OCR Text |
Show McKaySoundsOff About Impouded Funding Washington-ongress-' man Gunn cKay expressed ex-pressed disny overthe announcemeioy the Administration Ad-ministration lat funds for the RunEnviron-mental RunEnviron-mental Assis.ice Program Pro-gram (REAFhad been impounded. "This is ather example ex-ample of thftdminis-tration's thftdminis-tration's faile to be responsive toie needs of the West a a direct failure to cai out the law," McKay id. "This program, whi provided provid-ed funds for il conservation, con-servation, hj been a solid successi Utah. It has providdrriga-tion providdrriga-tion pipeline range management, d leveling, lev-eling, water :ontrol structures, ai other beneficial soibnser-vation soibnser-vation practici It is not logical th these funds be impouid, and I have sent a ter to the Office of nage-ment nage-ment and Bud, expressing ex-pressing my xeme dissatisfaction h this step." McKay said RE construction con-struction had domore than any otheringle program to presie the rural environment. Furthermore, Fur-thermore, he added, the program's cost was borne largely by the recipients, rec-ipients, and the federal investment was a bargain. bar-gain. "In REAP funding, farmers far-mers pay at least half, usually two thirds," McKay Mc-Kay said. "When these funds are impounded, the net result will be higher operating costs for farmers far-mers and cattlemen and, ultimately, higher food prices." Besides blocking a good program, McKay said, withholding these funds raised a more serious question. "When Congress appropriates ap-propriates funds for an program," McKay said, "that program has Constitutional Con-stitutional authority to be implemented unless the President vetoes it. The President did not veto this measure; he signed it into law. This back-door approach for withholding legislation is a frightening development develop-ment and represents another way in which the power of the Executive is growing beyond what the Constitution intended." |