Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Showtime Studios Dance Team, Showtime Storm from Alamogordo, New Mexico on their success at the United States All Star Federation's World Competition (USASF). This is a competition where young people travel to Disney World to compete against the best dancers from around the world. These 18 students from the Showtime Studio's senior hip hop team showed their diligent work ethic and amazing talent by advancing to the world competition through a series of regional and national dance championships. The hip hop dance team set a high standard for others to follow since 2007 was the first year USASF held the Senior Hip Hop Gold Championship title. The team has overcome adversity on their journey to the championship and I commend them for their dedication and success.

I am proud to recognize the Showtime Storm dance squad for their accomplishments. I specifically want to congratulate, Kelsey Osterholm, Perla Alarcon, Michael Barber, Adam Berg, Samantha Burch, Marco Cardiel, Erica Clausen, Samantha Collins, Bryan Harris, Vanessa Hernandez, Raynee Hopkins, Shawnna Jett, Kristina Joyner, Macey Marquardt, Ashley Pacheco, Sarah Santos, Whitney Weise, Lexi Wright, assistant coach Vickie Marquardt, and head coach Lorrie Black.

It is my honor as a Member of Congress to have the chance to congratulate this outstanding group of young people on an achievement their hard work has earned them. Congratulations to each of you, your family, your community, and your congressman are all proud of your achievements.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Fort Stanton-Snowy River Cave National Conservation Area Act. This bill is a companion to legislation introduced by my state's Senior Senator, Mr. Domenici. Last year, the Senate passed this legislation but the House was unable to act on it before we recessed. It is my hope by introducing the bill today we can push the process along and get this legislation done this year.

The Fort Stanton Cave is a tremendous national resource, which includes a cave that has calcite flowing all along the cave formations. This truly rare resource deserves our protection. As the Representative of Carlsbad Caverns National Park, I am aware of how amazing cave formations can be and how valuable they are to educate and inspire our children.

This legislation does the following: (1) creates a Fort Stanton-Snowy River Cave Conservation Area to protect, secure and conserve the natural and unique features of the Snowy River Cave; (2) instructs the BLM to prepare a map and legal description of the Snowy River Cave, and to develop a comprehensive, long-term management plan for the cave area; (3) authorizes the conservation of the unique features and environs in the cave for scientific, educational and other public uses deemed safe and appropriate under the management plan; (4) authorizes the BLM to work with State and other institutions and to cooperate with Lincoln County to address the historical involvement of the local community; (5) protects the caves from mineral and mining leasing operations.

This cave is a valuable resource that in time will share with us its many wonders, but to do that we must preserve this resource for the future. I hope that my colleagues will join me in supporting these important protections.

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

I would like to begin by complimenting Representative Larsen for the hard work he has put into this legislation and for proposing wilderness only in his district. This would seem to be a basic sensible courtesy, but seems to be lost on some of his fellow Democrats.

With that said, the minority is opposed to this bill. During the markup in the Natural Resources Committee, the minority pledged its willingness to work with the majority, but this offer must have fallen upon deaf ears. In the future, we hope the majority can at least contact us after we make such a gesture.

Much of the area that would be designated by this bill does not qualify as wilderness. The 1964 Wilderness Act states explicitly that wilderness areas should be primitive and untrammeled by man. Yet the Wild Sky Wilderness Act includes several roads, a bridge, numerous culverts, and other man-made developments.

The proposal also includes areas with mining patents and lands identified by the Forest Service for timber harvest. Moreover, according to the Forest Service, road corridors within the wilderness are too narrow to ensure proper road maintenance and safe passage by travelers. Without sufficient corridors, landslides or other natural disturbances could permanently block or destroy the road.

Restrictions associated with the wilderness areas prohibit the use of mechanized or motorized activities, which would surely be needed to prepare a road. It is disingenuous for the majority to tout the public's ability to visit the Wild Sky area without protecting one of the main roads that would allow access to the Wild Sky area.

We are willing to work with the majority and have indicated our willingness to do so. In the future we hope that the majority would work with us.

Wilderness areas affect local communities, are permanent, and many times have ramifications or unintended consequences. We ask the majority to take these bills seriously and study them in good faith before hurriedly passing them on to the House floor.

Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

H. Res. 217 recognizes the flooding of Celilo Falls in Oregon. In 1957, the U.S. Corps of Engineers constructed the multipurpose Dalles Dam to provide much needed hydropower and irrigation for the Pacific Northwest. As a result of the dam, the falls were inundated, changing the way four tribes fished at the location.

This resolution recognizes the 50th anniversary of that change.

It is my understanding that this resolution will not be used for future litigation claims and legislative purposes, so we have no objection.

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

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

I would appreciate engaging in a brief colloquy regarding H. Res. 217.

Is it the understanding of the gentleman from Oregon that the enactment of this resolution will not be used for litigation or legislative purposes?

I thank the gentleman for that clarification.

Mr. Speaker, I would yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden).

(Mr. WALDEN of Oregon asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I cannot enhance or extend the word pictures given by my colleague from Oregon and would, therefore, reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I do not have other speakers and would yield back the balance of my time.

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

This bill authorizes Federal participation in a water reuse project in McLennan County, Texas. As central Texas cities experience rapid population growth and increased water demand, these communities are being proactive to better utilize their existing water supplies. We have no objection to this well-intended bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

H.R. 786 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to participate in the design, planning, and construction of a water recharge demonstration project in southern California. To meet the needs of future population growth in this arid region, capturing storm-water runoff and recharging groundwater could substantially increase local water supplies.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I appreciate the comments by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva).

H.R. 309, introduced by me, would establish an innovative 4-year demonstration program in the National Park Service to improve and expedite landscape restoration programs within 24 units of the National Park System to better preserve and interpret resources associated with American military history.

One of the tenets of the Park Service is to preserve the look of national battlefields as they existed at the time of the conflict. Often this involves removing trees and other woody debris that encroach on sightlines. Under current law, these trees are removed and any funds from their sale are returned to the General Treasury.

As a part of this new program, selected parks would be permitted to retain receipts from any timber sales and use those funds on the respective landscape restoration programs and interpretive services. While this would not involve a lot of money, every little bit helps, especially given the National Park System maintenance backlog.

This noncontroversial bill was favorably reported last Congress by unanimous consent, and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 309.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 815 and yield to the author of the bill, the distinguished gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Porter).

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 865. The majority, Mr. Grijalva, has adequately explained this bill. I thank him for his consideration on behalf of the author, Don Young.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise to thank the majority, Mr. Grijalva, for his support of H.R. 1191, and I would yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished author of the bill, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi), who has worked tirelessly for 4 years on this bill.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Benjamin Cline for recently earning his Eagle Scout Award, the highest award in Scouting. His keen interest, work ethic and drive in the pursuit of excellence have led Ben to complete all the ranks along the trail to Eagle, including 29 merit badges. Benjamin's Eagle Scout Service Project was completed by installing two flag poles at Belen's Alexander Airport. He has enjoyed Boy Scouts through many camping trips, building his own raft and river rafting, canoeing 50 miles down the Rio Grande and bicycling over 100 miles.

Ben is the son of Doug and Ann Marie Cline of Los Lunas and a junior at Belen High School. At BHS he holds the rank of Lt. JG in Naval ROTC and is the Color Guard commander. He is involved in the new Sea Scouts Ship recently formed at Belen High School as well as with MESA. He is a member of the First United Methodist Church Handbell Choir. Ben also holds a second degree Black Belt at Belen Goju Ryu Karate School. He attended Dennis Chavez Elementary then was home-schooled for several years before entering Belen High School. He has two sisters who are currently attending UNM in Albuquerque. After graduation in 2008, Ben plans to attend San Juan Community College and earn two associate degrees--Aviation and Law Enforcement. He then plans to attend the University of Minnesota to complete a BS degree in Aviation Law Enforcement and begin a related career.

Ben encourages all young men to explore the Scouting experience--``It has helped me grow in outdoor and leadership skills and helped to mold my character and make me a better person. The Scouting program teaches valuable life skills.''

I am proud to recognize Benjamin Cline for his accomplishments. It is my honor as a Member of Congress to have the chance to congratulate this outstanding young man on an achievement he will celebrate the rest of his life. Congratulations Ben Cline, your family, your congressman, and your country are all proud of your achievement.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from New York for working with me on this motion to recommit that we are offering today. I believe that we are going to make this legislation much better.

