[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 83 (Wednesday, June 16, 2004)]
[House]
[Pages H4191-H4193]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4568, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
             AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005

  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the 
Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 674 and ask for its 
immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 674

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 4568) making appropriations for the Department 
     of Interior and related agencies for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 2005, and for other purposes. The first reading 
     of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order 
     against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate 
     shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour 
     equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. After 
     general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment 
     under the five-minute rule. Points of order against 
     provisions in the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 of 
     rule XXI are waived except as follows: in title I, the sixth 
     proviso under the heading ``Wildland Fire Management,'' the 
     final proviso under the heading ``United States Geological 
     Survey, Administrative Provisions,'' and section 113; in 
     title II, the fourteenth proviso under the heading ``Wildland 
     Fire Management'' and the final sentence of the sixth 
     paragraph under the heading ``Administrative Provisions, 
     Forest Service''; in title III, section 317, the proviso in 
     section 319, and sections 324, 328, 331, and 333. Where 
     points of order are waived against part of a paragraph or 
     section, points of order against a provision in another part 
     of such paragraph or section may be made only against such 
     provision and not against the entire paragraph or section. 
     During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chairman 
     of the Committee on the Whole may accord priority in 
     recognition on the basis of whether the Member offering an 
     amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of the 
     Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 
     of rule XVIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as 
     read. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for 
     amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the 
     House with such amendments as may have been adopted. The 
     previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill 
     and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening 
     motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
     instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) 
is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate 
only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York 
(Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may 
consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is 
for the purpose of debate only.
  (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 674 is an 
open rule waiving all points of order against consideration of H.R. 
4568, the Department of Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations 
Act of 2005.
  The rule provides for one hour of general debate equally divided and 
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee 
on Appropriations.
  The resolution provides, per the rules of the House, that the bill 
shall be read for amendments by paragraph. Points of order against 
provisions in the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI, 
which prohibits unauthorized appropriations or legislative provisions 
in an appropriations bill, are waived except as specified in the 
resolution.
  The rule authorizes the Chair to accord priority recognition to 
Members who have preprinted amendments in the Congressional Record.
  The rule also provides for one motion to recommit with or without 
instructions.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4568, the Department of Interior and Related 
Agencies Appropriations Act of 2005, sets clear priorities in a year of 
tight budgets.
  The chairman of the Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies 
faced a difficult challenge and has written a solid bill that focuses 
on meeting the Federal Government's core responsibilities in the 
agencies under the subcommittee's jurisdiction.
  Priority was given to essential functions and duties of these 
agencies, rather than on launching new initiatives and expanding 
government's reach.
  One of the highest priorities must be preventing wildfires on our 
national lands. This bill provides $2.6 billion for wildland 
firefighting in the National Fire Plan. This is a significant increase 
over fiscal year 2004, and it is a much-needed increase.
  Wildfires have a dramatic impact on our public lands, on private 
property and, even tragically, on human life. We must maintain the 
commitment to working to prevent such blazes and combating them 
aggressively when they do strike.
  Another priority must be providing for our existing parks and public 
lands. This bill increases funding for our national parks, a total of 
$1.7 billion. For example, the bill includes $471 million to address 
the backlog in maintenance at our national parks and places 
restrictions on travel expenses for Park Service officials, a common-
sense policy during a time when our parks have serious maintenance 
needs. Addressing these maintenance needs is something that I have long 
supported.
  The bill also includes increased funding over the fiscal year 2004 
level for the Indian Health Service, the National Forest System, BIA 
Education and Operations of Indian Programs and the U.S. Geological 
Survey.
  Funding is limited for Federal land acquisition, a decision on 
priorities that I strongly support. In a year of fiscal constraints, it 
certainly is appropriate to focus first on maintaining the Federal 
Government's existing lands.
  Land acquisition is not a necessity. Indeed, it costs local 
governments through decreased tax revenue and has real impact on local 
governments' abilities to provide essential services.
  Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman from North Carolina (Chairman 
Taylor) for his leadership in writing H.R. 4568, especially in this 
challenging year. The gentleman from North Carolina (Chairman Taylor) 
has guided this bill in a reasonable and responsible manner, which is 
especially appreciated in all areas of the West like the district I 
represent that are heavily impacted by the work of Federal agencies 
under his jurisdiction.
  I also want to recognize the role that I know the ranking minority 
member of the subcommittee, my colleague from Washington State (Mr. 
Dicks), played in the preparation of this bill. I value highly our 
ability to work together on matters of importance to Washington State, 
and this is a good example of that. I know my colleague's dedication to 
solving challenges and bettering our Nation are traits he brings to all 
of his responsibilities here in the House.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this open rule, 
H. Res. 674, and the underlying Interior Appropriations bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington 
(Mr. Hastings) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield 
myself such time as I may consume.
  (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
her remarks.)
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, the appropriations process for the coming

