Wasteful EPA Programs Elimination Act of 2017

Madam Chairman, it is my distinct honor to bring to the House floor the fiscal year 2019 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill.

Before I go into details about the bill, I would like to commend Chairman Frelinghuysen for his leadership and support throughout this process.

As reported by the Appropriations Committee, the fiscal year 2019 Interior and Environment bill is funded at $35.252 billion, which is equal to the FY18 enacted level. We have made sincere efforts to prioritize critical needs within our subcommittee allocation and in reviewing more than 5,200 individual requests.

In the interest of time, I won't outline all the problems or programs and activities funded in this bill. I would like to point out a few highlights.

The bill provides robust wildland fire funding totaling $3.9 billion. It fully funds the 10-year average for wildland fire suppression costs and provides an additional $500 million in suppression funds for the Forest Service. The committee has also provided a $30 million increase over fiscal year 2018 for hazardous fuel reduction.

The bill provides $500 million in fiscal year 2019 for the Payments in Lieu of Taxes, PILT program, which is a top priority for many Members on both sides of the aisle.

The bill also makes critical investments in Indian Country, a top priority of this committee. This legislation honors our commitment to Native Americans with a particular emphasis on Indian health, law enforcement, education, and water settlements.

The bill fully funds contract support costs and Tribal grant school support costs; provides funding to staff newly constructed health facilities; improves public safety; significantly increases economic development; invests an additional $16 million in fiscal year 2019 to address needs of schools throughout the BIE system; and invests an additional $82 million to correct funding disparities across the Indian Healthcare System.

Overall, funding to EPA has been reduced by $100 million from fiscal year 2018, with reductions aimed at research and regulatory programs. Members from the Midwest will be pleased to know that the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative is maintained at the fiscal year 2018 enacted level of $300 million.

The bill continues to invest in water infrastructure and cleaning up contaminated land. These programs help create jobs and spur economic development in communities all across the Nation. The bill provides funds to leverage over $10 billion worth of investment in water infrastructure through the funding in the WIFIA program and the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Funds.

The bill also provides $3.2 billion for the National Park Service. It maintains, and builds upon, critical investments made in the fiscal year 2018 enacted bill to address longstanding park operations and deferred maintenance needs.

We have also attempted to address a number of concerns within the Fish and Wildlife Service accounts. The bill restores popular grant programs through fiscal year 2018 enacted levels. It also restores funds to combat international wildlife trafficking; protects fish hatcheries from cuts and closures; and continues funding to fight invasive mussels and Asian carp; and reduces the backlog of species that are recovered but not yet de-listed. We have also increased funds for the Recovery Challenge program, which we started in 2018 to challenge non-Federal partners to a more active role in recovering endangered species.

The bill also provides $360 million for Land and Water Conservation programs with bipartisan support.

Lastly, this bill makes significant investments toward critical deferred maintenance, construction, and infrastructure needs within the Department of the Interior, Forest Service, Indian Health Service, Smithsonian, as well as critical air and water infrastructure programs within the EPA.

In closing, I would like to thank staff on both sides of the aisle who have worked long hours on this legislation. On the minority side, I would like to thank Rita Culp, Jocelyn Hunn, and Rebecca Taylor.

On the majority side, I would like to thank Darren Benjamin, Betsy Bina, Jackie Kilroy, Kristin Richmond, Mac Cloyes, and Dave LesStrang from the committee staff, as well as Ian Foley, Rebecca Keightley, Tricia Evans and Dave Kennett from my personal staff.

To say the least, this has been a team effort.

Lastly, I would like to thank my good friend and ranking member, Betty McCollum, for working with me to address a number of critical needs throughout the bill.

Madam Chair, while we may disagree on some issues, we are never disagreeable and we continue to work well together.

Madam Chair, it is a good bill. I urge its adoption.

Madam Chairwoman, at this time, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Lance) for the purpose of a colloquy.

Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman. I want to thank my colleague from New Jersey for expressing support for the Superfund program.

The Superfund program continues to be a priority of this committee. In the fiscal year 2018 omnibus, we provided a $66 million increase to the program to accelerate cleanup of Superfund sites and respond to the release of hazardous materials.

I look forward to working together through the 2019 process to ensure that the Superfund program receives necessary funding to clean up and revitalize our Nation's toxic sites, like the American Cyanamid site, so that they are returned to productive use.

Madam Chair, I thank the chairman.

Madam Chair, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Ruiz).

I thank Mr. Ruiz for raising this issue. I would like to offer and continue working with the gentleman and the Forest Service to amicably and productively resolve the situation.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment. I want to acknowledge, our members on both sides of the aisle support more land acquisition funding, not less. That said, both sides of the aisle also recognize the maintenance backlog of our national parks is unacceptable.

In this bill we tried to balance the bipartisan support for land acquisition with bipartisan support for maintaining and improving the conditions of facilities we already own.

The gentleman from Arizona thinks we should direct a bit more to the National Park Service maintenance, and there is no debate that those needs are there.

Madam Chair, I support the amendment.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of the amendment.

Madam Chair, I am happy to accept the gentleman's amendment and to work with the rest of my colleagues to address a need for funding to battle the spread the harmful invasive species. I support an ``aye'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment.

