Thanks to Vermont Gov. Douglas, the Green Mountain National Forest wilderness bill advanced by the state’s congressional delegation stalled earlier in the week. Douglas, it turns out, dispatched a letter to anti-conservationist Richard Pombo in the House, objecting to the bill as then written. Douglas claimed that some Vermont towns thought the bill went too far. But Douglas, a Republican, probably just didn’t like the legislation to start with.
Here’s the Rutland (Vt.) Herald’s story:
The state’s Washington delegation and Gov. James Douglas reached a compromise Wednesday on how much additional land should be given wilderness protection in the Green Mountain National Forest, an issue that had threatened to become a thorny election-year problem for the Republican governor.
If legislation embodying the compromise passes the U.S. House and Senate, about 41,000 acres would be added to the 59,000 acres now designated as wilderness. That’s roughly 6,066 acres less than would have been added to the wilderness area under the original bill.
Only two days remain in the regular session, and it is not clear if the compromise can pass before Congress breaks.
“What was already difficult is even more difficult with the week that we have lost,” said David Carle, spokesman for Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. “The delegation will do all that is humanly possible to get the bill back on the legislative tracks.”
Vermont’s congressional delegation - one Democrat and two independents - supported the original bill, but Douglas opposed it in a letter he sent this month to Republican House leaders. Douglas’ letter came after the bill passed the U.S. Senate unanimously.
The 6,066 acres that have been removed from the bill as part of the compromise are in the northern part of the proposed Glastenbury Mountain wilderness area in Bennington County. The same compromise had been offered to Douglas earlier in the month, according to the delegation.
Leahy, U.S. Sen. James Jeffords and U.S. Rep. Bernard Sanders jointly offered the amended proposal to Douglas.
Jason Gibbs, a Douglas spokesman, said the two sides have reached “a responsible compromise.”
So, a big chunk of the original set-aside - championed by groups like Vermont’s Forest Watch - is out of the bill. Compromise appears to have won again. Just how much more territory must be compromised before all the Jim Douglases of this country are satisfied?
Recent Comments