[[Page H4192]]

fiscal year has just begun, and much is being said about how tight the 
budget numbers are this year. And while this is a statement of fact, it 
is no excuse for our current fiscal situation.
  At the turn of the 21st century, the Federal Government had an 
historic budget surplus of $3 trillion. In just 3 years, the government 
is facing historic deficits, upwards of $7 trillion. Bad fiscal policy 
has greatly diminished the Federal Government's ability to invest in 
the Nation's resources and the Nation's people. The tight budget 
numbers are the result of tax giveaways to people who least need it, 
the people that the Oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffett, has said owe the 
most to the country and pay for far too little.
  Much is lacking in this appropriations bill. Overall spending levels 
are down. Federal land acquisition funds have been significantly cut, 
even the projects requested by President Bush. Once again the bill 
fails to meet the obligations of the so-called CARA light agreement. 
Operating funds for the National Park Service are only modestly 
increased. The modest spending boost is barely enough to keep pace with 
expenses and fails to tackle the $5 billion maintenance backlog at the 
Nation's parks. The National Endowment for the Arts and the National 
Endowment for the Humanities are again underfunded. The bill 
shortchanges investments in the American people and our country's 
natural resources. Former President Theodore Roosevelt, one of the 
fathers of the American conservation movement, warned that in utilizing 
and conserving the natural resources of this Nation, the one 
characteristic more essential than any other is foresight. We are 
lacking that, Mr. Speaker.
  Back in 1992, funding for the NEH and the NEA reached their funding 
zenith, $176 million for each agency. Over the years their budgets have 
been slashed again and again. Recently this body has voted to increase 
the funding for the arts and the humanities and I urge my colleagues to 
continue this trend to support an amendment to increase funding for 
both of these agencies. The gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) and I 
will offer an amendment later to do so. As Pulitzer prize-winning 
former Librarian of Congress Daniel Boorstin said, ``Planning for the 
future without a sense of history is like planting cut flowers.''
  Investing in the arts is smart business. The $232 million the Federal 
Government invested in the NEH and NEA in 2002 had an economic impact 
of $132 billion and generated billions in Federal, State and local tax 
revenues. Every dollar they invest in local theater groups, orchestras 
or exhibitions generates $7 for the arts organization by attracting 
other grants, private donations and ticket sales. In my district alone, 
1,215 arts-related businesses employ almost 20,000 people. Buffalo, New 
York, I am pleased to say, was just recently designated as the number 
four destination in the United States for top art events and venues. We 
are very proud of that. Nationwide, creative industry businesses employ 
almost 3 million people, 2.2 percent of all who are employed.
  Investing in the arts is also smart for our children. Over and over 
arts education has proven to increase academic performance, regardless 
of socioeconomic background. The NEA provides grants for local arts 
activities in every State and every congressional district. Small 
grants make a big difference.
  The National Endowment for the Humanities is at the forefront in 
preserving our American culture and history. Democracy will not 
flourish without an understanding of its past. The NEA and NEH preserve 
and promote the understanding of where we have been and where we are 
today that our democracy needs to endure. Democracy dies in a cultural 
vacuum. This bill even guts funding for the President's We the People 
initiative, which supports exploration of the significant events and 
themes in American history.
  Bruce Cole, the Chair of the National Endowment for the Humanities, 
warns, ``We face a serious challenge to our country that lies within 
our borders and even within our schools, the threat of American 
amnesia. We are in danger of having our view of the future obscured by 
our ignorance of the past. We cannot see clearly ahead if we are blind 
to history. And a Nation that does not know why it exists, or what it 
stands for, cannot be expected to long endure.'' Very wise words from 
Mr. Cole.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Dicks).
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for 
yielding me this time and thank her for managing this rule every year 
so very effectively. I look forward to our joint efforts today to try 
to help the National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities.
  Like her State, the State of Washington, Seattle, Bremerton, Tacoma, 
the tri-cities, have all benefited by this funding. I just think it is 
one of the most important things that we do. I remember those great 
days when we were at $176 million before the Reagan Revolution came to 
town. I would also like to compliment the gentleman from Washington 
(Mr. Hastings) from the Fourth Congressional District. We work 
together. I just want him to know we were over in the Energy and Water 
appropriations full committee markup today. I think the tri-cities did 
as well as they have ever done and even our joint project we worked on, 
Hammer, $8 million is very, very generous. Our delegation has always 
worked very effectively together.
  There are some things, though, that concern me about this bill. First 
of all, I wish we could have done more for the operation of the 
national parks. The administration asked for a $22 million increase. 
Our committee increased that by $33 million for a total of $55 million. 
But that simply is not enough. We need more money for the operation of 
our parks. I think part of the problem, as the gentleman from North 
Carolina (Mr. Taylor), chairman of the Subcommittee on Interior and 
Related Agencies, has said, we have got a problem with the management 
of the Park Service and we have got to get priorities straightened out 
at the Park Service.
  I love Fran Manella. She is a wonderful person. But she has got to 
realize that it is the operation, the day-to-day operation and 
availability of those parks that the American people count on. Let me 
give my colleagues the numbers. The Olympic National Park is either 
third or fourth in the Nation in visitation. Two years ago we had 130 
summer workers at that park.

