Oklahoma Sen. suggests transfer of North Fork lands to the state

The political saga continued last week over the North Fork Watershed Protection Act, as an Oklahoma Republican Senator revealed why he opposes the one-page bill and suggested that if the state really wants to protect the land, the federal government should give it to them.

“Since Montanans widely support the withdrawal of the land from energy development, Congress can transfer the land in question to the state of Montana and the state can withdraw the land under their jurisdiction,” Tom Coburn wrote in an April 4 letter Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

The bill would withdraw about 362,000 acres of federal land in the North and Middle Forks of the Flathead from future energy development leases. About 84 percent of the current leases have already been voluntarily retired by the energy companies that held them.

The Coburn letter comes on the heels of an attempt by Montana Sen. John Walsh, a Democrat, to pass the bill with a live unanimous consent request on the floor of the Senate April 3.

Under Senate rules, the request is denied if any one Senator objects to the measure, and Coburn was joined by fellow Republicans Ted Cruz of Texas and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania in objection.

In addition to the idea of giving the land to Montana, Coburn notes that the subsequent payment-in-lieu of taxes to the state would also be reduced.

“(But) if Montana wishes to have provenance over the land use decisions in the North Fork Watershed, then they should also assume financial and management responsibility of the American taxpayers,” Coburn wrote.

But if a land transfer won't work, Coburn then suggests amending the bill so it has a 20-year sunset on the withdrawal.

“If 20 years from now Congress deems that all energy production should be prohibited on these federal lands, then Congress could simply extend the withdrawal,” Coburn suggests.

But Walsh and Montana Sen. Jon Tester said the letter was pure politics.

“These objections are rooted in politics - not policy,” Walsh said in a statement. “This bill is important for Montana's lucrative outdoor economy and it protects Montana's clean air and water. The Senators should end their partisanship and vote for this bipartisan bill that would truly create jobs and benefit our economy.”

Tester, a Democrat, had similar sentiments.

“The North Fork bill has bipartisan support because it preserves one of our nation's most treasured landscapes and strengthens Montana's outdoor economy,” Tester said last week. “It will take more than a couple of senators from Oklahoma and Texas to prevent me from working to protect this watershed for future generations.”

Sponsored by Montana Congressman Steve Daines the bill has already passed the House. Daines said the Senate should bring the bill to the floor.

“We remain hopeful that the Senate will bring forward a vote through regular order, like we successfully did in the House, so that we can finally get this done for the people of Montana,” Daines said.

But Tester has said in the past that because of Senate rules, that would be difficult, if not impossible, for a one-page piece of legislation.

Montana Gov. Steve Bullock also weighed in on the matter.

“I am disappointed that a few Tea Party Senators decided to once again put partisan politics ahead of sound public policy, and undermine a bipartisan, made in Montana effort to protect one of the most wild and pristine places on earth,” Bullock said. “Moreover, Sen. Coburn’s proposal is nothing more than political gamesmanship — a red herring designed not to further progress, but rather to score political points using a place that is near and dear to the hearts of all Montanans.” 

There are election politics in play as well. Daines will likely be the challenger to Walsh in the general election this fall for the Senate seat. Walsh was appointed to the post by Gov. Steve Bullock, a Democrat after longtime Sen. Max Baucus was named ambass