America deserves a fuels reduction program in our forests that protects two American icons: first, small towns; and second, big trees. This bill does neither. This bill is doomed to failure in not protecting either small towns or big trees, for three reasons. The first reason is, it does not provide the money that is necessary to do the job. If we take a look at this map, the Forest Service suggests there are 190 million acres needing treatment. They propose to do about 2.8 million in the next year, this tiny little red dot. They want to propose to do a tiny little red dot, and they do not authorize a dollar for the fuels reduction program. They are so fixated on red tape they forget green money. They cannot do the job without it. Our bill does that job. Second, the bill does not target our precious resources to protect human property and life first as a priority, unlike our bill, which does.
Jay Inslee: “America deserves a fuels reduction program in our forests that protects two American icons: first, small towns; and…”
On the recordMay 20, 2003
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Criticizing a fuels reduction program bill for failing to protect small towns and forests.
Share
More from Jay Inslee
Jan 19, 2022
The best way we could possibly reopen our economy is to knock down the virus.
Jun 27, 2022
We want them to know there’s a wall in the West Coast, protecting the women of the West Coast and the citizens that come from these other states.
Jan 19, 2022
We're now at about 80 percent. This is pivotal because 80 percent of the people that are in our hospitals are the unvaccinated.
Jan 19, 2022
If you have one party telling their Members that you can't trust government enough to even decide who won the last election, it's pretty certain they're not going to trust government when government shares the truth about this virus and…





