Law, College of
Title
Sacrificing Legislative Integrity at the Altar of Appropriations Riders: A Constitutional Crisis
Document Type
Article
Date of this Version
1997
Abstract
The technique of appending substantive provisions to appropriations
bills has become a favorite tool of the legislative trade in
recent years. Congress has employed appropriations riders to dictate
the outcome of public policy issues ranging from abortion to
oil development in pristine wilderness areas. Riders have been used
with particularly destructive effect to circumvent long-standing environmental
policies, especially those involving the use of natural
resources and public lands. In many cases, the policies affected
were the result of decades of activity in Congress and in the courts,
and retain broad public and legislative support. Appropriations riders
have also allowed these significant changes in policy to be
made without public input or legislative accountability. The policy
changes implemented through the appropriations process would
likely not survive the scrutiny of natural resources committees and
full floor debate. Appropriations riders have mandated dramatic
changes in these carefully brokered policies, with highly disruptive
effects on the long-term management and the sustainability of the
public lands and natural resources.
This Article explores several recent environmental riders and
proposed riders, and their likely long-term effects. In particular, it
focuses on the effects of the 1995 Rescissions Act--specifically
the Emergency Timber Salvage Rider3--on the management of natural
resources within federal forest lands in the Pacific Northwest.
In an attempt to provide relief to communities dependent on logging
of public lands, this rider undermined decades of land management
planning and overturned policies developed through extended
litigation and negotiations between industry, environmentalists,
state and local governments, and the executive branch of the
federal government. The cumulative environmental effects of the
rider are likely to persist long after the "emergency" indicated by
the rider has passed. Yet, because of the abbreviated nature of the
appropriations process, neither the public nor the legislators who
voted on the timber rider were aware of its potentially far-reaching
consequences.
This Article argues that the appropriations process is an ill-suited
vehicle for formulating major changes in policy and establishing
national priorities. Indeed, the repeated abuse of the process
to force executive action and, curtail judicial oversight has created
a serious crisis. This Article examines several possible remedies,
including the possibility of stricter judicial scrutiny of legislation
passed by rider, as well as the enactment of line-item veto legislation
and legislation that would give congressional germaneness
rules (limiting the subject matter of provisions that can be appended
to a bill) the force of law. Such legislation may be a step
in the right direction; however, it may raise constitutional challenges,
and, in any event, none of these options would go far
enough to prevent future legislative subterfuge. Moreover, as a
practical matter, the fact that an interest is ,deemed a "right" does
not necessarily preclude erosion of that right through appropriations
riders..

Comments
Published in Harvard Environmental Law Review Vol. 21 (1997), pp. 457-535.