The Delaware River Conservation Program leverages Federal funding by at least 2 to 1. That is exactly the kind of public-private partnership we should be fostering throughout the enterprise. That is why I support this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Madam Chair, I appreciate the Member's interest in the New England Scenic Trail and the National Park Service operations generally.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, as the gentleman knows, I am a strong supporter of the National Park Service and the Historic Preservation Fund. While I have some concerns about the offset at the Office of the Secretary, this is a bipartisan amendment I can accept, and I urge adoption of the amendment.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, to the gentlewoman, my colleague on the House Intelligence Committee, this is certainly an amendment I can accept. The gentlewoman and I have a history over the years of working together on this program, and I am happy to continue it.

Madam Chair, I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I have no objections and urge adoption of the amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, the gentleman and I have a history over the years of working together to support HBCUs. I thank the gentleman for working with me on this issue and with the ranking member, and I urge the adoption of this amendment.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of the gentlewoman's amendment.

Madam Chair, I am happy to continue to work with the gentlewoman from Texas on this program and others, and I have no objection.

Madam Chair, I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I am happy to support the gentlewoman from Michigan in her quest. The Great Lakes Science Center has bipartisan support for the role it plays in protecting the economic and environmental health of the Great Lakes region.

Madam Chair, I support my colleague's amendment, urge an ``aye'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I support this amendment. I will work with the gentleman to address this issue with the United States Geological Survey and learn more about where this mineral occurs.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, it is my understanding that the United States Geological Survey is in its early stages of discussing temporary spaces but that, eventually, the United States Geological Survey may have to develop a long-term solution for the Hawaiian Volcano Observatory.

I encourage the Department of the Interior, the United States Geological Survey, and the National Park Service to work together to develop a plan for the future observatory because operating the HVO out of the Hawaii Volcanoes National Park was a cost-effective solution for many years.

Madam Chair, in the meantime, I certainly support my colleague's amendment. I urge an ``aye'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, we can accept the gentleman's amendment.

The committee takes invasive species threats seriously. We spent a lot of time on Asian carp in our committee in prevention efforts throughout the bill. It is a bipartisan effort. Everyone is very concerned about this. We are talking about a bounty program, possibly, to go after these things. Let's go do it.

I accept the gentleman's amendment, but I will be working with him and the rest of my colleagues to ensure that Asian carp and grass carp control and prevention efforts are effectively coordinated across the agencies within our jurisdiction.

Madam Chair, I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman, and certainly we are prepared to accept the amendment.

I understand the gentleman's overall goals to continue funding for the AML pilot consistent with the fiscal year 2018 enacted bill that provided the funding for the six Appalachian States, and I know the economic devastation that has happened throughout that region.

This increase to the AML program by $30 million, so that Ohio, Alabama, and Virginia would receive $10 million each, equal to the fiscal 2010 enacted levels, could certainly help in those regions.

So we can accept this package of amendments at this time. I look forward to maintaining funding for the six States, with distribution similar to fiscal year 2018 and the final 2019 enacted bill. As such, I encourage my colleagues to adopt the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment.

Mr. Chair, I am happy to accept the gentleman's amendment and work with him and the rest of my colleagues to address the public safety and justice construction needs in Indian Country.

The ranking member and I have worked very closely together in Indian Country to recognize the shortcomings throughout Indian Country in Indian education, Indian healthcare, and certainly within the Indian public safety and justice problems that we are having throughout the United States.

Mr. Chair, I certainly support an ``aye'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I rise in reluctant opposition to this amendment.

Mr. Chair, I was happy to support the gentleman and accept the prior amendment, but this just goes too far.

I couldn't agree with the gentleman more that the Federal obligations for construction in Indian Country far outweigh the amount of money we have in the budget. That is why the Bureau of Indian Affairs Construction account has been and will continue to be a nonpartisan priority for the subcommittee, and we are certainly proud of the progress we have made so far, but I cannot support an offset on an account that also serves Indian Country and other underserved populations.

In addition to cutting the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs, this amendment is likely to cut the Office of Native American Relations, the Office of Small Disadvantaged Business Utilization, the Office of Civil Rights, and the Office of Hearings and Appeals.

Again, while I agree with the increase, and I certainly don't disagree with the gentleman's intentions, I cannot in good conscience agree to this offset.

If we find money down the road in this process as the gentlewoman and I are going through the conference, this is something I would be very interested in looking at, but right now I must encourage a ``no'' vote.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the amendment.

Mr. Chair, in light of the catastrophic hurricane season last year and the fact that we are already in the midst of another hurricane season right now, I suspect there is additional relief needed for the territories in the weeks and months ahead. So with this reality upon us, I am happy to accept the amendment.

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

Mr. Chair, while I certainly have some concerns about

the offset, I am able to support my recent classmate's and colleague's amendment. As the gentlewoman knows, this bill has a strong history of supporting underrepresented communities, including African American and Tribal communities.

This bill funded the construction of the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History and Culture and continues to strongly support the operations of this very popular museum.

This bill maintains a strong bipartisan support for Tribal health, Tribal education, Tribal law enforcement, and numerous other priorities critical to Native Americans and Alaska Natives, and this bill supports underrepresented communities throughout the Historic Preservation Fund grants under the National Park Service.

Though we may have to turn the lights off at the Department of the Interior if we keep going on--he is a Navy SEAL; he will get by--I certainly urge the adoption of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to this amendment.

