In a May 1 news release, Senator Angus King, a member of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and Ranking Member of the National Parks Subcommittee, criticized the Trump Administration for drastic cuts to the National Park Service’s budget.

In an ENR committee hearing this week, King questioned Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum on the rationale behind cutting the chronically-underfunded park service funding by a third when there is a history of a deferred maintenance backlog. 

 “Let's talk about the National Park Service," said Senator King. "You and I talked about this before. [The] National Park Service budget is cut by one third. About $1 billion, which is one day of the Iran war just to put it in context. I don't understand why. In terms of the overall budget, in terms of what is being proposed for expenditures in many other areas, why are we cutting the most popular program the federal government runs? I understand there's always room for rightsizing and analysis of staffing and those kinds of things, but this is not a gotcha question. I'm puzzled why the administration would cut by one third the funding of one of the most important agencies that we have in terms of direct interface with the public? It’s not just about people at the parks. They need the backup from the rest of the organization. Why such a major cut?”

The release said that Secretary Burgum replied, “You said a number of things that were qualifying in there, but I think there is a belief that we can deliver the services that people desire and the outcomes people are looking for. One thing I found as governor and I’m finding in this role is there is a high degree of interest in inputs and less interest in outcomes. If you said ‘the goal is, Secretary, please deliver higher customer satisfaction at all of your parks. Go get it done as efficiently as you can, we want to have citizens very satisfied.’ But it’s never about satisfaction. It’s always about the spending like a bigger input somehow implies a better outcome. I just don’t believe that."

King replied: “I would understand that, but has been an outside consultant's study of the staff size or internal study? If there has been such, I would certainly like to see it. You probably knew I was going to bring this chart. This is FTEs in the National Park Service going back 10 or 15 years. Here's where we are now. We were understaffed back then. The number we were working from was 23,000 and now we are down to about 15,000 I think. So this is where we are going. Again, if there is a study or a rational basis for the cuts being made, I just don't see it."

Later in the exchange, King raised concerns about massive staffing cuts and how those, coupled with the budget cuts, could harm visitor satisfaction in the future.

"As a lifelong advocate for conservation and Chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks, Senator King is among the Senate’s most prominent voices advocating for our national parks," the release said. "Senator King helped lead the passage the Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA) into law; the legislation that included the Legacy Restoration Fund (LRF). Because of his work, in 2020, Senator King was awarded the inaugural National Park Foundation (NPF) 'Hero' Award. Since the creation of the LRF, Senator King has pushed park leaders to discuss funding maintenance efforts, maintaining a sufficient NPS workforce, and managing growing park visitation. Senator King’s work on the National Parks Subcommittee is the culmination of more than four decades of work on land conservation efforts in Maine, including helping to establish the Land for Maine’s Future program in 1987 and supporting extensive conservation projects during his time as Governor."