United States-Russia Polar Bear Conservation and Management Act of 2006

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Mr. RAHALL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, the pending measure, as passed by the Senate, may be one of the last items on our schedule this Congress, but it is certainly not the least important. The bill would reauthorize the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act in order to guide the management of our marine fisheries through 2013. We would not be here today if Senator Ted Stevens and Daniel Inouye had not extended an olive branch. I am extremely appreciative of the hard work that they and their staff put into this legislation. I also commend our colleague on this side of the aisle, Tom Allen from Maine, who worked tirelessly on behalf of the fishermen in his district to improve this legislation. And while the pending measure does not do everything I would have liked, it does not roll back the conservation principles in this important fisheries management law. The legislation actually strengthens the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

I support the bill. I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I was going to wait until the very end to respond, but I want to say to the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo), the distinguished chairman of the House Resources Committee, that it has truly been an honor to work with him during his tenure as chairman of our committee. The gentleman has fought hard for those principles that he has believed in. He has accomplished a great deal during his tenure here. I commend him for his tenacity, and he truly has been a fighter for that which he believes. As he has said, we have not agreed on every issue, but we have had our respectful disagreements and we have worked in good faith as well. I believe we have during his tenure as chairman.

I do welcome the incoming ranking member, Mr. Young. I have served on both the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the Resources Committee for my entire tenure in this body. Thirty years we have worked together, and now I am glad to have him as the ranking member on my committee and may he stay that way for a long, long time.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), who has been a true leader on this issue and fought very hard for this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), a valued member of our committee.

If the gentleman would yield.

The gentleman from Oregon is entirely correct. It is my understanding that the bill would permit the Pacific Council process to continue. We recognize that the Pacific Council has made substantial progress and do not intend to disrupt their efforts to develop and implement an appropriate groundfish management program, consistent with this act.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

I appreciate the gentleman's question. I would say that he is entirely correct. In order to help ensure that affected stakeholders have the maximum degree of confidence in the management measures developed by the councils and that those measures are as effective as possible, it is vital that the Science and Statistical Committees operate in an open manner that is receptive to a full spectrum of scientific opinion. Accordingly, it is our expectation that under this legislation, the Science and Statistical Committees would gather information and prepare recommendations in a way that takes into account the research and expertise of a wide range of scientists.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Wu).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen).

Mr. Speaker, this concludes debate on our side of the aisle. Again, commending our chairman, Mr. Pombo, wishing him the best on whatever avenue he pursues in the future. I know that he will be spending a great deal of time on the ranch with his lovely wife, Annette. I wish him Godspeed there.

I thank Mr. Gilchrest for his work on this legislation, those that have spoken on it for the help they have been, especially, as I started out my remarks, I thank Senator Stevens and Senator Inouye who truly extended the olive branch that broke the logjam on this legislation.

As Mr. Allen has already done, I also want to recognize our committee Democratic staff who helped make this bill possible. Chief among them is Lori Sonken, as well as Jeff Petrich and Charlotte Stevenson.

I thank Mr. Pombo's staff as well. His staff has put in numerous hours on this over a long, long period of time. Without their work we would not be here today celebrating the passage of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4075) to amend the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 to provide for better understanding and protection of marine mammals, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, which reauthorizes portions of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, authored by Resources Chairman Richard Pombo.

The Marine Mammal Protection Act was enacted in 1972 with the purpose of protecting and restoring marine mammal populations. The act has been very successful over its 30-year history in recovering marine mammal populations, and this legislation builds on those accomplishments.

Recently, there have been many news reports on the status of polar bears and other arctic marine mammal species. H.R. 4075 includes language which will allow for increased international cooperation to help protect the shared U.S.-Russia polar bear population. In fact, without these provisions, the future of polar bear populations in Russia is very much in jeopardy. It also authorizes much needed research which will afford us the opportunity to better understand the needs of marine mammals and give us the means to better conserve these species for future generations.

H.R. 4075 also authorizes the Prescott Marine Mammal Stranding program. The Prescott program has been very successful in recovering and rehabbing thousands of stranded marine mammals. The Prescott program supports a network of facilities around the Nation that have dedicated themselves to the recovery of stranded marine mammals.