Ever since 9/11, law enforcement agencies have been telling the American people that they should immediately report any suspicious activity. This important step is one of the best ways that we have to stop terrorism. In essence, the public is the eyes and ears for the security of the Nation.

Sadly, a lawsuit has been filed in Minnesota which named as defendants the Americans who were simply trying to protect themselves and their country. These everyday people have now found themselves subject to a lawsuit for simply reporting what they thought in good faith was suspicious activity.

We are in grave danger when terrorists and their sympathizers use our freedoms against us. Terrorists have abused our Nation's immigration system, our foreign student travel visa opportunities, and open society's freedom to travel.

On 9/11 the hijackers knew how the crew on the plane would respond and used that knowledge against the air crews to carry out their deadly attacks.

Now, we have imams who behaved in methods similar to those 9/11 terrorists and are now using our courts to terrorize the Americans who reported the behavior. They used a seating pattern that was similar to the 9/11 attackers. They asked for seatbelt extensions, and then didn't use them but laid them at their feet in an ominous gesture of disrespect. They did not sit in assigned seats. The loud criticism of President Bush and the war all added together to create a mood of uncertainty among passengers who were watching them.

If we allow these lawsuits to go forward, it will have a chilling effect on the future of American security. Today's USA Today opinion stated the ``Clerics' lawsuit threatens the security of all passengers; efforts to name those who reported suspicious actions has chilling effect.'' I will submit the full article for the Record.

If we are serious about fighting terrorism, if we are serious about protecting Americans and asking them to help protect each other, then we must pass this motion.

If I leave my colleagues with one message about this motion, it is simply, no American should be sued for trying to stop terrorism.

Recently, I visited Israel. There they were much more open about it. They said, the stakes are too high. The danger is too imminent. There is no room left in the world for political correctness.

Today we are going to make that choice on the floor of the House, to choose political correctness or to choose to protect the people in this country and the people who would bring the attention of suspicious activities to the Nation's authorities.

Vote ``yes'' on today's motion to recommit and help protect Americans.

[From USA Today, Mar. 27, 2007]

Our View on Post-9/11 Travel: Clerics' Lawsuit Threatens Security of

All Passengers

``If you see something, say something.''

Since the terror attacks of 9/11, that common-sense message

has been displayed prominently worldwide for obvious reasons.

Police and transportation authorities can't be everywhere.

Whether at an airport, bus or rail station, officials need

passengers to alert them to unattended baggage that might

contain explosives and behavior that appears out of the

ordinary.

Now the reward for being vigilant apparently includes being

dragged into a lawsuit and accused of bigotry. The wry adage

about how no good deed goes unpunished seems apt, though not

so funny.

The lawsuit grew out of an incident last November when six

Muslim clerics, returning from a religious conference in

Minneapolis, were removed from a US Airways flight after

passengers and crew raised alarms. The imams were questioned

by authorities and released. The six say they are innocent

victims of ethnic profiling for merely praying quietly in

Arabic at the terminal.

Their lawsuit, filed earlier this month, accused the

airline and Metropolitan Airports Commission of anti-Muslim

bias. That was expected. What's unique and especially

troubling, though, is the effort to identify an unknown

number of passengers and airline employees who reported

suspicions so they might also be included as defendants. For

example, the imams want to know the names of an elderly

couple who turned around ``to watch'' and then made cellphone

calls, presumably to authorities, as the men prayed.

This legal tactic seems designed to intimidate passengers

willing to do exactly what authorities have requested--say

something about suspicious activity.

The imams' actions last November appeared to be either

deliberately provocative or clueless as to how others might

perceive them. Several passengers and crewmembers told

authorities that the men loudly chanted ``Allah'' several

times, cursed U.S. involvement in Iraq and switched their

seat assignments. Three imams asked for seat belt extenders,

which include a heavy metal buckle that could be used as a

weapon, but left them on the floor.

Under the circumstances, the pilot made a reasonable

judgment call to remove them from the plane. Some of the

facts are in dispute: The imams deny making any anti-American

remarks and say seats were changed to accommodate a blind

cleric who might need assistance. They accuse the airline of

slandering them.

US Airways can afford to defend itself and the crew in

court. Passengers who notified authorities don't have those

resources. Several lawyers have promised to represent such

passengers for free. The American Islamic Forum for

Democracy, a moderate Muslim group, will raise funds for

their defense. Rep. Steve Pearce, R-N.M., has introduced a

bill to shield from legal liability those who report

suspicious behavior.

It shouldn't have to come to that, especially if a judge

has the wisdom to throw out the complaints against the ``John

Doe'' passengers before they're identified.

As for ethnic profiling--the reprehensible practice of

discriminating solely based on ethnicity--this incident

doesn't qualify. The imams were tossed off the plane because

of suspicious behavior, which obviously can't be ignored.

Suing passengers who merely report such behavior threatens

everyone's ability to travel securely.

Mr. Speaker, ever since 9/11, law enforcement agencies have been telling the American people they should immediately report suspicious activities. This important step is one of the best ways we have to stop terrorism. Sadly, last week, Americans who were simply trying to protect themselves in their country have now found themselves subject to a lawsuit for reporting suspicious activity.

In a lawsuit filed against US Airways, 60 moms removed from planes in Minneapolis have named ``John Does'' as defendants. These are simply people who were watching suspicious activities and called to report those suspicious activities, and now they are going to be terrorized in our court system in this country.

Mr. Speaker, I think that that is unconscionable, and so I am presenting the Protecting Americans Fighting Terrorism Act to keep people safe who report suspicious activity in this country to law enforcement officials to protect the American people.

I urge my colleagues to support this important measure to help us be able to police ourselves and report suspicious activity.

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

I am here to support H.R. 902 introduced by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall). I have cosponsored legislation authorizing the Department of the Interior to study the potential use of extracted water from oil and gas production for irrigation and other purposes.

It will not surprise anyone in this Chamber that water is the most important resource in the West. Water is the lifeblood of the American West and the foundation of its economy. Yet it is also the scarcest resource in some of the fastest-growing areas of the country. But we can go beyond that and declare that water is the most strategic asset in the entire world. It may surprise some in this Chamber that the potential source of good-quality water lies just beneath the surface and is being wasted every day.

During the process of oil and gas development, approximately 924 billion gallons of water is extracted throughout the year, with most of that water being pumped back underground. Some significant share of that water is already being used for irrigation and livestock watering, but converting just 1 percent more of that total to additional beneficial use would yield over 75 billion gallons of more usable water for irrigation, ranching, fish and wildlife enhancement, stream augmentation or drinking water. The produced water that contains the lowest concentration of total dissolved solids, or TDS, less than 10,000 parts per million, is found in the western United States where water is a critical resource.

Often the largest hurdle to beneficial use of water produced from oil and gas production is finding the technology to accomplish water treatment in a cost-effective manner. Water treatment must compete with the lower-cost option of deep well injection. And while deep well injection is the most environmentally sound method of disposal, it forgoes the opportunity to use millions of gallons as a resource.

Beneficial use of this water in these arid environments will be a win-win situation for the energy industry, water consumers, and oil and gas consumers. This legislation will facilitate the potential use of this abundant water for irrigation uses and other beneficial purposes. It could potentially help us find new water from what is now a virtually untapped water resource.

I thank the gentleman from Colorado for introducing this legislation, and urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, many times people have asked exactly how does this work on the ground. For instance, in my home county of Lea County, New Mexico, we have the Ogallala Aquifer. We are right at the very edge of it. And in the 50 years we have been pumping out of the aquifer, we have used about 50 percent of the water that is available to us. There is no surface water available, only that aquifer water is available. We have used 50 percent of it, and it would take 1,900 years to recharge what has been used, and so we understand that we are on the downward slide for having water available to us.

In Lea County, New Mexico, we produce over 150,000 barrels of water yearly, and that water is reinjected. If that water were available to be cleaned up, that water would be available for development, industry and jobs. It is a very important thing.

The county right next is Eddy County. Water is produced there that is fresher than water in the Pecos River, and yet law and regulation requires the disposal of that water back down into salt zones. Everyone in the West understands that at some point we are going to go back and repump that water to the surface, this time for use as water. Right now it is free at the surface. It is a by-product of the oil and gas exploration, and yet we are required to put that water back down into wells, into the salt zones, where it is going to be very much harder to clean up the next time we use it.

So this bill represents a great opportunity for us to take a step forward to benefit the industry in the West, to benefit the residents of the West, and to help lower the cost of production of oil and gas. It seems to be a win-win situation every way that we look at it.

I compliment the gentleman from Texas and the gentleman from Colorado for introducing this legislation.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado, Madam Speaker, I rise in support of my bill, H.R. 902, the ``More Water and More Energy Act, and to express my thanks to Chairman Rahall and Ranking Member Don Young of the Natural Resources Committee for making it possible for the House to consider it today.

The bill's purpose is to facilitate the use of water produced in connection with development of energy resources for irrigation and other uses in ways that will not adversely affect water quality or the environment.

It is similar to a bill I introduced in the 109th Congress that passed the House last year but on which the Senate did not complete legislative action. It is cosponsored by Representative Pearce of New Mexico, who is the ranking Republican member on the Natural Resources Committee's Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources and also by Representative Edwards of Texas. I greatly appreciate their support.

I think the bill may help change an energy-industry problem into an opportunity, not just for oil and gas producers but for everyone else who would benefit from increased supplies of useable water.

Especially in the arid west, that covers everyone--not least our hard-pressed ranchers and farmers.

The focus of the bill is the underground water extracted in connection with development of energy sources like oil, natural gas or coalbed methane. It would do two things:

First, it would direct the Bureau of Reclamation and the USGS to identify the obstacles to greater use of produced water and the how those obstacles could be reduced or eliminated without adversely affecting water quality or the environment.

Second, it would provide for Federal help in building 3 pilot plants to demonstrate ways to treat produced water to make it suitable for irrigation or other uses, again without adversely affecting water quality or the environment.

At least one of these pilot plants would be in Colorado, Utah, or Wyoming. At least one would be in New Mexico, Arizona or Nevada. And there would be at least one each in California and Texas. This is to assure that, together, the plants would demonstrate techniques applicable to a variety of geologic and other conditions.

Under the bill, the federal government could pay up to half the cost of building each plant, but no more than $1 million for any one plant. No federal funds could be used for operating the plants.

The bill's goal is reflected in its title--the ``More Water and More Energy Act of 2006.''

The extent of its potential benefits was shown by the testimony of Mr. David Templet at a hearing on the similar bill of mine the House considered last year.

Mr. Templet testified in support of that bill on behalf of the Domestic Petroleum Council and several other groups, including the Colorado Oil & Gas Association. He noted that produced water is the most abundant byproduct associated with the production of oil and gas, with about 18 billion barrels being generated by onshore wells in 1995.

And he pointed out that if only an additional 1 percent of that total could be put to beneficial use, the result would be to make over 75 billion gallons annually available for use for irrigation or other agriculture, municipal purposes, or to benefit fish and wildlife.

Now, remember that in the west we usually measure water by the acre- foot--the amount that would cover an acre to the depth of one foot--and an acre-foot is about 32,8560 gallons, so an additional 75 billion gallons is more than 230,000 acre feet--more water, indeed.

And at the same time making produced water available for surface uses, instead of just reinjecting it into the subsurface, can help increase the production of oil and gas.

At last year's hearing, this was illustrated by the testimony of Dr. David Stewart, a registered professional engineer from Colorado. He cited the example of an oil field in California from which an estimated additional 150 million barrels of oil could be recovered if water were removed from the subsurface reservoir. And he pointed out that where oil recovery is thermally enhanced, a reduced amount of underground water means less steam--and so less cost--is needed to recover the oil.

The potential for having both more water and more energy is also illustrated by the example of a project near Wellington, Colorado, that treats produced water as a new water resource. I had the opportunity to visit it just last week, and found it very interesting.

An oil company is embarking on the project to increase oil production while a separate company will purchase the produced water to supplement existing supplies, eventually allowing the town of Wellington and other water users in the area to have increased water for drinking and other purposes.

In view of its potential for leading to both ``more water'' and ``more energy'' I was pleased but not surprised that last year the Administration, through the Interior Department, testified that it ``agrees that the goals of the bill are commendable and the needs that could be addressed are real'' and that the roles the bill would assign to the Bureau of Reclamation and the USGS are consistent with the missions and expertise of those agencies.

In view of all this, Madam Speaker, I submit that this bill--and its promise of helping provide our country with both more water and more energy--deserves the support of the House, and I urge its approval.

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

Madam Speaker, on Friday, March 9, while on a tour of Walter Reed Medical Center, I inadvertently missed the vote on H. Res. 229. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''