Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6118) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to annually designate at least one city in the United States as an ``American World War II Heritage City'', and for other purposes, as amended.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Rouzer), the sponsor of this piece of legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, during World War II, our cities built armaments; they had war bond drives; and they grew victory gardens. They did what they could to support our troops who were fighting abroad in a two-front war.

It is significant and important that we recognize the efforts that went into that part of our history and also that we reward, in some way, the efforts to protect that history so that we will always remember the sacrifices that were made by the Greatest Generation and recognize their efforts on the field of battle, as well as back home, to preserve that and support that.

The past will not be forgotten. This part of our American history will be remembered going forward.

Mr. Speaker, this is a wonderful effort to do that, to actually provide, once again, for the history of this country, for the symbols of this country, for the future of this country, to remember how we got to the position in which we are.

This bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to designate at least one city a year, each year, as an American World War II Heritage City. It is appropriate that we go forward on this.

Mr. Speaker, I fully support its efforts, and I urge the adoption of this bill by my colleagues.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6665) to amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to apply to territories of the United States, to establish offshore wind lease sale requirements, to provide dedicated funding for coral reef conservation, 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.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to read this part.

From the whooshing in the western Pacific to the windswept waters of the Atlantic, a wonderful wealth of offshore wind exists. While this wonderful resource weapon withstood the tests of time in Europe, we have waffled in our worldview on wind power.

But worry not. With this worthy bill, we will warrant our Nation's territories--from Guam to Puerto Rico--will no longer be wasting their overwater reward and will be powered with the waterproof windmills.

Now I have to stop because I did that for the staffer who wrote it. Obviously, I don't do this kind of stuff, and I lost the bet.

However, despite the alliteration that went there, this is still a good bill which will move us forward in energy production, especially in our territories of the United States.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I obviously urge my colleagues to support it and move us forward, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman could at least put some kind of rhyme in there.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Puerto Rico (Miss Gonzalez-Colon) to speak on this particular bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves).

Will the gentleman yield?

Yes.

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate those who have spoken on this particular piece of legislation.

Mr. Graves, I didn't want to be too flippant, although I was, does raise a major point of concern that, on Federal lands and on Federal waters, how we deal with the resources that are there is significant, and they play a role in the entire Nation.

But we also have to recognize the role that those States and territories play where we find those particular resources, whether it be offshore on Federal waters or onshore on Federal lands. For us to review that policy is a wise thing we should do.

I also am appreciative of the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico for explaining the significance this has for all those areas that have not yet been considered as we deal with a new kind of alternative energy, in this case, wind power. That is significant, and it plays a significant role in the future development of those territories that are using and in which the energy and the cost of energy is more significant than you find on the mainland, and yet we need to find a way to build their economies by having an affordable and renewable and reliable energy source coming in the future.

Because of that, I find this to be a significant piece of legislation. I urge adoption, Mr. Speaker, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 792) urging the Secretary of the Interior to recognize the historical significance of Roberto Clemente's place of death near Pinones in Loiza, Puerto Rico, by adding it to the National Register of Historic Places, 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.

Mr. Speaker, this has been, for me, an exciting day, as we have talked about bills that provide for the history of this country and move it forward; as we talked about energy, which I find significant, especially for my State, which has so much Federal land and energy available to it; and now you are coming into one of the heroes of my childhood with Roberto Clemente.

Mr. Clemente won 12 Gold Gloves; 4 National League batting titles; 12 All-Star Game selections; 2 World Series Championships--although the 1961 still pains me to no end, but he still had two championships--and reached the 3,000-hit milestone. He was the first player born in Latin America to be inducted into the National Baseball Hall of Fame and was posthumously awarded both the Congressional Gold Medal and the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

I still have his baseball cards, and I cherish them. He was a special person not necessarily on the field--he was unique and wonderful--but even off the field he was an even greater individual. His accomplishments off the field speak to the quality of man Roberto Clemente was.

He spent his time in the off-season involved in charity work. He also spent his time in the off-season helping the game of baseball in his home in Puerto Rico. He made people's lives better. He ended his life, once again, trying to head a relief effort for Nicaragua. He gave his life in defense of other people. He is definitely someone who is worthy of being remembered in what he did on the ball field, which was spectacular, but what he did at home with real people, which was even better than what he did on the ball field.

I am proud to be here and wish to add my support to this resolution to recognize a great, great American hero.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Puerto Rico (Miss Gonzalez-Colon).

