[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 104 (Tuesday, June 26, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H7083-H7087]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2643, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, 
       ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008

  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee 
on Rules, I call up House Resolution 514 and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 514

       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. 2643) making appropriations for the Department 
     of the Interior, environment, and related agencies for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, 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 except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule 
     XXI. 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. During consideration of 
     the bill for amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of 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. When the committee rises 
     and reports the bill back to the House with a recommendation 
     that the bill do pass, 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.
       Sec. 2. During consideration in the House of H.R. 2643 
     pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of 
     the previous question, the Chair may postpone further 
     consideration of the bill to such time as may be designated 
     by the Speaker.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) is 
recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, 
I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Washington, my 
namesake and good friend, Mr. Hastings. All time yielded during 
consideration of the rule is for debate only.
  I yield myself such time as I may consume.


                             General Leave

  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I also ask unanimous consent 
that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and 
extend their remarks on House Resolution 514.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 514 provides 
for consideration of H.R. 2643, the Department of the Interior, 
Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 
2008. It is an open rule, and allows all Members the opportunity to 
amend the bill.

                              {time}  1030

  Mr. Speaker, the funding levels in the underlying bill make clear the 
change in priorities of this new Democratic Congress. This bill 
refocuses our Nation's priorities to ensure that all Americans have 
access to clean water and air as well as appropriately addressing 
climate change and conservation, all of which have not been seen since 
Democrats last controlled this body in 1994. Democrats are restoring 
our obligation to the American people to protect and preserve the land 
and shores and all creatures who inhabit this Earth.
  I commend Chairman Dicks and Representative Tiahrt for their hard 
and, perhaps most importantly, bipartisan work on this legislation. I 
do believe that they did a tremendous job in crafting this bill.
  This bill restores our promise to America's underserved minority 
communities and to our children to ensure that our cherished land, 
water, and air will be preserved for generations to come. I commend the 
committee for including funding for important environmental justice 
programs I have long advocated for such as $1.1 billion for the Clean 
Water State Revolving Fund. This is $437 million above the 
administration's request and will help over 150 communities with 
drinking water and wastewater infrastructure projects.
  The bill also includes $140 million for sewer and water grants, which 
received zero funding in 2007 and was not in the President's budget 
request this year. Further, this legislation provides $16 million for 
rural water technical assistance that was also zeroed out in the 
President's budget request. We are ensuring that all communities have 
clean and safe drinking water.
  The underlying legislation also includes limitation language that I 
authored in the 109th Congress, ensuring that EPA respects the needs of 
environmental justice communities. It appropriate $7 million for 
environmental justice programs, the amount that Congresswoman Hilda 
Solis, I, and others requested. This is $3 million over the 
administration's budget request and $2 million over fiscal 2007 levels.
  This bill provides much-needed funding for our national parks and 
wildlife protection. The legislation includes $2.5 billion for our 
national parks, $223 million above the 2007 levels.

[[Page H7084]]