                              {time}  1330

  That is now down to 25. And we have 202 authorized FTEs for the 
Olympic National Park. It is down to 120. It was 146 a couple of years 
ago. Why is that? Because the administration in their budget request is 
not covering the cost of the COLA, the increase that we give in pay 
every year, and also there are other fixed costs that have to be paid 
that are not being covered in the budget request, the increase in the 
budget request.
  So what do they have? The only choice they have is to reduce the 
number of personnel, not to fill slots. So when people go to the park 
this summer, they are not going to have the same quality of a visit. 
There is not going to be a ranger out on the trail to tell them about 
the important cultural and historic areas within the Olympic National 
Park. They do not have people to take care of cultural assets, to take 
care of the buildings and infrastructure. And this is not just Olympic; 
this is across the country.
  This year even with this increase of $55 million from last year's 
level, we have 388 parks; 241 of them will be funded at below the 2003 
level. That is a prescription for disaster; and it is coming down, 
down, down. And we have got to step up. We, the Congress, cannot allow 
this to happen on our watch. And, yes, a big part of the problem is the 
inadequacy of the Presidential budget request. This is not just this 
administration. This goes back to 1994. This has been going on for a 
10-year period of time, and that is why it is even more devastating, 
the consequences of this. And we have to continue to work together to 
come up with the resources.
  I think this is a top priority within this bill that has not been 
properly met. We have made a modest increase here, but not adequate to 
the task. In fact, if my amendment that I brought up in committee had 
been accepted, we could have increased it by $45 million, and that 
would have meant that every

[[Page H4193]]

