Managed Democracy Comes to Missoula

Matt... (4.00 / 1)

Grow up.

Too bad about the date (and the typical short notice given to the public), but I'll be in the Wilderness looking for elk and deer to put in the freezer, as general season opens up this Sunday.

But dog-and-pony-show "town hall meetings" ain't really my thing anyway.

You see, even though we all might have some frustrations with public lands management as administered by the US Forest Service, there are at least public participation rules and regulations that must be followed and all Americans have an opportunity to participate fully and equally.

That's not the case with Tester's bill. It's part of a dangerous trend in public lands management...something that has come to closely resemble a political campaign, or even a political take-over of the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest.

See, in a political campaign you ignore questions and concerns and just stick to your talking points no matter what.

In a political campaign, if people have concerns with the US Congress mandating logging on public lands at a time when lumber demand is at an all time low...ignore economic realities and talk about the need to "get people workin' in the woods."

In a political campaign, tell people that "introducing legislation is just the start of the process and public input in important." But when representatives of local conservation groups that were excluded from the exclusive Beaverhead Partnership met with Sen. Tester's staff last month to find out what the process is for amendments, changes or additions they were told by staffers that there is no process for amendments currently in place and that no amendments would even be considered before the bill has a hearing in the Senate. Ironically, no date has been set for a hearing either...and word on the street is that right after the first and only hearing Sen Tester will attach his bill as a rider to an upcoming Omnibus bill. Hey, but Sen Tester is all ears, right?

In a political campaign, when people point out that there are easily 30,000 to 50,000 acres of logging, "thinning" and "fuel reduction" projects on national forests in Montana just sitting on the shelves waiting to be implemented (with no appeals or litigation to contend with)...ignore these facts and just state (as Sen Tester has numerous times) "lawsuits have stopped forest management cold" and throw in another "We need to get people workin' in the woods" for good measure and maximum effect.

When people point out that ten years of "stewardship contracting" timber sales on national forests in the northern Rockies have resulted in a lot of logging completed, but a backlog of promised restoration work that runs upwards of $100 million...ignore this economic and ecological reality and simply tell people "We can use money generated from timber sales to pay for restoration."

If people have concerns with Tester's bill allowing military landings in Wilderness (for the first time ever)...ignore them and say "the old way of managing our forests isn't working."

If natural resource policy experts worry that your bill violates NEPA (our nation's bedrock environmental law)... ignore the policy experts and talk about "Montana solutions."  If the public is worried with Wilderness Study Areas, which were protected by Montanans and Sen. Lee Metcalf, losing protections under Tester's "Montana solutions" just say that "not everyone is getting everything they want."

Again, all of this differs greatly from the open, inclusive, transparent public process that has been established to manage these federal public lands, which belong equally to all Americans. Ironically, these public processes were established during the 1970s and 1980s in response to public outrage over the incredible political influence that certain western politicians and certain resource extractive industry's had over public lands management. Unfortunately, looks like things are coming back full circle again. We can do better.

---

by: Matthew Koehler @ Wed Oct 21, 2009 at 18:42:01 PM UTC

Sarcasm aside, Matt (4.00 / 2)

It would be good to see you occasionally give some credence to the Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act which has, after all, had a hearing in the House, is headed for mark-up, has dozens of co-sponsors, and protects a lot more valuable wilderness in Montana than Tester's logging collaboration bill.  Jon's bill, so far, has no co-sponsors, is not slated for a hearing, and is unlikely to find any companion bill coming out of the House.  But, as usual, you're playing politics again here rather than policy -- just like with Baucus' health care bill -- and settling for so much less of a progressive measure than we could and should be fighting for.

---

by: ochenski @ Wed Oct 21, 2009 at 19:28:17 PM UTC

the forest service and BLM began this method of "managing public input" (0.00 / 0)

back in the eighties with the requirements of NEPA. the reagan administration methods of limiting public input has served them well and i see they have perfected the strategy to include nailing down all the alternatives in private meetings before anyone gets a chance to actually participate or affect anything.

that would be two hours of my life i wouldn't miss at the end.....  http://latimesblogs.latimes.co...

---

by: problembear @ Wed Oct 21, 2009 at 21:24:35 PM UTC

Open house, maybe (4.00 / 1)

open ears, no way.

Here's what our good Senator's staffer Aaron Murphy has to say about "listening" to critics:

The loudest criticism, according to Tester staffer Aaron Murphy, has come from the far ends of the spectrum - "those who just don't like wilderness, and those who don't like logging. Frankly, it's a lot of stuff that we've all heard before."

"A lot of stuff we've all heard before"... which is why they don't want to allow anyone to ask questions publicly in a town hall or open house session.

The "Managed Democracy" part of his sessions occurs when he stifles the public being allowed to have their voices heard--questions asked and answered (or not)--in front of their communities, politicians, and government servants. Tester just wants to hear or read comments from people driving down the middle of his faux consensus roadway to affirm his process, his policy, and his politics.

Sounds pretty closed minded to me.

