John Fleming

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5069) to amend the Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act to increase in the price of Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamps to fund the acquisition of conservation easements for migratory birds, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

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

As author of H.R. 5069, I am pleased that we are considering this bipartisan bill that has been cosponsored by the dean of the House of Representatives, the leadership of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus, and the entire Louisiana House congressional delegation.

The Federal Duck Stamp Act will modestly increase the price of the Federal duck stamp for the first time in 23 years and, by so doing, restore the buying power of this conservation tool which has been used to acquire, conserve, lease, and restore thousands of acres of wetlands.

Wetlands are critical to the survival of not only migratory waterfowl but to the millions of Americans who live along our coastlines. The U.S. Geological Survey has calculated that for every 2.5 miles a hurricane travels across wetlands, the storm surge is reduced by 1 foot. It is therefore likely that wetlands were directly responsible for saving lives and property in the gulf coast that were devastated by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

This legislation has been endorsed by Ducks Unlimited and more than 30 national conservation organizations, including the National Rifle Association, Boone and Crockett Club, the National Wild Turkey Federation, and the Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation.

In their support letter, these groups noted that, ``In order for us to pass down our hunting heritage from generation to generation, sustain a vital and viable resource for wildlife and people, we must increase the price of the duck stamp this year.''

I urge adoption of H.R. 5069, and I want to thank all of the Members who join with me in this effort.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to say in closing that not only do we have huge bipartisan support for this bill, but I just want to point out, as an example, in 2012, we spent, essentially, an equal amount of money on both the fee simple land purchase and the easement. Around $16- to $17 million each. But look at the bang for the buck we got. We purchased 14,747 acres fee simple, but on easements we got 48,144.

So it is obvious that not only is this a huge savings to the taxpayer, this is a much better deal, but also think about the maintenance costs that are now going to be unnecessary because landowners with the easements will continue to maintain the land rather than taxpayers.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5162) to amend the Act entitled ``An Act to allow a certain parcel of land in Rockingham County, Virginia, to be used for a child care center'' to remove the use restriction, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include

extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

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

In 1989, the Department of the Interior deeded a small parcel of land to Rockingham County, Virginia, for public purpose. This land includes a garage that had previously been used by the National Park Service.

The County determined a nonprofit childcare center in Broadway, Virginia, would benefit from the use of the garage, and Public Law 101- 479 allowed the deed to be changed for the particular use of the childcare center. However, under the terms and restrictions of the transfer, the nonprofit is unable to obtain financing to make improvements and renovations to the property. H.R. 5162 would remove the restrictions on the land so the necessary upgrades may be made to the childcare center.

Congressman Goodlatte has offered a commonsense bill that will assist the constituents and the community. I urge support for the bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte).

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

We have no further speakers.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, the chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the President's vague and inadequate strategy for dealing with ISIS; and, therefore, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

In his haste to claim credit for withdrawing our troops from Iraq, President Obama left the door open to exactly the kind of crisis that has exploded throughout the region. Instead of working hard to renew a status of forces agreement with a sufficient number of American troops to preserve the peace, President Obama was anxious to use withdrawal from Iraq as a campaign slogan in 2012. We are now reaping the whirlwind sown by that reckless policy.

This new policy is little more than an incremental strategy, not unlike the one used in Vietnam. History warns of the dangers of such approaches. By moving hesitantly, in piecemeal fashion, the enemy has more time to learn, adapt, and get stronger. This is a recipe for stalemate and failure.

There is another obvious lesson in all of this: almost since taking office, the Obama administration has been working to reduce our military. President Obama has directed over $1 trillion in cuts to the U.S. military since he took office. Under his planned cuts, senior Army leaders have testified that the Army would be unable to repeat its performance over the last decade in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And, finally, the President has acted as if dangerous and avowed enemies are either not serious threats--like the JV team of global terrorism--or he has acted as though they are reasonable enemies who are willing to negotiate peace.

Neither is true with ISIS. If we are going to degrade and destroy them it will not happen through an indecisive strategy that relies on unreliable and largely unknown help from Syrian rebels, whose own motivations and goals are mixed, and almost impossible to be certain of.

In addition, recent history has taught us that the weapons and resources we commit to other forces could easily fall into the hands of even worse enemies, like ISIS.