Mr. Chair, don't get me wrong. I am not opposed to what the EPA is doing at the border to improve water quality, but I think it is important to note that the bill already provides $10 million for the program, equal to the fiscal year 2018 level, and did not support the elimination of the program as proposed in the President's budget.

As the gentleman knows, we are level-funded in this year's appropriation bill, so I wasn't able to get additional funds for some of these programs that I like. Because a $5 million reduction could significantly impact the work of the Secretary of the Interior--we have been chewing away at that all night--the programs under this jurisdiction, and other important offices funded by the account, I can't support the amendment.

I will continue to work with the ranking member as we move this through this process because I know the important work we have done in California and along the entire border. It is a good program, and I certainly support it, but I can't support this amendment at this time.

Mr. Chair, I must oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for the time.

Mr. Chairman, I also rise in opposition to the amendment. As the gentleman mentioned, the bill already includes a $1.5 million increase for the Inspector General which is the amount that was requested. This transfer is not needed, and if enacted, it could affect the operations of the Department of the Interior.

For those reasons and others, I oppose this amendment.

Madam Chairwoman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, I thank the chairman and ranking member, Mr. Calvert and Ms. McCollum, for their leadership on these issues of preservation.

The Jackson Lee amendment increases grant funding by $500,000 so that organizations interested in historical preservation, especially in underrepresented communities, have the ability to study, survey, and nominate properties to the National Register of Historic Places.

Due to lack of resources, certain communities are underrepresented in this process, so this amendment ensures that they have a greater opportunity.

The Jackson Lee amendment ensures that sites important to our American history are no longer overlooked due to mere lack of resources. It accomplishes this goal by promoting research that uncovers information to assist in telling the full American story.

Historical places create connections to our heritage that help understand our past, appreciate our triumphs, and learn from our mistakes. And they cover all of the cultural backgrounds, from African Americans, to Anglos, to Hispanics, and to Asians, all in this wonderful, diverse country who have had a story to tell, as well as Native Americans and many others.

Such stories might otherwise be lost because urban renewal and out- migration of Blacks destroyed or led to the abandonment of many African American communities. Preservation helps recognize, save, revitalize, and protect Americans' historic places, build communities, and foster education and pride.

I am reminded of Freedmen's Town in my home city and Emancipation Park, which was the first park bought in the entire State of Texas by freed slaves.

Madam Chair, I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment.

Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of Jackson Lee Amendment No. 8 to Division A of H.R. 6147, the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2019.

This Jackson Lee Amendment increases grant funding by $500 thousand so that organizations interested in historical preservation, especially in underrepresented communities, have the ability to study, survey, and nominate properties to the National Register of Historic Places.

Due to lack of resources, certain communities are underrepresented in this process so this amendment ensures that is no longer the case.

This Jackson Lee Amendment ensures that sites important to our American history are no longer overlooked due to mere lack of resources, it accomplishes this goal by promoting research that uncovers information to assist in telling the full American story.

Historical places create connections to our heritage that help us understand our past, appreciate our triumphs, and learn from our mistakes.

Madam Chair, by understanding and designating landmarks we stimulate local revitalization and foster interest in places that otherwise may go unnoticed, despite cultural and historic significance.

By preserving historic sites that tell the story of Americans in this country, we draw attention to the contributions of both ordinary and extraordinary people.

Such stories might otherwise be lost because urban renewal and the out-migration of blacks destroyed or led to the abandonment of many African American communities.

Preservation helps to recognize, save, revitalize and protect America's historic places, build communities, and foster education and pride.

The Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) provides matching grants to State and Tribal historic preservation offices.

These HPF grants are used to pay for research and surveys of historic sites, training for staff, and the work involved in nominating these sites to the National Register of Historic Places.

In short, it makes preservation possible to communities that otherwise would not have the means to engage in the nominating process.

The Jackson Lee amendment is essential because it provides funds to preserve sites that are directly connected to the Civil Rights Movement.

For example, earlier this year I introduced H.R. 4745, the Emancipation National Historic Trail Act that seeks a federal designation of the Emancipation National Historic Trail.

The Emancipation National Historic Trail extends approximately 51 miles and marks the migration of newly freed slaves, who, upon learning of the Emancipation Proclamation two years after the President had signed it into law, departed from what is now the Osterman Building and Reedy Chapel in Galveston, and charted a course along Texas State Highway 3 and Interstate Highway 45 North to Freedmen's Town and Emancipation Park in Houston.

Increasing grant funding for this program would make projects like the Emancipation Trail possible.

Madam Chair, it is imperative that we preserve and codify the historical record and memorialize significant events of our past.

I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for Jackson Lee Amendment No. 8 to Division A of H.R. 6147 as it is vital that we support the preservation of important sites.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman for that, and I want to give an example that earlier this year I introduced H.R. 4745, the Emancipation National Historic Trail Act, that seeks Federal designation of the Emancipation National Historic Trail, that it would extend 51 miles and mark the migration of newly freed slaves. But, more importantly, it takes us from Captain Granger in Galveston, who brought the slaves in Texas who were freed in 1865, 2 years after the Emancipation Proclamation, and it tracks the historic markers all the way to Freedmen's Town and Emancipation Park.

This is an opportunity not only for the communities to be joined together but, again, to reemphasize history that is intertwined. A study shows the connection between culture, heritage, and tourism, and that 37 percent of global tourism has a cultural motivation, and 57 percent of travelers are strongly influenced by history and culture in their choice of holiday destination. This will help underserved communities.

