I'd like to start by empathizing with the concerns of Senator Murkowski.
Montana may not be as large, as sparsely populated, and as far away from Washington as Alaska.
But Montana is large, sparsely populated and far away.
The federal government owns about one-third of our land. It is to put it lightly, a very influential and sometimes controversial neighbor.
We are significantly affected by federal agency decisions that are made far away from Montana, either in Washington D.C. or in a distant regional office. EPA is in Denver. BPA is in Portland. The National Marine Fisheries Service, which determines what must be done to recover the salmon, is in Seattle. The Corps of Engineers is in Omaha.
We often feel that these offices make decisions that don't take adequate account of Montana's interests, whether it's BPA considering the effect of rate increases on a small aluminum plant in Columbia Falls, or the Corps favoring downstream over upstream interests on the Missouri River.
So I share Senator Murkowski's frustration with the way this system works, or, sometimes, doesn't work.
However, I am concerned about the proposal to create a separate region for Alaska. It would be costly. It would give special treatment to a single state. It may raise concerns from the other states in Region 10, who may worry that they'll get short shrift.
And, by creating a full-blown 11th EPA region for a single state, we could threaten the balance between the goals of, on one hand, maintaining a national system of environmental laws and, on the other, being sensitive to local concerns.
So, at this point, I am skeptical about S. 1311. It may be a more radical approach than is necessary in order to strike the right balance.
That said, I appreciate Senator Murkowski's concern and look forward to the testimony.