Oh, and for this wilderness supporter, it's not that I don't like logging in general, it's that I don't like logging wilderness (Wilderness Study Areas and currently protected roadless areas).

Much of the debate about Tester revolves around his process, in addition to his bad approach to policy. Those of us who have been in the wilderness debate trenches over the decades know that in order to succeed legislatively with questionable and/or bad policy, you have to control the process. And that is what Tester did with his secret club writing the bills, continues to do with his not-so-open meetings, and appears to want to do with possibly attaching his bill to an omnibus bill.

And Matt, why must you continue to be so condescending to the long time wilderness supporters who frequent LitW?  

---

by: JC @ Wed Oct 21, 2009 at 22:41:40 PM UTC

He's not (2.00 / 2)

why must you continue to be so condescending to the long time wilderness supporters who frequent LitW?

Seems to me Matt's being sarcastic towards the soap-box screamers who blame him for giving them a venue in which to scream, and gets only insult in return.

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Wed Oct 21, 2009 at 23:21:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ah, sarcasm... (0.00 / 0)

Not my favorite type of humor.  I said in an essay on these public meetings that Professor Sheldon Wolin used this phrase "managed democracy" in the title of his very serious and brilliant book "Democracy Inc: Managed Democracy and Inverted Totalitarianism". I don't think this is a subject for "witty" repartee.  I am dead serious about the lack of any humanity and wisdom in Washington and those who desire to be players in politics.  

There is a great essay over at firedoglake by one of my favorite essayists "letsgetitdone" about Kip Sullivan's piece on the dangerous way the polling was done on the so called public option.  Kip has written on the Herndon Alliance and HCAN's role in this mess.  I hear all that Celinda Lake garbage coming out of people that I like here in Montana. (Oh, weren't we smart to call it "public" instead of "government"option.) And once again I heard a party loyalist speak that stupid phrase "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good".  A commenter pointed out that the timid is the real enemy of the good.

The idea of making polling questions to fit your own viewpoint is part of "managed democracy".  And it is tragic for any real reform whether it is our economy, health care or managing the environment.  http://seminal.firedoglake.com...

---

by: Feral Cat @ Thu Oct 22, 2009 at 23:20:12 PM UTC

For what it's worth... (0.00 / 0)

Here is the official Missoula Indy take on Tester's meeting in Missoula. Sure seems to fit into the "managed democracy" category.  

I wasn't able to attend the meeting, but I was told by numerous sources that the only person allowed to speak to the crowd, besides Sen Tester, was the Roseburg Forest Products rep (Daly.  Daly was allowed to read a letter to the whole crowd about how all the mill employees support Tester's bill and how Roseburg just needs more national forest logging to survive (despite profound economic realities). This action also sure seems to fit into the "managed democracy" category. Anyway...

Missoula Independent
October 29, 2009
http://missoulanews.bigskypres...

On the list of things we never thought we'd see in Montana, right alongside the Rolling Stones taking over Washington-Grizzly Stadium and Barack Obama flipping burgers in Butte, was a wilderness advocate stumping for more logging. But sure enough, at Sen. Jon Tester's Oct. 26 open house in Missoula, where he presented his Forest Jobs and Recreation Act, there was a Montana Wilderness Association staffer holding a sign that read, "I support jobs in the woods!"

But like the Stones show a couple years ago, something about Monday's surprisingly subdued event seemed staged. There was the white sheet held at the entrance to the Doubletree Hotel, spray-painted with the words, "Thank You Senator Tester"-just like the one that hung from a logging truck as Tester announced the bill in Townsend in July. And there were many more "homemade" signs planted inside the packed conference room calling for universally agreeable things like clean water and recreation.

We'll give Tester's team credit for their finely tuned rhetorical strategy. They know full well that if you're trying to sell a wilderness bill to Montanans you better not mention wilderness. Instead, they know to talk only about what the bill would do to cut trees, create jobs, manage wildfires and provide access to land to hunt, fish and ride snowmobiles in. Selling wilderness on its merits alone doesn't fly in most corners of Montana. Just ask Pat Williams.

Tester barely mentioned wilderness during his 30-minute slideshow presentation, even though we suspect most Missoulians want much more of it. He then stepped down and let the audience mingle with him and staffers who were manning booths with maps detailing how the bill would cut or protect thousands of acres of Montana forests. Perhaps it was this arrangement-keeping Tester from publicly answering to his critics-that gave the open house such a canned atmosphere.

That's probably what Tester wanted, and it's perhaps why the open house was announced with only four days' notice. In any case, it makes us wonder, if Tester's bill isn't challenged in Missoula, where will it be? And if not at the open house, then when?

We're not saying we oppose the bill. Reconciling the interests of conservationists and the timber industry is critically important. But as we've reported, the bill would set precedents, in both positive and negative ways, meaning it demands intense scrutiny, not a superficial flyby.

Which reminds us of another thing we never thought we'd see in Montana: helicopters landing in wilderness areas, which is exactly what Tester's bill would allow if it moves forward, unquestioned.

---

by: Matthew Koehler @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 15:52:40 PM UTC