[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 162 (Wednesday, October 26, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H7090-H7107]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SOUTHEAST ARIZONA LAND EXCHANGE AND CONSERVATION ACT OF 2011
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that
all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend
their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1904.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Scott of South Carolina). Is there
objection to the request of the gentleman from Washington?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 444 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 1904.
{time} 1321
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 1904) to facilitate the efficient extraction of mineral resources
in southeast Arizona by authorizing and directing an exchange of
Federal and non-Federal land, and for other purposes, with Mr. Murphy
of Pennsylvania in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
The gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) and the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, our Nation has suffered through 32 consecutive months
of over 8 percent unemployment, and people everywhere across our great
Nation continue to ask, where are the jobs? Congress' top priority
right now is job creation, and today we have an opportunity to act on
that commitment by passing a bill that would put thousands of Americans
to work.
The Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act, sponsored
by our colleague from Arizona (Mr. Gosar), is a commonsense measure
that will create new American jobs and strengthen our economy through
increased U.S. mineral production.
The bill authorizes an equal-value land exchange between Resolution
Copper, the Federal Government, the State of Arizona and the town of
Superior, Arizona, that will open up the third-largest undeveloped
copper resource in the world. The bill requires the cost of the land
exchange to be fully paid for by the mine developer, ensuring fair
treatment for taxpayers and for the government.
This project will provide substantial benefits to the United States
in the
[[Page H7091]]
form of job creation, economic growth, and increased national security.
This mining project will support nearly 3,700 jobs. These are good
paying, American wage jobs that will equate to more than $220 million
in annual wages.
At a time when our economy continues to struggle, this mining project
will provide a much-needed boost through private investment. This
mining activity will have over $60 billion in economic impact, and will
generate $20 billion in total Federal, State, county, and local tax
revenue.
So this bill, Mr. Chairman, is a perfect example of how safely and
responsibly harnessing our resources will generate revenue and get our
economy back on track. The importance of U.S. copper production cannot
be overstated. Our Nation has become increasingly reliant on foreign
countries for our mineral resources, placing our economic
competitiveness and national security at risk.
The U.S. currently imports 30 percent of the copper we need, and we
will continue to be dependent on foreign countries if we fail to
develop our own resources and the vast resources, indeed, we have in
this country. The copper produced from this single project will meet 25
percent of the United States' entire copper demand. The copper could be
used for a variety of projects, ranging from hybrid cars like the Prius
to medical devices, plumbing, and computers. Without it, the
microphones and lights that we're using here right now would not be
functioning. It's also essential for national defense equipment and
technology. It is used in satellite, space and aviation, weapons
guidance, and communications.
The benefits and the reasons to pass this bill, Mr. Chairman, are
plentiful. However, we are likely to hear several inaccurate claims
from those across the aisle who are opposed to mining in America. I
would like to take a moment to set the record straight right from the
beginning.
First, the bill follows the standard Federal land appraisal process,
procedures issued by the Department of Justice which have been used in
this country for decades. The appraisal requires full market value to
be paid for both the land and minerals within.
If, by chance, there is copper production beyond the appraised value,
Mr. Chairman, the mine developer will be required to pay the United
States the difference, which would be assessed on an annual basis. This
is an added guarantee to ensure that taxpayers get a fair return on
their copper resources.
Second, this bill is about creating nearly 3,700 American jobs. It's
not about helping foreign mining interests, as some have charged.
Opposing this mine and not producing copper in the U.S. is what truly
benefits foreign nations by sending American jobs overseas and making
it increasingly reliant on foreign resources of critical minerals.
Third, the bill requires full compliance with environmental laws and
tribal consultation prior to constructing the mine. This bill provides
more conservation and protection of culturally sensitive riparian and
critical habitat than otherwise would occur, especially areas to be
conveyed currently under private ownership.
Fourth, the developer has already secured over half the water needed
for this project, and has committed to having 100 percent of the water
it needs in hand before construction begins. Claims that the project
will require the same amount of water used by the City of Tempe is, Mr.
Chairman, a gross exaggeration.
Finally, this bill does not trade away sacred sites. As previously
stated, the bill requires tribal consultation. And there is a map that
will be shown later on today that talks about the copper triangle in
this part of Arizona, and you will see that on this map which will be
shown later, this mine is right in the middle of that copper triangle.
H.R. 1904 is about creating new American jobs, strengthening our
economy, and decreasing our dependence on foreign minerals. The bill
has broad support, both locally and nationally, including from Arizona
Governor Jan Brewer, the Arizona Chamber of Commerce, the U.S. Chamber
of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturing, and the
National Mining Association.
They all, Mr. Chairman, recognize the job-creating benefits of this
bill. So I urge my colleagues to strongly support H.R. 1904 to put
Americans back to work on American jobs and utilize the vast resources
in this country that we should be using for economic and for national
security reasons.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
H.R. 1904 is a triple threat. It will rob Native people of their
heritage. It will rob local people of their water. And it will rob the
American people of their money.
This legislation is simply an abdication of our responsibilities as
stewards of public lands and the public trust, and it must be rejected.
The Congress routinely considers land exchanges. It is our
responsibility to weigh the merits of each proposal to determine
whether it is in the best interest of the American people. Some
proposals facilitate public recreation, some help local communities
build courthouses and schools, and some serve important environmental
goals.
The land exchange required by H.R. 1904 serves none of those
purposes. Rather, this legislation will take thousands of acres of
healthy, protected, sacred public land and convert it into billions of
dollars in corporate profits for two foreign mining companies.
H.R. 1904 trades away several sites that are sacred to Native people.
The hearing record before the Natural Resources Committee includes
desperate pleas from San Carlos Apache, White Mountain Apache, Yavapai-
Apache, Tonto Apache, Fort McDowell Yavapai, Hualapai, Jicarilla
Apache, Mescalero Apache, and the Zuni Pueblo and others, pleading to
respect the religious and cultural traditions.
{time} 1330
Instead, the bill waives compliance with NEPA, the Native American
Graves Protection Act, the Historic Preservation Act, and all other
statutes that might give the tribes a voice and respect at the table
before this decision is finalized. The final insult comes when the bill
requires consultation with Native people--after the land exchange,
after that exchange has already occurred. This will not be government-
to-government consultations as required by the treaty trust
relationship. Rather it continues a pattern of neglect and belittles
Native people once again.
The legislation also threatens to dewater a large and already
drought-prone area, turning it from an arid but functioning landscape
into a desert. According to testimony received by the committee, a
mining operation like the one planned by Resolution Copper requires an
estimated 40,000 acre-feet of water per year. This is roughly the
amount of water used by the entire city of Tempe in Arizona.
The company does not own any water rights and has failed to indicate
where the water from the mining operation will come from. Historically,
mining companies have simply sunk their wells deeper than their
neighbors and taken the water that they need. A Federal mining permit
process, along with compliance with NEPA and other laws, might mitigate
or at least explore these concerns; but the legislation allows
Resolution Copper to skip these steps, leaving the people of
southeastern Arizona in grave danger of severe water shortages. NEPA
happens after that land trade is finalized, when Rio Tinto--the parent
company of Resolution Copper--holds all the cards. Compliance with NEPA
becomes unclear and poses legal issues regarding private property.
Finally, the legislation will allow Rio Tinto--the parent company of
Resolution Copper--to realize billions in profits without guaranteeing
a fair return to the current owners of the land, the American people.
The bill contains appraisal and payment provisions; but the language is
nonstandard, and in some cases totally unique. Why are such provisions
necessary when a simple, straightforward royalty would provide a fair
and predictable return for the taxpayers?
At a time when we are told that everybody from college students to
the elderly must accept drastic cuts to basic Federal programs, it is
unconscionable that we would approve a massive transfer of wealth from
the American people to a foreign-owned mining company without insisting
on a fair return.
[[Page H7092]]
Supporters of this legislation claim it would create jobs. Job
creation has been the excuse used here on the House floor to push
legislation dismantling the last century of environmental protection,
and H.R. 1904 continues that pattern. The job-creation claims are all
based on predictions provided by the industry and the companies which
stand to profit from this deal without a mining plan to verify or
corroborate any of the information. Thus, they are all highly suspect.
When this proposal was first developed in 2005, the Arizona Republic
and Tucson Citizen reported the mine would create 450 jobs. Without
explanation, these predictions have skyrocketed over the years to 1,200
jobs to 3,700 today; and 6,000 jobs, as well, have been brought up as
numbers of jobs that would be created. None of these numbers are
supported by facts.
The trend in mining over the last several decades is clear: mining
companies are producing more and more and using fewer and fewer
workers. Rio Tinto and BHP-Billiton are pioneers in the use of
automation, and the Resolution Copper project is an opportunity to
perfect these technologies even further. The number of jobs actually
created by H.R. 1904 will pale in comparison to the economic and
environmental devastation that it could cause.
Mr. Chairman, this is a special interest legislation that is not in
the interests of the American people. This legislation asks Congress to
be business agents for foreign-owned corporations and not stewards of
the public land or represent the American taxpayer.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield
5 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar), the sponsor of
this bill, somebody who has been absolutely tenacious in seeing that
this legislation advances to where it is today.
Mr. GOSAR. I rise today in support of my legislation, H.R. 1904, the
Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act, legislation that
will create new American jobs, reduce our dependence on foreign sources
of energy and minerals, protect high-profile conservation lands, and
generate revenue for Federal and State treasuries.
In this time of serious economic hardship, Congress must engage in
serious debate over serious issues. What should not guide Congress is
an endless game of unfounded attacks that lead to trumped-up fear-
mongering to gain political advantage, particularly, in this case, the
fear of robots.
This legislation is a real job creator. I would like to tell a story
about Chris Astor, a current employee at the mine site and a member of
the San Carlos Apache Tribe. Chris grew up attending public schools on
the San Carlos Apache Reservation and graduated from high school in
nearby Globe. In 2010, Chris was among those in the first group of the
Resolution Experience participants--a paid 3-week program Resolution
launched in the summer of 2010 to introduce potential employees to the
world of mining. Each participant receives a Mining Safety and Health
Administration-certified training and then is exposed to the various
work disciplines within Resolution Copper. Following this 3-week
program, many of the program participants are hired by the company or
its contractors. Among the hired employees was Chris Astor.
Chris is one of seven San Carlos Apaches who have been hired by
Resolution Copper or its contractor since the program began in the
summer of 2010. Chris now works as a core handler--one of a seven-
member crew that retrieves drill core samples from the rigs that do the
project. I've had the blessing of doing this in my own life for my dad.
Under the guidance of geologists, the core handlers log, process, and
archive core samples with geologists and mine engineers helping them to
rely on and understand the nature of the ore body. ``I would like to
eventually try different jobs, get a broader view, learn and grow into
a supervisory role,'' Chris says. ``I also want to be trained to work
underground.''
Prior to the Resolution Experience, Chris worked at the Pinto Valley
copper mine, an open-pit mine a few miles northeast of Resolution
Projects, which is owned by BHP-Billiton. However, this mine is
currently closed. Before joining Resolution Experience, Chris had been
out of work for more than a year.
Chris is now a 31-year-old father of three children, ages 13, 9, and
5. With his stable, good-paying job, including great medical and
benefits, Chris is able to confidently support his family. ``I can take
care of my kids better and provide what they need--and sometimes even
what they want,'' he says.
Life was not always good for Chris. He grew up as an only child
raised by his mother and grandparents. He spent most of his childhood
on the reservation. ``We went where my mom could find work,'' he says.
``I never knew my dad.'' Chris feels fortunate to have a job and to
live on the reservation, where more than 80 percent of the residents
live in poverty and seven out of 10 eligible workers are unemployed.
It is true that modern mining technology uses high-tech equipment to
accomplish certain tasks. This is done for efficiency's sake and for
the sake of worker safety. Mining is a potentially hazardous task and
certainly a difficult one that must be done with precision.
Chris is not a robot. You can still see there is a need for people to
run the mine, to drive the trucks, to feed the workers, to drill the
holes, to engineer the dig, to build the structures, to process the
minerals, and, yes, build, maintain and control technology. Chris is a
real human being operating this technology already at the site whose
life has benefited greatly from this project. If we pass this
legislation, over 3,700 more success stories like Chris's will come to
fruition.
I urge my colleagues to continue this debate with serious discussions
about the facts about this bill, not scare tactics.
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to
the gentleman from Arizona, my colleague, Mr. Pastor.
(Mr. PASTOR of Arizona asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. PASTOR of Arizona. First of all, I want to thank the gentleman
from Arizona for the courtesy.
Mr. Chairman, this is an issue that I have been working on for
probably the last 10 years. And one of the interests that I have on
this issue is because I was born in and grew up in this copper triangle
that we're talking about today.
{time} 1340
It's a beautiful area, and at one time, copper was the industry for
this Copper Triangle. Yet, over the past 20-25 years, many of the mines
have shut down, and copper production has stopped in Arizona. So I have
to tell you that my interest in this land exchange would be the
possible economic development of this area.
I travel through this area because my mom still lives up in Miami,
Arizona, where I was born and raised. I travel regularly, at least once
a month, through these canyons. I can tell you that it's the most
beautiful sight, about 85 miles east of Phoenix, where you can still
see a fine, pristine environment with some of the most spectacular rock
formations you'll ever see in this country. It's very beautiful, but
it's also an area that has been hit by some hard times.
I grew up in a mining town, so I know what a mining town is. During
the summers, while I was attending Arizona State University, I'd go to
work in the mines. I worked in the leaching plant, the electrolytic
plant, the leaching tanks, the ball mills, and the moly plant, so I
have the experience of knowing this type of life. I know the economic
boom that copper mining can bring to a community, but I also have
experience with the adverse impact that copper mining can have, not
only on the people who work there, but also on the environment. I have
seen both sides.
It's with that interest that I have seen the evolution of this
debate. At one time, even I sponsored a bill that would deal with the
economic development of these mining towns--Superior, Globe-Miami, et
cetera. The area that we're talking about being exchanged, is an area I
know well. As a kid growing up, we used this area for a picnic site,
and in some cases, when we didn't go to school, that's where we would
have our impromptu picnics. So I know this area.
I have to tell you, with regard to the issue of jobs, as will be
discussed, I
[[Page H7093]]
guess ``a number of jobs'' is in the eye of the beholder. Mining has
changed, and I know that it's a different type of mining now from the
one I experienced. We can debate the number of jobs, but I will tell
you that this will bring some economic development to these areas of
the Copper Triangle. That I cannot deny. Yet the issue for me is at
what price.
At what price do we bring this economic development without some
protection to the environment and without some protection to an
employee's rights?
