[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 9 (Wednesday, February 2, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S898-S900]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. CRAIG (for himself, Mr. Wyden, and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 267. A bill to reauthorize the Secure Rural Schools and Community 
Self-Determination Act of 2000, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleagues and 
friends, Senator Wyden of Oregon and Senator Feinstein of California, 
to reauthorize a law that has stabilized payments to rural forest 
counties and, more important, has brought communities together to 
accomplish projects on the ground that improve watersheds and enhance 
habitat.
  It should be remembered that the National Forest System was formed in 
1905 from the Forest Reserves, which were established between 1891 and 
1905 by Presidential proclamation. During that time, 153 million acres 
of forestlands were set aside in Forest Reserves and removed from 
future settlement and economic development. This imposed great 
hardships on those counties that were in and adjacent to these new 
reserves. In many cases, 65 to 90 percent of the land in a county was 
sequestered in the new forest reserves, leaving little land for 
economic development and diminishing the potential tax base to support 
essential community infrastructure such as roads and schools. There was 
considerable opposition in the forest counties to establishing these 
reserves.
  In 1908, in response to the mounting opposition to the reserves in 
the West, Congress passed a bill which created a revenue sharing 
mechanism to offset for forest counties the effects of removing these 
lands from economic development. The 1908 act specified that 10 percent 
of all revenues generated from the multiple-use management of our 
National Forests would be shared with the counties to support public 
roads and public schools. Several years later that percentage was 
increased to 25 percent. People in our forest counties refer to this as 
the ``Compact with the People of Rural Counties'' which was part of the 
foundation for establishing our National Forest System.
  It was the intent of Congress in establishing our National Forests, 
that they would be managed in a sustained multiple-use manner in 
perpetuity, and that they would provide revenues for local counties and 
the Federal treasury in perpetuity as well. And, from 1908 until about 
1993, this revenue sharing mechanism worked extremely well. However, 
from 1986 to the present, we have, for a variety of reasons, reduced 
our sustained active multiple-use management of the National Forests 
and the revenues have declined precipitously. Most counties have seen a 
decline of more than 85 percent in actual revenues generated on our 
National Forests and therefore an 85 percent reduction in 25 percent 
payments to counties which are used to help fund schools and county 
road departments.
  And more important, they have seen a 60-percent reduction in the 
economic activity that the federal timber sale programs generated in 
these counties. The Forest Service in its 1997 TSPIRS report estimates 
the total economic activity in these rural counties to be more than 
$2.1 billion, compared to more than $5.5 billion as recently as 1991.
  In 2000, Congress passed the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self 
Determination Act to address the needs of the National Forest counties 
and to focus on creating a new cooperative partnership between citizens 
in forest counties and our Federal land management agencies to develop 
forest health improvement projects on public lands and simultaneously 
stimulate job development and community economic stability.

  This Act restored the 1908 compact between the people of rural 
America and the Federal Government, and it has been an enormous success 
in achieving and even surpassing the goals of Congress.
  This is a remarkable success story for rural forest communities. 
These funds have restored and sustained essential infrastructure such 
as county schools and county roads through title I. Essential forest 
improvement projects have been completed through title II projects 
funded by forest counties, and planned by diverse stakeholder resource 
advisory committees. In Idaho, resource advisory committees are 
partnering with the Forest Service and other organizations to fight the 
spread of weeds on the Nez Perce National Forest, make road 
improvements in Hells Canyon National Recreation Area, and repair 
culverts and improve fish habitat on the Caribou-Targhee National 
Forest.
  These groups are reducing management gridlock and building 
collaborative public lands decisionmaking capacity in counties across 
America. These resource advisory committees are a real and working 
compact between the Federal land management agencies and rural 
communities that includes all interest groups; they represent a true 
coupling of community with land managers that is good for the land and 
good for the communities.