H.R. 4075 includes additional provisions which will support the development of cleaner fishing gear to reduce interactions with marine mammals. It also authorizes research to develop nonlethal measures to control nuisance pinniped populations. Finally, H.R. 4075 clarifies the permit requirements for marine mammals on public display.

While it is not a major reauthorization of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, these amendments have been carefully crafted and are specifically designed to enhance the fundamental conservation goals of this important law. This is a good conservation bill. It is good for marine mammals, and it should be overwhelmingly adopted.

Finally, I wish to thank Chairman Henry Hyde of the International Relations Committee and Chairman Bill Thomas of the Ways and Means Committee and their staffs for their cooperation in moving this legislation. At this time I will include in the Record an exchange of letters between our committees on this bill.

I urge an ``aye'' vote on H.R. 4075.

Committee on Resources,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, July 13, 2006.

Hon. William M. Thomas,

Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means,

Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman: I ask your cooperation to help schedule

consideration by the House of Representatives of H.R. 4075,

the Marine Mammal Protection Act Amendments of 2006, during

the week of July 17-21, 2006. I have proposed an amendment to

this bill which includes text from S. 2013, the United

States-Russia Polar Bear Conservation and Management Act of

2005. The Committee on Ways and Means has a jurisdictional

interest in this Senate bill because of its inclusion of

trade measures.

My staff has worked with yours to develop a mutually-agreed

on text for this amendment, and I have enclosed this

amendment for your review. I ask that you not seek a referral

of H.R. 4075 based on the inclusion of this language to

expedite Floor scheduling. Of course, this action would not

be considered as waiving or affecting your jurisdiction over

the subject matter of the amendment, nor as precedent for any

future referrals of similar measures. Moreover, if the bill

is conference with the Senate, I would support naming Ways

and Means Committee members to the conference committee for

the trade provisions. I would also be pleased to include this

letter and your response in the Congressional Record during

consideration of the bill on the Floor.

Mr. Chairman, I have been very pleased with the tremendous

degree of cooperation between our two Committees. Your staff,

especially Angela Ellard and Steven Schrage, has been

responsive and thoughtful, and my staff very much appreciates

their support and teamwork. I hope that you will give my

request serious consideration and I look forward to your

response.

Sincerely,

Richard Pombo,

Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately as the result of a death in the family and my need to return to Illinois by Saturday morning for the funeral services, I was unable to cast my votes on the following pieces of legislation. I request that the Record state my intentions on these votes had I been present to vote.

I would have voted ``aye'' for H. Res. 1100, the rule providing for consideration of H.R. 6406, to modify temporarily certain rates of duty and make other technical amendments to the trade laws, to extend certain trade preference programs, and for other purposes.

I would have voted ``aye'' on H.R. 5948, the Belarus Democracy Reauthorization Act of 2006. Passage of the Belarus Democracy Reauthorization Act supports Belarus as an emerging democracy with U.S. assistance by strengthening democratic institutions and processes within the country. Our country has a long history of promoting democracy worldwide and this bill will assist the people of Belarus with foreign aid and the risk of U.S. sanctions should the recent political upheavals and the repression of democratic groups in the country continue.

I would have voted ``present'' in response to the Call of the House. I am sorry to have missed Speaker J. Dennis Hastert's farewell speech. I respect and admire him, and am proud to serve with him in the Illinois congressional delegation. His long tenure as the Speaker of the House is historic, and he will be celebrated as an esteemed statesman.

I would have voted ``aye'' on H.R. 6406, to modify temporarily certain rates of duty and make other technical amendments to the trade laws, to extend certain trade preference programs, and for other purposes. This package contains trade provisions I have supported in the past and will continue to do so in the future. These provisions will help expand the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers and exporters within the global marketplace.