Madam Chair, I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, I thank the chairman and the ranking member of this committee for their commitment to historic preservation.

Since 1837, Historically Black Colleges and Universities have served the needs of higher education for the African American community. The first HBCUs were established in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri, and Tennessee.

After the Civil War, there was an influx of HBCU establishments throughout the Southeast, Midwest, and Southwest. The Jackson Lee amendment provides an additional $1 million for the Historic Preservation Fund, and within that fund to be allocated to Historically Black Colleges and Universities, institutions that are uniquely American, fundamentally historical, and distinctly beneficial to the American culture and history.

In my State of Texas, it joins with any number of States throughout the United States in the North, the South, the East, and the West. Interestingly, these schools are not relegated to the South. They are actually all over the United States, and they are older structures. For those of us who visited these schools, we recognize the importance of continuing to preserve their historic structure.

I mentioned earlier that there are great results in funding and profits for those who can provide historic opportunities for travelers to visit.

In 2017, Congress appropriated $4 million for the Historic Preservation Fund to rehabilitate historic structures on campuses of HBCUs that are listed in the National Register of Historic Places either individually or as contributing to the National Register of Historic Places. I can assure you that these are great assets to America. The projects must meet major program selection criteria, and all work must meet the Secretary of the Interior's standards and guidelines for archeology and historic preservation.

Simply, what we are doing is allowing our history to be preserved. The network of more than 100 historic institutions, established as early as 1837 for former slaves and by former slaves and freedmen, contain repositories of important books, papers, and memorabilia of Black history.

Black history, as other history, is American history, and the opportunity to preserve it and to continue to expand the opportunity to improve buildings that will now educate this generation of students is an important role for us to play.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of Jackson Lee Amendment No. 10 to Division A of H.R. 6147, the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Financial Services Appropriations Act of 2019.

Jackson Lee Amendment No. 10 provides an additional $1,000,000 for the Historic Preservation Fund to be allocated to Historically Black Colleges and Universities--institutions that are uniquely American, fundamentally historical, and distinctly beneficial to American culture and history.

Since 1837, Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) have served the needs of higher education for the African American community.

The first HBCUs were established in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri, and Tennessee.

After the Civil War there was an influx of HBCU establishment throughout the Southeast, Midwest, and Southwest.

Since the 1990s, the National Park Service has awarded over $60 million in grants to over 80 of the remaining active HBCUs.

These grants work to preserve the historic structures on HBCU campuses, many of which are listed in the National Register of Historic Places.

In 2017, Congress appropriated $4 million from the Historic Preservation Fund to rehabilitate historic structures on campuses of HBCUs that are listed in the National Register of Historic Places either individually or as contributing to a National Register historic district.

Projects must meet major program selection criteria and all work must meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation.

HBCUs represent a significant place in American history.

This network of more than 100 historic institutions established as early as 1837 for former slaves and freedmen contain repositories of important books, papers and memorabilia of Black history.

In addition, HBCUs served as meeting places during the civil rights struggles of the 1900s.

Against substantial odds, HBCUs have played a unique role in transforming the landscape of higher education in the United States, and continue to prepare the African American professional and civic leaders needed by communities, employers and the nation.

In 2013, HBCUs comprised 3 percent of all four- and two-year colleges and universities, but enrolled 10 percent of African American

undergraduates, produced 18 percent of the nation's African American college graduates, and generated 25 percent of African Americans with bachelor degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields.

Created to educate black students at a time when society had yet to integrate, historically black colleges and universities (HBCU's) have had an outsize impact on the success of the black community and therefore the American community as a whole.

HBCUs do not only educate--HBCUs have and will continue to fill an important role in education opportunity and engagement for millions of young people from diverse backgrounds.

Ensuring HBCUs receive the funds necessary to succeed enriches our culture as a nation and promotes a more complete history of our country to be preserved.

Emphasizing the importance of diversity is the best way to tell the complete story of the American experience, and when the American story is told by all of those who helped shape its success as a nation, we perpetuate American exceptionalism.

Madam Chair, our HBCUs are not just academic institutions, rather, incubators that stimulate black excellence that, more importantly, preserve the rich and true history of those of African descent--again, contributing to the fabric of American culture as a whole.

Texas Southern University, an outstanding HBCU, is a major contribution and asset to the 18th District, serving as a distinct example of the benefits that these institutions offer to the community.

HBCUs not only enjoy historical campuses, but they are also repositories of expertise on American History.

In a 1998 study, more than 100 HBCUs identified 712 historic properties that were owned by the schools in responses to a survey from the U.S. Government Office of Accountability.

Nearly half of those buildings, 323, are on the National Register of Historic Places indicating significance in American history, and the others were eligible for the national register based on surveys by state historic preservation officers or considered historic by the colleges and universities.

According to the surveys at that time, 103 HBCUs estimated $755 million in costs to restore and preserve the properties, such as improving accessibility to people with disabilities, roof replacement and removing lead-based paint or asbestos, both known for containing cancer-causing material.

Routine maintenance costs were not part of the estimates.

We, as a nation, have a responsibility to foster education, culture, knowledge, diversity and leadership; and with that, Mr. Chairman, we have a responsibility to ensure that HBCUs continue to serve as repositories of American History and thrive as academic institutions and continue to benefit society as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for Jackson Lee Amendment No. 10.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I thank Mr. Calvert, and, again, I thank the ranking member who has been so gracious.