[[Page S899]]

  Finally, essential services are being supported and developed in 
forest counties by investing title III funds. In Idaho, counties are 
using the funding as directed for search and rescue operations and 
youth employment and educational opportunities.
  The impact of this act over the last few years is positive and 
substantial. This law should be extended so it can continue to benefit 
the forest counties and their schools, and continue to contribute to 
improving the health of our National Forests.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 267

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Secure Rural Schools and 
     Community Self-Determination Reauthorization Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY 
                   SELF-DETERMINATION ACT OF 2000.

       (a) Extension Through Fiscal Year 2013.--The Secure Rural 
     Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Public 
     Law 106-393; 16 U.S.C. 500 note) is amended--
       (1) in sections 101(a), 203(a)(1), 207(a), 208, 303, and 
     401, by striking ``2006'' each place it appears and inserting 
     ``2013'';
       (2) in section 208, by striking ``2007'' and inserting 
     ``2014''; and
       (3) in section 303, by striking ``2007'' and inserting 
     ``2014,''.
       (b) Authority to Resume Receipt of 25- or 50-percent 
     Payments.--
       (1) 25-percent payments.--Section 102(b) of the Secure 
     Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is 
     amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``of the Treasury'' 
     after ``Secretary''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) in the first sentence, by inserting ``, including such 
     an election made during the last quarter of fiscal year 2006 
     under this paragraph,'' after ``25-percent payment''; and
       (ii) in the second sentence, by striking ``fiscal year 
     2006'' and inserting ``fiscal year 2013, except that the 
     Secretary of the Treasury shall give the county the 
     opportunity to elect, in writing during the last quarter of 
     fiscal year 2006, to begin receiving the 25-percent payment 
     effective with the payment for fiscal year 2007''.
       (2) 50-percent payments.--Section 103(b)(1) of such Act is 
     amended by striking ``fiscal year 2006'' and inserting 
     ``fiscal year 2013, except that the Secretary of the Treasury 
     shall give the county the opportunity to elect, in writing 
     during the last quarter of fiscal year 2006, to begin 
     receiving the 50-percent payment effective with the payment 
     for fiscal year 2007''.
       (c) Clarification Regarding Source of Payments.--
       (1) Payments to eligible states from national forest 
     lands.--Section 102(b)(3) of the Secure Rural Schools and 
     Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is amended--
       (A) by striking ``trust fund,'' and inserting ``trust 
     funds, permanent funds,'';
       (B) by inserting a comma after ``and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``If 
     the Secretary of the Treasury determines that a shortfall is 
     likely for a fiscal year, all revenues, fees, penalties, and 
     miscellaneous receipts referred to in the preceding sentence, 
     exclusive of required deposits to relevant trust funds, 
     permanent funds, and special accounts, that are received 
     during that fiscal year shall be reserved to make payments 
     under this section for that fiscal year.''.
       (2) Payments to eligible counties from blm lands.--Section 
     103(b)(2) of such Act is amended--
       (A) by striking ``trust fund,'' and inserting ``trust 
     funds'';
       (B) by inserting a comma after ``and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``If 
     the Secretary of the Treasury determines that a shortfall is 
     likely for a fiscal year, all revenues, fees, penalties, and 
     miscellaneous receipts referred to in the preceding sentence, 
     exclusive of required deposits to relevant trust funds and 
     permanent operating funds, that are received during that 
     fiscal year shall be reserved to make payments under this 
     section for that fiscal year.''.
       (d) Term for Resource Advisory Committee Members; 
     Reappointment.--Section 205(c)(1) of the Secure Rural Schools 
     and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is amended--
       (1) in the second sentence, by striking ``The Secretary 
     concerned may reappoint members to'' and inserting ``A member 