  Democrats are appropriating $1.4 billion for the Fish and Wildlife 
Service, $86 million above 2007 levels and $130 million above the 
President's budget request.
  Ladies and gentlemen, our national parks have been shortchanged for 
too long. This funding will be used for critical maintenance and 
repair, conservation, and recreation, and for the preservation of our 
natural heritage.
  Importantly, the underlying legislation maintains the longstanding 
Presidential and congressional moratoria on drilling for natural gas on 
the Outer Continental Shelf. The committee rightly rejected attempts to 
permit drilling to occur off the shores of coastal States, including my 
home State of Florida, and I am sure my colleague from Tampa (Ms. 
Castor) will speak more specifically to that issue during her time on 
the rule. In doing this, we continue to protect and preserve the health 
of Florida's beaches and tourism industry, the largest industry in our 
State.
  Amendments may be offered today on the floor that will seek to strip 
Florida and other coastal States of their protections. I urge all of my 
colleagues to do what is right for our Nation and reject such 
amendments. Drilling for natural gas on the Outer Continental Shelf 
will have zero impact at the gas pumps. It will not under any 
circumstances reduce the cost of a gallon of gasoline.
  This legislation offers a more forward thinking approach to our 
Nation's energy needs. Instead of looking for short-term, short-sighted 
solutions, Democrats have a smarter, long-term energy strategy. For 
starters, Democrats have increased funding for programs such as the 
global climate change research, providing $10 million above the 
President's request for new research on global climate change and its 
impact on rivers, groundwaters, and on organisms.
  The bill also increases our investment in energy conservation and 
alternative fuels and research capabilities by nearly 60 percent. What 
a difference a change in Congress does make for our Nation.
  Critically important to my district and to the entire State of 
Florida is restoration of America's Everglades, one of the most 
biologically diverse areas in the world and a unique and world-renowned 
eco-region. The Everglades is one of the Nation's most fragile 
ecosystems and remains an area of national and international 
significance. Increased funding to advance this restoration initiative 
ensures that the Federal Government keeps its commitment to the River 
of Grass, the largest environmental rescue in the world. Chairman Dicks 
and Representative Taylor, in my judgment, should both be applauded for 
their continued effort to restore and preserve this pristine ecosystem.
  Democrats also take significant steps to finally work to fulfill our 
promise to our neglected Native American communities. In all, the bill 
provides almost $250 million more in funding for Native American health 
care and education opportunities than last year.
  This legislation truly provides for each and every one of us. By 
investing in the health of America's natural resources, we are 
investing in the future of this majestic country.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, later today I intend to offer an amendment that 
would designate $1 million for grants for the National Underground 
Railroad Network to Freedom, the only national program dedicated to the 
preservation, interpretation, and dissemination of underground railroad 
history. I urge my colleagues to support this important amendment.
  I am pleased to support this rule and the underlying bill, and I urge 
my colleagues to do the same.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my good 
friend and namesake, Mr. Hastings, for yielding me the customary 30 
minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, the Rules Committee heard 
testimony nearly 2 weeks ago from my good friend and colleague from 
Washington, Subcommittee Chairman Norm Dicks and the Ranking Member 
Todd Tiahrt of Kansas. When they appeared before the Rules Committee, 
concerns were raised that the bill at that time did not include a list 
of earmarks or earmark sponsors and that no Member could challenge, 
discuss, and call for a vote on earmarks on the House floor.
  Fortunately, Mr. Speaker, Republicans succeeded in forcing the 
Democrat majority to restore the earmark transparency and 
enforceability rules that they had changed at the beginning of this 
Congress, and now spending bills are being brought to the floor with 
earmarks where they can be discussed, debated, and voted upon, as they 
should be.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the fiscal year 2008 Interior and 
Environment Appropriations bill that we will consider today contains a 
list of earmarks and the names of the sponsors of those earmarks. This 
means that Members will have the opportunity to review them before 
casting their vote on the House floor and not just see them added 
months from now, as was previously tried.
  Mr. Speaker, the Central Washington area that I represent covers more 
than 19,000 square miles, much of which is controlled and managed by 
the Federal Government. The Federal agencies funded in this bill 
directly impact those that I represent on a number of levels. When 
storms and mudslides wipe out trails and roads, it affects not only my 
constituents that enjoy camping, hiking, and hunting on public roads, 
but also visitors to the area and the local businesses that rely on 
tourism. When invasive species, plant pests, and wildfire threats are 
not adequately controlled on Federal land, the problems do not stop at 
the property line.
  I think I speak for many Western Members of the House when I talk 
about the huge stake we have in the general direction of the agencies 
funded under this bill. For this reason, Mr. Speaker, I am concerned 
that at a time when Federal land agencies struggle to manage the land 
they now have, this Congress would provide tens of millions of dollars 
for the Federal Government to buy up more land. This takes private 
property off the tax rolls and leaves county governments with a heavier 
burden to pay for emergency services, roads, and schools.
  I have stood on this floor before to discuss the importance of 
another program, the Secure Rural Schools program, which compensates 
local governments that are negatively affected by Federal forest land 
policy and ownership and the virtual shutdown of the Federal timber 
program over the last 15 years. We need to get the Secure Rural Schools 
program reauthorized and we need to get the Payment in Lieu of Taxes 
program fully funded for the long term before we start spending 
millions of dollars adding more and more land to the Federal estate.
  Finally, I want to express my concern about the overall increase in 
spending that this bill represents. I know that the chairman of the 
subcommittee and the ranking member worked very hard to try to manage 
the many demands for funding under this bill. However, this bill 
represents a $680 million increase over last year. As I have said 
previously with respect to other appropriation bills this year, we 
simply must rein in spending in order to prevent the massive tax 
increases that the Democrat majority is poised to impose, as reflected 
in their budget.
  Congress must work for balancing the Federal budget in 5 years. There 
are two ways to balance the budget, whether it is your family budget or 
the Federal budget. You can either, one, reduce the amount of money 
being spent or, two, increase the amount coming in. This bill 
highlights the Democrat majority's allegiance to option number two: 
spending more money each and every year and at a rate faster than 
inflation, while relying on tax increases to balance the budget down 
the road.
  Mr. Speaker, we don't need a bigger Federal Government. We need a 
balanced approach that holds the line on spending; provides for our 
Nation's most fundamental priorities; and allows taxpayers to keep more 
of their hard-earned money to spend, save, and invest as they see fit.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased at this time 
to yield 6 minutes to my good friend

