Richard Pombo: “I wish the property rights language in the bill did what he says it does. Because he knows that we both worked extremely…”

“I wish the property rights language in the bill did what he says it does. Because he knows that we both worked extremely hard to try to get to that point and, unfortunately, that is not where we are. The language that is actually in the bill when it comes to condemnation leaves one very big loophole, and that is that unless it is authorized by an act of Congress, which is a huge loophole. What it says is that under the generic authorization of the National Park Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the Forest Service, it allows condemnation. Therefore, condemnation is allowed in the bill. That is identified in the bill on page 33 when it talks about taking land by adverse condemnation. It is identified in the bill. It is quite clear why this was put in. I was part of the negotiations, and we all know why it was put in, because it was insisted that the Government be allowed that their right of condemnation be protected. And that is why it is in the bill. Now, what the gentleman from California is doing is he is saying that if the States are going to take land that they should not be allowed to take the land by condemnation. The fifth amendment of the Constitution was put in place to protect the property rights of individuals. It is a Federal issue. And there is no way around that.”