[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 124 (Tuesday, August 16, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1521-E1522]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             FY 2012 DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR APPROPRIATIONS

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. GWEN MOORE

                              of wisconsin

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, August 16, 2011

  Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the FY 2012 
Department of Interior Appropriations bill, H.R. 2584. An appropriate 
short title for this legislation would be the ``Let's Leave our Air and 
Water Dirtier Act of 2011.''
  This bill leaves no stone unturned in the majority's relentless 
attack on our environment. National parks are slashed. Even in the 
midst of the economic downturn, Americans have continued to visit our 
national parks and we need to continue to ensure that their experience 
is a safe and reflective one.
  Wildlife refuge funding is cut. The bill also targets the only 
program (the State and Tribal Wildlife Grant program) that helps us 
help conserve wildlife and their habitat before they become endangered 
or threatened. This represents a whopping 64 percent cut for this 
state-based conservation program.
  The bill reduces funding for land acquisition funded by the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund--which does not use taxpayer dollars but oil 
revenues--to $66 million, a 78 percent reduction from FY11, the lowest 
level of funding in the history of the program.
  The bill also targets grants that help keep pollution out of our 
Nation's waters, including the Great Lakes. Keeping that body of water 
clean is absolutely critical to my region's economy. Businesses don't 
set up shop next to polluted bodies of water. Tourists don't go to 
visit or fish in polluted bodies of water. We know what happens when we 
ignore the state of our natural resources. Do we really need to have 
our lakes catch fire for some on the other side to understand the 
importance of this funding?
  According to the Great Lakes Metro Chambers Coalition, the region's 
twelve states account for 33 percent of the Nation's population, 32 
percent of its GDP, 30 percent of its merchandise exports, and 28 
percent of its patents.
  Local governments in the region on both sides of the border 
contribute an estimated $10 billion in annual investments in wastewater 
systems to keep pollution out of the Great Lakes. Is it too much to ask 
the Federal Government to adequately support this effort as well? I 
think not.
  Yet, H.R. 2584 slashes the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) 
by $50 million compared to current levels and by $100 million compared 
to the President's request. If this level is approved, the funding 
levels for this initiative will have been slashed in half in the two 
appropriations bills that the new House majority has brought to the 
floor this year.
  The GLRI is critical to the Great Lakes which contains some 20 
percent of the world's freshwater and 84 percent of the surface water 
supply in North America. Because this body of water is so vast, there 
is a perception that these waters are inexhaustible. In reality, this 
water resource--that millions of Americans and businesses rely on every 
day--is finite, intensely used, and ecologically fragile. The 
initiative is guided by sound science and an action plan with 
performance measures and accountability standards. Over 300 restoration 
projects are already underway and demand for funding continues to 
outpace supply. Just approaching halfway in this 5-year initiative, now 
is not the time to start pulling back.
  The Great Lakes Metro Chambers of Commerce Coalition estimates that 
every $1 in federal investments generates some $6 in other funds for 
restoration efforts.
  This cut endangers efforts to remove contaminated sediments like 
PCB's from the Great Lakes. I don't know how allowing these poisons to 
linger in the Great Lakes somehow advances our national interests.
  GLRI provides funds that are also a vital and active part of current 
efforts to keep the Asian Carp out of the Great Lakes. The Asian Carp 
have the potential to devastate the Great Lakes. Asian Carp could kill 
a billion dollar industry, cost jobs, and cost taxpayer money at all 
levels of government to ``manage'' this invasive species if it were to 
somehow get into the Great Lakes. The Administration's Asian Carp 
Control Strategy Framework directs $26 million in FY 2011 GLRI funds to 
fighting the Carp. These ongoing efforts will require continued 
support.
  Restoration of the Great Lakes can be one of the great environmental 
success stories of our time. We still have a way to go and unwise cuts 
now will harm the region's environment and economic outlook.
  My colleagues from the region--both Republican and Democratic--
recognize the shortsightedness of the funding cuts for the GLRI in this 
bill and have offered amendments to restore funding levels for the 
GLRI. I am pleased to support those amendments, including the 
LaTourette amendment which restored

[[Page E1522]]

funding to the FY 2011 levels, which was approved by the House 
recently. However, I am concerned that this amendment reduced funding 
for climate change programs to restore GLRI funding even as climate 
change will have an enormous impact on the Great Lakes, and the 
citizens and industries that live, work, and recreate in the region. We 
must continue to work together to keep these waters ``Great.''
  I also note the provisions in the bill that would undermine the work 
done since passage of the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts to get and 
keep pollution out of our air and water, and as a result, out of our 
bodies.
  The bill also included a provision that would cease listings of 
species for protection under the Endangered Species, a radical proposal 
that would do much harm. The majority is declaring ``open season'' on 
endangered species across our country. I was glad to vote to remove 
that harmful provision.
  We have a responsibility to help get our Nation's finances in order. 
But we also have a responsibility to maintain our Nation's 
irreplaceable resources. What we don't keep clean today will cost us 
much more to clean up tomorrow. That's what the brownfields and 
Superfund sites we still are cleaning up today tell me.
  We don't want to leave our children and grandchildren a legacy of 
debt or deficits. Good. But let's also not leave those same children 
and grandchildren a legacy of closed beach and no swimming signs, of 
``code red'' poor air quality days, and of increasing sewage overflows 
into local bodies of water. I oppose this bill and will vote no on it.

                          ____________________