[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 144 (Thursday, September 7, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H7135-H7146]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]





     DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2018

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 504 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, 
H.R. 3354.
  Will the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Jody B. Hice) kindly resume the 
chair.

                              {time}  1719


                     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 further consideration of 
the bill (H.R. 3354) making appropriations for the Department of the 
Interior, environment, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 2018, and for other purposes, with Mr. Jody B. Hice of 
Georgia (Acting Chair) in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today, 
amendment No. 113 printed in House Report 115-295 offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Gaetz) had been disposed of.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 504, no further amendment to the bill, 
as amended, shall be in order except those printed in House Report 115-
297, amendments en bloc described in section 3 of House Resolution 504, 
and available pro forma amendments described in section 4 of House 
Resolution 500.
  Each further amendment printed in the report shall be considered only 
in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member 
designated in the report, shall be consider as read, shall be debatable 
for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by 
the proponent and an opponent, may be withdrawn by the proponent at any 
time before action thereon, shall not be subject to amendment except as 
described in section 4 of House Resolution 500, and shall not be 
subject to a demand for division of the question.
  It shall be in order at any time for the chair of the Committee on 
Appropriations or his designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting 
of amendments printed in the report not earlier disposed of. Amendments 
en bloc shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 20 minutes 
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member 
of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees, shall 
not be subject to amendment, except as described in section 4 of House 
Resolution 500, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of 
the question.


     Amendments En Bloc No. 1 Offered by Mr. Calvert of California

  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution 
504 and as the designee of the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Frelinghuysen), I offer amendments en bloc. A list of the included 
amendments included in the en bloc is at the desk and has been agreed 
to by both sides.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 1 consisting of amendment Nos. 3, 7, 9, 10, 
11, 16, 17, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25, 26, 34, 35, 47, 48, 49, 58, and 79, 
printed in House Report No. 115-297, offered by Mr. Calvert of 
California:


             amendment no. 3 offered by mr. soto of florida

       Page 8, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $500,000) (increased by $500,000)''.


         amendment no. 7 offered by mr. courtney of connecticut

       Page 15, line 13, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $300,000) (increased by $300,000)''.


        amendment no. 9 offered by mr. cicilline of rhode island

       Page 15, line 13, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 39, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $2,000,000)''.


       amendment no. 10 offered by mr. clyburn of south carolina

       Page 16, line 4, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 16, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 39, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $2,000,000)''.


           amendment no. 11 offered by mr. heck of washington

       Page 16, line 4, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $5,500,000)''.
       Page 39, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $5,500,000)''.


         amendment no. 16 offered by mr. o'halleran of arizona

       Page 31, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 39, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $10,000,000)''.


       amendment no. 17 offered by ms. plaskett of virgin islands

       Page 39, line 1, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $995,000)''.
       Page 40, line 11, after the first dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $995,000)''.
       Page 40 line 11, after the second dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $977,000)''.
       Page 40, line 25, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $18,000)''.


    amendment no. 19 offered by mrs. carolyn b. maloney of new york

       Page 39, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 109, line 5, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.


    amendment no. 20 offered by mr. brendan f. boyle of pennsylvania

       Page 43, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $1,911,000)''.
       Page 104, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,911,000)''.


            amendment no. 22 offered by mr. welch of vermont

       Page 63, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $5,399,000)''.
       Page 64, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $4,399,000)''.
       Page 64, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $4,399,000)''.


            amendment no. 23 offered by mr. mast of florida

       Page 63, line 6, insert ``(increased by $1,086,000)'' after 
     the dollar amount.
       Page 64, line 1, insert ``(decreased by $1,086,000)'' after 
     the dollar amount.


            amendment no. 25 offered by mr. soto of florida

        Page 64, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $468,000) (increased by $468,000)''.


            amendment no. 26 offered by mr. mast of florida

       Page 64, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 67, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 74, line 4, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.


           amendment no. 34 offered by mr. polis of colorado

       Page 81, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $12,371,000)''.
       Page 85, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $12,371,000)''.
       Page 86, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,989,000)''.
       Page 86, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,382,000)''.


         amendment no. 35 offered by mr. o'halleran of arizona

       Page 95, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $47,000,000) (increased by $47,000,000)''.


          amendment no. 47 offered by ms. jackson lee of texas

       At the end of division A (before the short title), insert 
     the following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to limit outreach programs administered by the 
     Smithsonian Institution.


          amendment no. 48 offered by ms. jackson lee of texas

       At the end of division A, before the short title, add the 
     following new section:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act for 
     the ``DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR--National Park Service--national 
     recreation and preservation'' may be used in contravention of 
     section 320101 of title 54, United States Code.


          amendment no. 49 offered by ms. jackson lee of texas

       At the end of division A (before the short title), insert 
     the following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used may be used to eliminate the Urban Wildlife Refuge 
     Partnership.


           amendment no. 58 offered by ms. poliquin of maine

       At the end of division A (before the short title) insert 
     the following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available under this Act 
     may be used to enforce the export permission requirements of 
     section 9(d)(1) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 
     U.S.C. 1538(d)(1)) for members of the phylum Echinodermata 
     commonly known as sea urchins and sea cucumbers.


          amendment no. 79 offered by ms. speier of california

       At the end of division A (before the short title) insert 
     the following:


                       limitation on use of funds

       Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to finalize, implement, administer, or enforce the 
     proposed rule entitled ``Special Regulations, Areas of the 
     National Park Service, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, 
     Dog Management'' published by the National Park Service in 
     the Federal Register on February 24, 2016 (81 Fed. Reg. 9139 
     et seq.; Regulation Identifier No. 1024-AE16).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 504, the gentleman

[[Page H7136]]

from California (Mr. Calvert) and the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. 
McCollum) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Heck).
  Mr. HECK. Mr. Chairman, this amendment helps our local communities 
preserve and restore important historic sites through a successful 
Federal-State partnership.
  For more than 40 years, the Historic Preservation Fund has helped our 
States and Native Tribes leverage funds to revitalize communities and 
create opportunities for economic growth.
  In my district, for example, the Historic Preservation Fund was 
recently used to rehabilitate Olympia's historic Stoker House, which is 
now home to a small clinic that provides much-needed mental health 
counseling services.
  This year, funds were also used for Washington State's Youth Heritage 
Project in Tacoma, which introduced high school students to the 
maritime heritage of the Puget Sound region.
  This amendment would simply restore Historic Preservation funding to 
last year's levels. It is a small but effective Federal program that 
deserves continued support.
  This is a bipartisan amendment, and I am thankful to have the support 
of the co-chairs of the Historic Preservation Caucus, Congressmen 
Turner and Blumenauer, along with Congressmen Smith, Courtney, and 
Keating.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the amendment.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I have no opposition to this en bloc 
amendment moving forward, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the en bloc, and I 
urge its adoption.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. 
Poliquin).
  Mr. POLIQUIN. Mr. Chairman, I am thrilled to rise today to speak on 
behalf of my amendment which will remove unnecessary, redundant, and 
burdensome regulations from our sea urchins and sea cucumbers industry 
in the great State of Maine.
  Now, we have some of the most hardworking people, Mr. Chair, in our 
State, and some of them--about 600 or so of them--along with the 
processing part brave the cold, dark waters of the great State of Maine 
and dive for sea urchins and cucumbers and harvest them on a regular 
basis year-round. It is a process that is dangerous, but these 
delicacies are sold all around the world, mostly in the Far East, and 
we need to make sure our government helps these individuals work this 
terrific fishery that has been doing so well in the past.
  Now, I want to thank my colleague, Chellie Pingree, who represents 
the First District. I represent the Second District of Maine. She has 
been very helpful. We have worked together for quite some time on this 
issue in a bipartisan way to make sure, Mr. Chairman, that we don't 
have too many regulations that are unnecessary and expensive such that 
we can make sure this part of our fishery is healthy and goes forward.
  So, again, I appreciate, Mr. Chairman, very much your giving me this 
opportunity to speak on behalf of my amendment.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I have no other speakers present at this 
time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I have no other speakers. I rise in 
support of the amendments en bloc, and I urge its adoption.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, thank you for this opportunity to speak 
in support of my amendment to Division A of H.R. 3354, the ``Interior 
and Environment Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2018.''
  Let me also thank Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for 
their leadership in shepherding this bill to the floor.
  Among other agencies, this legislation funds the Smithsonian 
Institution, which operates our national museums, including the Air and 
Space Museum; the Museum of African Art; the Museum of the American 
Indian; and the National Portrait Gallery.
  The Smithsonian also operates another national treasure: the National 
Zoo.
  Mr. Chair, my amendment is simple but it sends a very important 
message from the Congress of the United States.
  The Jackson Lee Amendment simply provides that:
  ``Sec.___. None of the funds made available in this Act may be used 
to limit outreach programs administered by the Smithsonian 
Institution.''
  This amendment is identical to an amendment I offered to the Interior 
and Environment Appropriations Act for FY2008 (H.R. 2822) that was 
approved by voice vote on July 7, 2016.
  Mr. Chair, the Smithsonian's outreach programs bring Smithsonian 
scholars in art, history and science out of ``the nation's attic'' and 
into their own backyard.
  Each year, millions of Americans visit the Smithsonian in Washington, 
D.C.
  But in order to fulfill the Smithsonian's mission, ``the increase and 
diffusion of knowledge,'' the Smithsonian seeks to serve an even 
greater audience by bringing the Smithsonian to enclaves of communities 
who otherwise would be deprived of the vast amount of cultural history 
offered by the Smithsonian.
  The Smithsonian's outreach programs serve millions of Americans, 
thousands of communities, and hundreds of institutions in all 50 
states, through loans of objects, traveling exhibitions, and sharing of 
educational resources via publications, lectures and presentations, 
training programs, and websites.
  Smithsonian outreach programs work in close cooperation with 
Smithsonian museums and research centers, as well as with 144 affiliate 
institutions and others across the nation.
  The Smithsonian's outreach activities support community-based 
cultural and educational organizations around the country.
  They ensure a vital, recurring, and high-impact Smithsonian presence 
in all 50 states through the provision of traveling exhibitions and a 
network of affiliations.
  Smithsonian outreach programs increase connections between the 
Institution and targeted audiences (African American, Asian American, 
Latino, Native American, and new American) and provide kindergarten 
through college-age museum education and outreach opportunities.
  These outreach programs enhance K-12 science education programs, 
facilitate the Smithsonian's scholarly interactions with students and 
scholars at universities, museums, and other research institutions; and 
disseminate results related to the research and collections strengths 
of the Institution.
  The programs that provide the critical mass of Smithsonian outreach 
activity are:
  1. the Smithsonian Institution Traveling Exhibition Service (SITES);
  2. the Smithsonian Affiliations, the Smithsonian Center for Education 
and Museum Studies (SCEMS);
  3. National Science Resources Center (NSRC);
  4. the Smithsonian Institution Press (SIP);
  5. the Office of Fellowships (OF); and
  6. the Smithsonian Associates (TSA), which receives no federal 
funding.
  To achieve the goal of increasing public engagement, SITES directs 
some of its federal resources to develop Smithsonian Across America: A 
Celebration of National Pride.
  This ``mobile museum,'' which will feature Smithsonian artifacts from 
the most iconic (presidential portraits, historic American flags, Civil 
War records, astronaut uniforms, etc.) to the simplest items of 
everyday life (family quilts, prairie schoolhouse furnishings, historic 
lunch boxes, multilingual store front and street signs, etc.), has been 
a long-standing organizational priority of the Smithsonian.
  SITES ``mobile museum'' is the only traveling exhibit format able to 
guarantee audience growth and expanded geographic distribution during 
sustained periods of economic retrenchment, but also because it is 
imperative for the many exhibitors nationwide who are struggling 
financially yet eager to participate in Smithsonian outreach.
  For communities still struggling to fully recover from the economic 
downturn, the ability of museums to present temporary exhibitions, the 
``mobile museum'' promises to answer an ever-growing demand for 
Smithsonian shows in the field.
  A single, conventional SITES exhibit can reach a maximum of 12 
locations over a two- to three-year period.
  In contrast, a ``mobile museum'' exhibit can visit up to three venues 
per week in the course of only one year, at no cost to the host 
institution or community.
  The net result is an increase by 150 in the number of outreach 
locations to which SITES shows can travel annually.
  And in addition to its flexibility in making short-term stops in 
cities and towns from coast-to-coast, a ``mobile museum'' has the