There is no debate that this ore deposit has some of the richest ore
bodies. Copper, gold, silver, molybdenum, and other rare metals will be
mined here. It's one of the richest deposits of ore not only in North
America but probably in this world. That's why Resolution Copper has
maintained 8 years, 9 years, 10 years of trying to get this bill done,
because they know how rich this deposit is.
So at what price do we pay for this economic boom?
Mr. Chairman, I will tell you of the differences I have with the
sponsor of this bill. But, first, I have to thank him because
Representative Gosar reached out very early, and we talked about this
particular bill. He has improved the bill I sponsored, but I feel that
he has not gone far enough.
This bill would be highly improved if the amendment offered today
that gives an 8 percent royalty fee on the extraction of the ore would
be adopted, making the bill more fair to the American public. If that
amendment is adopted, obviously, it will be very difficult to oppose
this bill; but if the amendment is not adopted, then, Mr. Chairman, the
American public will be paying too high a price for the economic
development of the Copper Triangle. The only enrichment will be for
those copper companies that are foreign based.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2\1/
2\ minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Quayle), who also has
been very tenacious on this issue.
Mr. QUAYLE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1904, a bill
authored by my good friend and fellow Arizonan, Congressman Gosar, that
will create thousands of jobs in Arizona.
I want to commend Chairman Hastings for his work on this and for
bringing it to the floor today.
What we see right now is a jobs crisis that we have in America. We
need to be able to unleash the ingenuity of our job creators. We also
have to make sure that we're not putting up barriers for people to
actually start companies, expand companies and hire new workers.
H.R. 1904 will have broad economic impacts, not only for Arizona but
for the country as a whole, because it will create 3,700 jobs equaling
nearly $220.5 million in annual wages. These are good, high-paying jobs
right here in America. It will also generate nearly $20 billion in
Federal, State, county, and local tax revenue.
This is a win-win. Not only is this legislation completely paid for,
but it also ensures that mining is done in a responsible manner because
H.R. 1904 requires full compliance with NEPA and because it requires
tribal consultation prior to mine construction.
Now, Mr. Chairman, copper is a vital mineral that we have in the
United States and across the world. It's going to continue to be vital
because it's a critical mineral that is widely used in construction,
telecommunications, electricity, and transportation. Copper is also
extremely conductive, which makes it very important in power generation
and utility transmission.
Our actual desire and demand for copper is just going to continue to
go up. That's why we've actually started to import close to 30 percent
of our copper from foreign countries. Now, if we actually open up this
mine and allow this land swap to happen, this project alone could
provide us with enough copper to meet 25 percent of current U.S.
demand. By taking advantage of American sources of copper, we can
prevent supply disruptions and decrease our dependence on foreign
imports. Most importantly, Mr. Chairman, this bill will create
thousands of American jobs in a responsible manner at no cost to the
taxpayer.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. GRIJALVA. There is a cost to the taxpayer, Mr. Chairman. I would
consider the fact that this very valuable mineral is being extracted
without any royalties and without any payment a cost to the American
taxpayer.
The issue about NEPA is not semantics. NEPA and other environmental
processes should occur before the land trade, not after. After the land
trade, it will be very difficult for compliance to happen. As a
consequence, this land will be in the hands of a foreign-owned company,
and it will be private property.
With that, I yield such time as he may consume to the ranking member
of the Natural Resources Committee, the gentleman from Massachusetts
(Mr. Markey).
Mr. MARKEY. I thank the gentleman from Arizona for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, the New Deal was a jobs plan. President Obama has put
forward a jobs plan.
H.R. 1904 is not a jobs plan. H.R. 1904 is a massive payout to
multinational mining giants that are wearing a jobs plan as a disguise.
That disguise is slipping. Real jobs are about making wise investments
in businesses and technologies that put Americans to work. This bill
just gives billions of dollars in copper to foreign mining companies
for free.
{time} 1350
Let's do the math. Estimates vary on the value of the copper from $2
billion to $7 billion or $8 billion. So let's just split the difference
down the middle and say that the copper might be worth $5 billion. The
jobs claims for this bill vary wildly as well from 500 to 5,000 jobs.
Now, there is a good reason to believe the jobs numbers will be on
the very low end, but let's be optimistic and take the highest jobs
claim possible.
So supporters of this bill are going to give away $5 billion in hopes
of creating 5,000 jobs. Well, that's $1 million per job, Mr. Chairman,
$1 million not paid necessarily to the workers themselves but to
foreign mining giants. Now, is that the kind of wise investment that we
need? I do not think so.
I think that we need some new jobs, but they should be real jobs.
They should be here.
Much of the work that's going to be done in this mining is going to
be done by robots. So there will be full employment for R2-D2 and for
the transformers; but the total number of jobs here, very speculative
and very expensive per job created. That's the real question here
because I think many human beings are just going to remain unemployed
under this plan.
And since it's a multinational that gets the benefits, there will be
plenty of accountants and lawyers in London and Melbourne, all around
the world, that will be employed, but in America, not so many. And
those that are there, very expensive, especially since the per capita
cost is very, very high.
Now, why do we know that? Well, we know it because Rio Tinto and BHP-
Billiton stand to pocket an enormous amount of money, billions of
dollars, off of this deal.
So if you count the chauffeurs, if you count the food service workers
in the executive dining rooms of these companies, well, you can see
where there will be some jobs that are created if you're adding it up
that way.
But the truth is, this is a windfall, a windfall, which is why I am
going to make an amendment to charge a reasonable royalty for the
privilege of mining this copper on public lands in the United States.
And when the majority votes ``no'' on that, when the Republicans say,
no, we don't want a royalty payment that can actually be collected by
the American people, we'll see what the real aim of this is, which is
to privatize this resource for multinational corporations without
giving the full benefit to the American taxpayer for the copper which
is mined.
Mr. Grijalva and Mr. Garamendi will offer an amendment to require
local hiring and local ore processing and Make It in America, make it
here and have Americans working here doing this work, people from
Arizona itself. That's the real debate that we're going to have.
In conclusion, Mr. Lujan as well will offer an amendment to protect
Native American sacred sites from being destroyed by this bill. And
when that is defeated as well by the majority, it will
[[Page H7094]]
be painfully clear just how far they are willing to go to enrich these
foreign corporations.
This should not be a Filene's Basement sale. This should not be a
fire sale giving away American valuable copper resources to
multinationals. We should be able to put a price tag on what the
American people are getting from this bargain basement sale, this
giveaway, without proper compensation given to the American taxpayer.
That's what this bill and the debate is going to be all about. It's
whether or not, in fact, there is corporate profiteering at taxpayer
expense, plain and simple, which is at the heart of this bill. History
will record that when the public cried out for a jobs plan to put
Americans back to work, what was put together was a retirement plan for
executives at Rio Tinto and BHP-Billiton that did not, in fact, get a
return on investment for the American taxpayers.
The National Congress of American Indians Resolution #MKE-11-0xx
TITLE: OPPOSITION TO H.R. 1904, PROPOSING A LAND EXCHANGE IN
SOUTHEASTERN ARIZONA FOR THE PURPOSE OF MINING OPERATIONS
Whereas, we, the members of the National Congress of
American Indians of the United States, invoking the divine
blessing of the Creator upon our efforts and purposes, in
order to preserve for ourselves and our descendants the
inherent sovereign rights of our Indian nations, rights
secured under Indian treaties and agreements with the United
States, and all other rights and benefits to which we are
entitled under the laws and Constitution of the United
States, to enlighten the public toward a better understanding
of the Indian people, to preserve Indian cultural values, and
otherwise promote the health, safety and welfare of the
Indian people, do hereby establish and submit the following
resolution, and
Whereas, the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI)
was established in 1944 and is the oldest and largest
national organization of American Indian and Alaska Native
tribal governments; and
Whereas, H.R. 1904, entitled ``Southeast Arizona Land
Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011,'' was introduced by
Arizona District 1 Congressman, Paul Gosar, on May 13, 2011,
to approve a federal land exchange to transfer to the
ownership of Resolution Copper, a joint venture of two
foreign mining companies, Rio Tinto, PLC and BHP Billiton,
Ltd., over 2,400 acres of federal lands located within the
Tonto National Forest for purposes of an unprecedented block
cave copper mine; and
Whereas, the federal lands which are proposed to be
exchanged, which are generally known as Oak Flat, are within
the ancestral lands of certain Arizona Indian tribes, and
these land's are of unique religious, cultural, traditional,
and archeological significance to American Indian tribes in
this region; and
Whereas, H R. 1904 would require Congress to lift the
decades old ban against mining within the 760 acres of the
Oak Flat Withdrawal which was expressly set aside from mining
by President Eisenhower in 1955 due to the land's value for
recreation and other important purposes; and
Whereas, the mining proposed for Oak Flat will destroy the
religious, cultural and traditional integrity of Oak Flat for
American Indian tribes affiliated with the area, and it will
cause serious and highly damaging environmental consequences
to the water, wildlife, plants, and other natural ecosystems
of the area; and
Whereas, the block cave mining method to be employed at Oak
Flat will also cause the collapse of the surface of the earth
and endanger the historic terrain at Apache Leap, Oak Flat,
and Gaan Canyon, as well as in the surrounding countryside;
and
Whereas, the mining activity would deplete and contaminate
water resources from nearby watersheds and aquifers leaving
in its wake long term and in some cases, permanent religious,
cultural and environmental damage; and
Whereas, although we are not opposed to mining in general,
this form of mining and mining in this location does not make
sense, is offensive to us, and would pose a danger to many
important values of this region; and
Whereas, the National Congress of American Indians has
adopted resolutions in the past opposing this mining project
at Oak Flat and the land exchange to be facilitated by H.R.
1904; and
Whereas, the Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. has
adopted resolutions in the past opposing this mining project
at Oak Flat and land exchange, and most recently adopted
Resolution 0311 on May 20, 2011, opposing H.R 1904; and
Whereas, the San Carlos Apache Tribe, the Fort McDowell
Yavapai Nation, the White Mountain Apache Tribe, and other
Tribes have opposed this land exchange due to the
environmental consequences to the land in the proposed mining
area, as well as the harm to religious, cultural,
archeological, and historic resources from the proposed
mining by the huge foreign mining companies; and now
therefore, be it
Resolved, that the National Congress of American Indians
oppose H.R. 1904, providing for a land exchange in
southeastern Arizona for the purpose of mining by Resolution
Copper; and be it further
Resolved, that this resolution shall be the policy of NCAI
until it is withdrawn or modified by subsequent resolution.
____
Inter Tribal Council of Arizona Resolution 0311
In Opposition to H.R. 1904, Proposing a Land Exchange in Southeastern
Arizona for the Purpose of Mining Operations
Whereas, the Inter Tribal Council of Arizona (ITCA), an
organization of twenty tribal governments in Arizona,
provides a forum for tribal governments to advocate for
national, regional and specific tribal concerns and to join
in united action to address those concerns; and
Whereas, the member Tribes of the Inter Tribal Council of
Arizona have the authority to act to further their collective
interests as sovereign tribal governments; and
Whereas, the member Tribes of the ITCA have the charge to
support the sovereign right of Indian nations, tribes, and
communities on matters directly affecting them upon their
request; and
Whereas, H.R. 1904, entitled ``Southeast Arizona Land
Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011'', was introduced by
District 1 Congressman, Paul Gosar, on May 13, 2011, to
approve a federal land exchange to transfer to the ownership
of Resolution Copper, a joint venture of two foreign mining
companies, Rio Tinto, PLC and BHP Billiton, Ltd., over 2,400
acres of federal lands located within the Tonto National
Forest for purposes of an unprecedented block cave copper
mine; and
Whereas, the federal lands which are proposed to be
exchanged, which are generally known as Oak Flat, are within
the ancestral lands of certain Arizona Indian tribes, and
these lands are of unique religious, cultural, traditional,
and archeological significance to American Indian tribes in
this region; and
Whereas, H.R. 1904 would require Congress to lift the
decades old ban against mining within the 760 acres of the
Oak Flat Withdrawal which was expressly set aside from mining
by President Eisenhower in 1955 due to the lands value for
recreation and other important purposes; and
Whereas, the mining proposed for Oak Flat will destroy the
religious, cultural and traditional integrity of Oak Flat for
American Indian tribes affiliated with the area, and it will
cause serious and highly damaging environmental consequences
to the water, wildlife, plants, and other natural ecosystems
of the area; and
Whereas, the block cave mining method to be employed at Oak
Flat will also cause the collapse of the surface of the earth
and endanger the historic terrain at Apache Leap, Oak Flat,
and Gaan Canyon, as well as in the surrounding country side;
and
Whereas, the mining activity would deplete and contaminate
water resources from nearby watersheds and aquifers leaving
in its wake long term and in some cases, permanent religious,
cultural and environmental damage; and
Whereas, although we are not opposed to mining in general,
this form of mining and mining in this location does not make
sense, is offensive to us, and would pose a danger to many
important values of this region; and
Whereas, the Inter Tribal Council of Arizona has adopted
resolutions in the past opposing this mining project at Oak
Flat and the land exchange to be facilitated by H.R. 1904;
and
Whereas, the San Carlos Apache Tribe, the Fort McDowell
Yavapai Nation, the White Mountain Apache Tribe, and other
Tribes have opposed this land exchange due to the
environmental consequences to the land in the proposed mining
area, as well as the harm to religious, cultural,
archeological, and historic resources from the proposed
mining by the huge foreign mining companies; and now
therefore be it
Resolved, that the member Tribes of ITCA oppose H.R. 1904,
providing for a land exchange in southeastern Arizona for the
purpose of mining by Resolution Copper; and be it finally
Resolved, that the ITCA inform all appropriate
Congressional Committees, the Arizona Delegation, and all
appropriate state and federal agencies of and the reasons for
this position.
CERTIFICATION
The foregoing resolution was presented and duly adopted at
a meeting of the Inter Tribal Council of Arizona on May 20,
2011, where a quorum was present.
Shan Lewis,
Vice-Chairman, Fort Mojave Tribe
President, Inter Tribal Council of Arizona.
____
Eight Northern Indian Pueblos Council Inc. Resolution No. 11-10-15
In Opposition to H.R. 1904, Proposing a Land Exchange in Southeastern
Arizona for the Purpose of Mining Operations
Whereas, the Eight Northern Indian Pueblos Council Inc.
