Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call the Nation's attention to a tragic event unfolding in my State of Oregon, the horrifically destructive Bootleg fire.

This fire, now the third largest in my State's history, has consumed some 400,000 acres. That is about 660 square miles of previously beautiful landscape, pine, fir, sagebrush, grass, and meadows. The fire has taken millions of board feet of timber, the lives of thousands of forest creatures, cattle by the dozens, if not hundreds, horses, fences, buildings, and homes. The fire has released hundreds of thousands of tons of carbon, which could have remained sequestered far into the future. The smoke plume created by this conflagration has reached across this Nation, more than 2,000 miles, to pollute the air across the U.S., reaching finally the East Coast, including the air right here in Washington, D.C.

I have spoken with people whose homes and ranches were in the path of this fire. It moved so fast they could not gather and remove their cattle in time to save them. They have been sending me pictures of animals that have perished and pictures of many others who had to be put down because of injuries they suffered from the flames from which they could not escape. These are truly some of the saddest photos I have ever seen.

How did we get here? Fires happen naturally in our Western forests. They have always been a part of the Western landscape. These fires used to burn low to the ground at relatively low temperatures. Underbrush, vegetation, and smaller trees would burn, and in what were normal times, larger trees would survive.

Then about 100 years ago, our Nation decided to put out and suppress these fires. For years the trees and brush that grew unabated by fire were reduced to some extent by logging activities then allowed in our forests.

In the 1970s, forests saw the beginning of a steep reduction in forest management, and our forests began to grow unnaturally dense. Federal regulations decimated the timber industry, leaving more and more trees and brush on our Federal lands. The fires, fueled by this huge amount of ever-increasing woody mass, grew in their ferocity and danger. And now, after years of fire suppression and woefully inadequate forest management, we are paying the price.

The horrific infernos we are seeing out West are not the fires of centuries past. These terrifying, out-of-control wildfires become so immense, they often start burning from the top of the trees, not from the underbrush, leaping from treetop to treetop, causing the fire to travel faster and burn hotter.

The blame for our forests' deplorable and dangerous condition does not belong to any one person or group. However, I must call out the massive special-interest lawsuit industry that profits from the operation of the Equal Access to Justice Act by legally kneecapping almost every attempt to manage our Western forests.

So what is the long-term solution? We are seeing some early evidence that managed forests fared far better than did forests that were not thinned or otherwise treated in anticipation of the fires that are sure to come. Firefighters on the ground indicated that thinned areas slowed down the fires so that firefighters had a fighting chance to bring the fire in those areas under control.

This is good news because it means there is some hope. There is a way out of this if Congress can find the political will to work toward a solution.

I am pleased to report I am working with ranking member Bruce Westerman, whose Resilient Federal Forests Act will be a huge step toward giving the Forest Service the tools it needs to better manage our vast public lands.

In fact, today, I introduced legislation included in that package, the Commonsense Coordination Act. This bill will cut through some of the red tape that agencies must overcome to complete critical forest management activities.

I express my sympathy to the people suffering from the Bootleg fire and all the fires across the West. My staff and I have been on nonstop calls with local officials, county commissioners, and ranchers. The experiences they are sharing are incredibly sad and made more so by the fact that we could have done so much better when it came to protecting our Nation's forests and those that live in and around them. I will continue to do all I can here in Congress to help.

Lastly, I thank all the brave men and women who are out fighting the fires, including firefighters, farmers, ranchers, helicopter pilots and others. This is hot, dirty, difficult, and dangerous work, but their tireless efforts are saving lives, homes, forests, wildlife, livestock, and property.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 created a special immigrant visa, or green card, program for Afghan nationals who have worked for or on behalf of the United States Government for at least a year and who have experienced a serious threat as a result of this work. The program also provides green cards to the spouse and children of the Afghan national.

To date, over 15,500 green cards have been issued to principal applicants. Additionally, for each principal applicant, an average of 3.5 green cards have been issued to the spouse and children.

Section 221(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act requires an alien seeking a U.S. green card to undergo a physical and mental exam prior to the issuance of the green card. Any communicable diseases found during the exam must be treated before the alien is allowed to come to the U.S. This reasonable requirement helps to ensure that aliens do not introduce communicable diseases into the U.S. population once in the country.