     of a resource advisory committee may be reappointed for one 
     or more''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new sentence: 
     ``Section 1803(c) of Food and Agriculture Act of 1977 (7 
     U.S.C. 2283(c)) shall not apply to a resource advisory 
     committee established by the Secretary of Agriculture.''.
       (e) Revision of Pilot Program.--Section 204(e)(3) of the 
     Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 
     2000 is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``The Secretary'' and 
     all that follows through ``approved projects'' and inserting 
     ``At the request of a resource advisory committee, the 
     Secretary concerned may establish a pilot program to 
     implement one or more of the projects proposed by the 
     resource advisory committee under section 203'';
       (2) by striking subparagraph (B);
       (3) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``by the Secretary 
     concerned'';
       (4) in subparagraph (D)--
       (A) by striking ``the pilot program'' in the first sentence 
     and inserting ``pilot programs established under subparagraph 
     (A)''; and
       (B) by striking ``the pilot program is'' in the second 
     sentence and inserting ``pilot programs are''; and
       (5) by redesignating subparagraphs (C), (D), and (E), as so 
     amended, as subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D).
       (f) Notification and Reporting Requirements Regarding 
     County Projects.--
       (1) Additional requirements.--Section 302 of the Secure 
     Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) Notification and Reporting Requirements.--
       ``(1) Notification.--Not later than 90 days after the end 
     of each fiscal year during which county funds are obligated 
     for projects under this title, the participating county shall 
     submit to the Secretary concerned written notification 
     specifying--
       ``(A) each project for which the participating county 
     obligated county funds during that fiscal year;
       ``(B) the authorized use specified in subsection (b) that 
     the project satisfies; and
       ``(C) the amount of county funds obligated or expended 
     under the project during that fiscal year, including 
     expenditures on Federal lands, State lands, and private 
     lands.
       ``(2) Review.--The Secretary concerned shall review the 
     notifications submitted under paragraph (1) for a fiscal year 
     for the purpose of assessing the success of participating 
     counties in achieving the purposes of this title.
       ``(3) Annual report.--The Secretary concerned shall prepare 
     an annual report containing the results of the most-recent 
     review conducted under paragraph (2) and a summary of the 
     notifications covered by the review.
       ``(4) Submission of report.--The report required by 
     paragraph (3) for a fiscal year shall be submitted to the 
     Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry and the 
     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and 
     the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on Resources 
     of the House of Representatives not later than 150 days after 
     the end of that fiscal year.''.
       (2) Definition of secretary concerned.--Section 301 of such 
     Act is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(3) Secretary concerned.--The term `Secretary concerned' 
     means--
       ``(A) the Secretary of Agriculture or the designee of the 
     Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to county funds 
     reserved under section 102(d)(1)(B)(ii) for expenditure in 
     accordance with this title;
       ``(B) the Secretary of the Interior or the designee of the 
     Secretary of the Interior, with respect to county funds 
     reserved under section 103(c)(1)(B)(ii) for expenditure in 
     accordance with this title.''.
       (3) References to participating county.--Section 302(b) of 
     such Act is amended--
       (A) by striking ``An eligible county'' each place it 
     appears in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) and inserting ``A 
     participating county''; and
       (B) by striking ``A county'' each place it appears in 
     paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) and inserting ``A participating 
     county''.
       (g) Technical Correction.--Section 205(a)(3) of the Secure 
     Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is 
     amended by striking the comma after ``the Secretary concerned 
     may''.