I would have voted ``aye'' on the Conference Report on H.R. 5682, the Henry J. Hyde U.S.-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006. India has been a longtime and important ally to the U.S. and U.S. assistance in the development of a civilian nuclear energy program will only cement the strategic partnership between our two countries. With the passage of the cooperation agreement with India the U.S. can be assured the peaceful sharing of nuclear energy technologies under international safeguards while preventing the spread of nuclear weapon information to rogue countries, such as North Korea and Iran.

I would have voted ``aye'' on H.J. Res. 102, making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2007. While I am disappointed that we were not able to pass the remaining appropriations bills under regular order, I feel that it is important that we continue to fund our government program at adequate levels until we can address the appropriations bills in the next session of Congress.

Finally, I would have voted ``aye'' on the following bills, considered under suspension of the rules:

1. H.R. 6407--Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act

2. H. Res. 1104--Providing for a severance payment for employees of leadership offices and committees of the House of Representatives who are separated from employment solely and directly as a result of a change in the party holding the majority of the membership in the House

3. H.R. 6060--Department of State Authorities Act of 2006

4. S. 4050--Sergeant First Class Robert Lee `Bobby' Hollar, Jr. Post Office Building Designation Act

5. S. 4093--A bill to amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 to extend a suspension of limitation on the period for which certain borrowers are eligible for guaranteed assistance

6. H.R. 5304--Preventing Harassment through Outbound Number Enforcement Act

7. S. 3821--COMPETE Act of 2006

8. S. 4042--A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit disruptions of funerals of members or former members of the Armed Forces

9. H.R. 6427--To increase the amount in certain funding agreements relating to patents and nonprofit organizations to be used for scientific research, development, and education, and for other purposes

10. H.R. 6428--To authorize the Secretary of the Army to carry out certain elements of the project for hurricane and storm damage reduction, Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana

11. S. 2735--Dam Safety Act of 2006

12. S. Con. Res. 123--A concurrent resolution providing for correction to the enrollment of the bill H.R. 5946

13. H.R. 5946--Stevens-Inouye International Fisheries Monitoring and Compliance Legacy Act of 2006

14. H.R. 4075--Marine Mammal Protection Act Amendments of 2006

I thank the gentleman for yielding. Everybody has been thanked on the floor. I double that.

This is a good piece of legislation. It has been a long time coming. I want to thank the ranking member, of course, Mr. Gilchrest and Mr. Oberstar, and the chairman. This bill will do good for our oceans and for our fisheries. Although it is far from being perfect, we expect to have this finalized tonight and, as has been mentioned before, because it originated in Alaska, the 200-mile limit, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, we will continue to work to improve it. Because it is very, very important that we keep our fisheries sustainable and also to make sure that our oceans are not only protected and conserved but provide the food that is necessary for this Nation of ours.

Again, a lot of work was done, but I can tell you frankly it was the staff on both sides of the aisle, especially on this side, as has already been mentioned. Dave Whaley, who actually used to have hair before he started working on this bill. He doesn't have it anymore. Bonnie Bruce. She is still, I think, relatively attractive and she has been through agony for all types of activity to get this bill done.

I again thank the people that understand the importance and the staff does the majority of work on this. We did do it. The Senate side did it. Now it is the

House side's turn to do what is right for the oceans.

Mr. Speaker, while I support this legislation, there are several provisions which need further explanation.

Section 107 provides that the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Regional Councils and the Council on Environmental Policy, shall revise the procedures for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act. Those procedures shall integrate NEPA's environmental analytical procedures with the procedures for preparing and approving fishery management plans and amendments under the Magnuson-Stevens Act and shall conform the timelines for NEPA compliance with the timelines for the approval of fishery management plans and amendments established under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The only way those requirements can be met for plans developed by a Council is to use the Council's plan development processes. That means NEPA procedures must be integrated into the Council process which will be the vehicle for identifying the problem to be addressed, identifying the reasonable alternatives to address that problem, identifying the preferred alternative, and examining the environmental consequences, positive and negative, of the preferred alternative and the reasonable alternatives. After the Council completes its processes, the Secretary will have the final responsibility for determining if NEPA has been complied with and may disapprove the plan, plan amendment, or regulation pursuant to section 304(a)(3) of this act.

