Editor's note: This corrects that the report was a "scorecard" charting votes, not a "survey" of congressional action. The headline was changed to reflect that as well.
It might come as a surprise, but Congress is not as "parks friendly" as many folks might think. Indeed, a recent "scorecard" prepared by an affiliate of the National Parks Conservation Association found that nearly half of Congress regularly voted against parks during the 114th Congress. That's something to keep in mind when you vote this fall.
The National Parks Action Fund evaluated park-related votes taken by the House and Senate during the 114th Congress through the 2016 summer congressional recess. The scored votes included a variety of issues affecting parks, including clean water and wildlife protections, the president's ability to protect new sites as national monuments and funding levels for the National Park Service.
“Just as national parks are the indicator of the health of our country’s water, air and wildlife, the votes lawmakers cast are the indicator of Congress’s willingness to protect America’s favorite places,” said National Parks Action Fund Chair Theresa Pierno. “It’s easy for members of Congress to say they love national parks, particularly ones in their home state. But the facts often tell a different story. A single vote can have a profound and lasting effect on our national parks. This scorecard brings to light whether their rhetoric matches their record.”
According to the scorecard:
* 54% of House members and 47% of senators received an F
* 34% (34 Senators and 146 House members) voted against parks 100% of the time
* Eight full state delegations received F grades
* 40% of lawmakers (43 senators and 171 House members) voted for parks 100% of the time
* 39% of House members and 43% of senators received an A
* Seven full state delegations received A grades
* In 17 states, both senators received F grades
* In 16 states both senators received A grades
Most votes fell along party lines despite national parks long being a non-partisan issue. You can find some examples of the politicians voting against parks-related issues, as well as a vote breakdown by senators and representatives at this page.
“The scorecard’s clear partisan divide is a stark reminder of the deep political divide in Congress,” said Jane Lyder, a member of the Action Fund board who served in the Interior Department under both Republican and Democratic administrations. “It is extremely disappointing that the large majority of Republicans received a failing grade, particularly when past members of the party have been some of our country’s most important park champions. National parks should not be a Republican or Democratic issue. They are an American issue. We need lawmakers who will stand up and protect these places for future generations, just as they were protected for us.”
In the past, Republicans have been some of our parks’ biggest champions, including President Abraham Lincoln's protection of what would become Yosemite in the midst of the Civil War, and President Richard Nixon's approval of many of the environmental protections critical to preservation of national parks.
According to a release from the Action Fund, "despite all there is to celebrate with the National Park Service’s centennial this year, there has never been a more critical time for our national parks. Due to years of neglect by too many members of Congress, our parks need $12 billion in repairs and more rangers to care for them. This while many in Congress are actively working to prevent protections for park waterways and wildlife and to hamper our ability to preserve new places for future generations."
“As we prepare for the start of a new Congress next year, we hope members will think hard about the impact their votes have on America’s favorite places, and ensure each vote they take is a pro-park vote,” said Ms. Pierno, who also heads NPCA. “In this centennial of the National Park Service, now is the time for them to commit to ensuring our national parks have the resources and support they need to continue protecting America’s favorite places. Our parks deserve no less.”
Comments
Everyone should post the scorecard on their Facebook to show its importance in protecting our parks.
The "survey" is total BS. They took a select number of votes rather than all votes that involved the parks. Many of the votes were minor amendments to totally unrelated bills and the "survey" totally ignored any balance in the consideration of what constituted a good or bad vote.
This is nothing but a partisan hit job. Most of the votes have nothing to do with the National Park Service itself or are only tangentially related.
I suppose it's fitting that Page 2 of the report displays a picture that's not even in the National Park System (Antelope Canyon). That should tell you right away how much the National Park Action Fund actually knows about the parks.
It's interesting to note that virtually all the votes listed here are not on BILLS related to the parks, but on AMENDMENTS to bills that often have little or nothing to do with parks. These were not, as some would try to fool us into believing, mere "minor amendments."
Legislation by amendment is a cowardly way to try to avoid accountability in Congress. They're hoping no one will notice.
It's disgusting.
With the exception of major appropriations and major additions of new units, most of the legislation that affects the NPS system are via amendment to "unrelated" bills. So yes, that is important.
Antelope Canyon lies both within and without the Glen Canyon NRA, a unit of the National Park System. Popular photos such as this one can take place on either side of the boundary now that lower water levels exist at Lake Powell.
That said, as you know this one is taken in the Tribal Park on the Navajo Nation upstream from the NRA boundary. And it certainly isn't in Grand Canyon NP as it's listed in the credits.
Congress itself isn't very popular right now, and it doesn't adequately fund the National Park Service. However, if they did, the NPS would likely be spending less of its windfall to reduce the maintenance backlog and employee shortage, and more to building more monuments to Superintendents like it did at Effigy Mounds, and pursuing whistleblowers who have the temerity to challenge the agency's corrupt culture.
That's an extremely cynical viewpoint, that I don't think it has much accuracy.