Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Chair, in 1906, the Antiquities Act was passed by Congress to give the President authority to declare our national monuments were historical landmarks and structures. But this act required that declaration be confined to the smallest possible area to do a given job. In 2023, we see the original intent of this bill has become almost unrecognizable.
Much like Congress has experienced and the American people have experienced with the Clean Water Act and the definition of the waters of the United States, the executive branch has continually run wild with the authority Congress at one time had granted it.
While the Clean Water Act was used by both the Obama and Biden administration in an attempt to put all water under the jurisdiction of bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., so too has the Antiquities Act been used to take vast tracks of land, especially in the Western United States, out of consideration for economic development and responsible land management, such as for fire.
Some of the early drafts of the Antiquities Act even mentioned a total limitation of any monuments to 640 acres. A limitation on monument size, 640 acres was the original draft. That is only one square mile.
By contrast, in August President Biden designated new lands to the Grand Canyon totaling nearly 1 million acres. That would be approximately 1,500 square miles.
When President Teddy Roosevelt signed the Antiquities Act into law, he did so believing it would allow the U.S. to honor its history and protect public lands. All good things.
Today, when word of a new national monument reaches an area, such as my area in northern California, my constituents in Colusa County didn't react with hope or an appreciation of history in this particular instance. Instead, they reacted with anger, frustration, or even fear of what it will mean for lands in their areas.
For example, will the Federal Government still perform necessary forest and land management? That is an issue we deal with continuously. As we saw in my district in 2021, we had a 1-million-acre fire known as the Dixie fire due to lack of forest service management on Federal land.
And another question would be: Can we still allow for recreation on these lands?
Mr. Chairman, this body has allowed the executive branch to take too much of our authority away from Congress. The abuse of the Antiquities Act is just the latest in a long line of white flags Congress has flown against the President.
Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the thoughts by my good colleague from Maine, and I appreciate her.
In this particular case, we are limiting, relative to the whole country, a small area. This affects several thousand acres, not the entire country. The President's whole powers are in one county in my district, Colusa County in northern California. They have asked not to be included in this monument because it would limit their ability to do important things, such as manage the land for fire danger or recreation. It is really rather sparse land in that area. It is good for deer hunting.
So what is it you really need a monument for? If you are going to do extensive things like mining, drilling, putting in pipelines or power lines, you already have to get permits for those. And it takes the mines we are going to need in this country if we are going to electrify everything, they take 20 years to get a mine made. But that is not even proposed in this area. It is simply to have a little autonomy in the area.
Now, when it wasn't affecting Colusa County, the locals there weren't particularly against the moment as it didn't affect their county. After an additional portion got drawn in, they said, Well, wait a minute. This is our county. We already have difficulty in this rural county with revenue and being able to do the things we need to do in a rural economy, in an agriculture economy or what little tourism they can get out that way too, they are having that option taken away from them.
With the monument, you basically can't do anything on the land, including in many cases, mechanized forest firefighting. You have to go out with hand tools in some of these areas. And so, it just means the fire gets bigger. It just means less options for locals.
I thought the Antiquities Act was supposed to be preserving things for the people's enjoyment, not completely cutting them off. That is why we are so strongly opposed to this being added to Colusa County in this instance here.
With that, I still oppose. I appreciate being able to work over on the other side with Senator Padilla's office on this conversation in moving forward to say, Let us have our autonomy in our areas of northern California where we don't think a monument works for us in order to manage the land as needed.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source