[[Page H7085]]

and member of the Rules Committee, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. 
Castor).
  Ms. CASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Florida (Mr. 
Hastings), who has been an outspoken advocate for environmental justice 
for this great country and a strong supporter of Everglades 
restoration. So I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Speaker, our natural environment and clean neighborhoods are 
vital to the health of the folks that we represent back home. This 
bill, and the rule, contains much to recommend it to the American 
people. But I rise in support today because my community, the Tampa Bay 
area, will benefit greatly due to the new investments being made under 
the leadership of this new Democratic Congress.
  See, our communities have suffered over past years while 
environmental agencies were infiltrated by industry lobbyists. That was 
a strategy of this White House, unfortunately. And some in past 
Congresses whittled away at environmental protections.

                              {time}  1045

  Well, we're going to begin to turn that around today and repair 
America's natural environment and the public health so we can breathe 
easier.
  First, we will make new investments in clean air and clean and safe 
drinking water. We know that the rate of asthma in children is rising 
in America, and this bill will help our communities get back on track 
with enforcement of the Clean Air Act.
  On clean water, the residents of the cities of Tampa and St. 
Petersburg have benefited greatly over the years due to the Clean Water 
Act and the State Water Revolving Loan Program because my communities 
have been able to repair sewers, and in my hometown, clean up Tampa Bay 
and make it safer for swimming, boating, and fishing. But we have more 
work to do. The National Estuary Program portion of this bill will 
help, as the bill provides greater assistance to local communities to 
improve water quality in our national estuaries like Tampa Bay.
  I also hope the committee will look favorably upon an amendment 
relating to the red tide that is affecting the physical environment of 
our coastal communities and causing respiratory ailments at a time when 
folks are trying to enjoy their vacation at the beach.
  Urban communities like mine also need assistance in cleaning up toxic 
waste sites and Superfund sites. As a former county commissioner back 
home, I understand the value of cleaning up old brownfield sites so 
they do not remain as blights on the community. Oftentimes these 
polluted industrial sites are located in communities of modest means. 
So I salute the committee and Chairman Dicks for his commitment to 
environmental justice to ensure that environmental decisions do not 
adversely affect minority populations.
  This bill also charts a new direction on global warming as well by 
increasing climate change scientific research, including attention to 
coastal communities to help us determine how we can best adapt to a 
warming planet.
  This act and rule also provides long overdue funding for our national 
parks, including the beautiful Florida Everglades. Thanks to Chairman 
Dicks and the committee for stepping up our efforts to ensure that 
these valuable environmental resources are protected.
  One final issue: this bill maintains the long-standing moratoria on 
oil and gas drilling off our beautiful gulf coast beaches. Now, I 
expect that the oil and gas lobby will take a run at this protection 
today, and I urge my colleagues to hold firm.
  In Florida and in other coastal States, drilling threatens our 
environment, it threatens our health, and it threatens our economic 
livelihood. Instead of risking our critical coastline for short-term 
gain, the new Democratic majority is pursuing a long-term energy 
strategy by investing in energy conservation and alternative fuels.
  Granting oil and gas leases and access to our coastline is not the 
solution to our energy crisis. The current leases that oil and gas 
companies exploit far off the coastline exist with the help of 
taxpayers. Allowing drilling closer to our coastline is simply a way 
for oil and gas companies to maximize their profits. Such actions will 