Mr. Speaker, this is a good piece of legislation. I just wish that when the Dodgers left him vulnerable in 1966, the Cubbies had picked him up, instead of the Pirates.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 245) to amend the Indian Tribal Energy Development and Self Determination Act of 2005, and for other purposes.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young). Much of his bill is incorporated in this. He has been a long-time champion and supporter of this effort.

(Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I want to do two motions simultaneously here. I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Mrs. McMorris Rodgers), and I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the time be managed by the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young).

Mr. Speaker, section 202(b) of S. 245, the ``Tribal Biomass Demonstration Project Act,'' amends the Tribal Forest Protection Act of 2004 (TFPA) to include new authority that directs the Secretary (of Agriculture or the Interior) to enter into a minimum number of contracts or agreements with Indian tribes to enable the tribes to carry out various activities on Federal land. Unlike the current TFPA, which is discretionary, the Secretary must enter into agreements with tribes under this new authority. These activities will benefit the Indian tribes that enter into the agreements as well as the surrounding communities, and they will promote healthy forests to stem the plague of wildfires afflicting many Western communities, tribal and non-tribal alike.

As an initial matter, Section 202(e) requires the Secretary to consult with tribes and tribal organizations in developing the eligibility criteria and to make the criteria public within 120 days of enactment. It is critical that the Secretary meet this deadline to ensure that tribes are able to submit applications for projects in the remainder of fiscal year 2019.

As provided in the bill, in evaluating tribal projects, the Secretary is directed to weigh several factors. Given the severe impact of wildfires over the past decade, the importance of one of the factors, improving the forest health of Federal land, cannot be emphasized enough. For example, in August of 2015, two wildfires burned more than 255,000 acres of the Colville Indian Reservation in Washington State. The fires burned nearly 20 percent of the reservation land base and more than 800 million board feet of timber, making it the most damaging fire event in history in terms of board feet of timber lost on any Indian reservation. As noted in a November 8, 2015, column in the Seattle Times by then-Colville Chairman Jim Boyd and the Gentlelady from Washington, the Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers, the damage to the Colville Reservation was amplified because major fire-suppression resources were tied up suppressing fires on undermanaged areas of nearby National Forest land, leaving the Colville Reservation with little protection. The Secretary should, accordingly, give strong weight to tribal proposals that will improve the forest health on Federal land and protect tribal lands.

Finally, Section 202(b) requires the Secretary to incorporate, at a tribe's request and to the maximum extent practicable, the tribe's on- reservation management plans in the contracts or agreements under which the tribe will perform the activities on Federal land. The requirement that on-reservation management plans be incorporated into tribal activities on Federal land is an extension of what Congress has already required. For example, since its enactment in 1976, Section 202(b) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act has required the U.S. Forest Service to coordinate the lands use plans for National Forest System lands with tribal management practices.

As highlighted over the years in numerous Committee on Natural Resources hearings, tribal land management practices are widely acknowledged as more flexible and as having forest health outcomes superior to those in effect on non-tribal Federal land. The Committee on Natural Resources examined this at an April 10, 2014, oversight hearing on tribal forest management. Compared to federal land managers, tribes find increased forest management efficiencies in the tiered environmental compliance afforded by tribal Integrated Resource Management Plans and the limitation on third party appeals in Bureau of Indian Affairs forestry regulations (which are incorporated into tribal forest management plans). These and other on-reservation management practices could and should be included in agreements under Section 202 at a tribes' request.

On a final note, nothing in the TFPA or the amendments made to the TFPA under Sec. 202 of S. 245 provide, or imply a provision, for tribal management of non-tribal interests in Federal land (and non-tribal users of such land) beyond the specific forest management-related functions set forth in the Act.

Mr. Speaker, Major Brent Russell Taylor is one of six brothers to each wear the uniform of the United States Army.

While training Afghan security forces in support of Operation Freedom's Sentinel, Major Taylor was killed by an apparent insider attack on November 3 in Kabul province while in the final months of his deployment. He is survived by his wife, Jennie, and seven children: Megan, Lincoln, Alex, Jacob, Ellie, Jonathan, and Caroline. In Utah, we mourn with the family of Major Taylor and grieve his loss and honor his sacrifice.

As Major Taylor and his brothers passed through Basic Combat Training, they learned the seven Army values in great detail. Those values are loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity, and personal courage, and Major Brent Taylor lived these values.