I believe Texas Southern University--not as old as 1837--Prairie View A&M, and others throughout the Nation will benefit from preserving these historic buildings, and, as well, providing them as a source of learning for everyone around the Nation.

Madam Chair, I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I would like to thank Ranking Member Lowey as well as the full committee chair for their work, but I would like to give a special thanks to Chairman Calvert and his staff, whom he mentioned by name, and of course my wonderful staff, including my personal staff, for working together using a collaborative approach to help us move forward.

The subcommittee has a challenging portfolio of issues, and I commend the chairman's efforts to maintain many of the fiscal year 2018 investments, such as addressing the backlog of deferred maintenance on Federal lands and investing in Indian Country. I want to express how sincerely proud I am of this subcommittee's nonpartisan approach to addressing the issues facing our Native American brothers and sisters.

I am pleased that the bill recommends an increase of $410 million over the fiscal year 2018 enacted level for programs critical to Indian Country.

The health, education, and safety of our Tribal communities is a Federal responsibility that our subcommittee takes very seriously, and that is the one bright spot in this bill; but, unfortunately, other important priorities for the American public did not fare as well.

Even though the fiscal year 2019 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Subcommittee allocation is equal to the fiscal year 2018 enacted level, the majority is proposing a $100 million cut from the Environmental Protection Agency, which is just untenable.

The cuts in this bill would target air and water quality programs, reduce Federal funding to enforce the law against polluters, and, if enacted, they will undermine the EPA's ability to keep our families and communities healthy and to protect our environment for future generations.

We are at a defining moment in history. The Interior bill has an opportunity to make a global difference in the quality of life for generations to come, but, sadly, this bill is a mirror of the Trump administration's actions and disregard for the environment.

We cannot afford to ignore the overwhelming scientific evidence the planet is warming, sea levels are rising, and glaciers are melting. We must do more, not less, to pursue policies and programs that will put us on the right path to conserve and protect our natural resources and the planet we call home.

The bill before us also reduces funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund by $65 million from the fiscal year 2018 enacted level. This program has strong bipartisan support. It conserves natural areas and provides recreational opportunities in all 50 States.

The American people expect us to be good stewards of our public lands and wildlife, but this bill falls short on that commitment.

In addition to the irresponsible cuts to the EPA, I must express my concern and my disappointment to the 18 partisan riders in this bill that pander to special interests at the expense of the public good. These riders undermine clean water and clean air safeguards, jeopardize protection and recovery for vulnerable species, and even intercede in California water issues outside of the jurisdiction of the subcommittee.

The Senate has committed to work in a bipartisan manner to keep controversial policy riders out of their appropriations bills. I agree with that strategy and believe these policy issues should receive a full and transparent debate in the authorizing committees of jurisdiction. Congress must stop holding the government hostage over these ideological policy riders.

And, finally, it is impossible to talk about the bill that funds the Environmental Protection Agency without addressing the ethical problems that have plagued this administration and were embodied by the former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. There is ample evidence that the former Administrator was misusing Federal dollars for lavish expenses and prioritizing the interest of corporations over protecting America's families. Mr. Pruitt may be gone from the Agency, but Congress should be doing considerable oversight to ensure that a culture of transparency and accountability is restored at the EPA.

We should also be doing our best to ensure that every agency we fund is not abusing taxpayers' dollars. So I am deeply disappointed that my Republican colleagues voted down multiple amendments in our committee markup that would have held up our responsibility for oversight and adequately funded ongoing investigations. They also denied several more Democratic oversight amendments a chance to come to this floor for debate today.

Madam Chair, this bill fails the American people. It cuts environmental protections. It removes safeguards for our air and water and endangered species and allows rampant corruption in the executive branch to go unchecked. I know we can do better than this, and it is my hope we will do better after conference.

Madam Chair, I thank Mrs. Lowey for yielding.

So despite my current opposition, I intend to continue to work with the chairman through this year's appropriations process to produce a responsible bill that I know we can have both parties support in the end.

Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

Madam Chair, investments in the Land and Water Conservation Fund support public land conservation and ensure access to all the outdoors for all Americans. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, all 50 States enjoy and appreciate access to this fund.

The House bill provides $360 million which is $65 million below the fiscal year 2018 level. So this account has already seen a cut.

So I think that the committee made it very clear. We are very concerned about deferred maintenance in the national parks. The FY18 budget provides a $40 million increase over the FY18 enacted levels for facility operations and maintenance.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time

I believe I have the right to close, Madam Chair, so I reserve the balance of my time until closing.

Madam Chair, to the gentleman who is offering the amendment, I appreciate his goal of wanting to address backlog. I would love to address more of our national park's backlog. But as I pointed out, the Land and Water Conservation Fund also has broad bipartisan support and has already taken a cut of $65 million below the FY18 budget level. So increasing access to our public lands for hunting, fishing, and other recreational activities has bipartisan support, just as addressing the deferred maintenance.

So if we can see an increase in the 302(b) as we move forward in committee, I am sure the chairman would consider that, and I would be very much in support of working something out.

But at this point, I am adamantly opposed to cutting the Land and Water Conservation Fund any further.

With that, I would tell my colleagues to oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Chair, I think what the gentleman from New Jersey is talking about is something that I am supportive of, but I am not supportive of the offset.

