Providing for Consideration of H.R. 5386, Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2007
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5386, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007 -- (House of Representatives - May 18, 2006)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlemen for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I want to say to the gentleman from Maryland who just spoke that I agree with almost everything he just said, except when he said that he was going to vote for the underlying rule, because the rule specifically does not protect the global warming language.
So I do not know how the gentlemen can feel on the one hand very passionately about doing something about global warming and having us look into the issue, and on the other hand go ahead and vote for a rule that will allow anybody on this floor to strike it.
Mr. Speaker, it has been nearly a year since we considered the Interior appropriation, the last Interior appropriations bill. One year ago I joined with my colleagues in voicing my outrage at the inadequate funding levels for critical environmental and conservation programs, and last year, like this year, we were told that because of the budget allocation this was the best that we could do, we will try to do better next year.
So here we are today in the wake of having the Republican leadership ram through a martial law rule in order to take up a budget resolution that just like last year's version slashes programs in areas of education, job training, conservation, public health and medical research and social services.
Another year has gone by, but it is still the same old story. And so I rise today, sadly, in opposition to the fiscal year 2007 Interior appropriations bill. This bill is an assault against our environment and it should be defeated.
Once again, it significantly cuts funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund and completely eliminates the Stateside Grant Program. That is right, zero dollars for the Stateside Land and Water Conservation Program. I am simply not interested in hearing the same old argument that this is simply the best we can do given the budget allocation.
The budget allocation does not just fall from the sky, this Congress voted on the budget yesterday. The Republican majority chose to slash environmental programs. The Republican majority chose to eliminate the State grants for the Land and Water Conservation Fund. The Republican majority chose to pass a budget that requires a completely inadequate allocation for the Department of Interior and environmental programs.
Mr. Speaker, we have the results of those choices before us today. We could have done better. We could have chosen to move away from the deliberate policy of putting the privileges of millionaires ahead of the needs of our communities and families.
Since 1964, LWCF funding has been used to support the acquisition and maintenance of our national wildlife refuges, parks, forests and public domain lands, and the stateside program has helped to preserve open space, slow urban sprawl and given our children safe places to play.
This program has broad bipartisan support, and success stories can be found in every single State and every single community throughout this country. In fact, this year I joined with my colleagues from New York (Mr. King) and New Jersey (Mr. Holt) in urging the committee to restore funding to the Stateside Grant Program. One hundred fifty Members shared this concern and signed on to a bipartisan letter.
Mr. Speaker, it is all about priorities: Tax breaks for the wealthy few or open space and environmental protections for the majority of Americans. I commend Mr. Taylor and Mr. Dicks for the good in this bill, but the good is not enough to outweigh the bad.
The Republican majority in this House have made their choices. It is the wrong choice. I urge my colleagues to hold true to their promise to the American people and reject this bill. We must do better.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov/