Otter focuses on easing land rules

EDITOR’S NOTE: This is the first in a two-part series examining the legislative records of the two members of Congress who are seeking another term representing North Idaho, U.S. Sen. Mike Crapo and U.S. Rep. Butch Otter. Today’s report looks at Otter’s record, and his opponent, Democrat Naomi Preston; next Sunday, we’ll examine Crapo’s record, and his write-in challenger, Scott McClure.

BOISE – In his second term in Congress, U.S. Rep. Butch Otter has called for a time limit on wilderness study areas, tried to exempt small public water systems from drinking water regulations, and railed against aid to the Palestinians.

He twice tried to give older Americans the option of skipping Social Security benefits in favor of a hefty income tax deduction, and he proposed easing restrictions on travel to Cuba.

Though the 1st District congressman made his biggest national splash with his opposition to various sections of the anti-terrorism USA Patriot Act, a Spokesman-Review analysis of his legislative record shows that he focused mostly on reducing environmental regulation and, secondarily, on foreign relations.

“Anytime we get a conservation issue that in one way or another tries to control private property, I have a problem with that,” Otter said in an interview.

In the 108th Congress, Otter sponsored 26 bills, including four amendments. He also was listed as a co-sponsor on 294 more, but many bills have dozens or even hundreds of co-sponsors.

A look at the bills he sponsored himself shows seven aimed at reducing environmental regulation and four on foreign relations. There were three on the Patriot Act, and two each on four other topics: Social Security; health care; selling or exchanging specific federal land in Idaho; and implementing proposed agreements approved by state leaders.

Otter also proposed one bill to rename a federal building; one to impose duties on semiconductors produced by a Korean firm; one to settle a property dispute; and one to congratulate the nuclear energy industry on its 50th anniversary.

Two of the 26 bills passed the House: Otter’s amendment to prohibit spending any money to enforce the section of the Patriot Act that allows “sneak-and-peek” or delayed-notification searches; and his bill to rename a Boise building housing the U.S. Geological Survey and Bureau of Reclamation after early hydrographer F.H. Newell.

Otter chuckled about the naming bill, which he said was requested by “the people out here at the USGS and Bureau of Reclamation.”

“We spend so much time naming buildings,” he said. “Until they get down to a system where they want to number them sequentially, I’ll go along.”

Otter’s Patriot Act provision didn’t pass the Senate after it won a 309-118 vote in the House, but it got him a huge amount of attention, including being labeled a “terrorist tipster” by the U.S. Department of Justice.

“He’s been a national leader on this issue, which is really striking for a second-term congressman from Idaho,” said Boise State University political scientist Jim Weatherby. “Rarely do first- or second-term congressmen distinguish themselves as he has done, particularly from Idaho.”

Asked why he’s been so willing to buck his own party leaders on the Patriot Act issue, Otter says quickly, “Because they’re wrong.”

He maintains the act goes too far, interfering with constitutional rights.

“If we went to war to preserve freedom, we’re not doing a very good job of it,” Otter said. “It makes no difference to me whether it’s my government that takes my freedom away, or some of these foreign terrorists.”

Environmental legislation

Otter’s legislative focus on minimizing environmental regulation is consistent with positions he’s taken throughout his political career, including his high-profile fight with the Environmental Protection Agency over his own violations of the Clean Water Act on his property near the Boise River.

Otter paid $50,000 in fines for the violations in 2001.

“It resonates, particularly with his supporters,” Weatherby said. “That doesn’t put him out of the mainstream of Idaho politics, by any means.”

Otter sees many environmental regulations as obstacles to free enterprise.

“Sure, I want a clean environment, I want clean air and water,” Otter said. “But I want to be able to live and work here.”

Otter’s attempts to reduce environmental regulation included HR 1153, which he touted as a way to end the gridlock over future use of thousands of acres of wilderness study areas. The bill, introduced last year, would have set a 10-year time limit, after which, if the areas hadn’t been designated as wilderness, they’d be opened up to multiple uses including road-building and logging.

While Otter argued that the plan would eliminate incentives for wilderness advocates to seek endless delays, critics said it would just shift the advantage of delays to wilderness opponents. The bill had 17 co-sponsors, including Idaho Rep. Mike Simpson, but it was shunted off to a subcommittee and there it sits.

Otter said he gets particularly frustrated when environmental questions cause delays in project approvals. “I don’t think it should take us all the time it appears to be taking us to make an environmental decision,” he said.

That was part of his thinking in introducing HR 3400, to declare that certain man-made waterways “are not navigable waters” and therefore not subject to regulation by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the EPA.

Otter also proposed HR 2602, to make it optional rather than mandatory for the U.S. secretary of Interior to designate critical habitat when a species is declared endangered; and HR 4717, to allow public water systems that serve fewer than 10,000 people to be exempted from drinking water contamination rules if it isn’t economically feasible for them to comply.

Both dealt with what Otter sees as excesses in federal environmental regulations.

Middle East matters

Otter is less well-known for speaking out on foreign policy issues, but he’s introduced one bill and two amendments to restrict U.S. aid to Palestinians if terrorist attacks against Israel continue, and one bill to ease restrictions on trade and travel to Cuba.

He likened the Palestinian aid issue to the allowance he gave his four children when they were young – if they misbehaved, they didn’t get the money.

“It’s not like they earned it,” he said. “We’ll support ‘em when they do right.”

Otter even used his allowance example in arguments on the House floor.

However, he said, “That could never pass. The first time I tried it, I really thought I had a chance, because I talked to a lot of people.”

Otter proposed dividing Palestinian aid into four quarterly payments, with each payment to be made only if there had been no terrorist attacks on Israel by Palestinians in the previous three months.

He said he got opposition from the Bush administration, which didn’t want that kind of control on foreign policy, and from other interests who were worried their aid, too, would become conditional.

Social Security

Otter’s Social Security proposals came from his own personal experience. A millionaire who once was married to the daughter of the richest man in Idaho, Otter, 62, said he figured he’ll be due several hundred thousand in Social Security old-age benefits that he really doesn’t need.

“I got this idea,” he said.

He figured if older Americans had the option, some would skip old-age benefits in exchange for an income tax deduction. He proposed figuring the value of the future benefits, and letting folks deduct it from their taxes over seven or 10 years. If they died during that time, the deduction could come from their estate. That way, the Social Security program would save money, and the tax break would be funded by the general treasury.

“Now, obviously I’ve got to make a lot of money in order to take the tax deduction,” he said. “They set there and said, ‘Nobody would be interested in that.’ Then what’s it going to hurt to try?” Then, he said, some argued that it would cost too much money.

“It still made sense to me,” he said.

Otter introduced two bills on the topic, HR 3279 in 2003 and HR 3877 in 2004, but neither went anywhere. Both bills called for a one-time, irrevocable option for older Americans to give up benefits in exchange for the tax deduction. Those proposals got little attention, and Otter hasn’t sought publicity on them.

“It’s the kind of bill that takes time,” he said. “I’m going to continue to bring it up.”

Otter made headlines in his first run for Congress when he called Social Security “a failure,” then recanted.

“When the Republicans talk about privatization, they don’t talk about this approach,” Weatherby said regarding the tax-deduction plan. Otter’s plan, he said, is “obviously not the solution to the Social Security crisis in this country.”

Otter also has introduced two health care bills, one to adjust payment rules for outpatient tests and one to set up a $20 million a year, three-year “demonstration program” to encourage more health care professionals to practice in rural areas.

The second bill, Weatherby said, was “right on target when you talk about rural Idaho. Accessibility of health care is a critical issue.”

That bill, HR 3512, had 13 co-sponsors, but didn’t pass.

“It’s worth doing,” Otter said, recalling the movie “Doc Hollywood” with Michael J. Fox, which he saw once on an airplane. “I believe they’d get out here and they’d spend three or four years, and say, ‘Hey, I kinda like this lifestyle. … I want to spend my career out here.’ “

Otter’s legislative track record shows that he’s “pretty active, really,” Weatherby said, “and involved in a lot of legislation, sponsoring several significant pieces.”

Overall, Otter said, he thought his greatest legislative accomplishment in his second term was “returning more responsibility for the states back to the states, whether it’s the healthy forest initiative or environmental regulation. But, he said, “I don’t think we’ve accomplished enough of it.”