H.R. 3385, the HOPE for Afghan SIVs Act of 2021, allows the Secretaries of Homeland Security and State to waive the medical exam requirement until after the Afghan SIV holder is admitted to the U.S. Proponents of the bill believe that the waiver authority granted by the bill will speed the pace of processing for some of the Afghan population seeking green cards.

Timing is important because, earlier this year, President Biden announced that American troops would withdraw from Afghanistan by September 11, 2021. The Taliban continues to fight and take over districts in Afghanistan. There is concern that the lives of the Afghan nationals who work for the U.S. Government, and their families, are in danger because the Taliban intends to kill them.

Many in Congress would like to see all 18,000-plus remaining Afghan nationals and their families who are at some point in the SIV process immediately brought to the U.S. However, there is no way to adequately conduct the necessary background checks and to otherwise process that many green card applications in such a short timeframe.

As sympathetic as we are to this population and this situation, we should not abdicate our duty to thoroughly vet potential green card recipients. H.R. 3385 is a measured response to the chaotic situation surrounding the Afghan SIV program.

This bill is yet another piece of legislation that has skipped the committee markup process this Congress. Had this bill gone through regular order, we would have been able to discuss concerns and make potential changes. That said, late last week, Judiciary Committee Republicans worked with Mr. Crow and Mr. Wenstrup, as well as Chairman Nadler, to address some concerns.

For instance, the sponsors agreed to reduce the 90-day window after admission for the alien to complete the medical exam to 30 days. During a global pandemic and outbreaks of other serious communicable diseases in Afghanistan, the shorter time period is more prudent.

In addition, the introduced text contained no mechanism to help ensure that the alien actually gets the medical exam. The bill sponsors agreed to include such a mechanism. The suspension text makes clear that a green card issued to the beneficiary of a medical exam waiver is a conditional green card, which means the alien should not be able to naturalize without having completed the requisite medical exam.

The bill's sponsors also agreed to add a requirement that the administration report to Congress on the number of Afghan SIV holders who do not comply with the medical exam requirement.

Even under the improved suspension text, U.S. taxpayers may bear the cost of the medical exams and any requisite treatment for illnesses discovered. Currently, the alien bears the cost of medical exams prior to admission to the United States. However, once in the country, they are entitled to public benefits, including Medicaid. That said, the text we are considering today is a better alternative to the introduced version.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the efforts of the bill sponsors and the chairman to address these concerns, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Wenstrup).

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the achievements of Brad Hicks, who retires on June 30, 2021, after working nearly 28 years with The Chamber of Medford & Jackson County, serving as its President and Chief Executive Officer for 21 of those years.

Brad was raised in Grants Pass, Oregon, and graduated from North Valley High School in 1983, where he served as Class President. Brad attended Southern Oregon University, graduating with a bachelor's degree in Political Science in 1987, and then worked with members in the Oregon State Legislature and the United States Congress for nearly five years. In 1993, Brad returned to the Rogue Valley, beginning his career in chamber management as the Membership Director for The Chamber of Medford & Jackson County. In 1999, Brad took leadership of The Chamber as its President and CEO.

As leader of The Chamber, Brad's experience in government helped him develop a unique strategy focused on encouraging competition among small businesses, limiting their tax burden, and promoting highly qualified workers. Brad also raised serious questions about how businesses were expected to thrive while government was failing to capitalize on Oregon's economic advantages. He also focused The Chamber's attention on issues

ranging from Oregon's convoluted tax structure, failing transportation strategy and a higher education system that failed to produce skilled workers. Brad's efforts led to the creation of ChamberPAC, a business advocacy organization.

The amazing level of support Brad was able to generate for businesses in Southern Oregon won him several well deserved and prestigious honors. In 2009, Brad earned the internationally recognized Certified Chamber Executive designation from the Association of Chamber of Commerce Executives. Brad was the only sitting chamber CEO in Oregon to hold this certification, which helped earn him a seat on the United States Chamber of Commerce Committee of 100. Additionally, both the Oregon State Chamber of Commerce and the Western Association of Chamber Executives named Brad the Chamber Executive of the Year. In 2018, the Western Association elected Brad as its Chairman, the first Oregonian to lead the 94-year-old association, which consists of members from 19 Western States and three Canadian provinces.