(ENIPC, Inc.), believes in supporting the sovereign rights of
Indian nations, tribes, and communities on matters affecting
them upon request; and
Whereas, traditional tribal life is rooted in a deep and
personal understanding of the natural world and the forces
that govern it; the source of tribal health, happiness,
strength, and balance is the natural world, making our
relationship with the natural world sacred; and
Whereas, H.R. 1904, entitled ``Southeast Arizona Land
Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011,'' would approve a
federal land exchange to transfer to the ownership of
Resolution Copper over 2,400 acres of federal lands
[[Page H7095]]
located within the Tonto National Forest for purposes of an
unprecedented block cave copper mine; and
Whereas, the federal lands which are proposed to be
exchanged, which arc generally known as Oak Flat, are within
the ancestral lands of certain Indian tribes, and these lands
are of unique religious, cultural, traditional, and
archeological significance to American Indian tribes in this
region; and
Whereas, H.R. 1904 would require Congress to lift the
decades old ban against mining within the 760 acres of the
Oak Flat Withdrawal which was expressly set aside from mining
by President Eisenhower in 1955 due to the land's value for
recreation and other important purposes; and
Whereas, the mining proposed for Oak Flat will destroy the
religious, cultural and traditional integrity of Oak Flat for
American Indian tribes affiliated with the area, and it will
cause serious and highly damaging environmental consequences
to the water, wildlife, plants, and other natural ecosystems
of the area; and
Whereas, the block cave mining method to be employed at Oat
Flat will also cause the collapse of the surface of the earth
and endanger the religious and historic terrain at Apache
Leap, Oak Flat, and Gaan Canyon, as well as in the
surrounding countryside; and
Whereas, the mining activity would deplete and contaminate
water resources from nearby watersheds and aquifers leaving
in its wake long term and in some cases, permanent religious,
cultural and environment damage; and
Whereas, the National Congress of American Indians, the
Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, the United South and Eastern
Tribes, the San Carlos Apache Tribe, and other Arizona and
New Mexico Tribes have opposed this land exchange due to the
harm to religious, cultural, archeological, and historic
resources, as well as the environmental consequences to the
land from the proposed mining activities; and now, therefore,
be it
Resolved, that the Eight Northern Indian Pueblo Council,
Inc.'s Board of Governors firmly commit their support to
oppose H.R. 1904: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and
Conservation Act of 2011; be it further
Resolved, that the ENIPC Board of Governors will inform all
appropriate Congressional Committees, the New Mexico
Delegation, and all appropriate federal agencies of and the
reasons for this position; be it finally
Resolved, that the Tribal Council is expressly authorized
to take any and all actions necessary to accomplish the
intent of this Resolution.
CERTIFICATION
We hereby certify that Resolution No. 11-10-15 was
considered and adopted at an Eight Northern Indian Pueblos
Council, Inc., Board of Governors meeting held on October 18,
2011, and that a quorum was present and that the vote was 6
in favor, 0 opposed, 0 abstained and 2 absent.
Signed this 18th day of October 2011
Governor Perry Martinez,
Chairman, Pueblo de San Ildefonso.
Governor Mark Mitchell,
Pueblo of Tesuque.
Governor Gerald Nailor,
Pueblo of Picuris.
Governor Nelson J. Cordova,
Pueblo of Taos.
Governor Ron Lovato,
Vice Chairman, Ohkay Owingeh.
Governor George Rivera,
Pueblo of Pojoaque.
Governor Ernest Mirabal,
Pueblo of Nambe.
Governor Walter Dasheno,
Pueblo of Santa Clara.
Attest:
Rob Corabi,
Interim Executive Director, Eight Northern Indian Pueblos
Council, Inc.
____
All Indian Pueblo Council Resolution 2011-08
In Opposition to H.R. 1904, Proposing a Land Exchange in Southeastern
Arizona for the Purpose of Mining Operations
Whereas, the All Indian Pueblo Council (``AIPC'') is
comprised of the Pueblos of Acoma, Cochiti, Isleta, Laguna,
Jemez, Santa Ana, Sandia, San Felipe, Santo Domingo, Zia,
Zuni, Nambe, Picuris, Pojoaque, Santa Clara, San Ildefonso,
Ohkay Owingeh, Tesuque, Taos and 1 Sovereign Pueblo, Ysleta
Del Sur, located in the State of Texas and each possessing
inherent government authority and sovereignty over their
lands; and
Whereas, the member Tribes of AIPC have the charge to
support the sovereign right of Indian nations, tribes, and
communities on matters affecting them upon request; and
Whereas, H.R. 1904, entitled ``Southeast Arizona Land
Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011'', would approve a
federal land exchange to transfer to the ownership of
Resolution Copper over 2,400 acres of federal lands located
within the Tonto National Forest for purposes of an
unprecedented block cave copper mine; and
Whereas, the federal lands which are proposed to be
exchanged, which are generally known as Oak Flat, are within
the ancestral lands of certain Arizona Indian tribes, and
these lands are of unique religious, cultural, traditional,
and archeological significance to American Indian tribes in
this region; and
Whereas, H.R. 1904 would require Congress to lift the
decades old ban against mining within the 760 acres of the
Oak Flat Withdrawal which was expressly set aside from mining
by President Eisenhower in 1955 due to the lands value for
recreation and other important purposes; and
Whereas, the mining proposed for Oak Flat will destroy the
religious, cultural and traditional integrity of Oak Flat for
American Indian tribes affiliated with the area, and it will
cause serious and highly damaging environmental consequences
to the water, wildlife, plants, and other natural ecosystems
of the area; and
Whereas, the block cave mining method to be employed at Oak
Flat will also cause the collapse of the surface of the earth
and endanger the religious and historic terrain at Apache
Leap, Oak Flat, and Gaan Canyon, as well as in the
surrounding country side; and
Whereas, the mining activity would deplete and contaminate
water resources from nearby watersheds and aquifers leaving
in its wake long term and in some cases, permanent religious,
cultural and environmental damage; and
Whereas, the National Congress of American Indians, the
Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, the United South and Eastern
Tribes, the San Carlos Apache Tribe, and other Arizona and
New Mexico Tribes have opposed this land exchange due to the
harm to religious, cultural, archeological, and historic
resources, as well as the environmental consequences to the
land from the proposed mining activities; and now therefore
be it
Resolved, the All Indian Pueblo Council Governors firmly
commit their support to oppose H.R. 1904: Southeast Arizona
Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011; and be it further
Resolved, that the AIPC will inform all appropriate
Congressional Committees, the New Mexico Delegation, and all
appropriate federal agencies of and the reasons for this
position; be it finally
Resolved, that the officers of AIPC are expressly
authorized to take any and all steps necessary to effectuate
the intent of this Resolution immediately.
CERTIFICATION
I, Chairman Sanchez of the All Indian Pueblo Council,
hereby certify that the foregoing resolution 2011-08 was
considered and adopted at a duly called council meeting held
on the 17th day of August 2011, and at which time a quorum as
present and the same as approved by a vote of 16 in favor, 0
opposed, 0 abstained and 4 absent.
Chandler Sanchez,
Chairman.
Attest:
Leroy Arquero,
Secretary/Treasurer.
Pueblo of Acoma, Gov. Vicente; Pueblo of Isleta, Gov.
Lujan; Pueblo of Laguna, Gov. Luarkie; Ohkay Owingeh,
Gov. Lovato; Pueblo of Pojoaque, Gov. Rivera; Pueblo of
San Ildefonso, Gov. Martinez; Pueblo of Santa Ana, Gov.
Montoya; Pueblo of Santo Domingo; Pueblo of Tesuque;
Pueblo of Zia; Pueblo of Cochiti, Gov. Pecon; Pueblo of
Jemez, Gov. Toledo Jr.; Pueblo of Nambe, Gov. Mirabal;
Pueblo of Picuris, Gov. Nailor; Pueblo of San Felipe,
Gov. Sandoval; Pueblo of Sandia, Gov. Montoya; Pueblo
of Santa Clara; Pueblo of Taos; Pueblo of Ysleta del
Sur; Pueblo of Zuni.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2
minutes to another gentleman from Arizona, somebody else who has been
involved in this issue for some time, Mr. Franks.
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. I certainly thank the distinguished chairman
for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, first let me just congratulate Mr. Gosar on the
introduction and passage of this legislation. He has done an amazing
job in helping this legislation get to where it is now, and I have
every confidence that he will see it through to the end.
Mr. Chairman, according to a United States Geological Survey report,
the United States currently imports over 30 percent of the country's
copper demand. And in 2010 alone, domestic copper production decreased
by another 5 percent; it decreased by another 5 percent.
And just as relying on foreign oil imports threatens national
security, relying on foreign copper suppliers also threatens U.S.
industry. We must use domestic resources to meet that growing demand;
and this legislation is a major step in the right direction, producing
enough copper to meet as much as 25 percent of America's current
demand.
The Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act would open
up the third largest undeveloped copper resource in the world, creating
new American jobs, reducing our dependence on foreign sources of energy
[[Page H7096]]
and minerals, and generating tens of billions of dollars in revenue.
Now, in the midst of a prolonged recession, Mr. Chairman, that has
hit Arizona very hard, we really cannot afford not to pass this
legislation because it so uniformly benefits our labor force, our State
and local governments and conservationists who would benefit from much
of the high-value land exchange in opening this land to mining.
I would just encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill.
It's time that America begins to produce our own energy and our own
minerals and to get back on track to being the greatest Nation in the
history of the world.
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, the claim is that this legislation is
going to boost the U.S. economy tremendously, but the copper will
likely benefit China more than the United States.
Nine percent of Rio Tinto is owned by the state-controlled Aluminum
Corporation of China. Rio Tinto has a long-established relationship and
at our hearings refused to disclaim what level of exportation they were
going to make to China of this copper ore.
At a time when we should focus on U.S. industry supporting that
industry, creating jobs here in America, we should not be trading away
billions in copper to supply China's needs. This bill doesn't even
require that the ore extracted from this mine be processed here, much
less that it will be marketed or sold here.
With that, let me yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California, a
member of the Resources Committee, Mr. Garamendi.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Thank you, Mr. Grijalva, and thank you very much for
our friends from Arizona.
Let me just tell you, my family has been in mining since the 1860s,
gold mining, which isn't working too well in California right now. And
I am not at all opposed to mining copper in Arizona, although there are
issues, local, to be dealt with; and I will let that go to another
individual. I was deputy Secretary of the Department of the Interior
and had the opportunity to deal with appraisals and land transfers.
This bill, as structured, is a bad deal for American taxpayers and
for Americans. It basically is an enormous giveaway of extraordinary
value to these two companies. As has been mentioned by our colleagues
from Arizona who are in support of the bill, this is one of the biggest
deposits of copper and other minerals in the United States and quite
possibly among the biggest in the world.
What is its value? The mechanism that's used to determine the value
of the trade is called a capitalization appraisal, which has to assume
the cost, has to make assumptions on the extraction, the cost of
extraction, and the amount of ore to be obtained.
There is no way in the appraisal process that that can be done with
any accuracy at all.
{time} 1400
In the language of the bill, there are certain provisions that make
it impossible for the United States Government to go back and do a
reappraisal, so we're left with a bad financial deal.
I'm all for the copper mining. It has to be done properly, and
environmental views and all that. That's not the issue for me. The
issue for me is let's make sure the American public gets the right
value out of this, and there's only one way to do it. That is as the
ore is extracted. It then has a known quantity and a known value, and a
royalty on the ore extracted, that is the material--copper, gold, and
other materials--is then known. And if you simply put a royalty on it,
then the American people will get its fair share of its property.
This property doesn't belong to Rio Tinto or BHP Billiton; this
property belongs to us, Americans.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield the gentleman an additional minute.
Mr. GARAMENDI. It belongs to us, Americans, and we ought to be
getting our full value.
This is not an obscure or new provision. This is the standard
procedure. We actually use it for oil extraction, except in deep water.
It is something that really will give us the value.
Secondly, and I'll make this very, very short, the equipment used
ought to be American made. There's going to be a lot of equipment, a
lot of different equipment and material used; let's make that American-
made. That's an amendment that will come later. But right now, deal
with the royalty issues so that us Americans, all of us, 300 million,
will get our share of the extraordinary value that this mine will
produce.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2
minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Benishek), a member of the
Natural Resources Committee whose district has a long mining history.
Mr. BENISHEK. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I came to the floor to speak in favor of this bill
because frankly, I find it hard to believe what I'm hearing from those
arguing against it.
Does anyone honestly believe that passing this bill will create jobs
only for an army of robots? Are you kidding me? Robots? According to
one study, this bill may create as many as 3,000 real jobs for humans.
Mr. Chairman, my district in northern Michigan is a long way from
Arizona, but we, too, have a rich history of copper mining. Today,
people need copper in their daily lives, and the growing demand means
we need more mines, creating more jobs in Arizona and Michigan. My own
father was a miner.
Congress needs to demonstrate to the American people that it supports
mining jobs and developing our Nation's resources, as this bill does in
a way that is both environmentally responsible and culturally
respectful.
I urge passage of this bill.
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time remains?
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. LaTourette). The gentleman from Arizona has 8
minutes and the gentleman from Washington has 13\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. GRIJALVA. Let me, if I may, yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I'm afraid that this bill is another
example of the majority having no real jobs agenda. The Republicans are
claiming that this bill will create jobs in Arizona. And, of course,
our whole country wants more jobs anywhere we can get them. But the
truth is no one really knows the exact economic impact of this mine.
The only jobs number that we have to go on are those provided by Rio
Tinto, the foreign parent company of Resolution Copper. When this
proposal was first developed in 2005, it was reported that the mine
would create about 450 jobs. Without any explanation, no data, no
analysis, the estimates have skyrocketed to over 1,200 jobs or even
6,000 jobs. That sounds enticing, particularly to a country where we
have 10 percent, 9 percent unemployment. But without any data to
support it, it just seems like speculation. You could just say it's
going to create a gazillion jobs. Why not? Anything to get the deal.
There's no way to know because the numbers are not supported by a
mining plan of operations or impartial economic documentation of any
kind. This bill is an affront to the National Environmental Policy Act.
Under this legislation, by the time any environmental review or
accurate job figures are available, the land will already be in private
hands. In fact, there is no job requirement in the bill. There is no
job requirement in the bill despite the vaunted promises of 6,000 jobs.
This bill doesn't include any local jobs requirement from the mining
company.
At a time when the whole country is looking to Congress to create
much-needed jobs, and we really are vulnerable to any promises of jobs,
our colleagues across the aisle should be focusing on creating jobs in
America, not just large, vaunted promises that really have no
background or substantiation. Our colleagues across the aisle are
spending time in this House to create a special interest carve-out for
a giant, multinational corporation. It's, by the way, owned by people
outside the United States.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2
minutes to another gentleman from Arizona who has been a longtime
supporter of this project, Mr. Flake.
