You are here

Updated: Democratic, Republican Budget Proposals Take Decidedly Different Tacks On National Parks

Share

Published Date

March 14, 2013

Editor's note: This corrects details on continuing resolution in penultimate graph to show measure does not restore sequestration cuts.

Federal budget proposals released this week by the Republicans and Democrats take decidedly different tacks when it comes to national parks, with the GOP plan continuing cuts to the National Park Service while the Democratic version would stablize funding, according to onlookers.

The GOP proposal put forth by U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., is very similar to the one he offered a year ago. Under that proposal, the Park Service would have to close "hundreds of national parks ... for parts of the year" beginning in 2014, the Office of Management Budget said at the time.

Scott Slesinger, legislative director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the congressman's new proposal should be rejected because "it solidifies drastic sequestration cuts to initiatives that protect our air, water, food, wildlife, national parks, and transportation infrastructure. Cutting these services that every American relies on won’t dent the deficit, but it will harm our economy and our future."

Under the Democratic proposal offered by U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, cuts ordered by the budget sequestration would be restored through a mix of spending cuts and new revenues. It would not immediately balance the budget, though, something Rep. Ryan said his proposal would do in a decade.

At the National Parks Conservation Association, Craig Obey, senior vice president for government affairs, called the Democratic budget proposal a "refreshing budget blueprint that values investments in our national treasures, not reflexive, mindless cuts."

Sen. Murray, he added, "recognizes that our communities, businesses, and futures all benefit from protecting our heritage, keeping our national parks and their visitor facilities open, and confronting the challenges posed by climate change. As Congress and the Obama administration debate the chasm that separates the approaches in the Murray and Ryan budgets, we hope the values and aspirations Senator Murray’s proposal promotes will find their way into the actual funding Congress provides for our national treasures and our environment."

Parks won't likely get financial relief any time soon, as continuing resolutions in both the House and Senate continue the sequestration.

Of course, with the House and Senate needing to reconcile their differences in both the budget proposals as well as the continuing resolutions, the likelihood of those fiscal landscapes changing is great.

Support National Parks Traveler

Your support for the National Parks Traveler comes at a time when news organizations are finding it hard, if not impossible, to stay in business. Traveler's work is vital. For nearly two decades we've provided essential coverage of national parks and protected areas. With the Trump administration’s determination to downsize the federal government, and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum’s approach to public lands focused on energy exploration, it’s clear the Traveler will have much to cover in the months and years ahead. We know of no other news organization that provides such broad coverage of national parks and protected areas on a daily basis. Your support is greatly appreciated.

 

EIN: 26-2378789

Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places

A copy of National Parks Traveler's financial statements may be obtained by sending a stamped, self-addressed envelope to: National Parks Traveler, P.O. Box 980452, Park City, Utah 84098. National Parks Traveler was formed in the state of Utah for the purpose of informing and educating about national parks and protected areas.

Residents of the following states may obtain a copy of our financial and additional information as stated below:

  • Florida: A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR NATIONAL PARKS TRAVELER, (REGISTRATION NO. CH 51659), MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING 800-435-7352 OR VISITING THEIR WEBSITE. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL, OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE.
  • Georgia: A full and fair description of the programs and financial statement summary of National Parks Traveler is available upon request at the office and phone number indicated above.
  • Maryland: Documents and information submitted under the Maryland Solicitations Act are also available, for the cost of postage and copies, from the Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401 (410-974-5534).
  • North Carolina: Financial information about this organization and a copy of its license are available from the State Solicitation Licensing Branch at 888-830-4989 or 919-807-2214. The license is not an endorsement by the State.
  • Pennsylvania: The official registration and financial information of National Parks Traveler may be obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of State by calling 800-732-0999. Registration does not imply endorsement.
  • Virginia: Financial statements are available from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 102 Governor Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
  • Washington: National Parks Traveler is registered with Washington State’s Charities Program as required by law and additional information is available by calling 800-332-4483 or visiting www.sos.wa.gov/charities, or on file at Charities Division, Office of the Secretary of State, State of Washington, Olympia, WA 98504.

Comments

Why waste time and calories on a Ryan 'budget', which presupposes repeal of Health Care Reform to 'work'. Some people are absolutely tone deaf to overwhelming election results.


Probably not a good idea to respond to your comment but what the heck. In refering to "elections," Rick B, have you any interest or opinions into the administration's nominee for Labor Tom Perez and Holder's DOJ's approach to voter intimidation (Black Panthers) and voter suppression (military vote to name one instance)? Elections have taken on quite a different reality to the many I've participated in over the years. Using the "overwhelming" term just seems unrealistic but certainly is how the holders of the WH and Senate like to think. Yes, elections have consequences but it'd be nice if we had an Admin that worked for all the people rather than just those on the "friends" list. Some serious stuff going down, I believe.


Rick B. " overwhelming election results"? You are aware that a diference of 330,000 votes would have lead to a different outcome - aren't you?


You are aware that a diference of 330,000 votes would have lead to a different outcome - aren't you?

Sure. Obama would have carried North Carolina and Arizona as well, winning by 178 electoral votes instead of 126, essentially beating Romney 2 to 1.


Leave out the Holder DOJ, voter fraud, personal destruction on a level never before seen, immigration issues, food stamps, class envy, the pathetic press not doing their job? The Democratic Party as constitued now truly sucks. I don't like the thought that our Parks are associated in any way with them. Just not good. My roots and NPS run deep in my family so don't even try to pitch any snark on me or my history. Things aren't as they seem with this bunch. You are being played.


Well, you go, Patty. I knew there was a reason I voted for you (lots of them, actually, but this is certainly in the top five).


Right, TA, and Glenn Beck is emotionally balanced & Karl Rove called the election right. Right.

My original point above, before you started invoking black helicopters again, is that it is ridiculous to consider seriously the Ryan budget proposals, as he based his budget on the faulty premise that Health Care Reform would be revoked. It has been upheld by the Supreme Court. He still can't accept the fact that his lack of compassion was rejected by well over half of both the Electoral College as well as well over half of the popular vote.

"This bunch" indeed. Get more tin foil.


Compassion as defined by who, Rick B? OK, the Candy Man reins with elections is what I'm hearing. No problem...be groovy...no spending problem.


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

Your urgent support helps the National Parks Traveler increase awareness of the wonders and issues confronting national parks and protected areas.

Support Our Mission

INN Member

The easiest way to explore RV-friendly National Park campgrounds.

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

Here’s the definitive guide to National Park System campgrounds where RVers can park their rigs.

Our app is packed with RVing- specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 national parks.

You’ll also find stories about RVing in the parks, tips helpful if you’ve just recently become an RVer, and useful planning suggestions.

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

FREE for iPhones and Android phones.