Brad is most recognized for nearly doubling the size of The Chamber on several occasions and achieving the title of the largest Chamber of Commerce in Oregon and on the West Coast. Brad took The Chamber to even greater heights garnering the respect of the local community, the State of Oregon, and across the Western United States. Brad's focus and work has always been to benefit business owners and communities throughout Oregon and the Nation. In fact, Brad would help a struggling business owner in Jackson County whether they were a member of the Chamber or not because he knew that a thriving business would always be a positive force to the community. Even in retirement, he plans to spend the first year in an advisory role with the Chamber while he builds up his own business consultancy company.

Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating the remarkable career of Brad Hicks. For a man of his ability, who demonstrated superb leadership and dedication to Oregonians and Americans alike, we cannot thank him enough. Brad's achievements and reputation speak for themselves, and as an Oregonian, he has brought great credit to himself, his community, the State of Oregon, and our great Nation as an industrious leader in commerce.

Madam Speaker, I thank Congressman LaMalfa for his years of work on the extraordinary problems in the Klamath.

Let me, again, by talking briefly about drought and what it means. I select this as a starting place because many out here in the East have the opposite problem--too much water.

Sadly, to those of us in the West, the term drought is all too familiar. We know what the word means because we have lived in drought conditions for years. Drought means no water. It means bankruptcy. It means catastrophe. It means the death of trees, plants, animals, and dreams. In anticipation of drought, out in the West, we have developed means of surviving when droughts occur. We have built reservoirs, dams, canals, pipelines, drains, wells, and legal systems to deal with the supply and allocation, legally and practically, of water--this most precious, essential, and life-giving resource.

These systems, legal and hydraulic, provided the essential and irreplaceable foundation of communities in the West. These laws, and the water divided under them, provided a reliable and dependable system upon which futures were planned, families were raised, and rural towns with churches, schools, and hospitals were built. Droughts were expected, but Western communities were prepared--or at least they thought they were. But change has come. Change has come in the form of the Endangered Species Act and in the form of even hotter and drier weather. This law and these warmer, hotter conditions have upset--some would say, destroyed--the systems that entire communities have relied upon for well over a century.

Let me be clear: The Endangered Species Act is the law, and I am not suggesting we break or violate it. Recently, I called for unity in the Klamath basin urging calm and cooperation in the face of this incredible and damaging challenge. But if ever there was an example of the need to refine and better implement the Endangered Species Act, what is happening to the Klamath basin this year is that reason.

But it is simply not possible to change the way the ESA is implemented in time to help this year. As I mentioned, and all of us know, there is another thing happening: it is getting hotter and drier, and all of our systems, manmade and natural, are under stress--the stress of severe drought and an ever-increasing demand for water: demand from fish, demand from wildlife, demand from agriculture, and demand, soon, from rural homes which rely on wells for their water.

What can we do?

First, we must do our best to tell the Nation that some 60 to 70 million people across the Western United States will be suffering this year from the cost and the loss of severe drought. The Klamath basin in Oregon and California unfortunately is the poster child for this disaster.

Secondly, we must call out clearly and loudly that our laws, as written and enforced, when faced with the choice of instream use for ESA purposes on one hand or the community on the other, will allocate all of the water to instream use, letting other needs go begging.

It must be noted that the water being given by the law and the means of enforcing it operates to give all of the water to the instream interests, even though this allocation is in excess of that which would have naturally flowed down the river during summer months.

Once again, I want to be clear that this allocation of stored water for instream purposes is a choice of what to save and what to let go. That choice has costs--incredible costs.

Now, it is not my goal today to attack the administration, the Department of the Interior, or the Bureau of Reclamation. It is my goal to call out that this country has, through its government and its laws--the Endangered Species Act--made a decision to take water from a community and to use it for another purpose, placing the burden of that choice on people and other less fortunate creatures not protected by the ESA.

What is that cost?

Some have said at least $400 million will be lost in the Klamath community this year. But that hardly tells the story. So let me elaborate.

The average farmer has mortgage payments, property taxes, irrigation district assessments, equipment payments, and most important of all, the need to house and take care of his or her family. Without water, there are no crops, no income, and no ability to pay the bills all families have.

Many producers in the basin have supply contracts that they have worked for years and years to achieve and retain. If producers cannot deliver on those contracts, for example, with Safeway and Whole Foods Market, those contracts are lost to other competitors, and many times to other countries, such as Mexico, Chile, Australia, and Brazil. Oftentimes, these contracts can never be recovered.