Mr. FLAKE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
You know, listening to the debate, you wonder what bill we're
debating
[[Page H7097]]
here. The opposition seems to be talking about something completely
different. We heard under the rule debate yesterday and some of the
debate today that this won't create any jobs in Arizona, that somehow
these jobs will go to robots. I mean, come on, this isn't the Jetsons
doing this. I have no idea what's being talked about here.
Let me give you a couple of examples of those who are employed
currently. There are 500 people currently employed by Resolution on the
mine, 500, and 90 percent of them are Arizonans. So 90 percent of the
500 right now. There are an estimated 1,400 jobs directly related to
the mine or directly in the mine, and some 3,700 beyond that, ancillary
jobs, would come as a result of the mine.
Albo Guzman, he's a local Superior Trading contractor. He has several
local employees working for him on this project. He is a person, not a
robot.
Jeff Domlin, a Globe-based contractor whose company is doing much of
the reclamation work on the project.
Elizabeth Magallanez, she's a longtime resident.
Melissa Rabago, she was actually born in the hospital that was run by
the company on the previous mine that her father worked on, the Magma
project. That company hospital now serves as project headquarters. Two
of her sons work for a Resolution contractor.
Mike Alvarez, third generation from Superior, works as a map
technician. These are all real people, not robots. You didn't here me
say C3PO or anything like that. So the arguments that we hear coming
out of the opposition on this are just complete nonsense about this not
creating jobs.
And this talk about royalties; if we want to go in and change the
Mining Act of 1872, let's do it. I'll be there. A lot of us have argued
for that. But this is not the place to address the Mining Act of 1872.
Let's address that when it should be addressed, and let's address the
facts at hands. The facts are these: Jobs will be created. This is a
great bill. Let's pass it.
Mr. GRIJALVA. I thank my friend Mr. Flake.
And you're right; this isn't the Jetsons doing this. I probably would
feel a lot more comfortable if that were the case.
Given the time we have left, I will reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I have another speaker
coming to the floor; so I will yield myself such time as I may consume.
We have heard some curious arguments on the other side, as my
colleagues on this side have pointed out a few times, but let me just
talk about a couple of them where there's a charge that this will cost
the taxpayers.
We measure what the costs are to the taxpayers of this country by the
Congressional Budget Office, the CBO. And CBO, in looking at the land
exchange aspects of this and the other costs associated, have concluded
that the cost to the taxpayer is effectively zero. Now that's the
official agency that we go by, so when we hear that there's a whole
bunch of costs associated with that to the taxpayer, it's simply not
so.
What is even more ironic, Mr. Chairman, when they make that argument,
they ignore the fact that jobs that will be created here get paid
wages. Those wages then will be subjected to tax policies of the
Federal Government to where the Federal Government actually gets more
revenue. But that is ignored, it seems like all the time, when we hear
the other side argue on this issue.
{time} 1410
Let me talk about the issue of NEPA because that has been bandied
around a few times. The NEPA laws of our country are not changed at all
by the passage of this bill, but what we do is we put logic to the
process.
Mr. Chairman, as you know very well, our great government was
designed to have a dispersion of power. We sit in the legislative
branch and we make the policy of this country, and the executive branch
carries out that policy. It's been that way since our Republic was
founded. All we are saying is that when Congress directs an action--in
this case, an action of a land exchange--it shall not be subject to
NEPA because we are exercising our authority under the Constitution to
direct policy. Why should a NEPA policy be used to slow down a
direction that Congress has given? So that's the only part of the NEPA
policy that we are affecting in this bill.
Now, I want to say this very explicitly. Under this bill, all NEPA
laws as to the construction and the carrying on of this mine will be
subject to NEPA laws. And nothing is changed. Nothing is changed. So
when people throw around NEPA as one reason why we shouldn't adopt
this, that is simply a bogus argument.
Finally, I just want to make one more point here about this being a
giveaway. In fact, there are some of my persuasion that may have a bit
of heartburn with this because, as a matter of fact, we are giving the
Federal Government more land than we are exchanging for private
development of this copper land.
Mr. Chairman, I know you've heard the arguments over this in the time
you and I have been here, and yet this is something that I think is
worthy of support because we do want to make sure that those lands are
protected in a way. So to suggest that there's a giveaway here is
simply not the case because the exchange is of equal value.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes to a
former member of the Natural Resources Committee, the gentleman from
New Mexico (Mr. Pearce).
Mr. PEARCE. I thank the gentleman from Washington for yielding.
Every day in my district in New Mexico, people ask: What's gone wrong
with the American economy?
What's gone wrong with the American economy is that the Federal
Government spends $3.6 trillion a year and it brings in $2.1 trillion a
year.
So they ask then: Why are the revenues to the government down? I
said: Well, because jobs are down.
They want to know why jobs are down. And I can point to the
resistance to this bill and explain why jobs are down.
This is a very commonsense bill. It says we're going to take almost
twice as much land and exchange it to a private company, from a private
company, would give them half as much land and let them have a copper
mine there. The Americans are currently importing about 32 percent of
all the copper that we use. This one mine, if the resistance were
dropped and were put into operation, would provide 25 percent of the
domestic copper demand for the next 50 years.
Why would we be contesting this? I've heard my friend on the other
side of the aisle say it's because there are robots working in the
mine. The mines I go in--and I will guarantee you this mine is going to
be conducted with engineers, with mechanics. It's going to be conducted
with blue-collar labor down the hole working in the mine. They've got
better machinery than they did a hundred years ago. They're not there
working with pick and shovel. But these are real jobs--1,200 to 15,000
jobs long term, and 2,000 to 3,000 construction jobs. It's a $4 billion
increase in our economy and we can't get agreement.
This town talks so much about jobs on both sides of the aisle, and we
hear the President moving around the country. I haven't heard the
President once come out and say: At least free up these 1,200 jobs. I
will sign this jobs package. Instead, he wants to raise taxes to
increase jobs. That's his idea.
This is a private investment in a private land where they create a
lot of long-term jobs. More than that, they make it self-sufficient.
Now, the price of copper is almost four times what it was 10 years
ago. The most recent report is that people are stealing copper bells
off of churches and cutting them up and selling them. Copper is in that
great a demand and we still find resistance from our friends on the
other side of the aisle for creating these jobs, and no one in the
American public seems to understand why.
What is this about? It's about agenda politics. It's about saying
that we're not going to let any development of resources go in the
West. The West has had its timber jobs choked off. It's had its mining
jobs choked off. It has resistance to the oil and gas jobs, and there
are people who are trying to shut that industry down. They're trying to
shut the coal mining jobs down. The West is starving for jobs. In fact,
we in
[[Page H7098]]
the Western Caucus have recently put out a report highlighting all of
the many ways we can create jobs now, called the ``Jobs Frontier.'' I
would recommend people go to it. This is one of the bills in the ``Jobs
Frontier.''
I heartily recommend that we pass H.R. 1904.
Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
As I indicated, much of the opposition to this legislation is coming
from Indian country. All the pueblos in New Mexico have opposed this
legislation. The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona is opposed to this
legislation. Twenty-six tribes from across the country, including
Texas, have opposed this legislation. They see an impact on sacred
sites, history, and culture that has not been factored into this
discussion, nor have native peoples, particularly those affected nearby
in San Carlos. Apaches have been allowed to run what is important,
which is the government-to-government consultation.
Just a point. The chairman, my friend from the Natural Resources
Committee, mentioned the CBO score for this bill. There are also two
points to make. The CBO says this bill could cost the taxpayers up to
$5 billion over 10 years. This cost is not offset. CBO says the
payments to government could be significant, but the bill's provisions
don't allow CBO to score them accurately.
A straight royalty, for sure, would have certainty and would return
what was needed.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I would just respond that CBO also said
in their scoring that it's so insignificant, it's hard to measure.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Schweikert).
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Mr. Chairman, this is one of those moments where I
ran out of the Financial Services Committee where we were voting
because I thought it was important, being an Arizonan, but also
spending lots of time in this part of the State, which is a beautiful
part of the State. And many of these little communities there have
devastating unemployment, and they're literally furious with
Washington, D.C., for destroying their timber jobs and squeezing their
mining jobs. And then we stand here with something that, for a little
State like Arizona, could be billions and billions of dollars of
economic growth.
When you think about this one ore deposit could represent 20 percent
of the Nation's copper, how can we even be debating this when you also
realize an average single-family home uses about 440 pounds of copper?
Do you want housing? How about a car? A car uses 55 pounds of copper.
This is where it will come from.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield the gentleman an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. The last thing I want to say is my good friend
Congressman Gosar from northern Arizona, and actually from all over
Arizona, is deserving of a gigantic thank you here. To be a freshman
Congressman and to step into this body to deal with what ultimately is
sometimes a cantankerous issue but incredibly important to the Nation
and the Southwest and to those of us that live in and love Arizona,
this is important. This is a lot of jobs, a lot of economic growth.
Congressman Gosar gets a lot of credit for getting it this far.
{time} 1420
Mr. GRIJALVA. May I inquire, Mr. Chairman, how much time each side
has?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arizona has 3 minutes, and the
gentleman from Washington has 5 minutes.
Mr. GRIJALVA. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1
minute to the sponsor of this legislation, again, somebody who has been
absolutely tenacious on this issue, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Gosar).
Mr. GOSAR. I thank the chairman for yielding.
My legislation shows you can protect the land and the water and have
a strong economy with good jobs.
The land exchange will bring into Federal stewardship 5,500 acres of
high-priority conservation lands in exchange for the third largest
undeveloped copper deposit in the world. I'd like to speak about one in
particular.
The 7B Ranch, located in Pinal County, Arizona, is 3,073 acres
designated by the Nature Conservancy as one of the last great places on
Earth. And the Forest Service testified that this property was
``priceless''--and you will get a chance to see some of them.
This area is home to a free-flowing artesian spring-fed wetland
populated by lowland leopard frogs, nesting birds, and native fish. In
addition, this parcel is recognized by BirdLife International as an
``important bird area.'' These are amazing sites. These have
``priceless'' as their connotation.
Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me just talk about the opposition. It is not only with affection
for the State that I grew up in and that I was born in, but it's also
for the future of that State, and it's also for the future of important
rules and laws that have protected our environment for many years, and
to ensure that the jobs that we're talking about are not just a panacea
and a selling point as opposed to a reality.
The opposition to this Rio Tinto-Resolution Copper land exchange is
based on many factors, but let me just point out two. This is the
fourth version of the land exchange. It began with former colleague
Renzi, then Mr. Pastor, Ms. Kirkpatrick, and now my friend, Mr. Gosar,
from Arizona. They are not the same, none of those. The one major
difference is that, with the exception of the legislation before us,
the NEPA process, the ESI, the consultation all occurred before the
land exchange, not after. Once we do that process, if something comes
up that needs compliance and mitigation, it becomes subject to the
private property owner--a foreign company that will now have this
public land--to deal with that question, serious compliance issues, and
legal issues.
The other point is the water. Twelve years have already been banked
of the 20 that the mine would need in order to operate. The point
being, and protecting oak flats and other important areas of the water
supply for the region, that seems like a significant number. But to
bank water for this project on the outskirts of Phoenix does nothing to
mitigate the potential usage of water, the potential drain of water in
those three aquifers in that region, and the effect that it would have.
NEPA would tell us what that effect would be. A full study would tell
us what effect it is. But we're not having that done. So the
consequence is that we're working on supposition, and I think
supposition on this major land exchange is a huge mistake. We cannot
afford unintended consequences with this land deal.
And a full and open process. If we would have done that at the
initiation with the Renzi bill almost 8 years ago, we would be through
that process many, many years ago; and we would be perhaps talking
about a differently crafted piece of legislation. We aren't doing that.
And the last thing is, there is something sacred and spiritual about
this as well. Native people are not just complaining because they want
to complain. They are legitimately saying that we need to have
consultations, there should be full studies, and factored into the
decisionmaking must be the historical and cultural and religious sacred
areas that we need protected and ensured that they will be protected.
Those discussions have not occurred.
H.R. 1904 is a land giveaway. And the gentleman from New Mexico said
why our economy is in a bad place. Well, this kind of legislation tells
you why. It is a sweetheart deal for a multinational corporation
foreknown. It gives them breaks.
Mr. PEARCE. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GRIJALVA. I have 3 minutes, and I will be glad to as soon as I
have finished my summation, if I have time, sir.
But let me go over the points. This is a job for robots. I know it's
a touchy term for my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, but the
reality is Rio Tinto is a pioneer in automation. They've done it in
Australia; they've done it in other parts of the world. There is no
reason to believe that that
[[Page H7099]]
same pattern is not going to be applied to the mine that they own in
Resolution.
The sucking sound that we will be hearing will be the loss of water
levels in that area and the effect it will have. And it's a copper
caper, using unusual appraisal procedures which does not guarantee that
the company is going to pay any fair price for the billions of dollars
of copper they stand to receive from the American people.
Like I said earlier, something has to be sacred. H.R. 1904 trades
away many sites that are sacred to Native people. We've received pleas
from Indian Country over and over again; and we should deal with those
issues before the land exchange, not as this legislation has it, after.
Add insult to injury, we keep talking about jobs. There is an agenda
before this Congress to begin to immediately create jobs for the
American people. That is stalled--and from what I hear from leadership,
permanently derailed. So as the American people look for real
employment and real opportunity, we present a false hope in this
legislation, something that hasn't been vetted.
I urge opposition to the legislation, and I yield back the balance of
my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield myself the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 2 minutes.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I just want to make two
points in concluding debate before we go into the amendment process.
A reference was made to NEPA, and I responded to that just a bit
earlier where I simply said that there is a division of powers. And we
are making an action. With passage of this legislation signed into law
by the President, we have said that there will be a land exchange.
That's the policy of the country. Now, anything that happens on that
land after the exchange has happened is subject to NEPA review. I have
absolutely no problem with that and nothing in this bill changes that
process.
The second point I would want to make is on the issue of creation of
jobs. Honestly, when you hear the debate here on the floor on this
issue, that's probably emblematic of the debate that has been going on
in this Congress since day one. Apparently, the other side thinks that
the only way you can create jobs is raising taxes and expanding the
public sector. We believe that the best ways to create jobs and grow
our economy are based on the principles that have gotten the United
States from where we were when the Republic was created until now, by
relying on the private sector. This is a private sector investment on
lands that create a tremendous amount of wealth. This is a job creator,
and I think that this bill deserves passage.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BACA. Mr. Chair, I rise today to voice my strong opposition to
H.R. 1904, a bill that would authorize a land exchange in the state of
Arizona.