have no effect on either the cost of gas or on the future of our energy 
needs.
  I urge my colleagues to beat back this scheme of the oil and gas 
lobby today, their attempt to kill a ban on coastal drilling that was 
enacted in response to a 1969 oil and gas bill that blackened 35 miles 
of California's coast.
  Instead of drilling for limited resources, the country needs an 
accelerated program for alternative fuels, and Congress needs to 
investigate the oil companies' unseemly profits.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and the rule. I 
salute the leadership of Chairman Dicks, and I thank Ranking Member 
Tiahrt. This legislation will protect our environment and our public 
health and focus on renewable energy solutions that are vital to the 
State of Florida and the future of our great Nation.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, at this time I'm pleased to 
yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Neugebauer).
  (Mr. NEUGEBAUER asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the American 
taxpayers in opposition to this rule.
  A couple of weeks ago we had a lot of debate on this floor about 
earmarks. At the end of this agreement we were able to have a process 
that's more open and transparent for the earmark process, and so that 
was a victory for the American taxpayer. However, it's worth noting 
that when you look at the spending, for example in 2005, earmark 
spending was less than 1 percent. So even though the battle was won on 
earmarks, the war is still on against overspending of the American 
taxpayers' money.
  There are many causes for overspending in this country today, and one 
of those is the entitlement programs. Those are programs, 
unfortunately, that this body doesn't even get to vote on. And the fact 
that the new majority's budget now has an additional discretionary 
spending of $20 billion does not help the spending problem at all.
  I would argue that Congress is failing at another very important 
issue as well. According to a CQ Weekly article recently, $100 billion 
in appropriations this year that we will make aren't authorized. Now, 
the American people know what ``authorized'' means. If you go down and 
open up a checking account, people want to know if you're authorized to 
sign on that account. If you get a credit card, certain people are 
authorized to use the credit card. I wish we were using a checking 
account for the American taxpayers, but unfortunately we're using a 
credit card.
  What we're going to have in this bill today, the Interior EPA 
appropriations bill, is $7.29 billion that's not authorized. What does 
that mean? That means that the committees of jurisdiction have chosen 
either not to authorize this spending or to reauthorize this spending, 
yet the appropriation process is going to go ahead and spend $7.29 
billion of the American taxpayers' money. Let me tell you where some of 
that unauthorized money is going to be distributed; $160 million to the 
National Endowment of the Arts was last authorized and it expired in 
1993. The authorization for this expired in 1993. $1.8 billion of 
discretionary programs for the Bureau of Land Management. That 
authorization expired in 2002. $10.5 million for EPA State and Tribal 
Grants to Alaskan Native Villages. Authorization for this spending 
expired in 1979. These projects aren't on autopilot. In fact, there is 
not even a pilot in the cockpit. These are programs that no one has 
chosen to reauthorize in a number of years.
  As Members of Congress, we're entrusted to spend the taxpayers' money 
wisely. Congress is supposed to continually review these policies and 
programs to determine, one, are they working; secondly, do they need to 
be improved; or, third, should they be eliminated altogether.
  Get this: House rules require appropriations to go through the 
authorization program, yet each year the Rules Committee chooses to 
waive points of order authorizing spending. In other words, that means 
we have rules in this House to protect the American taxpayer by saying 
we're not going to fund projects that aren't authorized. But what is 
the first action that we take? We waive the rules. This is a practice