Beef and dairy producers lack grass for cattle because there has been no rain and they cannot irrigate. Hay is in short supply and prices for hay have increased dramatically. Beef and dairy producers are forced to sell their cattle because they cannot afford the cost of buying hay. Rebuilding these herds will require years and years and much more debt. In addition, the increased supply of cattle to market causes immediate reduction in prices, adding insult to injury.

Then there are jobs. Thousands of agriculture-related jobs will be lost. People who have been employed in the farming area for years will move away, and many will never return.

Then there are farms. This is the second consecutive year of what may be many years of too little water to meet the many needs of the community. As the level of uncertainty regarding the future becomes ever more pronounced, more and more young people raised on farms lose faith in the future of farming and ranching and choose other careers. The average age of the American farmer is now late fifties, and it keeps going up. This trend means that we will become more and more dependent upon foreign countries to sell us food. But everyone agrees, in principle, we should grow our food here at home. The pandemic and more recently the shipping crisis have shown us that a global supply chain is not always dependable.

This choice, along with many others, to treat farmers and ranchers as though they are expendable, is bad for our Nation and bad for our future.

When we talk about infrastructure, let's not forget that those who know how to operate farms and ranches are part of the essential infrastructure of our Nation. These choices that don't balance the needs of our environment and the community are driving food production into other countries, putting us all at risk.

In addition, this drought will create and is creating extraordinarily negative environmental, public health, and safety impacts. The waterfowl, reptile, and amphibians mentioned by Congressman LaMalfa that rely on our canal system, ditch banks, and irrigated fields will simply not be there. They will die, as there is no water in the canals or on the fields for them.

There have been and will continue to be dust storms--think dust bowl. And this is no exaggeration. Two national wildlife refuges rely exclusively on the Klamath Project for water. They will receive no water for those wetlands and habitats this year. They will dry up. The waterfowl that use them will be hurt.

There are 1,800 domestic water wells in Oregon within the geographic area served by the project. These will be affected.

The drought comes with another side effect, increased wildfire risks. Last summer, my district was devastated by once-in-a-generation, supposedly, fires that burned over a million acres in Oregon, destroyed thousands of homes and businesses, wiped away two entire towns, and killed 11 people. Dry vegetation and forests, combined with poor management, are the perfect storm for out-of-control wildfires. Those fires will damage the Klamath watersheds, making this bad situation worse.

What can we do? In the short term, Representative LaMalfa and I are proposing a $47 million critical aid package to help those hit hardest by the drought in the Klamath. Congressman LaMalfa will go through it in more detail.

Long term, we strongly believe there are critical legal issues that need to be addressed. Farmers in irrigation districts have strong objections to the reallocation of stored water. Dams and reservoirs were built to capture water during the wet time of year to have water available during the dry time of year. We have done that in the Klamath Project, and irrigation districts pay for the infrastructure that provides that storage. But now the government is requiring that we direct the release of stored water away from farms to artificially increase the amount and flow in the Klamath River.

During the irrigation season, the Klamath Project will be providing much more flow in the Klamath River than ever would have occurred naturally before the project existed. This is a legal problem, and it needs to be addressed.

More water storage is needed. A future of hotter, drier summers means this problem is not going to go away. In the Klamath and across the West, we need better infrastructure and a long-term plan so we have enough water for farms, cities, fish, and refuges. As snowpack decreases, and it is, water storage is critical, to have a reliable store of water when these droughts occur.

For long-term stability, we need the community to come together and figure out how to escape the zero-sum game that gives all the water to one use, ignoring others. There are critical parties to make this happen, and we need support of that work from the State, the Federal Government, and our community. Agreement can be reached. This has been done elsewhere.

As mentioned earlier, we need to protect and improve our watersheds. This means our forests. Each year, all stakeholders face uncertainty and risk. This fight over water has fractured the Klamath community and will fracture others.

To address these extraordinarily difficult problems, we must work together toward a long-term solution because this situation is not sustainable.

Next year's weather may well be worse than what we are facing now. Everybody is being harmed. There are no winners in this situation. Fish populations are not recovering; farms are not receiving enough water; refuges are going dry.

In the short run, perhaps, we can get through this year with the government's help. But in the long run, the Klamath community will have to decide what kind of future they want.

Congressman LaMalfa and I stand ready to work with everyone in the Klamath Basin to come up with real long-term solutions. It is time to sit down together and figure this out.