The lands impacted by this legislation contain many sites that are
sacred to our Nation's first peoples.
We in Congress have a responsibility to protect the rights of our
tribes to conduct religious ceremonies, and use their sacred sites.
Unfortunately, H.R. 1904 disregards this obligation.
Previously, Congress passed the Native American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act, NAGPRA, to protect the sacred sites of tribes. H.R.
1904 is a direct violation of the rights afforded to tribes by NAGPRA.
Both Presidents Eisenhower and Nixon worked to ensure the lands in
question were protected and available for tribes to worship. H.R. 1904
would reverse these past efforts.
To make matters worse, the legislation does not give the land in
question to an American-based company that would reinvest its profits
here in the United States.
Instead H.R. 1904 gives control of the land to foreign owned mining
corporations.
I urge my colleagues to ensure the religious rights of our Nation's
first peoples are respected in the Southwest, and vote no on H.R. 1904.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, today I voted against H.R. 1904,
legislation to give public lands away to a mining company without an
environmental review, without an independent appraisal of the value of
the land and the copper beneath it, and which waived all the safeguards
applied to other mining projects.
To the San Carlos Apache Tribe and other Tribes that live nearby,
these lands are sacred. In addition to the environmental devastation,
mining will devastate their relationship to this land. The Apache
Treaty of 1852 requires the U.S. to act to secure the permanent
prosperity and happiness of the Apache people. Instead, this bill
facilitates the destruction of their sacred land. This bill requires
consultation with tribes only after the exchange, which makes that
consultation a mere formality.
This bill will not create American jobs to help us out of this
recession. Any jobs will not begin for years--and most of the mining
will be done by machines deep underground. Rio Tinto has stated the
mine will be operated through its ``Mine of the Future'' program, which
is heavily automated, saving the company money by avoiding job
creation.
This legislation undermines basic protections of our public lands,
and arguments to the contrary are incorrect and misleading.
For instance, the legislation does not require any independent
evaluation of the value of the exchange at any time, taking the Rio
Tinto's word for the value of the land, the copper beneath it, and the
impacts mining will cause to the land, water resources, ecosystems, and
stability of the landscape. The Act exempts Rio Tinto from requirements
for bonding and clean-up of the mining project, leaving taxpayers with
the bill for the inevitable clean-up.
Even more misleading, the legislation does require the appearance of
compliance with NEPA, but only after the exchange has taken place,
which is too late to be any more than a formality. The Secretary will
have to prepare a single Environmental Impact Statement, which will be
the basis for all future decisions under applicable Federal laws and
regulations, but only after the exchange, with no discretion after
completion of the EIS. The Act prohibits the Secretary from considering
alternatives to specific mining activities, including alternatives that
would preserve cultural sites, and requires the Secretary to issue
permits for mineral exploration within 30 days of enactment of the act.
The Act requires Rio Tinto to submit a plan of operations, but does not
allow the Secretary to reject the plan, even if it is insufficient to
conduct even a limited review.
Lastly, there are no provisions to protect the water supplies in the
region from large-scale depletions from mining operations or
contamination. There are no protections for groundwater resources under
the San Carlos Apache Reservation, which is protected by the Apache
Treaty of 1872 and the San Carlos Apache Tribe Water Rights Settlement
Act of 1992.
The Act bypasses all normal administrative processes that other
mining companies are required to follow. This bill amounts to a land
giveaway to a company without a promise of American jobs anytime soon.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chair, I rise today to express my outrage and
disappointment about the bill before us, H.R. 1904.
In my 36 years in Congress I have seen many terrible bills, but this
legislation stands out as among the worst. In one fell swoop, this
legislation tramples on the rights of Indian tribes, damages our
environment and cheats American taxpayers.
Mr. Chair, this legislation is, quite simply, a travesty. It
authorizes a land exchange giving Resolution Copper, the subsidiary of
two foreign companies, the right to mine potentially billions of
dollars worth of copper from American land. In return, the American
people receive nothing, except the loss of our resources and damage to
our land.
My friends on the other side of the aisle like to talk local and
state rights, yet this legislation completely ignores the rights and
sovereignty of local Indian tribes. Mr. Chair, a large portion of the
proposed mine is considered sacred to local Indians. Tribes, nations,
pueblos and communities in Arizona, New Mexico, and across the country
adamantly oppose this transfer; however, H.R. 1904 ignores these
concerns, going so far as to waive federal statutes that require timely
consultation with affected tribes. Resolution Copper claims that they
can mine the land without disturbing these sites, a ridiculous
assertion that is at best naive and at worst, an outright lie.
Mr. Chair, many of us have fought long and hard to protect Indian
land and constitutionally retained rights. Over the years we have
strived to improve the government to government relationship between
the U.S. and Tribal Nations and I am proud of the progress we have
made. For this legislation to turn over rights to sacred Indian lands
to a foreign mining company, over the clear protests of Indian people
is outrageous and would be a shameful step in the wrong direction for
U.S.-Tribal relations.
We have no idea how the local environment and water resources would
be affected, because no impact analysis would be done until after the
transfer. Resolution Copper is estimating they will need as much water
as the entire city of Tempe on a yearly basis. It does not take
significant analysis to know that this could have potentially
devastating impacts on local water resources.
And what does our country get in return for all of this damage?
Nothing. Resolution Copper has estimated the mine to be worth several
billions of dollars, yet H.R. 1904 does not
[[Page H7100]]
require any royalties to be paid to the American taxpayer. Once they
have taken our copper, it can be shipped overseas to be processed and
utilized. First it was our jobs, now it's our natural resources. And
there are no guarantees that there will be any significant local job
impacts.
There are so many things wrong with this legislation that it is hard
to even mention them all. It is a disgrace that we are debating this
ill-conceived and destructive bill and I urge all my colleagues to
vehemently oppose it.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, the land swap in today's legislation would
grant two of the world's largest, foreign-owned mining companies--Rio
Tinto and BHP Billiton--mining rights to 760 acres of the Tonto
National Forest in Southeastern Arizona in exchange for other land the
companies currently own. This exchange is necessary for Rio Tinto and
BHP Billiton to gain access to significant copper deposits they believe
lie underneath the land in the Tonto National Forest.
Mr. Chair, I am not opposed to responsible domestic energy and
mineral production--but I am strongly opposed to this majority's
complete disregard for our environmental laws and this legislation's
failure to ensure American taxpayers get full value for the resources
at issue in this proposed transaction.
Specifically, H.R. 1904 would exempt this land swap from the
requirements of the National Environmental Protection Act--a law
specifically designed to evaluate the impacts of proposed actions on
our natural resources before public resources are sold to private
interests. The value of a thorough NEPA analysis is especially
significant in this case, where unanswered questions about the water
demands of the proposed mining operation are especially consequential
to the surrounding community. Furthermore, as we work to reduce our
national debt, I believe taxpayers have a right to fair compensation
for resources taken from public lands, something the convoluted
appraisal process called for in H.R. 1904 will almost certainly fail to
do.
Mr. Chair, if this land swap is truly in the interests of the
American people, it has nothing to fear from an appropriate
environmental review and should be expected to fairly compensate the
American taxpayer for the value of the resources taken from their land.
I urge a no vote.
Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chair, I rise today to express my opposition to
H.R. 1904, a bill that would transfer 2,400 acres of federal lands in
Southeast Arizona to a private copper mining company. There has not
been a thorough geological review to assess the impact of mining on
water resources or the surrounding communities and ecosystems.
Furthermore, the bill includes no protections or consideration for
native American tribes.
Since coming to Congress I have fought to ensure that American
taxpayers are properly reimbursed for resources like oil and gas
extracted from federal lands. This bill does nothing to appropriately
compensate American citizens and would instead give a single
multinational corporation the benefit from one of the largest copper
deposits in the world. Even more astonishing, the corporation
benefitting from copper resources cannot guarantee that the copper will
stay in America or that the mine will remain American owned.
This bill sets a dangerous precedent with regard to environmental
review and resource oversight. The Majority continues to fight against
preserving our nation's natural resources with legislation that
destroys the environment in favor of big corporations. I urge a no
vote.
The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule.
It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose
of amendment under the 5-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a
substitute printed in the bill, modified by the amendment printed in
part A of House Report 112-258. That amendment in the nature of a
substitute shall be considered as read.
The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as
follows:
H.R. 1904
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Southeast
Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings and purpose.
Sec. 3. Definitions.
Sec. 4. Land exchange.
Sec. 5. Conveyance and management of non-Federal land.
Sec. 6. Value adjustment payment to United States.
Sec. 7. Withdrawal.
Sec. 8. Apache leap.
Sec. 9. Conveyances to town of Superior, Arizona.
Sec. 10. Miscellaneous provisions.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) the land exchange furthers public objectives referenced
in section 206 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act
of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1716) including--
(A) promoting significant job and other economic
opportunities in a part of the State of Arizona that has a
long history of mining, but is currently experiencing high
unemployment rates and economic difficulties;
(B) facilitating the development of a world-class domestic
copper deposit capable of meeting a significant portion of
the annual United States demand for this strategic and
important mineral, in an area which has already been subject
to mining operations;
(C) significantly enhancing Federal, State, and local
revenue collections in a time of severe governmental budget
shortfalls;
(D) securing Federal ownership and protection of land with
significant fish and wildlife, recreational, scenic, water,
riparian, cultural, and other public values;
(E) assisting more efficient Federal land management via
Federal acquisition of land for addition to the Las Cienegas
and San Pedro National Conservation Areas, and to the Tonto
and Coconino National Forests;
(F) providing opportunity for community expansion and
economic diversification adjacent to the towns of Superior,
Miami, and Globe, Arizona; and
(G) protecting the cultural resources and other values of
the Apache Leap escarpment located near Superior, Arizona;
and
(2) the land exchange is, therefore, in the public
interest.
(b) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this Act to authorize,
direct, facilitate, and expedite the exchange of land between
Resolution Copper and the United States.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Apache leap.--The term ``Apache Leap'' means the
approximately 807 acres of land depicted on the map entitled
``Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of
2011-Apache Leap'' and dated March 2011.
(2) Federal land.--The term ``Federal land'' means the
approximately 2,422 acres of land located in Pinal County,
Arizona, depicted on the map entitled ``Southeast Arizona
Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011-Federal Parcel-Oak
Flat'' and dated March 2011.
(3) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the
meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).
(4) Non-federal land.--The term ``non-Federal land'' means
the parcels of land owned by Resolution Copper that are
described in section 5(a) and, if necessary to equalize the
land exchange under section 4, section 4(e)(2)(A)(i).
(5) Oak flat campground.--The term ``Oak Flat Campground''
means the approximately 50 acres of land comprising
approximately 16 developed campsites depicted on the map
entitled ``Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation
Act of 2011-Oak Flat Campground'' and dated March 2011.
(6) Oak flat withdrawal area.--The term ``Oak Flat
Withdrawal Area'' means the approximately 760 acres of land
depicted on the map entitled ``Southeast Arizona Land
Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011-Oak Flat Withdrawal
Area'' and dated March 2011.
(7) Resolution copper.--The term ``Resolution Copper''
means Resolution Copper Mining, LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company, including any successor, assign,
affiliate, member, or joint venturer of Resolution Copper
Mining, LLC.
(8) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Agriculture.
(9) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of Arizona.
(10) Town.--The term ``Town'' means the incorporated town
of Superior, Arizona.
SEC. 4. LAND EXCHANGE.
(a) In General.--Subject to the provisions of this Act, if
Resolution Copper offers to convey to the United States all
right, title, and interest of Resolution Copper in and to the
non-Federal land, the Secretary is authorized and directed to
convey to Resolution Copper, all right, title, and interest
of the United States in and to the Federal land.
(b) Conditions on Acceptance.--Title to any non-Federal
land conveyed by Resolution Copper to the United States under
this Act shall be in a form that--
(1) is acceptable to the Secretary, for land to be
administered by the Forest Service and the Secretary of the
Interior, for land to be administered by the Bureau of Land
Management; and
(2) conforms to the title approval standards of the
Attorney General of the United States applicable to land
acquisitions by the Federal Government.
(c) Consultation With Indian Tribes.--If not undertaken
prior to enactment of this Act, within 30 days of the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall engage in
government-to-government consultation with affected Indian
tribes concerning issues related to the land exchange, in
accordance with applicable laws (including regulations).
(d) Appraisals.--
(1) In general.--As soon as practicable after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary and Resolution Copper
shall select an appraiser to conduct appraisals of the
Federal land and non-Federal land in compliance with the
requirements of section 254.9 of title 36, Code of Federal
Regulations.
(2) Requirements.--
[[Page H7101]]
(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), an
appraisal prepared under this subsection shall be conducted
in accordance with nationally recognized appraisal standards,
including--
(i) the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land
Acquisitions; and
(ii) the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practice.
(B) Final appraised value.--After the final appraised
values of the Federal land and non-Federal land are
determined and approved by the Secretary, the Secretary shall
not be required to reappraise or update the final appraised
value--
(i) for a period of 3 years beginning on the date of the
approval by the Secretary of the final appraised value; or
(ii) at all, in accordance with section 254.14 of title 36,
Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation),
after an exchange agreement is entered into by Resolution
Copper and the Secretary.
(C) Improvements.--Any improvements made by Resolution
Copper prior to entering into an exchange agreement shall not
be included in the appraised value of the Federal land.
(D) Public review.--Before consummating the land exchange
under this Act, the Secretary shall make the appraisals of
the land to be exchanged (or a summary thereof) available for
public review.
(3) Appraisal information.--The appraisal prepared under
this subsection shall include a detailed income
capitalization approach analysis of the market value of the
Federal land which may be utilized, as appropriate, to
determine the value of the Federal land, and shall be the
basis for calculation of any payment under section 6.
(e) Equal Value Land Exchange.--
(1) In general.--The value of the Federal land and non-
Federal land to be exchanged under this Act shall be equal or
shall be equalized in accordance with this subsection.
(2) Surplus of federal land value.--
(A) In general.--If the final appraised value of the
Federal land exceeds the value of the non-Federal land,
Resolution Copper shall--
(i) convey additional non-Federal land in the State to the
Secretary or the Secretary of the Interior, consistent with
the requirements of this Act and subject to the approval of
the applicable Secretary;
(ii) make a cash payment to the United States; or
(iii) use a combination of the methods described in clauses
(i) and (ii), as agreed to by Resolution Copper, the
Secretary, and the Secretary of the Interior.