[[Page H7086]]

both Republican and Democratic Congresses are guilty of. However, I 
think it's important to point out this shortcoming as we go into this 
very important legislative process.
  Now, some might argue, well, Congress is just too busy, doesn't have 
enough time to review all of these program. Well, quite honestly, if 
these programs aren't important enough for Congress to take the time to 
review them to determine whether they should be continued to be funded 
or if they're relevant today, we probably shouldn't be sending billions 
of dollars of the taxpayers' money for those programs. And to the 
argument, well, we're too busy, well, we haven't been too busy in the 
first 6 months of this Congress. In the first 6 months of this Congress 
we've authorized $828 billion in new programs. So if we have time to 
authorize $828 billion in new programs, it looks like to me we have 
time to go through these programs that are going to be funded today in 
this bill that are unauthorized.
  Clearly, Congress needs to do a better job. The first thing Congress 
needs to do is follow the rules. These were rules that were put in 
place to put checks and balances on how we spend the American 
taxpayers' money. And so I would encourage our Members today to vote 
against this rule and for Congress to follow its own rules, and that 
is, to make sure that we do not fund unauthorized projects.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, before yielding to my good 
friend on the Rules Committee, let me clear up something for the 
American public.
  Mr. Dicks and Mr. Tiahrt, in a very responsible manner bringing this 
appropriations measure to the floor, had to work assiduously to ensure 
that this is a bipartisan effort and that we are being proper stewards 
of the environment. There is no question, I don't believe, that anybody 
can say about that.
  But I've listened now for a considerable number of days about the 
hammering of earmarks. Now, I'm not here as an apologist for anybody, 
but I think something needs to be understood that is not clear in the 
minds of many, particularly in the American public because of the 
confusion that has been put forward by my colleagues on the other side. 
Let me use as a ``for example'' in this particular measure some of the 
so-called earmarks that I say are needed in these communities. And I go 
specifically to Florida and specifically to Republicans who work on 
this floor with me.
  I support the city of Sarasota's water system placement that 
Congressman Buchanan asks for. I support Congressman Crenshaw's town of 
Callahan for the wastewater treatment plant. I support the fourth-
ranking member of the Republican Party's request for the city of 
Brooksville Southwest Florida Water Management District for the Peace 
and Myakka Rivers. I have fished in those rivers. I have seen them be 
damaged. They are nowhere near the district that I am privileged to 
serve, but I support that particular effort of Congressman Putnam.
  I support the city of Clearwater for wastewater and reclaimed water 
infrastructure. I have been in Clearwater when it was flooding and the 
people had problems in that area. That's offered by Mr. Young, the 
former appropriations Chair, and Mr. Bilirakis. Enough already, 
colleagues. These people need this environmental protection. They need 
these water treatment facilities. They need the things that Mr. Dicks 
and Mr. Tiahrt have worked out. And it's wrong for folks to come down 
here and to try to give the American public the impression that because 
somebody that is sent here for the purpose of trying to use the budget 
for the purposes of protecting the environment and the American people, 
that they have done something wrong.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
Vermont, my good friend who is on the Rules Committee (Mr. Welch).
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. I thank the gentleman from Florida and for his 
ringing endorsement of public spending for public projects.
  Two things: first, Democrats readopted in this Congress the principle 
of pay-as-you-go, acknowledging that we have to pay our bills, and that 
good intentions are not enough to balance the budget. We will do that 
as we did before. But in this bill we are proposing to spend 7.5 
percent more than the President asked for. And the reason? That 
spending is necessary and required if we're going to protect the 
rivers, the waterways, the air and the land of this great country.
  Second, the spirit of Teddy Roosevelt is alive and well in this 
bipartisan bill by Mr. Dicks and by Mr. Tiahrt. We are getting back 
into protecting the America that we are responsible to hand down to the 
future. This bill, a bipartisan bill, appropriates $266 million for 
climate change research across all Federal agencies. This bill creates 
a commission on Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation that will 
review scientific questions that need to be addressed to adapt to 
global warming and to recommend action. This investment in furthering 
our understanding of the impacts of climate change is a down payment on 
our future. If there has been a debate about whether global warming 
exists, this bill puts an exclamation point that the bipartisan 
conclusion of Congress is that global warming is real, is urgent, and 
requires immediate attention.
  The spirit of Teddy Roosevelt is also alive and well in this bill in 
the Forest Legacy Program. And thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Ranking 
Member. The Forest Legacy Program brings communities together, 
protecting their forests. In my own State, two very small towns of 
Fairlee and West Fairlee have been working hard contributing their own 
money to protect their Brushwood Forest. The increase in the Forest 
Legacy Program, something that's been overdue, is going to give them a 
fighting chance to be able to do that.
  The spirit of Teddy Roosevelt is alive and well in the bill's 
commitment to water quality. The Clean Water State Revolving Fund 
provides all of our States resources for local sewage treatment 
projects, one of the most important investments in the country towards 
public health.