First, loyalty: Major Taylor swore to bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and support and defend our Nation's guiding documents against all enemies. He demonstrated his loyalty to this oath time and time again.

Duty: Major Taylor earned a Bronze Star for his outstanding dedication to duty during combat operations in Iraq. The Army says doing your duty means more than carrying out your assigned tasks. Major Taylor's military service record shows he employed this guidance to the fullest.

So, too, does his life outside the military, because Major Taylor was not only Major Taylor, he was also Mayor Taylor. His community and neighbors so entrusted him to lead and provide that they elected him the mayor of North Ogden City in Utah.

In that role, he did much more than carry out his assigned tasks. He worked to beautify and improve the city and to create a community that was welcoming to newcomers; and in the predawn morning of his last Christmas on Earth, Mayor Taylor ventured out into the cold to oversee the snowplows and salt trucks as they cleared the roads and made his city safe.

Respect: Major Taylor not only enjoyed the respect of his family, community, and fellow servicemembers, but his praises came from across the globe. In a letter from Afghanistan to Mrs. Taylor following her husband's death, an Afghan aviator said: ``Your husband taught me to . . . treat my children as treasured gifts, to be a better father, to be a better husband, and to be a better man.''

A man does not receive that level of praise without first showing his own grand measure of respect.

Selfless service: As a high school senior in Chandler, Arizona, Brent delivered the honor speech at graduation, and his instruction to the audience was: ``Go out. Be happy. Find peace and make a positive difference in the world.''

Major Taylor left his family and American soil on four deployments to serve and ``make a positive difference in the world.'' In that same honor speech, he gave the order to ``stick with it to the end.'' He, himself, did just that.

Honor: Major Taylor honored his faith, his family, his community, and his country throughout his short life. Brent's social media postings are replete with photos of his children and family. They show images of love and service and patriotism, qualities of a man, a husband, and a father who honors his family and country.

In his last Facebook post, Brent implored that we all remember: ``We have far more as Americans that unites us than divides us.'' And he ended the post with the words, ``God Bless America.''

Integrity: The Army says that integrity is a quality you develop by adhering to moral principles, and the more choices you make based on integrity, the more this highly prized value will affect your relationships with family and friends.

The days since the sad passing of Major Taylor have been filled with an outpouring of love and grief expressed by those who knew Brent. His integrity left an impression, and his integrity affected his relationships.

Finally, personal courage: In September of 2007, Major Taylor was commanding a convoy in Iraq when he was hit by an insurgent IED. His vehicle was struck by shrapnel, asphalt, and concrete debris. For the wounds received in action, Major Taylor was awarded the Purple Heart, and he would go on to deploy twice more.

Brent Taylor stood as an example of personal courage. He lived the Army Values.

In April of this year, the Department of Veterans Affairs opened a facility in North Ogden City. It is a place where veterans and their families can go to receive counseling and support. It is a place located in the heart of Brent Taylor's hometown.

As a small gesture to his service and his sacrifice, I have introduced a bill to name that VA facility the ``Major Brent Taylor Vet Center Outstation.''

The naming of a building will never repay the debt our Nation owes Major Taylor or his family, but it can stand as a humble reminder of the citizen soldier who lost his life in the service of others.

Mr. Speaker, this week, my State lost a friend and a statesman. James V. Hansen, Utah's longest serving Member of this body, passed away on Wednesday. My condolences go out to his wife, Ann, as well as the rest of the Hansen family.

During his 22 years of service in the House, Jim became the first Utahn in history to assume the responsibilities of a full committee chairman. In 1997, Jim was chosen to be chair of the infamous Ethics Committee, where former Leader Armey said: ``It is one of the most extraordinary trusts that a body could put in another person.'' In 2001, Jim was named chairman of the Natural Resources Committee.

He was a trailblazer, not just for Utah, but for me. I followed him into the State legislature; as Speaker of the House in Utah; as a Member of this body; also as a chairman of the Western Caucus, which Jim founded; and, finally, as chairman of the Resources Committee.

I will be forever grateful for the time he took to mentor me in each and every one of these roles. His impact on my life and many others cannot be overstated.

As chairman of the Resources Committee, Jim prioritized wise use of public lands while developing sound energy policies and passing numerous conservation bills.

As a senior member of the Armed Services Committee, he defended Hill Air Force Base, as well as the importance of U.S. military needs.