(B) Amount of payment.--The Secretary may accept a payment
in excess of 25 percent of the total value of the land or
interests conveyed, notwithstanding section 206(b) of the
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.
1716(b)).
(C) Disposition and use of proceeds.--Any amounts received
by the United States under this subparagraph shall be
deposited in the fund established under Public Law 90-171
(commonly known as the ``Sisk Act''; 16 U.S.C. 484a) and
shall be made available, in such amounts as are provided in
advance in appropriation Acts, to the Secretary for the
acquisition of land for addition to the National Forest
System.
(3) Surplus of non-federal land.--If the final appraised
value of the non-Federal land exceeds the value of the
Federal land--
(A) the United States shall not make a payment to
Resolution Copper to equalize the value; and
(B) except as provided in section 9(b)(2)(B), the surplus
value of the non-Federal land shall be considered to be a
donation by Resolution Copper to the United States.
(f) Oak Flat Withdrawal Area.--
(1) Permits.--Subject to the provisions of this subsection
and notwithstanding any withdrawal of the Oak Flat Withdrawal
Area from the mining, mineral leasing, or public land laws,
the Secretary, upon enactment of this Act, shall issue to
Resolution Copper--
(A) if so requested by Resolution Copper, within 30 days of
such request, a special use permit to carry out mineral
exploration activities under the Oak Flat Withdrawal Area
from existing drill pads located outside the Area, if the
activities would not disturb the surface of the Area; and
(B) if so requested by Resolution Copper, within 90 days of
such request, a special use permit to carry out mineral
exploration activities within the Oak Flat Withdrawal Area
(but not within the Oak Flat Campground), if the activities
are conducted from a single exploratory drill pad which is
located to reasonably minimize visual and noise impacts on
the Campground.
(2) Conditions.--Any activities undertaken in accordance
with this subsection shall be subject to such reasonable
terms and conditions as the Secretary may require.
(3) Termination.--The authorization for Resolution Copper
to undertake mineral exploration activities under this
subsection shall remain in effect until the Oak Flat
Withdrawal Area land is conveyed to Resolution Copper in
accordance with this Act.
(g) Costs.--As a condition of the land exchange under this
Act, Resolution Copper shall agree to pay, without
compensation, all costs that are--
(1) associated with the land exchange and any environmental
review document under subsection (j); and
(2) agreed to by the Secretary.
(h) Use of Federal Land.--The Federal land to be conveyed
to Resolution Copper under this Act shall be available to
Resolution Copper for mining and related activities subject
to and in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and
local laws pertaining to mining and related activities on
land in private ownership.
(i) Intent of Congress.--It is the intent of Congress that
the land exchange directed by this Act shall be consummated
not later than one year after the date of enactment of this
Act.
(j) Environmental Compliance.--Compliance with the
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) under this Act shall be as follows:
(1) Prior to commencing production in commercial quantities
of any valuable mineral from the Federal land conveyed to
Resolution Copper under this Act (except for any production
from exploration and mine development shafts, adits, and
tunnels needed to determine feasibility and pilot plant
testing of commercial production or to access the ore body
and tailing deposition areas), Resolution Copper shall submit
to the Secretary a proposed mine plan of operations.
(2) The Secretary shall, within 3 years of such submission,
complete preparation of an environmental review document in
accordance with section 102(2) of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4322(2)) which shall be used as
the basis for all decisions under applicable Federal laws,
rules and regulations regarding any Federal actions or
authorizations related to the proposed mine and mine plan of
operations of Resolution Copper, including the construction
of associated power, water, transportation, processing,
tailings, waste dump, and other ancillary facilities.
SEC. 5. CONVEYANCE AND MANAGEMENT OF NON-FEDERAL LAND.
(a) Conveyance.--On receipt of title to the Federal land,
Resolution Copper shall simultaneously convey--
(1) to the Secretary, all right, title, and interest that
the Secretary determines to be acceptable in and to--
(A) the approximately 147 acres of land located in Gila
County, Arizona, depicted on the map entitled ``Southeast
Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011-Non-
Federal Parcel-Turkey Creek'' and dated March 2011;
(B) the approximately 148 acres of land located in Yavapai
County, Arizona, depicted on the map entitled ``Southeast
Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011-Non-
Federal Parcel-Tangle Creek'' and dated March 2011;
(C) the approximately 149 acres of land located in Maricopa
County, Arizona, depicted on the map entitled ``Southeast
Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011-Non-
Federal Parcel-Cave Creek'' and dated March 2011;
(D) the approximately 640 acres of land located in Coconino
County, Arizona, depicted on the map entitled ``Southeast
Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011-Non-
Federal Parcel-East Clear Creek'' and dated March 2011; and
(E) the approximately 110 acres of land located in Pinal
County, Arizona, depicted on the map entitled ``Southeast
Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011-Non-
Federal Parcel-Apache Leap South End'' and dated March 2011;
and
(2) to the Secretary of the Interior, all right, title, and
interest that the Secretary of the Interior determines to be
acceptable in and to--
(A) the approximately 3,050 acres of land located in Pinal
County, Arizona, identified as ``Lands to DOI'' as generally
depicted on the map entitled ``Southeast Arizona Land
Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011-Non-Federal Parcel-
Lower San Pedro River'' and dated July 6, 2011;
(B) the approximately 160 acres of land located in Gila and
Pinal Counties, Arizona, identified as ``Lands to DOI'' as
generally depicted on the map entitled ``Southeast Arizona
Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011-Non-Federal
Parcel-Dripping Springs'' and dated July 6, 2011; and
(C) the approximately 940 acres of land located in Santa
Cruz County, Arizona, identified as ``Lands to DOI'' as
generally depicted on the map entitled ``Southeast Arizona
Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011-Non-Federal
Parcel-Appleton Ranch'' and dated July 6, 2011.
(b) Management of Acquired Land.--
(1) Land acquired by the secretary.--
(A) In general.--Land acquired by the Secretary under this
Act shall--
(i) become part of the national forest in which the land is
located; and
(ii) be administered in accordance with the laws applicable
to the National Forest System.
(B) Boundary revision.--On the acquisition of land by the
Secretary under this Act, the boundaries of the national
forest shall be modified to reflect the inclusion of the
acquired land.
(C) Land and water conservation fund.--For purposes of
section 7 of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965
(16 U.S.C. 4601-9), the boundaries of a national forest in
which land acquired by the Secretary is located shall be
deemed to be the boundaries of that forest as in existence on
January 1, 1965.
(2) Land acquired by the secretary of the interior.--
(A) San pedro national conservation area.--
(i) In general.--The land acquired by the Secretary of the
Interior under subsection (a)(2)(A) shall be added to, and
administered as part of, the San Pedro National Conservation
Area in accordance with the laws (including regulations)
applicable to the Conservation Area.
(ii) Management plan.--Not later than 2 years after the
date on which the land is acquired, the Secretary of the
Interior shall update the management plan for the San Pedro
National Conservation Area to reflect the management
requirements of the acquired land.
(B) Dripping springs.--Land acquired by the Secretary of
the Interior under subsection (a)(2)(B) shall be managed in
accordance with
[[Page H7102]]
the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.
1701 et seq.) and applicable land use plans.
(C) Las cienegas national conservation area.--Land acquired
by the Secretary of the Interior under subsection (a)(2)(C)
shall be added to, and administered as part of, the Las
Cienegas National Conservation Area in accordance with the
laws (including regulations) applicable to the Conservation
Area.
(c) Surrender of Rights.--In addition to the conveyance of
the non-Federal land to the United States under this Act, and
as a condition of the land exchange, Resolution Copper shall
surrender to the United States, without compensation, the
rights held by Resolution Copper under the mining laws and
other laws of the United States to commercially extract
minerals under Apache Leap.
SEC. 6. VALUE ADJUSTMENT PAYMENT TO UNITED STATES.
(a) Annual Production Reporting.--
(1) Report required.--As a condition of the land exchange
under this Act, Resolution Copper shall submit to the
Secretary of the Interior an annual report indicating the
quantity of locatable minerals produced during the preceding
calendar year in commercial quantities from the Federal land
conveyed to Resolution Copper under section 4. The first
report is required to be submitted not later than February 15
of the first calendar year beginning after the date of
commencement of production of valuable locatable minerals in
commercial quantities from such Federal land. The reports
shall be submitted February 15 of each calendar year
thereafter.
(2) Sharing reports with state.--The Secretary shall make
each report received under paragraph (1) available to the
State.
(3) Report contents.--The reports under paragraph (1) shall
comply with any recordkeeping and reporting requirements
prescribed by the Secretary or required by applicable Federal
laws in effect at the time of production.
(b) Payment on Production.--If the cumulative production of
valuable locatable minerals produced in commercial quantities
from the Federal land conveyed to Resolution Copper under
section 4 exceeds the quantity of production of locatable
minerals from the Federal land used in the income
capitalization approach analysis prepared under section
4(d)(3), Resolution Copper shall pay to the United States, by
not later than March 15 of each applicable calendar year, a
value adjustment payment for the quantity of excess
production at the same rate assumed for the income
capitalization approach analysis prepared under section
4(d)(3).
(c) State Law Unaffected.--Nothing in this section
modifies, expands, diminishes, amends, or otherwise affects
any State law relating to the imposition, application,
timing, or collection of a State excise or severance tax.
(d) Use of Funds.--
(1) Separate fund.--All funds paid to the United States
under this section shall be deposited in a special fund
established in the Treasury and shall be available, in such
amounts as are provided in advance in appropriation Acts, to
the Secretary and the Secretary of the Interior only for the
purposes authorized by paragraph (2).
(2) Authorized use.--Amounts in the special fund
established pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be used for
maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation projects for Forest
Service and Bureau of Land Management assets.
SEC. 7. WITHDRAWAL.
Subject to valid existing rights, Apache Leap and any land
acquired by the United States under this Act are withdrawn
from all forms of--
(1) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land
laws;
(2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
(3) disposition under the mineral leasing, mineral
materials, and geothermal leasing laws.
SEC. 8. APACHE LEAP.
(a) Management.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall manage Apache Leap to
preserve the natural character of Apache Leap and to protect
archeological and cultural resources located on Apache Leap.
(2) Special use permits.--The Secretary may issue to
Resolution Copper special use permits allowing Resolution
Copper to carry out underground activities (other than the
commercial extraction of minerals) under the surface of
Apache Leap that the Secretary determines would not disturb
the surface of the land, subject to any terms and conditions
that the Secretary may require.
(3) Fences; signage.--The Secretary may allow use of the
surface of Apache Leap for installation of fences, signs,
monitoring devices, or other measures necessary to protect
the health and safety of the public, protect resources
located on Apache Leap, or to ensure that activities
conducted under paragraph (2) do not affect the surface of
Apache Leap.
(b) Plan.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 3 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in consultation with
affected Indian tribes, the Town, Resolution Copper, and
other interested members of the public, shall prepare a
management plan for Apache Leap.
(2) Considerations.--In preparing the plan under paragraph
(1), the Secretary shall consider whether additional measures
are necessary to--
(A) protect the cultural, archaeological, or historical
resources of Apache Leap, including permanent or seasonal
closures of all or a portion of Apache Leap; and
(B) provide access for recreation.
(c) Mining Activities.--The provisions of this section
shall not impose additional restrictions on mining activities
carried out by Resolution Copper adjacent to, or outside of,
the Apache Leap area beyond those otherwise applicable to
mining activities on privately owned land under Federal,
State, and local laws, rules and regulations.
SEC. 9. CONVEYANCES TO TOWN OF SUPERIOR, ARIZONA.
(a) Conveyances.--On request from the Town and subject to
the provisions of this section, the Secretary shall convey to
the Town the following:
(1) Approximately 30 acres of land as depicted on the map
entitled ``Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation
Act of 2011-Federal Parcel-Fairview Cemetery'' and dated
March 2011.
(2) The reversionary interest and any reserved mineral
interest of the United States in the approximately 265 acres
of land located in Pinal County, Arizona, as depicted on the
map entitled ``Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and
Conservation Act of 2011-Federal Reversionary Interest-
Superior Airport'' and dated March 2011.
(3) The approximately 250 acres of land located in Pinal
County, Arizona, as depicted on the map entitled ``Southeast
Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011-Federal
Parcel-Superior Airport Contiguous Parcels'' and dated March
2011.
(b) Payment.--The Town shall pay to the Secretary the
market value for each parcel of land or interest in land
acquired under this section, as determined by appraisals
conducted in accordance with section 4(d).
(c) Sisk Act.--Any payment received by the Secretary from
the Town under this section shall be deposited in the fund
established under Public Law 90-171 (commonly known as the
``Sisk Act'') (16 U.S.C. 484a) and shall be made available,
in such amounts as are provided in advance in appropriation
Acts, to the Secretary for the acquisition of land for
addition to the National Forest System.
(d) Terms and Conditions.--The conveyances under this
section shall be subject to such terms and conditions as the
Secretary may require.
SEC. 10. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
(a) Revocation of Orders; Withdrawal.--
(1) Revocation of orders.--Any public land order that
withdraws the Federal land from appropriation or disposal
under a public land law shall be revoked to the extent
necessary to permit disposal of the land.
(2) Withdrawal.--On the date of enactment of this Act, if
the Federal land or any Federal interest in the non-Federal
land to be exchanged under section 4 is not withdrawn or
segregated from entry and appropriation under a public land
law (including mining and mineral leasing laws and the
Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 (30 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.)), the
land or interest shall be withdrawn, without further action
required by the Secretary concerned, from entry and
appropriation. The withdrawal shall be terminated--
(A) on the date of consummation of the land exchange; or
(B) if Resolution Copper notifies the Secretary in writing
that it has elected to withdraw from the land exchange
pursuant to section 206(d) of the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act of 1976, as amended (43 U.S.C. 1716(d)).
(3) Rights of resolution copper.--Nothing in this Act shall
interfere with, limit, or otherwise impair, the unpatented
mining claims or rights currently held by Resolution Copper
on the Federal land, nor in any way change, diminish,
qualify, or otherwise impact Resolution Copper's rights and
ability to conduct activities on the Federal land under such
unpatented mining claims and the general mining laws of the
United States, including the permitting or authorization of
such activities.
(b) Maps, Estimates, and Descriptions.--
(1) Minor errors.--The Secretary concerned and Resolution
Copper may correct, by mutual agreement, any minor errors in
any map, acreage estimate, or description of any land
conveyed or exchanged under this Act.
(2) Conflict.--If there is a conflict between a map, an
acreage estimate, or a description of land in this Act, the
map shall control unless the Secretary concerned and
Resolution Copper mutually agree otherwise.
