#sthash.QAfBQM9V.dpuf
    THE FIRST STEP TOWARD CUTTING THE BUDGET OF THE ARMY CORPS IS TO END PASSAGE OF NEW WATER RESOURCE AUTHORIZATION BILLS. It makes no sense for Congress to keep putting new civilian projects into the Corps’ pipeline when the agency already has hundreds of projects previously authorized but not funded.

    Then Congress should go through the Corps’ budget and cut out all those activities that could be financed and OPERATED BY STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS OR THE PRIVATE SECTOR. Given the agency’s long-standing mismanagement and misallocation of spending, it should be removed from those activities where federal involvement is not essential.

    MANY OF THE CORPS’ ACTIVITIES SHOULD BE PRIVATIZED. Activities such as harbor construction and maintenance, beach replenishment, and hydropower generation could be provided by private construction, engineering, and utility companies. Those companies could contract directly with customers, SUCH AS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, to provide those services.

    CONSIDER THE CORP’S HARBOR MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES ON THE SEACOASTS. These activities are funded by a Harbor Maintenance Tax (HMT) collected from shippers based on the value of cargo. The tax generates about $1.4 billion a year and is spent on projects chosen by Congress and the Corps. But the federal government is an unneeded middleman here—port authorities could simply impose their own charges on shippers to fund their own maintenance activities, such as dredging. By cutting out the middleman, ports could respond directly to market demands, rather than having to lobby Washington for funding.

    Groups representing shipping interests complain that Congress is not spending enough on harbors to keep America competitive in international trade.
    But THE CURRENT FEDERAL SYSTEM ALLOCATES FUNDS INEFFICIENTLY, creating large cross-subsidies between seaports.

    The Congressional Research Service notes that harbor maintenance funds are often “directed towards harbors which handle little or no cargo” and “there is no attempt to identify particular port usage and allocate funds accordingly.”91 The Port of Los Angeles, for example, generates a large share of HMT revenues, but it receives very little maintenance spending in return. The Congressional Research Service further explains:

    Examining where trust fund monies have been spent INDICATES THAT LITTLE OR NO SHIPPING IS TAKING PLACE AT MANY OF THE HARBORS AND WATERWAYS THAT SHIPPERS ARE PAYING TO MAINTAIN. . . . Given the amount of HMT collections not spent on harbors, and the amount spent on harbors with little or no cargo,
    A ROUGH ESTIMATE IS THAT LESS THAN HALF AND PERHAPS AS LITTLE AS A THIRD OF EVERY HMT DOLLAR COLLECTED IS BEING SPENT TO MAINTAIN HARBORS THAT SHIPPERS FREQUENTLY USE.92

    THE SOLUTION TO THESE SORTS OF INEFFICIENCIES IS NOT MORE FEDERAL FUNDING, but greater port independence and self-funding. One step toward that goal would be to privatize U.S. seaports, which are generally owned by state and local governments today.

    Britain pursued such reforms in 1983 when it privatized 19 seaports to form Associated British Ports (ABP).93 Today ABP operates 21 ports, and its subsidiary, UK Dredging, provides dredging services in the marketplace. ABP and UK Dredging earn profits and pay taxes.

    TODAY TWO-THIRDS OF BRITISH CARGO GOES THROUGH EFFICIENT PRIVATIZED SEAPORTS.94 One advantage of private seaports is that they can expand their facilities when market demands warrant, free of the uncertainties created by government budgeting.

    Privatization is also a good option for the Corps’ 75 hydropower plants. More than two-thirds of the roughly 2,400 hydropower plants in the nation are privately owned.95 While federal facilities—INCLUDING THOSE OF THE ARMY CORPS—dominate hydropower in some states such as Washington, other states such as New York and North Carolina have substantial private hydropower. The point is that the private sector is entirely capable of running hydropower plants, and thus Congress should begin selling the generating facilities of the Corps.

    MANY OF THE CORPS’ ASSETS SHOULD BE TURNED OVER TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. THESE ASSETS INCLUDE FLOOD CONTROL INFRASTRUCTURE, MUNICIPAL WATER AND SEWER PROJECTS, the Washington, D.C., aqueduct system, and recreational areas.

    The financing and control of flood control infrastructure in Louisiana, for example, should be handed over to the State of Louisiana. That would give citizens direct responsibility over their hurricane defenses,

    RATHER THAN TO HAVE THEM RELY ON A DISTANT WASHINGTON BUREAUCRACY.

    State and local officials could better balance the costs and benefits of levees and other infrastructure if their own citizens were footing the bill.

    The Commerce Clause of the Constitution allowed the federal government to assert control over navigable rivers, and the Corps has taken the lead role in river navigation activities since the 19th century.

    However, CONGRESS SHOULD CONSIDER REFORMS TO REDUCE THE COSTS ON GENERAL TAXPAYERS OF THESE ACTIVITIES.

    Currently, a barge fuel tax generates revenues for the Inland Waterways Trust Fund, but this fund only pays half the cost of constructive projects on the inland waterways and none of the operation and maintenance costs.96

    One reform step would be to raise fees to cover a higher share of system’s costs, as proposed by the Simpson-Bowles fiscal commission in 2010.97

    An expert on the system, Steve Ellis, testified to Congress last year about the inefficiency of the current funding structure. One problem is that “since users don’t have to pay anything for maintenance, they are constant cheerleaders for new construction.”98

    ANOTHER PROBLEM IS THAT SPENDING IS ALLOCATED BASED ON POLITICS, not on market demands such as barge traffic levels. Some rivers in the system receive very little barge traffic, yet receive substantial spending from the Corps. Ellis also notes that inland waterway projects suffer from the Corps’ usual distorted analyses and cost overruns:

    “None of the inland navigation projects the Corps has green-lighted in recent decades have met their economic predictions.”99

    To create more efficient inland waterways, CONGRESS SHOULD CONSIDER TRANSFERRING THE CORPS’ ACTIVITIES TO STATE GOVERNMENTS OR PRIVATE BUSINESSES.

    In 2002 the Bush administration determined that the Corps’ civilian activities were not a “core competency” of the government and should be opened to private contractors.100

    It proposed allowing private bidding for 2,000 Corps jobs involved in the operation of locks and dams on the waterways, but that plan did not come to fruition.101

    Another idea is to create a self-funded organization to operate the inland waterways, either as an arms-length part of government or as a private entity.102

    To conclude, the nation’s long experience with the Army Corps illustrates how federal involvement in local infrastructure often leads to mismanagement, inefficiency, and pork-barrel spending.

    IT’S TIME TO REVIVE FEDERALISM IN INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND BEGIN TO PRIVATIZE ARMY CORPS ACTIVITIES OR TRANSFER THEM TO THE STATES.

    Those remaining activities of the Corps that are truly federal in nature should be moved to the Department of the Interior AND THE CIVILIAN SIDE OF THE CORPS CLOSED DOWN.