Jim accomplished much without ever succumbing to arrogance. He was a good man, a fine leader, and a cherished man. He will be missed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the National Day of Taiwan and its ongoing relationship with the United States. Relations between our two countries were cemented with the passage of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) in 1979 and have flourished for nearly 30 years.

Throughout the decades, Taiwan and the United States have continuously stood strong together against a number of challenges, while maintaining a steadfast commitment to one another's mutual security and prosperity. This commitment was first enshrined in the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 (TRA) and was supplemented by the Six Assurances by President Ronald Reagan in 1982. The TRA and the Six Assurances form the foundation of America's unshakable relationship with Taiwan and today, I would like to express my personal and continuing support for these pillars of our strategic partnership.

Our ongoing commitment to cooperation also extends into the areas of trade and economics. In 2017, Taiwan was ranked as the 11th largest trading partner of the United States, the 11th largest U.S. export market and the 7th largest market for U.S. agricultural products. Taiwan has imported $3.57 billion of food and agricultural products from the U.S. representing more than 28 percent of total imports of those products.

Taiwan also regularly sponsors trade missions to the United States in pursuit of agricultural products. Last year, these missions culminated in the signing of letters of intent to purchase approximately $2.8 billion in U.S.-produced grains between 2018 and 2019. Similar missions are organized by the U.S. Commercial Service to assist U.S. companies in identifying opportunities in Taiwan. One such mission was recently organized in conjunction with the World Trade Center of Utah and led by Governor Gary Herbert to assist Utah-based companies, and other Western states, to network in Taiwan. I will continue to seek avenues where we can work together to further promote not only Utah-Taiwan relations, but U.S.-Taiwan relations in general. I hope my colleagues will join me in promoting this cooperation wherever possible.

Once again, I am proud to recognize Taiwan's National Day, and look forward to many years of friendly and prosperous relations between our two nations.

Mr. Chair, this bill is the result of more than 6 years of work with commercial and recreational fishing groups, the seafood industry, coastal communities, and both sides of the aisle. It is a bipartisan bill that codifies the Obama-era guidelines and provides flexibility for fishery managers.

It is a good bill, but I do want to address some of the inconsistencies that have been circulated by Members or NGOs. At least let me hit some of the most gross inaccuracies. In dissenting views, it was written that:

Don Young agreed to work with Democratic Members and the

staff to develop a bipartisan bill. Unfortunately, Chairman

Bishop pulled the plug on promising negotiations and rushed

to markup with a half-baked mash-up of bad ideas.

This bill was a year in negotiation. Our efforts of trying to put numerous provisions on the table and accepting additional Democratic provisions were simply labeled as nonstarters. Every time Mr. Young agreed to a change, another issue came up. It is a perfect example of Lucy pulling the ball out from under Charlie Brown. Mr. Young is Charlie Brown.

Mr. Chair, I am appreciative, though, of certain off-committee Democrats who jumped at the opportunity to compromise. I especially want to thank Mr. Veasey and Mr. Green for their willingness to work across the aisle and assist with cosponsoring this particular bill.

Opponents of this bill said there is no science; that it is being taken out of the management decisions. Science and data appear 34 times throughout the bill. Sections 207, 208, 301, 303, and 306, all require the Secretary to use science, which means, if Mr. Young were trying to remove science from his bill and the process, he really did a crappy job at it.

This bill is also coming with the old canard that we are going to start overfishing. There is nothing in this bill that removes basic requirements that prevent overfishing, and it is consistent with guidelines for fishery management that were put forth in the Obama administration.

Another dissenting point that was made says that this bill is nothing more than a partisan measure. It is a cute idea, but something that is simply not there. Letters from scientists, many of them--in fact, most of them--do not conduct the type of research that underpins fisheries management. All have said that all of these agencies, the ESA, NEPA, and the Antiquities Act, whatever, are going to be destroyed because of this bill.

There was one specifically from the Seafood Harvesters of America that was brought to my attention because in that particular letter that was dated in June of this year, the group claimed that section 12 repealed sections of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. That is really cute because there is no section 12 in this act.

Section 12 hasn't been a part of this bill since November of 2017. In the opposition letters to this particular bill, there have always been references to previous versions of the bill, or they failed to recognize significant changes that were added, compromises that were added by both Mr. Young and Mr. Graves in their manager's amendment.

