Forwarded by Jane Clark

Last Wednesday, the Commerce Appropriations bill was passed containing a
very nasty rider which would exempt Pacific salmon from ESA protection in
Alaskan waters.  The Commerce bill passed by ONLY 2 votes.  Here is the
list of how the IA folks voted
on the Commerce bill Wednesday.

Yays: Ganske, Latham, Leach, Nussle
Nos: Boswell

Thanks to Rep. Boswell on this one.
===========================================================

The Interior Appropriations bill which was riddled with riders was debated
Thursday.

I don't know the votes on the Interior Bill but, Rep. Jim Leach voted FOR
the bad Interior Appropriations Bill
last Thursday.  Can you make a few calls expressing disappointment and
asking why Leach voted the way he did?  We'd love to know!

>      Carl Zichella, Midwest Office.

Calls should be made Rep. Leach.  He  voted to limit mining waste dumped on
public lands.  However, the current version of the Interior Bill contains a
rider which would allow unlimited dumping and he voted FOR it!!   Tell him
that he should have voted against this bill and protected our nation's
public lands!

Call Representative Leach  202-224-3121.

Hold your Representative Accountable for his Vote on Anti-Environmental
Riders

 On Thursday night, Congress passed a spending bill for the Interior
 Department that shortchanges funds for protecting parks and wildlands, and
 undermines existing environmental protection laws.

 "This shameful bill fails to protect the beautiful places our families
 treasure, while giving special breaks to the logging companies and
polluters
 that destroy our public lands," said Melanie Griffin, Director of the Land
 Protection Program.  "Special interests have tacked dozens of riders onto
 this bill to overturn court decisions, tie land managers' hands, and
 undermine environmental protection laws.  Rather than protecting America's
 public forests, canyons and streams, Congress passed a bill chock full of
 giveaways to the mining, timber, livestock and oil companies."

 The appropriations bill passed by the House of Representatives on a
225-200
 vote, provides the Interior Department nearly $1 billion less than the
 $15.048 billion requested by President Clinton and includes barely a
quarter
 of the $1 billion the President requested for his Lands Legacy initiative
to
 protect the threatened parkland and open spaces Americans cherish.  An
April
 poll conducted for the Sierra Club found that 78 percent of voters support
 the billion-dollar Lands Legacy program.

 Last week, President Clinton promised to veto this bill unless Congress
 adequately funded the Lands Legacy program and removed the harmful riders.
 On October 13, he said "let me be clear, if the Interior bill lands on my
 desk looking like it does now, I will give it a good environmental
response
 -- I will send it straight back to the recycling bin."

 In the face of the President's veto threat, 200 members of Congress voted
 against the bill--a healthy veto-proof margin--which means that the fate
of
 next years funding for our nation's natural resource programs as well as
the
 fate of these anti-environmental riders will be decided in some end of the
 year omnibus budget bills.  Please help keep the heat on Congress to
reject
 anti-environmental riders and this backdoor approach to doing business.

 To see how your legislator voted, check out the vote on our website:
 www.sierraclub.org/votewatch/   Please take the time to thank those
members
 who voted against this destructive bill and admonish those who voted for
the
 bill.  You can reach their offices by calling the Capitol Switchboard at
 (202)224-3121.

----------
> From: Jennifer E Hensley <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Fw: ROADLESS RADIO ADS
> Date: Sunday, October 24, 1999 11:32 PM
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I would appreciate it if you could take the time to make a call, e-mail
> etc. about this issue to Leach expressing disapproval.  I'm sorry that I
> do not have more details other than the ad script.  When these types of
> ads are run it is extremely important that we follow up with our calls so
> that legislators get the message.  I'm not sure why the choice was made
> to run the ads in Des Moines rather than the Quad Cities or Iowa City,
> but I was not part of this plan.  Please send this to anyone that might
> make a call on this issue.  I believe that if you go to the national
> website--they have more information.  Thanks, Jen

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To get off the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]