  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise today to join my very dear friend 
and colleague, Senator Craig of Idaho, as his principal cosponsor on 
legislation to reauthorize a law that has spawned a revolution in 
forest dependent communities in 42 States and in over 700 counties 
across the country. Our bill will reauthorize the Secure Rural Schools 
and Community Self Determination Act of 2000.
  This bill is short and simple but also extraordinary: it renews the 
original law and its programs for 8 more years. It also makes some 
technical and grammatical corrections to the original law and adds an 
oversight report on some of the projects done under this Act. As we 
introduce this bill today in the Senate, our friends and colleagues in 
the House are introducing the exact same bill with the same, bi-
partisan spirit.
  The reason we can pursue reauthorization of such a far reaching law 
with such little language is because the folks that it affects, the 
forest dependent communities, as well as the educators, the county 
leaders and the environmentalists in those communities, have made this 
law work. The reason we want to reauthorize this legislation is because 
these same folks want to continue the work this law allows

[[Page S900]]

them to do together, on federal and private lands, and in rural 
communities.
  The Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act of2000 
is sustaining rural communities as well as encouraging industry and 
creating jobs based on natural resources. If I may paraphrase a famous 
commercial to describe this legislation, I'd say:
  Stabilization of payments to counties for roads and schools--millions 
of dollars; Additional investments and the creation of new jobs through 
forest related projects--thousands of projects; Improving cooperative 
relationships among the people that use and care for federal lands: 
Priceless.
  Title I of the Act stabilizes funding for public education in rural 
communities. It also fortifies local government budgets that provide 
health and safety services in rural America, as well as maintains the 
transportation corridors that move people and material to and from 
forest communities.
  Title II of the Act provides resources for community-based 
stewardship for local federal lands. By establishing Resource Advisory 
Committees, RACs, tasked with reviewing and recommending to the Forest 
Service and Bureau of Land Management projects to be completed on 
Federal lands that benefit the community and the federal lands 
associated with that RAC, this Act has resulted in over a thousand 
projects making Federal lands more environmentally healthy today than 
before this Act passed in 2000. RACs enlist community members 
representing environmental interests, recreations users, farmers, local 
officials and forest products industry. This collaborative planning of 
management of local Federal lands has put people to work building fish-
friendly culverts; reducing hazardous fuel loads; enhancing picnic, 
camping and hiking facilities; and removing debris and noxious plant 
species.
  The kinds of projects the RACs have supported are varied: watershed 
restoration and maintenance; wild life habitat restoration; native 
fisheries habitat enhancement; forest health improvements; wild land 
fire hazard reduction; control of noxious weeds; removal of trash and 
illegal dumps; road maintenance and obliteration; trail maintenance and 
obliteration; and campground maintenance.
  Title III of the Act supports activities protecting federal 
infrastructure and the forest ecosystem. Fire Planning, emergency 
response, law enforcement and search and rescue services make 
federa1lands safe. They reinforce county government's commitment to the 
partnership between the Federal Government and local communities. These 
funds are being used to respond to forest fires conduct search and 
rescue missions and improve forest health while teaching at-risk 
children and rehabilitating prisoners in prison-work camp programs. 
Title III projects, like Title II projects, are also helping to develop 
cooperative projects between counties, local, State and Federal 
officials and agencies.
  The Act's greatest financial footprint is felt in the West, but 
financial benefits flow to counties nationwide. Significant investment 
in Federal lands has taken or will take place: $121 million from Title 
II and $124 million from Title III. At least 1,168 Title II projects 
were approved during the Act's first two years.
  Under the reauthorization we are sponsoring the payment amount will 
continue to be based on the average of timber receipts for the three 
top federal land timber production years: FY 1985 through FY 2000. 
Currently, on lands where there is no harvest and no safety net, the 
communities get no money. For those lands, funds will be provided from 
the general treasury. For others, there would be funds available, first 
from receipts but then from the general treasury. Still, for counties 
where the status quo is their best source of funds, they could stay 
with the status quo until they feel the need to use the safety net. No 
longer will there be an absolute a reliance on receipts, thus 
decreasing pressure on land managers to produce timber harvest for 
schools and counties. While there is widespread application of the Act, 
86 percent of counties nationwide have opted for the ``stable 
payment;'' under the reauthorization bill, if a county that has been 
part of this Act would like to opt out it may do so. It is only fair to 
allow this, given that the county may have opted in by assuming the law 
would only last through 2006.
  Very strong support exists across the nation from stakeholders for 
renewal of the Act past fiscal year 2006.
  I urge my colleagues to work with me and my colleague across the 
aisle on this bi-partisan, bi-cameral effort to renew a law that is 
actually working on the ground.
                                 ______