A smug, biting, and sarcastic roster of Republicans bashed National Park Service Director Jon Jarvis during a hearing Wednesday into how the Park Service handled the closure of the park system in the wake of the federal government's partial shutdown.
The joint hearing by the House Oversight and Natural Resources committees offered harsh criticism, and even condemnation, from many of the GOP committee members, alternating with praise and support from Democratic members.
Director Jarvis was forced to sit and listen to his critics, as the committees subpoeaned him to appear after he initially demurred from their request that he testify.
At one point Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colorado, pointedly called the director "a liability to the National Park Service."
That attack was quickly rebutted by Rep. Gerald Connolly, a Virginia Democrat, who defended Director Jarvis and praised his service to the Park Service.
The hearing offered stark contrasts over whose fault the closure of the National Park System was, with Republicans blaming the Senate for not voting on a measure that would have provided funding to open the parks and charging the Obama administration with making the parks' closure inconvenient and harsher than it might have been, while Democrats saddled the blame on the Republicans in the House for refusing to approve the Senate's Continuing Resolution to fund government.
Rep. Pete Defazio, D-Oregon, at one point held up a mirror to the Republicans on the two committees and remarked, "Here's who is responsible for shutting down the national parks."
In response to a question from Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Virginia, the director acknowledged the closure of the park system didn't go as smoothly as it might have.
"We haven't done this in 20 years. Shutting down is hard and complicated. There were some lessons learned here," said Director Jarvis.
Rep. Jared Huffman, D-California, said he was disgusted by this "sham of a hearing," calling it a "kangaroo court" and pointless other than to give some an opportunity to offer soundbites and toss about reckless claims.
In sum, he said, the hearing "makes the McCarthy era look like the Enlightenment."
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
Issa kept going on and on about the 1995 agreement with Arizona, but didn't that only partially reopen the Grand Canyon?
And who determines the discourse? Surely not the lowly Republicans. Being scammed folks. Using those that love the great places in dispicable ways.
You might ask yourself if he might choose a golf course over say, Canyonlands or Vessey's Paradise?
The idiots who shut the U.S. down can never admit their stupidity. It's much easier to try to find someone else to blame for their mess.
Jon Jarvis deserves some kind of medal for what happened today.
Any idea how we can sequester a bunch of Congressidiots?
What's the obsession with the DOD golf courses? They are not Obama's, the courses are there for the military and their guests. The golf courses do not require appropriated funds, the operation of the NPS does require an annual appropriation.
I agree Rick, thank you for your post.
I love how blind you GOP supporters are. Let's not acknowledge NPS is federally funded. Let's pretend the local tourists income is falling out of the sky and every penny goes back to federal's pocket. GOP is responsible for both sequester and this shutdown in the name of what? ACA? Two years later? What is next? Secession?
It's one thing to have a difference in opinions. It is simply dumb to not think and function logically. IF GOPs are going to keep crying about smaller gov't then come to the table with a better solution. Demanding a smaller gov't and less tax isn't a solution unless money falls out of the sky for everyone in the world. We are in a global economy, so stop pretending we can be a leader on the world stage and not spend money. You don't solve every conflict and disagreements with ignorance.
While Chairman Issa may be an idiot, let's not feel too sorry for Director Jarvis. It's a difficult job to be sure, but appearing before Congressional committees is not an optional part of it.
I'd be interested to know why it took over a week for the state-funded contingency arrangements to be agreed upon. If they are truly a legal and workable option, why can't they be in place at the beginning of any shutdown (when circumstances would be least disruptive for everyone involved)? Seems like the shutdown procedures were clearly understood and executed with gusto, while a more optimal arrangement was ignored for over a week.
Lancelot, your post is nonsense.
I haven't seen any GOP apologists post here.
Our level of spending and our level of debt is un-sustainable. There is common acknowledgement of these facts in both parties. The President won this latest battle. The press seems to agree upon that as fact. I'm not so sure he won all the marbles...
Ron Fournier is a liberal opinion writer but sees many of the larger issues involved in politics including the results of this latest dust-up. Read his post today. You may learn something...
http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/obama-wins-big-whoop-can-he-l...