Idaho Wilderness Hearings

Statement:

Ms. Robertson. I'd ask you not to read my testimony because what I'd like to say to you is more important than what I've written here. I consulted an attorney yesterday. He gave me an overwhelming reason why hard-release language would be very damaging. And that is because should we pass a bill which—what I'm saying to you is not on my testimony. So I would rather you'd listen to what I'm saying, please. If we passed a bill which hard-release language was included, investors would be entitled to rely upon that as broad public policy. And should we decide—should future genera- tions at any time ever decide that they wanted to change that even through an act of Congress, we would not only have to pass the bill through Congress, we would also have to pay those people back. Very likely we could be sued for damages to them for having— their having relied on the bill that we had passed. And I don't think the people of Idaho or any other part of the United States would want to assume that kind of liability in order just to support the forest and mining interests.