As the gentleman is aware, our 302(b) allocation was level-funded, and the 2018 omnibus bill provided $5 million to implement the Delaware Basin Conservation Act in FY19. An additional $5 million is provided, so it is a total of $10 million.

The offset to the amendment is what I have an objection to, not the gentleman's goals. The offset the gentleman

uses does not require a one-for-one match. The offset that he is using in order to move forward would reduce Fish and Wildlife Service construction by $3.85 million, and it has already been cut by $6 million. So the total cut to Fish and Wildlife construction would be $10 million at the end of the gentleman's amendment.

At this time, I am going to object to the amendment, but I would work with the gentleman and the chair to not only get a higher 302(b) allocation, but to find a different offset.

Madam Chair, I am honored to stand up and support Historically Black Colleges and Universities and, as has been pointed out, the important role that they play in our education system. Adding additional resources to preserve these structures on these campuses is necessary to maintain them.

Madam Chair, I am very honored to represent many people from the Oromo community who are proud alumni from HBCUs. I stand with the gentleman to make sure that we have the resources needed for African American preservation and history, not only to have passed along our appreciation of our Nation's history to future generations, but to give the next generation great buildings to be educated in.

Point of parliamentary inquiry. Could our side have an opportunity to look at the amendment? We haven't had an opportunity to see it. We do not know whether or not we would object. It might be a friendly amendment to us.

Permission to Consider Amendment Nos. 16 and 17 Offered by Mr. Johnson

of Ohio En Bloc

Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chair, I strongly oppose this amendment that takes more money from an already starved EPA account. This bill already severely cuts the Environmental Protection Agency's operating account by more than $100 million. The air we breathe and the water we drink are endangered by the funding and policy decisions that are made in this bill, and the consequences will be negatively felt in communities across this Nation.

It is unfortunate that our 302(b) allocation was level funded, and I am sorry to hear that the gentleman's account in which he is trying to restore funding also received a cut. I often know that cutting the EPA is an easy target for many of my colleagues across the aisle, Mr. Chair, but I want my colleagues to understand what this amendment would cut, if adopted.

This account funds programs that are important to both sides of the aisle: permitting construction projects across the country, toxic risk prevention, and a successful brownfields program, and even pesticide licensing.

I understand that the amendment would direct more funds to States in Appalachia who have suffered ravaging environmental costs caused by coal mining, and, once again, I want to stress that it is unfortunate that you are trying to restore funding that had been cut, but our allocation was very short.

Unfortunately, I cannot support any deeper cuts to the EPA because they will have consequences that will be felt by people all across the country, so I must oppose this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time to close.

Mr. Chairman, I want to be clear. I understand that this amendment would direct more funding to States in Appalachia who have suffered from the ravaging environment caused by coal mining, and that is a very noble goal, as I said before.

But at this time I have to oppose this amendment. Once again, I want to point out, we were level funded in our allocation in the Interior bill that we are debating today with amendments, and I cannot support any further deeper cuts to the EPA.

But as the chairman moves forward and as we go to conference, if we can start restoring some of the funds to the EPA, I would like to work with the gentleman to restore some of the funds to this also important program; but at this time I have to oppose.

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

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chair, Arizona's First Congressional District is home to the largest population of Native Americans and Indian lands in the Nation.

Many of the Tribal governments that I represent face a public safety crisis. Nearly every Tribal community I visit is caught in the justice facility backlog, and it is having a serious impact on their ability to protect and serve their communities.

The backlog in unmet need for Tribal justice facilities has grown significantly since fiscal year 2014, when the Department of Justice unilaterally stopped new and replacement construction of Tribal justice buildings. All the while, the Bureau of Indian Affairs has kept condemning these types of buildings. This negligent lack of Federal coordination between agencies has resulted in communities being forced to go without essential infrastructure.

Tribal justice officials dedicate and risk their lives to provide basic law and order in Native American communities. However, as a former police officer, I can tell you, no justice system can function without a safe and secure facility to house these officers.

The San Carlos Apache Tribe's justice system is a devastating example of the backlog for justice facilities in Indian Country.

The BIA condemned the San Carlos Police and Courts Building known as BIA Building 86 in 2009. The Tribal police officers and courts worked for 6 additional years in a condemned building, until the Bureau of Indian Affairs provided them with temporary trailers, which had been intended to be used as classrooms and temporary housing in 2015.

Here we are, 3 years later, and this temporary fix is failing the San Carlos police and courts, as well as the entire community. The San Carlos Police Chief works in an office with cracks in the wall where he can see outside. The generator doesn't provide air conditioning to the police patrol or court sessions of trailers, and that is in Arizona. Water service is intermittent. There is not enough space for evidence storage. The floors can't securely support storage safes that include cash, drugs, and other evidence. I can go on and on.

It is clear that it is past time to provide the San Carlos Apache Tribe, and Tribes across the country, a permanent facility to safely house their police and courts.

I commend Appropriations for providing $18 million for replacement of new public safety and justice construction.

My amendment demonstrates the reality that the need is greater. It suggests a funding level of $36 million divided between replacement and new construction. This would help provide for the needs of communities like San Carlos, who have had their police and court facilities condemned by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Every law enforcement officer at the local, State, Tribal, and Federal levels risk their lives to protect and serve their community. If we can't give them the basic tools to do their jobs, our communities risk safety and justice for victims. We must do better.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment on behalf of these brave law enforcement officials, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I just want to thank the chair and the ranking member for all their commitment to Indian Country and for their support of this amendment.