In addition, there are a number of provisions in this legislation which deal with the, amount and type of information which needs to be submitted to the Secretary by a variety of entities and how that information is to be treated by the Secretary. It is important that proprietary information, confidential economic information, personal information such as tax forms, and other sensitive information be maintained in a manner which does not compromise an individual or a company's reasonable expectation for privacy. The Secretary must develop regulations for the use and the protection of such information which weighs the need for the information for management purposes with a reasonable person's expectation for privacy.

I am also concerned that the provision requiring that harvest levels be set to prevent overfishing not be interpreted to shut down entire fisheries if one stock of a multi-species complex is experiencing overfishing. The purpose of the act is to provide a healthy fishery resource, but it is also to promote commercial and recreational fishing and support communities dependent on the fishery resources. The act should not be used as a tool for stopping all fishing activities in U.S. waters. The keys to achieving these goals are balance, flexibility, and common sense by the fishery managers. The provisions dealing with ending overfishing, rebuilding overfished fisheries, and setting harvest levels to prevent overfishing all need to be taken in the context of the National Standards and need to be viewed with an eye toward balance, flexibility, and common sense.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 5946) to amend the Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to authorize activities to promote improved monitoring and compliance for high seas fisheries, or fisheries governed by international fishery management agreements, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5946, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 2006. I want to thank Senator Stevens and Senator Inouye for their hard work in getting this authorization to the Senate and to the House. I also want to thank Chairman Richard Pombo, who has been a champion for the recreational and commercial fishermen of this Nation. We will miss his leadership greatly. And I want to thank and support all the other Members and their staff that have been involved in this process.

At this point I will insert in the Record an exchange of letters between Chairman Pombo and Chairman Boehlert regarding this bill and between Chairman Pombo and Chairman Thomas regarding the polar bear provisions

contained in title IX, originally part of H.R. 4075.

House of Representatives,

Committee on Resources,

Washington, DC, July 13, 2006.

Hon. William M. Thomas,

Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, Longworth House Office

Building, Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman: I ask your cooperation to help schedule

consideration by the House of Representatives of H.R. 4075,

the Marine Mammal Protection Act Amendments of 2006, during

the week of July 17-21, 2006. I have proposed an amendment to

this bill which includes text from S. 2013, the United

States-Russia Polar Bear Conservation and Management Act of

2005. The Committee on Ways and Means has a jurisdictional

interest in this Senate bill because of its inclusion of

trade measures.

My staff has worked with yours to develop a mutually-agreed

on text for this amendment, and I have enclosed this

amendment for your review. I ask that you not seek a referral

of H.R. 4075 based on the inclusion of this language to

expedite Floor scheduling. Of course, this action would not

be considered as waiving or affecting your jurisdiction over

the subject matter of the amendment, nor as precedent for any

future referrals of similar measures. Moreover, if the bill

is conferenced with the Senate, I would support naming Ways

and Means Committee members to the conference committee for

the trade provisions. I would also be pleased to include this

letter and your response in the Congressional Record during

consideration of the bill on the Floor.

Mr. Chairman, I have been very pleased with the tremendous

degree of cooperation between our two Committees. Your staff,

especially Angela Ellard and Steven Schrage, has been

responsive and thoughtful, and my staff very much appreciates

their support and teamwork. I hope that you will give my

request serious consideration and I look forward to your

response.

Sincerely,

Richard W. Pombo,

Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to thank Jim Saxton from New Jersey for his work on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to yield such time as he may consume to the chairman of the Resources Committee, Richard Pombo.

Thank you, Mr. Pallone.

I want to yield now to the part of the country that has the largest fishery, to Congressman Don Young.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden).

I want to thank Mr. Rahall and his staff and the Members on that side of the aisle, and Mr. Pombo for his effort, Mr. Young, and Mr. Jim Saxton, and certainly the staff behind me for all their work.

This is not a perfect bill. There is no utopia in the legislative process. Through consensus and dialogue, we have tried to integrate the ideas of the Members, and we feel very strongly that we have come up with a bill that will improve, sustain and restore the ecology of the Nation's oceans.

I urge my colleagues for an ``aye'' vote on this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.