(3) Availability.--On the date of enactment of this Act,
the Secretary shall file and make available for public
inspection in the Office of the Supervisor, Tonto National
Forest, each map referred to in this Act.
The Acting CHAIR. No amendment to the amendment in the nature of a
substitute is in order except those printed in part B of the report.
Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the
report, by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered read,
shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided
and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject
to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the
question.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Lujan
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1
printed in part B of House Report 112-258.
Mr. LUJAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 14, after line 12, insert the following new
subsection:
(k) Exclusion of Native American Sacred and Cultural
Sites.--The Federal land to
[[Page H7103]]
be conveyed under this section may not include any Native
American sacred or cultural site, whether surface or
subsurface, and the Secretary shall modify the map referred
to in section 3(2) to exclude all such sacred and cultural
sites, as identified by the Secretary in consultation with
Resolution Copper and affected Indian tribes.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 444, the gentleman
from New Mexico (Mr. Lujan) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Mexico.
Mr. LUJAN. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment is significant, but simple. My amendment
does not kill this project. As offered, it simply asks the Congress to
respect the religious and sacred sites of our tribal brothers and
sisters.
This bill does little, if anything, to offer protection to the sacred
sites in the area and does not offer true tribal consultation to the
tribes. We all know that consultation occurs before, not after,
decisions have already been made.
The tribes in this area believe Resolution Copper's block cave mining
method will have negative impacts on their sacred, cultural, and
traditional sites in the area.
{time} 1430
Again, this amendment will not kill this project. It would show
respect and offer protections to both surface and subsurface sites in
the proposed land conveyance.
More specifically, my amendment states that ``The Federal land to be
conveyed may not include any Native American sacred or cultural site,
whether surface or subsurface.'' This amendment would merely offer a
basic level of respect for many religious and cultural sites to the
many tribes in the region.
As our good friend, Congressman Kildee, reminds us daily, we have a
trust responsibility to our tribal brothers and sisters, and those who
oppose this responsibility will dismantle it piece by piece with a
scalpel and not all at once with an axe. This is what we're seeing
today, Mr. Chairman.
In its current form, H.R. 1904 would approve a Federal land exchange
to transfer ownership of 2,400 acres of land in the Tonto National
Forest to Resolution Copper for the purposes of block cave copper mine.
The Federal lands which are proposed to be exchanged, generally known
as Oak Flat, are part of the ancestral lands of the San Carlos Apache
tribe and other tribes in the region. These lands have unique
religious, traditional, and archaeological significance to many tribes
in southern Arizona. Behind me is a photo of one of those areas that's
most sacred, Apache Leap.
You've heard from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that
their bill offers protection for sacred, traditional, and cultural
sites in the proposed area to be exchanged, but I don't believe that to
be true. If it were true, then why is every major tribal organization
in the country opposing this bill?
It's because they do not believe these so-called protections to be
real. Opposing organizations include, but are not limited to, the
National Congress of American Indians, the United South and Eastern
Tribes, the All Indian Pueblo Council of New Mexico, the San Carlos
Apache Tribe, the Jicarilla and Mescalero Apache Tribes of New Mexico,
and many other tribes across the country.
Mr. Chairman, all of these organizations and tribal leaders know that
the degradation of these cultural sites means a loss of identity and
culture, not to mention utter disrespect for the religion and history
of the tribes connected to this area.
Just to be clear: Supporting my amendment will not kill the project.
It would simply mean respecting and preserving the religious, cultural,
and archeological and historic significance of the lands that mean so
much to the tribes in the region.
I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, when I became chairman of
the Committee on Natural Resources this last January, I established a
new subcommittee on Indian and Alaska Native Affairs. The purpose was
to ensure a special forum for the issues and concerns important to
Indian tribes and native people. I respect the views and special
concerns of Indian tribes, and it's important that they have a role and
are consulted in decisions that affect the people on their reservation
lands.
This bill before the House today explicitly includes a section
requiring government-to-government consultation. Section 4c, Mr.
Chairman, of the bill is titled, and I quote, ``Consultation with
Indian tribes.'' Consultation must occur before the mine operations
ever begin.
To repeat, the mine cannot happen without consultation with
interested tribes. To be clear, the mine is a site that is not located
on reservation land. The closest Native American reservation is the San
Carlos Apache, located more than 20 miles east of the mine site.
And it should be noted too that where this mine is proposed to be
developed is right in the heart of what we call Arizona's historic
copper triangle right here. These orange dots here are where copper is
mined or quarried right now. This is the proposed site of the mine. And
the San Carlos Apache reservation is up here. As you can see, there's
activity between here and the San Carlos reservation.
The real effect of this amendment would be to allow the Department
Secretary to veto and block the project on the subjective grounds that
a previously identified cultural site exists on these lands. As stated
previously, this is a geographic triangle that's historically home to
numerous mines.
I might add too, Mr. Chairman, the Forest Service completed an
environmental assessment in 2008, 3 years ago, in which, and I quote,
``several attempts were made to identify sacred sites and effects on
ceremonial use of sacred sites.'' The official conclusion was a Finding
of No Significant Impact, and that finding was sustained on appeal.
Furthermore, the terms ``Native American,'' ``sacred,'' and
``cultural'' in the amendment offered by my friend from New Mexico are
undefined, and thus it cannot be predicted what effect this amendment
would have. It opens the door to time-consuming litigation and
subjective or political decisions.
In the land exchange within the bill, environmentally sensitive and
culturally important lands are given protection. Thousands of more
acres, as I alluded to earlier on, are added for the protection than
are made available for the development of this mine; the ratio is
roughly 2-1. The bill specifically and permanently, for example,
protects Apache Leap.
Because this bill ensures and requires tribal consultation before
development of the mine and because the real effect of the amendment
would be for political mischief, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on
the Lujan amendment.
Harrison Talgo, Sr.,
Bylas, AZ, October 21, 2011.
Hon. Eric Cantor,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Majority Leader Cantor: I am the former Chairman of
the San Carlos Apache Nation and served in the Tribal Council
for 16 years. Many times I have come before Congress as an
official representative of my government to present issues
affecting and in the best interest of the San Carlos Apache
Tribal Government. But today I write to you as a concerned
private citizen of Bylas, Arizona which is located within the
San Carlos Apache Tribal Reservation and want to express my
support of H.R. 1904, The Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and
Conservation Act of 2011.
The current Tribal leadership does not share my position. I
have tried very hard to understand why they oppose this
project when we are in such desperate need of jobs and
industry. I believe that traditional Apache values are not
mutually exclusive with economic development.
We are one of the poorest Indian tribes in the nation.
Seven in 10 eligible workers in the Tribe are unemployed.
Almost 80 percent of our people live in poverty. Alcoholism
and drug use are rampant and suicide rates are high. The
average Apache male has a life expectancy of 54 years, about
20 years shorter than the average American male.
The proposed Resolution Copper Mine would bring hundreds of
new, high-paying jobs to our region. It represents progress
and hope and prosperity.
I have previously testified before Congress in support of
economic development
[[Page H7104]]
projects. I have done so in the face of opposition from other
leaders who have opposed these same opportunities on and near
the reservation. Some of those projects experienced costly
delays as a result of the Council's opposition, but they all
were built eventually. And to our benefit, they have all
hired Apaches. I am confident the Resolution project will be
no different. In fact, some members of the San Carlos Apache
Nation are already employed by the company and its
contractors.
I respect the Council's desire to protect sites that have
cultural or historical significance. I want that, too. But
Oak Flat is a long way from us, and I believe strongly that
it is possible for our traditional values to co-exist with
economic progress. In fact, I don't believe one can survive
without the other. Economic progress and prosperity leads to
a better standard of living, better health, better services
and better education. It increases our capacity to learn and
expands our cultural horizons. It gives us additional
resources to explore and study our past, to protect what we
hold sacred, to showcase and display those things that are
culturally important, and to help the outside world better
understand and appreciate the stories and traditions of our
fathers.
For all these reasons, I respectfully urge your support and
passage of the H.R. 1904.
Sincerely,
Harrison Talgo, Sr.,
Former Chairman, San Carlos Apache Nation.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LUJAN. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, look, just to be clear with this amendment, it does not
kill the project. The amendment simply states that the Secretary will
exclude sacred and cultural sites as identified by the Secretary. If
we're serious about protecting sacred sites and respecting tribes
across the country, I don't know why this is so complicated.
And the only area in the legislation, as we look at section 8 of the
bill, talks about preserving and consulting with tribes about Apache
Leap. But again, it's too little, too late. It's consulting after the
fact, not before the legislation is taken into effect.
And so, Mr. Chairman, it's as if we were going to go into a site,
say, the cathedral in Santa Fe or the Vatican in Rome, and they were
going to go and do something to that land, and they said, well, don't
worry, we have some other land that we're going to give you.
It's about the religious and sacred nature of these sites that we're
talking about. At the very least, and of its very essence, let's look
to see what we can do to preserve the government-to-government trust
responsibilities that we have with our tribes and respect those
religious sites, respect those sacred sites, and see what we can do to
work collectively.
Again, this isn't going to kill the project. Let's work together to
make sure that we respect the tribes that we're so honored to represent
here in the Congress.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 45
seconds to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce).
Mr. PEARCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
If the gentleman from New Mexico would answer a question, it's my
understanding that we have rock climbers who are always out there,
hikers up in there. That would be the equivalent of allowing people to
rappel down the side of the Washington Monument, but I've never heard
an objection from anyone to exclude those kinds of activities. And so
it comes across just a little bit strange that we would talk about
limiting one activity, while people are crawling and rappelling down
these sites already.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I understand the other side
has yielded back their time.
How much time do I have left?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 1 minute remaining.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I am more than happy to yield that 1
minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I find it very interesting that my opponent,
or our opponent on the other side, actually focuses a picture of Apache
Leap, which is specifically excluded from this legislation. Therefore,
when we talk about, in regards to protecting the sites, we have done
so. As far as the consultation is concerned, we have done
consultations.
Mr. LUJAN. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GOSAR. No, I will not yield.
Mr. LUJAN. Mr. Chairman, we know that that's not in here.
Mr. GOSAR. That is Apache Leap.
The Acting CHAIR. The time is controlled by the gentleman from
Arizona, and the Chair would ask all Members to respect that.
Mr. GOSAR. The point of reference is that we cite all the Native
tribes. They are far from being in unison. In fact, during our
conversation within the Resources Committee, former tribal chairman and
16-year tribal Councilman Harrison Talgo testified that the traditional
Apache values are not mutually exclusive with economic development.
Given that the San Carlos Apache is one of the most impoverished
tribes in the Nation, with unemployment rates around 70 percent and
poverty affecting every facet of tribal members' life, I couldn't agree
more with Mr. Talgo.
Mr. Talgo also points out that Oak Flat, the campground in question,
is a long way from the reservation. He also pointed out the majority of
tribal members he speaks about in this project support this project.
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Chair, as a member of the Native American Caucus,
I rise today in strong support of the amendment to H.R. 1904, the
Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011, offered
by Congressman Lujan of Arizona.
The Lujan Amendment exempts Native American sacred and cultural sites
from inclusion in the land transfer proposed by this bill.
As it stands, H.R. 1904 is fundamentally unfair to the San Carlos
Apache Tribe and other tribes in the region, who have inhabited this
land for thousands of years. This bill waives compliance with federal
statutes that require timely consultation with affected tribes, who now
face the prospect of witnessing their ancestral lands of unique
archaeological and religious significance fall victim to destructive
mining practices.
These techniques involve utilizing controlled cave-in deep
underground, which can cause massive depressions at the surface and
forever scar the landscape. Archaeological sites and religious lands
would be forever ruined and unrecognizable.
Other surveys have identified Civilian Conservation Corps sites and
structures eligible for inclusion in the National Register for Historic
Places which could also be destroyed by the proposed mining project.
Mr. Chair, H.R. 1904 has been called a ``special-interest'' bill
whereby a private company, Resolution Copper, which is actually a joint
subsidiary of two foreign-owned mining companies. Resolution Copper
would receive federal land worth billions of dollars without having to
pay royalties on any mineral wealth it extracts.
Furthermore, there are no guarantees that the company would even hire
locally, process the ore in the United States, or purchase equipment
made in America.
H.R. 1904 excludes the one special interest with an undeniable right
in this debate--the Native American tribes--from a decision that
affects their community at the absolute deepest level.
I strongly support the Lujan Amendment and oppose the underlying
bill. I urge my colleagues to do the same.
{time} 1440
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Lujan).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. LUJAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Mexico
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Markey
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2
printed in part B of House Report 112-258.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk made in
order under the rule.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 19, beginning line 8, strike section 6 (value
adjustment payment to United States) and insert the following
new section:
SEC. 6. ROYALTY PAYMENT TO UNITED STATES FOR MINERALS
PRODUCED FROM CONVEYED FEDERAL LAND.
(a) Royalty Payment Required.--As a condition of the land
exchange under this Act, Resolution Copper shall pay to the
United States, by not later than March 15 of each calendar
year, a royalty payment in an amount equal to 8 percent of
the value of the quantity of locatable minerals produced
during the preceding calendar year from the
[[Page H7105]]
Federal land conveyed to Resolution Copper under section 4,
as reported under subsection (b).
(b) Annual Production Reporting to Determine Royalty
Payment.--
(1) Report required.--Resolution Copper shall submit to the
Secretary of the Interior an annual report indicating the
quantity of locatable minerals produced in commercial
quantities from the Federal land conveyed to Resolution
Copper under section 4.
(2) Submission deadline.--The first report under paragraph
(1) shall be submitted not later than February 15 of the
first calendar year beginning after the date of commencement
of production of valuable locatable minerals in commercial
quantities from the Federal land conveyed to Resolution
Copper under section 4 and cover the preceding calendar year.
Subsequent reports shall be submitted each February 15
thereafter and cover the preceding calendar year.
(3) Sharing reports with state.--The Secretary shall make
each report received under paragraph (1) available to the
State.
(4) Report contents.--The reports under paragraph (1) shall
comply with any recordkeeping and reporting requirements
prescribed by the Secretary or required by applicable Federal
laws in effect at the time of production.
(c) Deposit of Funds.--All funds paid to the United States
under this section shall be deposited in the general fund of
the Treasury.
(d) State Law Unaffected.--Nothing in this section
modifies, expands, diminishes, amends, or otherwise affects
any State law relating to the imposition, application,
timing, or collection of a State excise or severance tax.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 444, the gentleman
from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, there are two versions of this land bill:
one with the Markey amendment and one without the Markey amendment. The
difference is the version with the Markey amendment is a deal the
American taxpayers should take. Without my amendment, this is a deal
that takes the taxpayers.