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

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chair, across Indian Country, access to safe and clean drinking water is a major issue that we are obligated to address.

In the northwest corner of my district, the Hopi Tribe has a water system with over three times the Federal maximum standard for safe drinking water for arsenic. Let me repeat that: three times the amount of arsenic than the maximum standard considered safe.

Members of the Tribe have no choice but to use this unsafe water. This is beyond unacceptable in any community in America, but it is a fact of life for Tribes across the Nation.

No matter where you are born, no child or family in America should have to risk their health because they can't access clean water.

This basic lack of water infrastructure has limited many Tribes' ability to unleash their economic potential in rural communities across the country.

The Hopi Tribe has limited financial resources. In fact, it has an 80 percent unemployment rate. Our country's unemployment rate is 4 percent. It also has a mine that is potentially going to close that supplies 80 percent of its general funds.

They have not sat idly waiting for the Federal Government to fix the problem it created. The Tribe has launched the Hopi Arsenic Mitigation Project to directly address this challenge.

Through the project, the Tribe has identified arsenic-free wells and mapped the pipeline route that will deliver arsenic-free water to villages and towns across the reservation. All the Tribe needs to complete the project is construction funding.

Unfortunately, funding for the Bureau of Indian Affairs Construction account has not been adequate enough to fund projects across country like Hopi's. That is why I am offering a commonsense amendment to increase BIA's construction funding by $10 million.

Increasing this funding for construction of water infrastructure will enable the BIA to assist communities in building water systems that will deliver clean drinking water to schools and homes, some for the first time.

This amendment is not only a wise investment for Tribal communities as they seek to develop their economies and attract investment, but it is also a moral imperative.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment to increase access to clean water for tribal communities across the country.

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

Mr. Chair, I understand that this bill increases the BIA Construction funding levels from last year, but I must remind the gentleman that this program is still woefully underfunded considering the tremendous needs across the West and in rural communities.

Although I believe this amendment's offset is reasonable considering the basic immediate and dire needs of tribes across the country, I appreciate the gentleman's comments and I hope he will commit to working with me on a bipartisan basis going forward on this amendment to ensure our communities have meaningful access funding for clean water.

I clearly understand the impacts potentially to the Bureau, but I also understand that when you have 80 percent unemployment and the risk of losing 80 percent of your general fund, that there is no other alternative than to look for money here, and I would appreciate consideration in the future.

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

Mr. Chair, the Office of Navajo-Hopi Indian Relocation was established to compensate and build homes for those Navajo and Hopi impacted by the Federal Government's mandated changes of the reservation boundaries, which resulted in families being forced to move away from their homes.

My amendment opposes efforts in the underlying bill to prematurely close the Office of Navajo-Hopi Indian Relocation. The bill significantly cuts this office while preparing for its premature closure. I strongly oppose these cuts.

The agency has not completed its mission, and families continue to wait for the benefits they were promised. Closing the agency without providing the benefits to the affected families entitled to them would be a violation of our trust responsibility.

Once the agency's mission is complete, it is essential that the remaining land management responsibilities are passed to capable and responsible agencies that will work with stakeholders to ensure that the trust responsibility is taken seriously.

For this to occur, a comprehensive plan must be developed, and the plan must include meaningful input from both the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe, and a thorough audit of the Office of Navajo-Hopi Indian Relocation.

I have concerns that preliminary discussions that have the Office of the Special Trustee assuming land management are premature, as the Office of the Special Trustee has no experience with land management or building housing.

While the details of the closure plan are worked out, it makes sense to continue funding the agency, so it can finish its mission and an orderly and agreeable closure plan can be developed.

The families impacted by relocation have suffered enough, and we have a responsibility to ensure that we solve the problem in an orderly way, not simply shift the responsibility.

My amendment simply shifts the funds that were provided to the Office of the Special Trustee, to assume land management responsibilities, back to the Office of Navajo-Hopi Indian Relocation where it can be used to build homes and review appeals until the agency mission is complete or a comprehensive closure plan is developed with significant Tribal input.

I thank the chairman and ranking member for their interest in this important issue, and I look forward to continuing to work with them toward a resolution that keeps the promises made and is inclusive of all impacted parties.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. Chairman, I have personally gone around this process for a long time now, both before I came to Congress and during my tenure in Congress.

We have hundreds of families who still are in an appeals process. We have homes throughout both reservations that are simply in a deteriorated state. This is not spending more money. It is shifting money from one agency to another to allow us to continue to make sure that the needs of this relocation project are met.

The time limit of 5 years was extended time and time again because of the technical nature of this process and the difficulty in our mandated process to make this a whole system that worked. It hasn't worked. It needs to be worked on, but not until we have a comprehensive plan. There is no comprehensive plan. There is just an idea and a concept, but no comprehensive plan.

I will be glad to work with anybody on a comprehensive plan, but the idea that we just walk away from this right now without an agency that really knows what it is doing makes no sense at all.

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

Mr. Chairman, I just want to point out the Navajo and the Hopi have indicated precisely what

they want to do. They need the time to be able to recognize that there is a comprehensive plan for their future and the families that are impacted. It is not in place.