park in the country would have gotten an 8 percent increase. We are 
talking about $45 million in the operating account would have done 
that. Each park would have gotten an 8 percent increase.
  So this is the one major thing that upsets me in this bill. Yes, we 
do not have money in here for land and water conservation, which I 
regret. I regret the lack of funding on the conservation amendment. But 
the thing we tried to do is protect our core agencies, the Park 
Service, the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the 
Department of Interior, the Fish and Wildlife Service. And yet they 
have these same problems.
  One very good thing that we did in this bill was to deal with 
firefighting in a much better way. There is money in here, $500 million 
in 2004. When this bill is signed, it would be immediately available 
for the firefighting season. Another $500 million for 2005, $500 
million for 2004, and I think a $167 million increase in the bill for 
firefighting itself. So we are trying to face up to that reality. We 
have got a drought out in the West. This is going to be a very serious 
problem.
  We are also working, of course, on other important issues. In my own 
area, Hood Canal, we are working with the USGS on dealing with this 
oxygenation problem. We have a problem with too much nitrogen in the 
saltwater, which is having a devastating effect on all the fish and 
creatures there, and we have got to deal with this problem; and the 
USGS, which is part of this bill, is helping in that respect, and it is 
a very important priority of mine.
  We are also working on the restoration of salmon runs, and we are 
doing a new process of mass marking with these fish so we can tell the 
wild fish from the hatchery fish. It is another important priority in 
our State. So overall, I think this bill, even though it is very 
deficient, below last year's level in terms of overall funding, below 
the President's budget request, we have tried to fund the things that 
are most crucially important; and I intend to vote for this bill on 
final passage. I hope we can improve it with several of the amendments 
that will be offered today.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy 
in permitting me to speak on the rule, and I appreciate her leadership 
dealing with the critical issues of arts funding and for the National 
Endowment for the Humanities.
  I look forward later today to being part of debate, and I hope 
amendment approval that will move us back in the direction that we need 
to go. But I too am a little frustrated in the context of billions of 
dollars that we are hemorrhaging with red ink where we seem to be able 
to find all sorts of resources for things that are suboptimal in some 
cases, to say the least, but certainly not the highest of priorities, 
that we are scrambling here for less than $14 million that has such a 
vital connection to our communities.
  I would hope that as our Members come to the floor to deal with the 
debate on this amendment and the final vote that they have a chance to 
look back at the records in their own offices of the dedicated men and 
women who are part of the arts councils, who are part of the local 
councils for the humanities. To consider the incredible mileage that is 
extracted from a few small dollars that benefit primarily the rural and 
outlying areas of our State, not necessarily the large cities like 
Seattle, New York City or even Portland, Oregon. Larger cities have a 
higher level of programming. It is the smaller communities that 
benefit. It is a tragedy that we are not meeting even what the 
President had requested.
  I also am pleased to follow my good friend from Washington who has 
worked so hard for so many years to keep our eye on the ball on the 
investment we need for critical parks infrastructure. Our national 
parks are part of the infrastructure every bit as much as our highways 
and our airports. I appreciated what he did with the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Regula) fighting in tough difficult budget times. I am 
hopeful that we will be able to honor the hard work here to see if 
there is something in the course of the amendment process and as the 
budget is working its way through the process here this year that we 
not turn our back on America's treasures.
  Last, but by no means least, I must acknowledge the hard work that 
the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) did with the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the gentleman from California (Mr. George 
Miller), the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), to deal with the land 
and water conservation fund. This has been an area that had been 
ignored for decades. It had been, frankly, a bipartisan shame that we 
did not fully fund the land and water conservation fund. These were 
resources that have such an important impact on States and localities. 
We reached a deal, as the ``little CARA'' was set aside. We have an 
opportunity to keep faith with the spirit of that agreement, and I am 
hopeful in the course of the budget process that we are able to do so.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's comments on the 
conservation amendment, but I also want to underline one other thing he 
said that I forgot to say, and that is that the President's budget 
requested an $18 million increase for the National Endowment for the 
Arts and for the National Endowment for the Humanities, and neither one 
of those has been accomplished. I think we have increased Humanities by 
$3 million, but this is below the President's budget request; and Mrs. 
Bush, who I think is a very thoughtful first lady, has been a proponent 
of these two increases. So I was somewhat surprised that it was decided 
to take out the money for these important programs, especially since 
they were requested by the first lady.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's underlining 
that.
  And I would just conclude by saying that I hope in the spirit of 
bipartisan accommodation that has accompanied much of the work with the 
arts, with the parks infrastructure, and with CARA that we are able to 
give our affirmative vote to preserving the integrity of them in the 
course of this budget process.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests 
for time, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous 
question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Fossella). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________