The kind of rhetoric that is opposed to this particular bill that we are seeing, in the past from NGOs, embodies what is wrong with Washington. I hope that everyone can see these kind of glaring inaccuracies

I am proud to support this bill. This bill does provide science. This bill does go through the process. This bill does move us forward. This bill does help commercial fishing and recreational fishing and the communities that are involved there. It is a good step forward. It has been 6 years in the coming. It has been 1 year of heavy work right now. It needs to go forward.

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the opportunity of speaking and supporting this bill.

Mr. Chair, I want to speak about the production of the Tomahawk cruise missile.

The Tomahawk is a battle-tested weapon that has been used in combat over 2,300 times. Tomahawks were launched in 2016 and again in April of this year in response to the Syrian regime's use of chemical weapons. The Tomahawk continues to be a credible, standoff weapon that provides lethal effects while keeping American fighting men and women in relative safety.

The 2018 National Defense Strategy prioritizes action against near- peer nations with significant area-denial capabilities. The Tomahawk is the Nation's preferred weapon to carry out this difficult mission. Halting production and devastating the missile's industrial base is ill-advised as the threat of near-peer warfare increases.

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the committee's support for the program and was encouraged to see additional funding for increased Tomahawk missile production in FY18. I would like to emphasize that this funding was provided at the Navy's request. However, I understand that the Navy recently informed the committee that they intend to utilize this for purchasing support equipment instead of missiles, as the committee intended.

Mr. Chair, I agree with the chairwoman that the Navy's disregard for congressional direction and intent is unacceptable. I appreciate her support for this important war-fighting capability. I look forward to resolving this issue in conference.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5751) to redesignate Golden Spike National Historic Site and to establish the Transcontinental Railroad Network, as amended.

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

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

May 10, 1869, is one of the most significant dates that we have in American history because that is the date when a congressionally mandated provision to try to unite the two oceans on this continent Nation together actually came into being.

The final spike that was put into this effort that was originated by Congress and, actually, oddly enough, Congress had to get them to stop going at different directions and come together at one point, took place in Promontory Summit in my State of Utah, in my district, about 30 miles from where I live.

This is a prominent symbol of the most significant achievement we had in the 19th century. It is, for transportation, as significant as landing a man on the moon would be for the 20th century.

Having the rail system go in there meant that some of my ancestors who had to walk every step across the plains, taking months to get to Utah, could now do it in 7 days on the new train that was going through there.

This is one of those things that has the support of the National Park Service, which wants to make sure that some of the less visual parks are given the quality attention they deserve, to make them something that is important for the future history of this country.

So it is not just going to be a park. This is going to be a historic park, and it is going to be part of a transcontinental railroad network that will take all sorts of other activities that deal with transportation within the area, allow them to make them more public, and allow people to spend several days visiting different areas.

It is also important since, ironically, within a few miles of this location is also the site where most of the motors that were made for outer space travel were also built at the same time.

This can also become a hub of truly educational value about transportation in both the 19th century as well as the 20th century. It can also be an opportunity to tell the story of the literally thousands of immigrants who helped build the system going both ways in both directions. And it establishes a process so that challenges that have been longstanding with neighboring landowners can be resolved in an easy and simple way not only now but also going into the future.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill which will make the Golden Spike a national historical park in time for the 150th birthday which will be May 10, 2019.

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

Mr. Speaker, I invite all of you out next May 10 to a celebration at this site. It will be a party you will not forget.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues' adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 805) to authorize the conveyance of and remove the reversionary interest of the United States in certain lands in the City of Tulare, California.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Nunes), the sponsor of this bill.

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

This is not a significant bill. We are talking about a couple of acres of property that used to be owned by the Federal Government that had no purpose and use for it. So they gave it up. But instead, Congress decided to include a reversionary clause with this stuff so that if they ever wanted to do something different with these 2 acres of property, they would have to come crawling back to us to ask for our permission to do it, which is silly.

It is ridiculous that we have to go through this process time, after time, after time. The Federal Government didn't need this land originally. They still don't need it, but they still have that particular clause attached to it.

This land needs to be given over to the city who uses it so they can make improvements on facilities that have been used since the 1800s. And that we

have to go through an actual law to do this, is a silly practice that we maintain here in Congress. It should not be done. This is a perfect example of why the reversionary clause is no longer needed.

If you really care about people, put a clause in there that says that if they want to change the practice, it has to be for the public interest and the public good. That would be logical. But what we have to do now is illogical in doing this particular bill. It needs to be done. It has to be done for the people who live there and for these properties, but it is silly that we have to go through this process.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 857) to provide for conservation and enhanced recreation activities in the California Desert Conservation Area, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cook), whose bill we are discussing, and who actually came up with the process of involving his community to do this kind of transfer the right way.

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

Mr. Speaker, I insert into the Record background material for this particular bill.

Background and Need for H.R. 857, the California Off-Road Recreation

and Conservation Act

President Clinton signed into law the California Desert

Protection Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-433), which

established the Mojave National Preserve, the Death Valley

National Park and Joshua Tree National Park. It also created

over 7 million acres of wilderness in the California desert,

which stretches across millions of acres of the southeastern

corner of the State. Since then, there have been numerous

legislative efforts to apply additional federal land

protections in this area, including the designation of

additional wilderness, national monuments, and expansion of

existing National Parks. In the 114th Congress, Senator

Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) introduced S. 414, the California

Desert Conservation and Recreation Act of 2015, a bill that

amends and updates the California Desert Protection Act of

1994 and reflects similar bills introduced in previous

Congresses. S. 414 would have created two new national

monuments, designated approximately 349,000 acres as

wilderness, and expanded Death Valley National Park, Joshua

Tree National Park and the Mojave National Preserve.

Rather than pursue the legislative process, Senator

Feinstein asked the Obama Administration in August 2015 to

use its authority under the Antiquities Act of 1906 (54

U.S.C. 320301 et seq.) to unilaterally designate three

national monuments in the California desert--the Mojave

Trails National Monument, Sand to Snow National Monument, and

Castle Mountains National Monument--without Congressional

approval. The following October, Senator Feinstein, the

Department of the Interior, and Department of Agriculture

hosted one public meeting on the prospect of designating

these areas as national monuments, as well as other

management priorities for the California desert area.

In response to concerns raised regarding this monument

strategy, Congressman Paul Cook worked with local communities

and stakeholders to craft alternative legislation which

attempted to balance the environmental protection of the

desert's landscapes with recreational and other multiple-use

activities that have occurred in the region for decades. The

result was H.R. 3668, the California Minerals, Off-Road

Recreation, and Conservation Act. It was the subject of a

Federal Lands Subcommittee hearing on December 9, 2015, but

no further legislative action was taken in the 114th

Congress. On February 12, 2016, President Obama designated

three new national monuments encompassing nearly 1.75 million

acres in the Southern California desert.

H.R. 857 seeks to balance many of the environmental and

recreationalist concerns that have remained in the wake of

the Obama designations. The bill creates the first system of

Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) recreation in the nation by setting

aside nearly 150,000 acres across six areas to enhance and

protect OHV activity. The bill also releases approximately

121,000 acres of Wilderness Study Areas, allowing for broader

management of such lands. Additionally, as part of a

compromise between OHV and environmental groups, H.R. 857

designates approximately 330,000 acres of new wilderness,

creates a new National Scenic Area, and establishes 77 miles

of new Wild and Scenic Rivers. Much of the wilderness

designated under the bill is contained within a National Park

or a Wilderness Study Area.

The following groups support this legislation: Advocates

for Access to Public Lands; Alabama Hills Stewardship Group;

American Motorcyclist Association; American Sand Association;

Americans for Responsible Recreational Access; The City of

Bishop, CA; Bishop Area Chamber of Commerce and Visitors

Bureau; Blue Ribbon Coalition, Inc.; California Wilderness

Coalition; Eastern Sierra 4X4 Club; Friends of the Inyo; Inyo

County Board of Supervisors; Inyo County Superintendent of

Schools; Lone Pine Chamber of Commerce; Lone Pine Paiute-

Shoshone Reservation; Motorcycle Industry Council; National

Off-Highway Vehicle Conservation Council; Pew Charitable

Trusts; Recreational Off-Highway Vehicle Association; San

Bernardino County; Specialty Equipment Market Association;

Specialty Vehicle Institute of America.

selected section-by-section analysis as reported

Sec. 2. California Off-Road Recreation and Conservation.

Designates approximately 330,000 acres of wilderness in the

California desert, 88,000 acres of which is primarily within

Joshua Tree National Park and 180,000 acres of which is

currently a Wilderness Study Area. This section also releases

approximately 121,000 acres of Wilderness Study Areas back

into multiple use, and ensures that ``cherry-stemmed'' roads

within wilderness remain open to motorized access.

