|
Washington D.C.- Why would Congress charge taxpayers $300,000 to have the National Park Service (NPS) study a possible new park site only to ignore its conclusion? In 2001, Congress authorized a study of the Great Falls Historic area in Paterson, New Jersey to determine whether it was an appropriate location to be designated as a National Park. As Roll Call reported today, the study was requested by Rep. Pascrell and completed by NPS, who determined that the historic district does not meet the criteria for suitability, feasibility, or need for the designation. Despite that determination, Democrats voted unanimously to pass H.R. 189, the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park Act of 2007, legislation that blatantly ignores the NPS recommendation.
What could possibly be so important about designating the Paterson, NJ, area a national park that Democrats in Congress would disregard the expert analysis of the Park Service, reject all Republican amendments that sought to improve the bill, and then vote in lockstep to approve the bill?
Perhaps it is a pure coincidence that Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Chief of Staff is from Paterson, New Jersey. Perhaps it is more of a coincidence that he just happened to personally attend the Committee mark-up of the bill, where he happened to be recognized by the Chairman – a clear sign of how important the project was to the Speaker’s Office.
|
Chairman Nick Rahall (D-WV): “The Chair had previously noted the main sponsor's presence in the room, the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Pascrell, and would also note at this time, there is another distinguished visitor present who happens to be the Chief of Staff to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Mr. John Lawrence, who must call this his hometown, I believe, and has been back there nodding very strongly "yes" to everything that the gentleman from New Jersey has been saying.”
-- Committee on Natural Resources Markup (6/28/2007)
|
In an interview with Roll Call, Republican Study Committee Chairman Rep. Jeb Hensarling… called Lawrence’s attendance “one of the most unprecedented strong arms I have ever seen. ... I’ve never known a committee chairman to stop the proceedings to single out a staffer.” …..given Lawrence’s position as the most powerful staffer in the House, his presence in the meeting cast a shadow over the proceedings and was tantamount to Lawrence “standing in the room and staring everyone down ... and next thing you know everyone’s voting for it.”
When questioned by Roll Call, Mr. Lawrence’s explanation seemed to be that if he wanted a National Park created in Paterson, he was powerful enough to deliver it years ago.
|
Lawrence also pointed out that he served on the Natural Resources Committee for years while he worked for Miller and that if he had a significant interest in the issue beyond his connection to his hometown, that would have been the time to press the issue. “I was the staff director of the Resources Committee ... if I had wanted to make it a national park, then would have been the appropriate time to do it.”
-- Roll Call, 10/23/2007
|
The proposal would send taxpayers a bill for up to $34 million to fund a new national park that includes an apartment complex, a micro-brewery, a rock climbing wall and a butterfly park. The NPS estimates that development of the site could cost between $20 million and $34 million, with an additional annual operating cost of up to $1.2 million.
If this $35 million fun park was created in part to please a senior member of Speaker Pelosi’s staff (and hand Rep. Pascrell a $30 million pet project in the process), taxpayers deserve an explanation, not a rock climbing wall. “If this is Speaker Pelosi’s definition of honesty and reform, it helps explain why Congress has such low public opinion ratings,” Hensarling told Roll Call.
(####)
|
|