                              {time}  1100

  The spirit of Teddy Roosevelt is alive and well in the self-help 
efforts in this bill in the small amount of money, $16 million, that 
provides for rural water technical assistance. This helps small 
communities across the State of Vermont and across the country get the 
technical assistance that they need in order to do locally what is 
required for the benefit of their own citizens.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlemen on both sides of the aisle for 
their leadership in this overdue legislation.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time 
as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to engage in a colloquy with my colleague 
from Washington, the chairman of the subcommittee.
  As the chairman is aware, I have been concerned for some time with 
the issue of Federal land acquisition due to its effect on local tax 
rolls. Many of the counties that I represent are heavily federally 
owned. Some of them have strong reservations about Federal land 
acquisition.
  I would like to say a word or two specifically about the Columbia 
River Gorge National Scenic Area. As the chairman knows, I represent 
the northeastern part of the scenic area. The Columbia River Gorge 
National Scenic River Act, passed by Congress in 1986, authorized $40 
million for land acquisition, $10 million for economic development 
grants, and $10 million for recreation grants for the scenic area. I am 
concerned that even though it has been 20 years since the Act was 
passed, the economic development and recreation accounts have yet to be 
fully funded. Meanwhile, the Forest Service has spent more than $55 
million on land acquisition in the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic 
Area. I believe we should make it a priority to fund the economic 
development and recreation accounts as envisioned under the Act.
  Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield to Chairman Dicks for his comments.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I share your interest in seeing that the economic development and 
recreation accounts under the gorge act are fully funded. I will be 
happy to work with you on this issue which is so important to the 
communities in your scenic area.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I 
appreciate the chairman's remarks. I also

[[Page H7087]]

noted that the committee report includes $1 million for land 
acquisition in the Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area requested by our 
colleagues, Mr. Blumenauer of Oregon and Mr. Baird of Washington. I 
would like to clarify with the chairman that it is not his intent that 
these funds would be spent on land acquisition in the part of the 
scenic area that I represent.
  Again, I would be happy to yield to the chairman on this question.
  Mr. DICKS. That is correct. The earmark in the committee report is 
for land acquisition in areas of the scenic area represented by the two 
gentlemen who requested the funding.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I thank the chairman. I appreciate very 
much your comments. I look forward to working with you on issues 
related to the implementation of the Columbia River Gorge National 
Scenic Act.
  Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Rules Committee, by a voice vote, approved 
an open rule for the consideration of the Department of Interior, 
Environment and Related Agencies Appropriation Act. I am pleased that 
this rule keeps with the longstanding tradition of allowing an open 
debate on spending bills. I support House Resolution 514.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, the underlying legislation 
moves our country in a better direction, providing improvements long 
overdue to our entire Nation. Our investments today will ensure that 
our children and grandchildren will have water and air that is cleaner, 
natural landscapes and historic structures that are protected, and arts 
and humanity centers that are bolstered.
  This bill fulfills past due obligations to our underserved 
communities and to our entire planet. Republicans in the last Congress 
and in the current administration have continued to fail to effectively 
fund the environmental and conservation needs of the American people 
and its natural resources.
  Today, under the Democratic leadership, we are reversing this trend 
and restoring funding to vital programs and agencies, fulfilling our 
promise to this Nation and to this Earth. The investments this bill 
makes are of vital importance today, and their benefits will be felt 
for years to come.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________