Adds approximately 40,000 acres to the National Park

System. Approximately 35,000 acres of land would be added to

Death Valley National Park, 25 acres would be added to Mojave

National Preserve, and approximately 4,500 acres would be

added to Joshua Tree National Park.

Designates six existing administrative off-highway vehicle

areas as ``National Off-Highway Vehicle Recreation Areas,''

creating the first system of national OHV Recreation Areas in

the nation. These include Dumont Dunes, El Mirage, Rasor,

Spangler Hills, Stoddard Valley, and Johnson Valley (a total

of more than 150,000 acres dedicated to OHV recreation), and

designates an additional 51,980 acres of previously disturbed

land for study and potential inclusion into the System.

Designates 18,610 acres of Bureau of Land Management (BLM)

land as the ``Alabama Hills National Scenic Area'' and

includes the area in the National Landscape Conservation

System.

Takes 132 acres of federal land into trust for the Lone

Pine Paiute-Shoshone Tribe and prohibits gaming on the land.

Ensures access to areas designated under the Act by tribes

for traditional cultural and religious purposes, including

the ability of a tribe to request the Secretary of the

Interior to temporarily close any designated area to protect

the privacy of traditional cultural and religious activities

by members of a tribe or Indian religious community.

Requires the development and implementation of a tribal

cultural resources management plan to identify, protect, and

conserve

cultural resources of Indian tribes associated with the Xam

Kwatchan Trail network.

Establishes a California-Nevada Desert Tortoise Relocation

Center with the aid of private partners and directs the

Secretary of the Interior to study wildlife corridors and

species migration in the California desert.

Sec. 3. Visitor Center.

Authorizes the National Park Service to acquire up to five

acres of land for a Joshua Tree National Park Visitor Center.

Sec. 4. California State School Land.

Allows BLM revenue from surplus land exchange and disposal

to fund the purchase of California State school trust land.

Sec. 5. Designation of Wild and Scenic Rivers.

Designates 77 miles of new wild, scenic, and recreational

rivers under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1271

et seq.). The designations affect the Amargosa River,

Surprise Canyon Creek, Deep Creek, and the Whitewater River.

Sec. 6. Conforming Amendments.

Makes conforming amendments and prevents the creation of

buffer zones around new wilderness areas.

Mr. Speaker, let me just say very quickly here that what Representative Cook has done is taking an important issue and doing it the right way, by collaboration and outreach with local people who live in those areas on what they want to do with the public land.

Public land does not necessarily only mean Federal land. Public land can also be State, it can be county, and it can be all sorts of entities' land, but the value of that land, whether it is Federal or State or county or municipality, is does it help the people of that particular area.

What Mr. Cook has done in this particular piece of legislation is talk to them and find a way in which the land can actually be used to help people. So, yes, he released some wilderness study areas that were designated as unsuitable for a wilderness designation but then created three times that number of acreage in new wilderness designations as well as new wild and scenic river designations.

Most importantly, because land is needed for recreational purposes, he puts protections for people who are using this land--OHV users, especially--that ensure these areas will not be closed administratively and that that kind of recreation opportunity will not be taken away on a whim.

So what he has done is worked very hard with local people to find local people's needs and desires for their local land and provided them an opportunity that will provide not only economic benefits for a few, but also recreational benefits for many, as well as creating new wilderness designations at the same time and wild and scenic designations at the same time.

This is a win-win for everyone involved. I commend him for his hard work in actually coming up with this particular process. This is the way land designation should be used.

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

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to adopt this bill. I have no more speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3392) to provide for stability of title to certain land in the State of Louisiana, 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 such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Johnson), who is the sponsor of this piece of legislation.

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

This particular bill is not the first time we have talked about this on the floor. It is long overdue. In fact, it is about 100 years long overdue, with only a handful of homeowners having their title for which they have bought, sold, and lived for decades questioning whether they actually have the title to it or not.

It is unfair, and it was wrong. It was wrong for BLM, and it is right for Congress to step in and try and solve this problem to bring some finality and certainty to an issue that never should have been an issue in the very first place. This harms the status quo and harms people.

That is not our position, and that is not what we should be doing. So I appreciate the minority working with us on this particular bill very well because it is an extremely important one to try and finally solve this particular issue so we don't come back again.