Without the Markey amendment, this land deal is a shell game, all
about misdirection and surprise outcomes. We are urged to keep our eye
on the beautiful surface acres the Federal Government would get in this
deal and the unique payment scheme included in the bill. This is like
the guy on the street who tells you to watch his right hand while his
left hand is picking your pocket.
This is not about the surface. This is about the copper and whether
Rio Tinto will have to pay its fair value. And the fact is the payment
scheme in this bill is completely--let me say it again--the payment
scheme in this bill is completely speculative. It will be based on
information only the company has access to and is subject to serious
manipulation.
In the end, Rio Tinto could end up paying absolutely nothing for the
massive windfall they stand to receive from this legislation. With the
Markey amendment, this bill is simple. It would require no guesswork on
the part of the taxpayers. It would allow for no manipulation that
could shortchange the American taxpayer.
My amendment strikes the convoluted payment scheme in this bill and
replaces it with a simple 8 percent royalty on the copper produced each
year from this mine. This is the American people's copper. It's not
their copper. It's the American people's. What are they going to get
out of this? How about 8 percent? Can we give the taxpayer 8 percent?
Now, we don't know how much copper exactly is down there. The benefit
of my amendment is we don't need to know ahead of time. If Rio Tinto
makes $1, then they owe the taxpayer a nickel and three pennies, and if
they make $8 billion, the Treasury gets $640 million.
Now, the company will argue a royalty is unfair. Well, guess who is
already paying royalties, Mr. Chairman. Oil and gas companies pay 12.5
percent when they drill on the taxpayers' land. 12.5 percent, that's
what ExxonMobil pays. That's what Shell pays. But do you know who else
pays the royalty? Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton when they mine on State
land. So, if you're in Colorado, you're in Wyoming and you're on State
land, you're paying a royalty. But, no, let's go to the American
taxpayers' land. Those same companies that pay to the States don't pay
to Uncle Sam.
And the revenue from a royalty is money we can use. What can we use
the money for? Make sure we don't have to cut Medicare payments for
Grandma. Make sure we have student loans for kids to be able to go to
college. That's what the money should be used for. Should it just be
pocketed by Rio Tinto, by these companies?
So I ask my colleagues, which deal do you want to go home with and
tell your constituents you were for? The deal where they got some nice
lands in Arizona while a foreign mining company got billions in copper,
or the deal where they got the land plus hundreds of millions of
dollars in royalty payments for the U.S. taxpayer?
With the Markey amendment, we in Congress are responsible stewards
doing our due diligence to protect the Federal Treasury to get the
taxpayer what they're owed. Without the Markey amendment, this House
looks like the old Keystone Kops, bumbling around in circles while
billions walk right out the door that should be in the pockets of every
taxpayer in this country.
We have a supercommittee debating how much they're going to cut poor
people, students, national defense, what we're going to spend on the
protection of our country, and how many policemen we can afford to
have. Meanwhile, out here on the House floor, we're going to turn a
blind eye to billions of dollars just going right out the floor of the
House here today into the pockets of Rio Tinto, into the pockets of a
foreign corporation. That's not right.
Vote for the Markey amendment. Capture this money for the American
taxpayer.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, in deference to my good friend from Massachusetts,
there is only one bill before us, and that's a bill without the Markey
amendment, and I hope it stays that way.
This amendment requires a company to pay for the minerals twice. The
value of the copper is already included in the appraised value of the
land under current law of the United States. That's the law. Section
4(e) of the bill requires the developer to pay full market value for
the Federal land and minerals within. Under the requirements of this
bill, the United States is fully compensated for the copper up front.
But, if, in fact, this vein is larger than what is anticipated, there
is a further provision that says that should it exceed that appraised
value, the developer, i.e., the copper mining company, is required to
compensate the United States through annual assessments. As the market
moves forward, the Markey amendment adds an 8 percent royalty to the
full, to the top payment. This would mean that the company would be
paying a huge premium in addition to what current law is of the value
they have already paid.
I have to tell you, Mr. Chairman, this is unprecedented in any law or
any activity regarding mining.
This amendment isn't about ensuring the full payment to the United
States, because that is required in the bill under current law. What
this amendment really does is send a signal to companies that want to
invest in Federal lands, to utilize the resources we have, that they
are not welcome in the United States. They are not welcome, and they
should go overseas where they are welcome, taking American jobs with
them and making us less economically viable as a country and also
costing us jobs.
With that, I would yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Flake).
Mr. FLAKE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I would just point out, if we want to address the royalty issue on
this and other mining ventures, let's address the Mining Act of 1872.
There were attempts to do this in the nineties, attempts to increase
royalties or impose a 5 percent royalty, and many on the other side of
the aisle opposed that measure. And so there have been a few attempts.
I would encourage, let's go back to it. But this is not the place to
[[Page H7106]]
do it. We can't do it here on this one bill.
And make no mistake about it; this is an attempt to kill this
legislation, nothing else. It's not an attempt to garner the taxpayer
more revenue. This is an attempt to kill the bill.
I would encourage rejection of the amendment and adoption of the
bill.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. How much time do I have remaining, Mr.
Chairman?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 2 minutes.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce).
Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chairman, it is interesting to listen to the
arguments. To listen to the arguments that were given just now on why
we should support the Markey amendment, you would believe that
Republicans have set up this massive scheme for avoiding payment for
royalties.
Now, this law has been in place on the books for a very long time.
But additionally, I remember that the Democrats were in control, for 2
years, of the House, the Senate, and the White House, and they elected
not to pass this royalty bill because they knew it would damage the
economy.
Like the gentleman from Arizona just said, this is a single attempt
to kill this one bill. Twenty-five percent of the Nation's copper needs
could be met for the next 50 years, and they're trying to kill the
bill. That's what defies explanation.
{time} 1450
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance
of my time.
I just want to point out the unprecedented nature of this amendment.
Let's think about it.
The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) properly pointed out that we
operate under the 1872 act, and there is some discussion about that;
but to single out one company in one area in one State for this tax
sends a terrible, terrible signal to our economic system. If this were
to be passed, then what is sacred about this industry compared to any
other industry that somebody doesn't like? We will sponsor an amendment
to tax one individual company. Boy, that is going to instill
confidence, I can really see, in our economic system if an amendment
like this is adopted. It is a bad amendment, and it will have a
detrimental effect on this project.
I urge the defeat of the Markey amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts will be postponed.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Grijalva
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3
printed in part B of House Report 112-258.
Mr. GRIJALVA. I have an amendment at the desk made in order under the
rule.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 21, after line 8, insert the following:
(e) Additional Conditions Related to Mining Operations on
Conveyed Federal Land.--As additional conditions of the land
exchange under this Act, Resolution Copper shall agree to the
following:
(1) To locate and maintain the remote operation center for
mining operations on the conveyed Federal land in the town of
Superior, Arizona, for the duration of such operations.
(2) To actively recruit and provide an employment
preference for qualified applicants who reside in the State
as of date of the consummation of the land exchange for
employment positions related to mining operations on the
conveyed Federal land.
(3) To ensure that all locatable minerals produced in
commercial quantities from the conveyed Federal land remain
in the United States for processing and use.
(4) To ensure that all equipment used to mine or support
mining activities on the conveyed Federal Land is made in the
United States.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 444, the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, just for clarification of the record, the
reform of the Mining Act of 1872 was passed by this House when the
Democrats were in the majority, including the 8 percent royalty
requirement, and it met almost unanimous opposition from my Republican
colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
We have been told that the creation of jobs is the principal
motivation and justification for H.R. 1904, but when we examine these
jobs claims, they start to fall apart. We've heard varying figures from
450 initially to 3,700 and sometimes even 6,000. The numbers aren't
supported by the facts.
The amendment before the House right now that is offered by myself
and the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi) is the only way to
ensure that at least some jobs will be created in Arizona as a result
of this bill. Our amendment adds conditions to the land exchange to
guarantee job creation in the community of Superior, Arizona, and the
surrounding area and to strengthen the overall benefits to the U.S.
economy.
Section 1 of this amendment guarantees that the Remote Operations
Center is located in Superior. Modern mines, Rio Tinto in particular,
use a range of automation technology, and most of the human labor is
done off-site at the Remote Operations Center. Rio Tinto is presently
operating its Pilbara, Australia, mine from 800 miles away in Perth,
which is a metro area. Our amendment will ensure that this Remote
Operations Center is in and operates from Superior, Arizona.
If this legislation is truly about jobs and lifting up the local
economy, it is important to guarantee that local residents will have
access to the jobs that are created by this mine. Section 2 of our
amendment makes sure that Arizonans are considered first for
employment.
Without active recruitment and a hiring preference for area
residents, how do we know that the residents of the region and Arizona
will benefit from the project? Our amendment makes sure that that
happens. If this bill is really about jobs and our national interests,
then we should guarantee that the ore produced from this mine has a
direct impact on the U.S. economy.
Section 3 of the amendment will make sure that all raw material
extracted from the mine is processed in the United States, not in China
or in any other foreign country.
Finally, section 4 of this amendment, by ensuring that all equipment
used in the mine is made in the USA, puts American manufacturers before
foreign competitors. If the promise of job creation is to have even a
shred of credibility, the Grijalva-Garamendi amendment must be adopted
to ensure that the promises we have heard and the guarantees that have
been talked about this afternoon are, in fact, reality. This amendment
would make it a requirement.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The fundamental purpose of H.R. 1904 is to make copper in the United
States and to create thousands of American jobs.
This amendment is purposefully written to make this mine impossible
by mandating conditions that can't be achieved. As a result of that, if
this were to pass, the 500 people currently employed on the project
would lose their jobs, and the 3,700 total jobs that would be created
would never materialize.
The lead sponsor of this amendment has fought this proposed mine for
years. Listen, I respect his position, but this amendment isn't written
to improve the bill; it's intended to kill the mine. It is simply an
amendment in wolf's clothing. This amendment dictates specific mandates
on business operations, Mr. Chairman, that are unrealistic,
unprecedented, and unworkable. Let me give you an example.
[[Page H7107]]
It mandates the precise town in which the mine operations center must
be located. The Federal Government should not be dictating where and
only where a company is allowed to conduct its private business. If you
take this to the logical extreme, what's next? Will House Democrats
push a new law to require Apple to move from Cupertino to--where?--
Detroit? How ironic that when a company that is investing hundreds of
millions of its private dollars in Arizona to create thousands of
American jobs that Democrats in the District of Columbia want to
dictate where to operate its business.
On the other hand, there may be some consistency, because when
President Obama and House Democrats handed out over half a billion
stimulus dollars to the Fisker car company, they allowed that to be
built in Finland, which, Mr. Chairman, I might add, is not even a
State.
The amendment also requires that all copper produced from this mine
be used in the United States. Copper is a basic component used to
construct and build items. It's ridiculous to mandate that if 1 ounce
of copper goes into an item it violates this law, this amendment, to be
used outside the United States.
I am sensitive to this because I'm from Washington. If a Boeing plane
is using copper made from this mine, that Boeing plane can therefore
never fly out of the United States. If copper pipe is used in the
plumbing of a boat that's built in America, it can never ship American
goods in this global economy. What about copper jewelry, Mr. Chairman,
or an American-built car that includes copper components, or the
multitude of everyday items that we build in America and sell abroad
that contain copper?
The fact is that this amendment would make it impossible to use the
copper from this mine; but on the other hand, that's probably what the
intent is.
Finally, the amendment mandates that all equipment used to mine or
support mining activities be made in the United States. The purpose of
the bill is to allow the third largest undeveloped copper resource in
the world to be developed in America to create American jobs and
provide up to 25 percent of America's copper consumption. It defies
reason and logic to say that this economic boost to America can't
happen if one piece of equipment used for the mine isn't made in the
United States.
Let me go a little bit further, Mr. Chairman. The word ``equipment''
is never defined. Does it include everyday office items that will
support mine activities, such as paper or pencils? What about cell
phones for workers? iPhones and Blackberries, I might add, are not
manufactured in America.
So I urge my colleagues, therefore, to vote against this amendment,
which stands in the way of American copper production and American
copper creation.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1500
Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield the balance of my time to the cosponsor of the
amendment, the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 2
minutes.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Our worthy chairman has put up a dozen canards, none
of which really address the underlying issue here. This amendment is a
very simple one that would locate in Arizona the headquarters for this
mine. Is there something wrong with that? We are not moving this off to
Finland. Come on.
This amendment would also provide that the copper--and it's been
stated by the proponents of the bill that 25 percent of the copper
needs in the United States would come from this mine, so why not use
this copper in the United States? It seems to me to be perfectly
reasonable, despite all the canards that we just tossed around here a
few moments ago.
The other part of this has to do with the equipment. Is the worthy
gentleman from Washington opposed to using American-made equipment in
American mines? Is that what this is all about?
Yes, there may be some definitional problems. I'd be delighted to
work with you on the definitional problems, but the underlying point is
why would we set up all of this so that we could import the equipment
from China or Japan or some other place. Why not simply require that
this mine, which under the bill itself is an enormous giveaway of
American property, of property owned by the American people and the
enormous unparalleled giveaway of our value, why not simply require
that at least if they're going to be given all of this, they be
required to buy American-made equipment for the mine operation?
What's wrong with that? Why not make it in America? If this mine is
in America, why not use American-made equipment and hire Americans and,
in this case, Arizonans? You got a problem with hiring Arizonans? You
got a problem with locating in Arizona the headquarters of this mine,
or would you prefer London or maybe somewhere in Australia?
Come on. These are very simple amendments so that Americans can go to
work. These are very simple amendments so that this company will buy
American-made equipment to mine our copper which, under your proposal,
is given away.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield myself the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 1 minute.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I just want to respond to my good friend
from California about working with us if there is a flaw in this
amendment.
I would just remind him he offered a similar amendment in committee;
we brought up precisely the same arguments, precisely the same
arguments. And here we are, we trot out an amendment on the floor of
the House, and it's precisely the same amendment. I have a hard time
thinking that somebody wants to work with us when they trot out the
same amendment with the same arguments that got defeated twice.
I just want to mention this, Mr. Chairman. It's a worthy goal to buy
American and promote buy American, but not when that sentiment is used
to block a project to create American jobs and that results in America
being less dependent on foreign minerals that gets our economy going.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I urge defeat of this amendment, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee
do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Gosar) having assumed the chair, Mr. LaTourette, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1904) to
facilitate the efficient extraction of mineral resources in southeast
Arizona by authorizing and directing an exchange of Federal and non-
Federal land, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution
thereon.
____________________