172 



Simply put, this bill is one of the most outrageous pieces of special interest, corporate 

 welfare legislation we have ever seen and one of the most damaging pieces of legislation 

 ever proposed for Southeast Alaska and the Tongass National Forest. SEACC strongly 

 o pposes this bill. 



Even the name of this bill is an insult and double-speak at its worst. The Delegation's 

 and L-P's proposal will damage the environment and threaten the Tongass. a national 

 and international treasure. 



We are sure we will hear time and time again today that the recent Supreme Court decision in 

 United States v. Winstar Corp. et al. , No 95-865, (July 1 . 1996) is relevant to the unilateral 

 modifications made by Congress to the two Tongass 50-year pulp contracts in the 1990 

 Tongass Timber Reform Act. Some may take the view that this decision limits the ability of 

 the Congress or the Administration to modify or terminate a contract. Because KPC and 

 Alaska Pulp Company have both filed lawsuits alleging that the Tongass Timber Reform Act 

 breached the contracts or was a "taking" of contract interests, this is not the time or place for a 

 debate on the relevance of this recent decision on past Congressional actions. 



It is SEACC 's position that the relevancy of the Winstar Corp. decision is the wrong question 

 to focus on here. Instead, Congress should carefully consider whether it is good public policy 

 for Congress to take any action today that may tie its hands in the future. The proposed bill 

 will adversely affect the public interest by constraining the Forest Service's discretion to 

 manage and protect public resources on this nation's largest national forest, the Tongass 

 National Forest. We believe Congress should avoid even taking the risk of giving KPC an 

 argument that might constrain a future Congress from taking an action it finds necessary to 

 protect the public's interest in forest resources. 



Our bottom line is that KPC does not need a new long-term contract to obtain timber. KPC is 

 pushing for this bill because it does not want to pay fair market value, like other Tongass 

 timber operators, for Tongass timber. It wants Congress to shield it from the inherent risks 

 that come from competing in the free market. We find it hard to believe that Americans 

 would support such an action by this Congress. 



The Alaska Delegation's frontal assault on the Tongass National Forest. 



This is the latest attack in an unprecedented assault that began in the fall of 1994. Counting 

 this hearing and the Senate hearing scheduled for July 17, 1996, the Delegation has held 14 

 hearings on 11 pieces of legislation. All of these actions have been aimed at rolling back 

 the Tongass Timber Reform Act, increasing clearcutting, and giving over the Tongass, a 

 national and international treasure, for exploitation by private commercial concerns. 

 Chairman Young, your footprints are all over the bill to giveaway the Tongass, dismantle 

 our national forest system, and the effort to hand over 200,000 acres of the Tongass to 

 five (5) new Native for-profit corporations as an amendment to the Presidio Bill. 