Mr. Chair, I request that my amendment be accepted, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, again, this is a simple amendment which would designate $300,000 within the operation of the National Park System for the New England National Scenic Trail. This is an amendment which was offered last year and was adopted by voice vote in an en bloc amendment. Again, the language is absolutely identical.

By way of background, the New England Trail was designated as a National Scenic Trail in 2009, making it one of the newest of the Nation's 11 National Scenic Trails. The trail is 223 miles long and winds through 41 communities in Connecticut and Massachusetts. Amazingly, nearly 2 million people live within 10 miles of the trail, making it one of the most accessible National Scenic Trails for one of the most densely populated parts of the country.

It was passed in 2007. Congressman John Olver, Richie Neal, John Larson, Rosa DeLauro, now-Senator Chris Murphy, and I introduced and passed the law, the New England Scenic Trail Designation Act.

Unfortunately, the trail has been woefully underfunded for the last 5 years. The trail system has received an average of $127,000 in funding, which is split three ways between the Connecticut Forest and Park Association, the Appalachian Mountain Club, and the National Park Service.

Of the approximately $43,000 each entity receives, the vast majority goes to facility maintenance, volunteer coordination, community engagement, outreach to youth, and the trail's landowner hosts. Impressively, much of the work that is done is supported by volunteers who put in more than 5,000 hours of maintenance activity annually.

I would just note that the managers of the trail have done their best to leverage an impressive $1.53 million in non-Federal funding in 2015. So they actually have been very efficient and creative in terms of trying to leverage and maximize the support that is, again, far below what the national park trail feasibility study recommended back in 2005, when they recommended an annual budget of $271,000.

Again, this is an amazing trail that goes through New England landscapes such as long-distance vistas with rural towns as a backdrop, farmlands, forests, and large river valleys. It also travels through colonial historical landmarks and highlights a range of diverse ecosystems and natural resources: mountain ridges and summits, forested glades, and wetlands.

Again, I want to thank Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for their support last year.

I would urge passage of this identical amendment. It is supported by my colleagues in the region.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, silence is golden, and I yield back the balance of my time

Madam Chair, I rise as the designee of the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), and I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, this bipartisan amendment would restore $5 million to the National Park Service's Historic Preservation Fund to achieve level funding from the 2018 fiscal year.

This amendment continues the same spirit of bipartisanship that Congress displayed in 2016 when we reauthorized the Historic Preservation Fund through 2023 and that Congress displayed last year when we passed a similar amendment in this Chamber.

Since the Historic Preservation Fund's creation in 1966, Congress has allocated more than $2 billion to communities across the country to connect Americans to our history and to contribute to our sense of place.

Historic preservation projects prioritize local workers, create more jobs per dollar spent than other construction projects, and use fewer carbon emissions than building anew.

The Historic Preservation Fund includes funding for State historic preservation offices, which work with local communities to revitalize historic locations and protect American heritage. Importantly, State historic fund offices administer the historic rehabilitation tax credit, which, nationwide, has leveraged $131 billion in private investment and created 2.4 million jobs since its inception.

It is that kind of high return leverage that the Historic Preservation Fund achieves. That explains why the program received the funding level in the 2018 omnibus that Mr. Blumenauer seeks to restore.

I would note that the omnibus was a bipartisan and bicameral agreement which the chair and ranking member supported.

Again, this amendment does not seek to raise spending above the 2018 omnibus, which cleared both Houses with a healthy bipartisan vote and which was signed into law by President Trump last March.

Madam Chair, I urge passage of the Blumenauer amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, this amendment designates $100,000 in funding to the United States Geological Survey so that they can create a searchable map showing occurrences of an iron sulfide material known as pyrrhotite nationwide.

Pyrrhotite is a material that has, unfortunately, shown up in concrete quarries in New England and Canada. When it is mixed into the aggregate poured into the foundations of homes, over a period of time, because it is an iron material and exposed to moisture, it actually rusts, expands, and cracks, basically causing a catastrophic collapse of the foundation.

In Connecticut, there are estimates that as high as 19,000 homes that have been infected with pyrrhotite material. It spread into western Massachusetts and three rivers in Quebec. The whole community of thousands of people have been devastated by the presence of this material.

The Trump administration and the Treasury Department actually recognized last November a property casualty loss tax guidance that allows homeowners who basically have to spend about $200,000 to repair their homes--because they have to lift the house, pull out the old foundation, and pour a new foundation--to claim it as a property casualty loss deduction.

Last month, Dr. Ben Carson from HUD came up and did a tour of these homes. It is a devastating occurrence, and it has potential nationwide consequences.

The United States Navy actually has a bidding process out right now through its SBIR program to come up with a testing mechanism. They calculate that they basically own about 300,000 structures throughout the United States. They want to have a system for testing for the presence of pyrrhotite.

I brought a picture, which shows the effects of the catastrophe. This is a home where the house was lifted. The material of the foundation is so badly compromised that the contractor can actually pull it apart by hand, it is that serious.

This amendment would allow the United States Geological Survey to create a searchable database nationally that would allow us to identify this. The Office of Congressional Affairs contacted our office and indicated that they do have the capacity to develop a national pyrrhotite map, but it is not in their current plan. This amendment, which is also supported by Mr. Larson from Connecticut's First District, would direct that priority.

Madam Chair, I urge passage of the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I thank the chairman for his consideration of this amendment. It is a very serious problem and much appreciated in the New England area. I thank the ranking member, Ms. McCollum, for her support as well.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time