Sedona-Red Rock National Scenic Area Act of 2010

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of my legislation, H.R. 4823, the Sedona Red Rocks National Scenic Area Act.

I have often said that the congressional district I am fortunate to represent is the most beautiful in the country. The iconic red rocks that surround the Sedona community and extend into the Verde Valley are indeed a national treasure that is unparalleled. Millions of visitors come from across the Nation and around the globe each year to see the red rocks.

The communities throughout Red Rock Country in Arizona have, for years, discussed the long-term protection of the amazing national resource that surrounds the area. A nonpartisan community coalition came together to advocate for protection of the red rocks through a National Scenic Area, as designated by Congress.

Preserving the natural beauty of the red rocks will ensure that our great-grandchildren will be able to enjoy this unique site just as we do. Just as important, it will attract new visitors and more business to the surrounding communities, getting folks to work during this economic downturn. This bill is necessary to secure these tremendous benefits.

Last year, I circulated draft legislation to local stakeholders, to supporters, and to those with concerns. The Forest Service, the city government, the local Chamber of Commerce, the coalition, Realtors, small business owners, and concerned citizens provided valuable comments and edits to the text of this proposed bill. Through the House Natural Resources Committee, the bill has been further amended by both Republicans and Democrats and was reported from committee without objection.

Good ideas and good policy come from the people, and this bill is the culmination of much debate and feedback in the communities it will affect. Thanks to the involvement of so many people with so many different perspectives, we have put together legislation that will work better for the Sedona area now and in the future. It is the first step forward in moving towards meaningful, long-term protection of the area and towards economic development for the region.

Once again, Mr. Speaker, this is a low-cost jobs project. There is no cost to this. It is a project that I have been looking for that creates jobs that requires Federal action, not Federal spending.

It's appalling, but not surprising, that my esteemed colleagues on the other side of the aisle oppose a low-cost jobs project. They clearly do not understand what's happening to the American people who do not have a job. And when you do not have a job right now, nothing else matters. And it is unbelievable to me that, again, partisan bickering in Washington--not in Sedona--is going to stop a job creation bill.

It's time that Washington started listening to the American people. The people in Sedona are able to put aside partisan bickering and come together for the good of the community and to create jobs, and Washington cannot do the same? Believe me, I will let the folks back home know who rose in opposition, who let partisan bickering drown out their voices and drown out their common sense.

I have always said it is the American people that are going to turn this country around, not Washington, and this is exactly why. This is exactly why: Partisan bickering that gridlocks Washington.

Shame on you.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have concerns about how this ``National Scenic Area'' designation will affect the safety, welfare, and economic livelihoods of those who live and work within this 160,000-acre proposal.

Mr. Speaker, there is no underlying act for national scenic areas, as is the case for wilderness proposals and wild and scenic river designations. Instead, unless guidelines are set limiting how restrictive the designation will be, a National Scenic Area designation is accompanied by only hope and uncertainty.

H.R. 4823 is silent on everything but the fact that land exchanges are prohibited. This sort of vague and open-ended delegation of authority is an invitation to litigation and bureaucratic overreach. So for that reason, Mr. Speaker, I cannot support this legislation in its current form.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Apparently the gentlelady from Arizona wasn't listening to what I said in my opening remarks as to what concerns I had with this bill. I wish that she had yielded to me because I could have asked a question and maybe she could have enlightened me. But my understanding is there is absolutely nothing in Federal law that designates or describes what a scenic area is. Unlike a wilderness area, unlike a wild and scenic river, nothing describes what a scenic area is. I said in my opening remarks that the reason I oppose this is simply because the vagueness of this opens up potential litigation that will likely affect those surrounding this area. That's what my concern is. I would be willing to work with anybody to try to resolve these issues, but to suggest that my opposition to this is because I am opposed to jobs, it simply misses the point. The gentlelady was simply not listening to what I was saying.

Now, I do have a concern when there are Federal dollars that are spent, but there are no Federal dollars on this; it's simply that we don't have what a designation is. In fact, one could say, Mr. Speaker, if one were thinking in a mischievous way, that the only job creation that legislation like this would create, if it were passed, would be for the trial bar because they could sue over something that is not described in statute. Who wins by that? I don't think the private property owners around this area would win by that.

So I'm disappointed that she would use the tone of argument against our opposition as not trying to work together. There is just simply no designation for ``scenic'' in Federal statute. Don't you think we ought to have some designation before we designate something ``scenic''?

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4823) to establish the Sedona-Red Rock National Scenic Area in the Coconino National Forest, Arizona, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4823, introduced by Congresswoman Ann Kirkpatrick, would authorize the establishment of the Sedona-Red Rock National Scenic Area in the Coconino National Forest in northern Arizona.

This legislation would protect approximately 160,000 acres by restricting land exchanges within the scenic area and by managing the land within the scenic area for conservation purposes. The bill specifically provides that the establishment of the national scenic area shall not impact surrounding land, roads or easements nor will it impact utility easements, the management of State, municipal or private land or the management of surrounding national forest land.

Mr. Speaker, 4823 is a good bill. Representative Kirkpatrick has worked diligently with residents, officials, and business owners to craft this legislation, making it widely popular in the community of Sedona.

I urge Members to support H.R. 4823.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Arizona, Representative Kirkpatrick.

Mr. Speaker, it's been clear from listening to my colleague Mrs. Kirkpatrick that not only she, but the community, recognizes that this bill is good for business and good for jobs. People come from all over the world to enjoy the unique red rock landscape and the world-class recreational opportunities this place offers.

This bill helps conserve that landscape that the community relies on for tourism. In fact, there were several amendments offered by the other side of the aisle at markup, and all of the amendments offered by the minority were accepted and they addressed their concerns then. In markup, Mr. Flake also added to this clause a section that provided that the construction or siting of transportation projects or water projects within the scenic area or outside the scenic area would not be impacted.

This is a good bill which the people of Mrs. Kirkpatrick's district strongly support. The community has diligently worked together to help get this bill here today, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise to a question of the privileges of the House and offer the resolution previously noticed.

I do, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, the rules of the House are important. Following these rules increases the trust of the American people in our institution, in our actions, a trust that is pivotal to the survival of our Republic.

The questions of privilege of the House in this resolution come to the floor by virtue of rule IX, which states in part: ``Questions of privilege shall be first those affecting the rights of the House collectively, its safety, dignity, and the integrity of its proceedings.'' Integrity of its proceedings, Madam Speaker.

Further: ``Those questions of privilege shall be those affecting the rights, reputation, and conduct of its Members.''

Madam Speaker, the reputation and the conduct of Members and the integrity of our proceedings is in question and is highlighted in this resolution. What could be more questionable than having this House adopt further affronts to this great country in a lame duck session.

As the resolution states in just one ``whereas,'' ``Whereas reconvening the House of Representatives in a lame

duck session to address major new legislation subverts the will of the American people, lessens accountability, and does lasting damage to the dignity and integrity of this body's proceedings.''

Madam Speaker, the intent of the majority is very clear. They want to spend more, they want to tax more, they want to borrow more, and they wish to harm more job creation in this lame duck session. And the American people don't want this.

To positively represent our constituents, I urge the Speaker to allow this resolution to be considered.

Madam Speaker, I appeal the ruling of the Chair.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, on September 23, 2010, I inadvertently missed rollcall No. 534, but had I been present I would have voted ``yea.''

Stated against: