Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Madam Chair, this amendment doesn't make sense from an economic perspective or a health perspective. It would block implementation of the Environmental Protection Agency's commonsense standards for sources of emissions of methane in the oil and gas industry. And while we invest in renewable energy, at the same time, we know that we can't wait to transition entirely to renewable energy before we address other side effects of the extraction process, like methane.

Pound for pound, methane pollution from oil and gas wells is 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide and is responsible for a quarter of human-made climate change.

This EPA rule, frankly, is just a starting point. It is a long overdue standard for the oil and gas industry to reduce methane pollution. Frankly, I wish these rules went further, but these stricter standards are a good start; they are necessary. Scientists have published data that shows that methane released during extraction is an incredibly large contributor to the climate threat.

I think it is really critical not to prevent the EPA from moving forward and fulfilling the mission that Congress gave them to protect our air, water, and planet, and that is what this amendment would do, which is why I oppose it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Madam Chair, before I begin my comments on this amendment, I want to thank the chairman for including my other amendment regarding volunteer and State wildfire assistance en bloc earlier today.

While a great deal of attention is being paid to Hurricane Harvey and Irma, the West is also being ravaged by wildfires, costing hundreds of millions of dollars and lives.

My amendment with Representatives Renacci and King that passed makes sure that States and local governments will have a little bit more resources with their volunteer fire departments to fight those fires, and I appreciate that.

Madam Chair, this amendment that is at the desk would address the really unsound plan by the EPA to close down their regional field offices. My amendment would prevent this plan from occurring by preventing funds from going to the closure of regional Environmental Protection Agency offices.

We already know that the new EPA leadership has its priorities backwards, focused on how they can help fossil fuels and coal and oil rather than the congressionally mandated responsibility of keeping our air an 5 office, which covers the upper Midwest, I was disappointed, hence, this action that I am taking here today with this amendment.

The reports we have heard are surrounding Region 5, but we have no idea which regions they are targeting. In my home State of Colorado, the Region 8 headquarters serves six States and 27 sovereign Tribal nations. Our headquarters in Denver are essential to protecting health and safeguarding the national environment in the American West.

It is very important to fight against this reckless EPA plan to close down regional offices that keep our air clean. And now more than ever, with tropical storms and flooded chemical plants and oil spills around Houston, we all know how essential EPA presence in the field is. The EPA field offices are often the first responders at the scenes of environmental disasters. Regional field offices are uniquely well versed in particular characteristics in our very diverse geographic Nation.

It is very important for Congress to send an unambiguous message that we want to safeguard the lives and welfare of our American citizens, acknowledge and address the very real threat of climate change.

Madam Chair, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.d water clean and helping to keep people healthy.

So earlier this year, when the President's budget included closing ten regional Environmental Protection Agency offices and reports began to surface in April that Secretary Pruitt was looking to close the Region 5 office, which covers the upper Midwest, I was disappointed, hence, this action that I am taking here today with this amendment.

The reports we have heard are surrounding Region 5, but we have no idea which regions they are targeting. In my home State of Colorado, the Region 8 headquarters serves six States and 27 sovereign Tribal nations. Our headquarters in Denver are essential to protecting health and safeguarding the national environment in the American West.

It is very important to fight against this reckless EPA plan to close down regional offices that keep our air clean. And now more than ever, with tropical storms and flooded chemical plants and oil spills around Houston, we all know how essential EPA presence in the field is. The EPA field offices are often the first responders at the scenes of environmental disasters. Regional field offices are uniquely well versed in particular characteristics in our very diverse geographic Nation.

It is very important for Congress to send an unambiguous message that we want to safeguard the lives and welfare of our American citizens, acknowledge and address the very real threat of climate change.

Madam Chair, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Well, if there is no plans to close offices and it would cost more to close them, I would just hope that the Chair would accept this amendment, which merely confirms what he just indicated.

Madam Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Madam Chair, again, the chairman has given his assurances that there is no plans to close offices, that it would cost more to close offices; therefore, since there is no additional money for office closure in this bill, it is not happening.

I don't see why we don't just confirm that same intent that he conveyed by putting this funding amendment restriction in place that would prevent offices from being closed. If they are saying they are not going to close, and if we are saying they are not going to close, well, let's just put that in words so it means something. That is all this amendment does.

Obviously, if the President or the executive want to propose consolidation or closures, they can come back and seek funding for that. The Chair is right. We have the final word.

If we include this language in the bill, our final word will be that you can't close EPA offices without a change in funding and coming back to Congress. So it is completely consistent with what the Chair indicated. I think it is a very important statement for us to make as a united Congress.

Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes,'' and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

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

This amendment is very simple. It offers Members of this body a very clear choice about whether or not we want to keep our public lands in the hands of those who rightfully own them, the American public; or if we want to sell off our public lands to the highest bidder.

This amendment would prohibit the Federal use of funds to pursue any additional extralegal ways to turn our Federal lands over to private owners. For example, it would prohibit commissions. It would prohibit groups that would find backdoor ways to do that, or any other means.

My amendment simply ensures that none of the funds through this bill can be used in violation of the law that already exists. I would hope that can be accepted by the Republicans. It is important to note that this amendment would not do anything to undermine the current authority for congressional- and administration-driven land exchanges that many of us have worked on.

In the district I am honored to represent, over 60 percent of the land is public land. These public lands are beautiful and majestic, just as they are across the entire country. They are a critical part of our American heritage; our Western heritage; in my State, our Colorado heritage; and they serve so many incredible purposes.

First of all, public lands are good for our mind and soul. A U.S. Army Iraq war veteran who lives in Colorado recently said: ``I fought to protect all that makes our Nation great, and that includes the public lands that belong to every American.''

Second, these lands are good for our bodies by protecting water quality and public health. People hike and fish and enjoy outdoor recreation time. The public lands are the ecosystems that house headwaters of our river systems that we rely on for our drinking water and that help keep our air clean through the plants that they water.

Not only are our lands good for the soul and health, they are also the key economic driver in my district and my State. Across the country, over $600 billion is generated through outdoor recreation on our public lands, and visiting public lands support over 6 million jobs.

I represent Rocky Mountain National Park, which has over 3 million visitors a year. The entire economy of towns, like Estes Park, rely on our public lands. From small businesses to ski resorts, from gas stations to diners, our economy thrives in districts like mine because of our public lands.

A recent poll across six Western States shows that 96 percent of Americans support public lands. Let's vote on this and make sure that 96 percent in Congress agrees with 96 percent of the American public.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Well, look, the only argument the chairman has made against this one, like the last one, is that it is not going to happen anyway. So why not give the American people the assurance? Because, frankly, it could happen anyway.

There is a real threat. There are Members of this body and there are members of the President's administration that are seeking to sell off our public lands, which would devastate our local economy, undermine wildlife and the ecosystems that we support, and remove a critical iconic part of our Western heritage.

Selling these public lands to private owners would lead to a loss of access to our most majestic, treasured spaces, a critical part of our quality of life not just for Coloradans, but for the millions of people from across the country that visit our wild areas.

Time after time we see real attempts that are made here to transfer our most precious public lands to private ownership or sell them at wholesale.

With this amendment, we offer a clear choice. Let's confirm what the chairman said: that this won't happen. Let's support the protection of our public lands as all of our constituents do.

I think it is clear to make sure that Members are on the record. Do we support keeping our public lands public? Or do we support the corporatization of something that is, in many ways, the iconic essence of our identity as a people and as a country, our public lands? Madam Chair, I ask for my colleagues' support on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source