Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), and James Lankford (R-OK) sent a letter to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) Friday, asking him not to include language permanently reauthorizing the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) in any end of the year or must-pass legislation.
Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), and James Lankford (R-OK) sent a letter to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) Friday, asking him not to include language permanently reauthorizing the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) in any end of the year or must-pass legislation.
Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), and James Lankford (R-OK) sent a letter to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) Friday, asking him not to include language permanently reauthorizing the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) in any end of the year or must-pass legislation.
MICHAEL S. LEE
United States Senate
WASHINGTON, DC 20510-4404
December 4, 2015
‘COMMITTEES:
JUDICIARY
ENERGY AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
vow economic
The Honorable Mitch McConnell
Majority Leader, U.S. Senate
317 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Majority Leader McConnell,
We write today to urge you not to include language permanently reauthorizing the
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) in any end of the year or must-pass.
legislation. Since its inception 50 years ago, the LWCF has drifted far from its
original intent and is in desperate need of reform. Simply reauthorizing the LWCF,
or doing so with insubstantial reforms, will only further erode support for the
program,
While we regret that Congress failed to enact meaningful reforms before the
authorization lapsed, the LWCF continues to function - the trust fund simply cannot
accrue new revenues under the LWCF Act. In fact, the program remains funded
through the CR process and it currently has a $20 billion account surplus. At
current funding levels, around $306 million annually,? the LWCF's current surplus
could provide funding for an additional 65 years. Congress should use the cushion
provided by this account surplus to fully debate and enact reforms to the LWCF.
‘We welcome a broader debate about how to improve the LWCF, but hope that any
reauthorization will address three areas of concern
Federal Obligations. Conserving land includes more than simply purchasing
it. Caring for the Federal estate requires funding to maintain the land as well
as compensate local governments for the loss of a property tax base. Current
estimates put the federal maintenance backlog at approximately $19 billion
for the four major federal land management agencies.’ Ill-kept roads and
trails mean that our constituents are unable to fully enjoy our nation's
greatest parks. In addition to hindered access, ignored maintenance is
spoiling our parks and, in some cases, permanently damaging them.
‘Additionally, as lands are added to the Federal estate, they are removed from
the tax base of local governments. In recognition of this the Federal
"Carol Hardy Vincent, Land and Water Conservation Pund (LWCF): Questions and Answers Related to Expired
Provisions (CRS Report No1F0323) (Congressional Research Service, 2015),
bnrpe//wunw.crs.gov/Reports/1F =soarch&guid=0443987bce24@cTb7a2818819e715438index=0
2 Carol Hardy Vincent, Land and Water Conservation Fund: Overview, Funding History, and isues (CRS Report No.
RL33531) (Congressional Research Service, 2015), 8, http://www crs gov/reports/pdt/RIS3531.
Government Accountability Office, "Department ofthe Interior: Major Management Challenges," GAQ-11- 424
(2014), htp://www.gao.gov/products/GA0-11-424Tgovernment makes Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) to local governments. A
dedicated portion of LWCF funds should be focused toward land the federal
government already owns.
2. Federal Land Acquisitions. The LWCF has been used to add over 4.5 million
acres to the federal estate.* Congress originally intended that a priority
purpose of the LWCF land acquisition program would be to purchase
inholdings.# Congress should statutorily define the term “inholdings” so the
LWCF can focus on its mission, Additionally, the administration has claimed
that some land acquisitions can result in cost savings “when done
strategically.”6 However, the current program does not contain requirements
that land acquisitions actually result in cost savings, as a reformed program
should.
3. Reinstatement of the state allocation requirement. When Congress created
the LWCE, it structured the program so that states received 60 percent of the
funding and the federal government received 40 percent. A 1976 amendment
to the LWCF act removed the 60% state provision. In the last decade the state
grant program has averaged only 11% of the total LWCF appropriations.”
States and local stakeholders are better equipped to manage LWCF funds and
should receive a larger share of the funds.
We thank you for your attention to this issue and look forward to working with you
to reform the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
Sincerely,
Michael S. Lee
JeffFial Ted Cruz
4 Jeffcey Zinn, Land and Water Conservation Fund: Current Status and Issues (Congressional Research Service
Report for Congress, 2005), hitp://nationalaglawcenter.org/wp-content/.ploads/assets/ers/RS21503 pat
Report 88-1364, to Accompany H R.3846, Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.
6 Statement of Michael Connor, Deputy Secretary, US. Department of the Interior, before the Senate Energy and
Natural Resources Committee, April 22,2015.
* Carol Hardy Vincent, Land and Water Conservation Fund: Overview, Funding Mistory, and issues (CRS Report No.
RL33531) (Congressional Research Service, 2015), 10-11, http://wwwcrs gov/reports/pal/RL33531