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

Again, Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Johnson for this particular bill that is solving a problem that should never have been there in his particular district, for his efforts on it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1791) to establish the Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage Area in the State of Washington, 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 such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Reichert), who is the sponsor of this piece of legislation, who is establishing a heritage area, and who is doing it the right way.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is often the situation where heritage areas that were originally established to try to allow local people to have some mechanism in which they can get together to actually advertise their particular area are usually for tourism interests or historical preservation interests. It kind of devolved, unfortunately, through time, to an issue in which people simply found a way of using the Federal Government as the deep pocket to keep getting more money all the time back to those particular areas, even though it was supposed to be a one-time situation. Then we found that other heritage areas found a way in which special interest groups got control of these areas and were starting to dictate to local government entities.

Each of those problems that have been a significant problem in other heritage areas was eliminated by Mr. Reichert in his particular piece of legislation. That is why I said he did it the right way, with the right instincts, with the right purposes, the right illustration, especially with the emphasis on protecting private property rights and Native American rights.

So this is one of the few heritage areas that I am happy to support, because it is organized the proper way to solve problems, not just try to find a cheap and easy way to get more money back into the area. So he is commended for his integrity and the way he has orchestrated that.

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

Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of this piece of legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4257) to maximize land management efficiencies, promote land conservation, generate education funding, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Stewart).

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record additional background that is necessary for this particular bill.

Background and Need for H.R. 4257, Advancing Conservation and Education

Act

The Advancing Conservation and Education (ACE) Act is based

on existing provisions in western State enabling acts

allowing States to select replacement lands in lieu of State

school grants that were not completed by the United States.

Congress granted most of the western States land to be held

in trust by the States and used to support public education

and other public purposes. Many of these State trust lands

parcels are in a ``checkerboard'' pattern inside federal

areas managed for conservation, such as national parks and

monuments, national wildlife refuges, wilderness study areas,

and areas of critical environmental concern. The

intermingling of land ownership creates significant problems

for both federal land managers and the States, since the

latter are required to manage State trust lands to provide

revenue for public education. Through its land use planning

process, the Bureau of Land Management

(BLM) identifies lands that are difficult or uneconomic to

manage, such as ``checkerboard'' areas.

H.R. 4257 will help meet the goal of rationalizing land

ownership in the west by creating an additional authority for

the United States to acquire State lands in federal

conservation areas, and compensating the States with equal-

value replacement federal lands within the State. The current

process where interested parties bring land exchanges to

Congress on a case-by-case basis is time-consuming and

cumbersome, and existing administrative land exchange

authorities are equally challenging.

The bipartisan proposal expands existing authority (43

U.S.C. 851-852), that allows western States to select federal

lands ``in lieu'' of lands lost to the States when original

statehood land grants were not completed. It would allow

States with lands located in federal conservation areas to

deed back those lands to the United States, and select

replacement lands of equivalent value from the unappropriated

federal public lands within that State. Many of the

provisions of the proposal incorporate existing BLM

administrative provisions for in-lieu selections, including

land valuation, and compliance with BLM land use plans. It

would not replace the land exchange process, but rather

provide an alternative mechanism for State-federal land

transfers.

Further, H.R. 4257 also directs the Department of the

Interior to create a process for the relinquishment of the

parcels and sets forth requirements regarding hazardous

materials on land conveyed, water rights, grazing permits,

road rights-of ways, and other valid existing rights.

The Western States Land Commissioners Association (WSLCA),

a bipartisan organization of 21 State agencies responsible

for managing more than 500 million acres of public and school

trust land, has proposed a legislative solution to provide a

mechanism for the United States to acquire lands owned by the

western States and located inside federal conservation areas,

while fairly compensating the States for those lands by

granting them the right to select replacement lands of

equivalent value from the public domain. The WSLCA proposal

has had substantial

input from western States and the conservation community.

Previous iterations of the proposed bill have also been

supported by conservations groups such as the Wilderness

Society. H.R. 4257 is based on this proposal.

H.R. 4257 would provide a useful tool for federal and State

land managers to make their respective landholdings more

rational, for the benefit of both sound land management and

public education funding.

A companion bill, S. 2078, has been introduced in the

Senate. The policy provisions set forth in H.R. 4257 have

enjoyed bipartisan support in the House and Senate in the

114th and 113th sessions..

Mr. Speaker, let me also say that, as a former teacher and a future teacher, I appreciate Mr. Stewart actually working on this piece of legislation that goes to help education in the State of Utah. No one else is doing that.

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

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.