[[Page H7137]]

advantage of being able to frequent the very locations where people 
live, work, and take part in leisure time activities.
  By establishing an exhibit presence in settings like these, SITES 
will not only increase its annual visitor participation by 1 million, 
but also advance a key Smithsonian performance objective: to develop 
exhibit approaches that address diverse audiences, including population 
groups not always affiliated with mainstream cultural institutions.
  SITES also will be the public exhibitions' face of the Smithsonian's 
National Museum of African American History and Culture, as that new 
Museum comes online.
  Providing national access to projects that will introduce the 
American public to the Museum's mission, SITES in FY 2008 will tour 
such stirring exhibitions as NASA ART: 50 Years of Exploration; 381 
Days: The Montgomery Bus Boycott Story; Beyond: Visions of Planetary 
Landscapes; The Way We Worked: Photographs from the National Archives; 
and More Than Words: Illustrated Letters from the Smithsonian's 
Archives of American Art.
  To meet the growing demand among smaller community and ethnic museums 
for an exhibition celebrating the Latino experience, SITES provided a 
scaled-down version of the National Museum of American History's 4,000-
square-foot exhibition about legendary entertainer Celia Cruz.
  Two 1,500-square-foot exhibitions, one about Crow Indian history and 
the other on basket traditions, will give Smithsonian visitors beyond 
Washington a taste of the Institution's critically acclaimed National 
Museum of the American Indian.
  Two more exhibits, ``In Plane View'' and ``Earth from Space,'' 
provided visitors an opportunity to experience the Smithsonian's 
recently opened, expansive National Air and Space Museum Udvar-Hazy 
Center.
  For almost 30 years, The Smithsonian Associates--the highly regarded 
educational arm of the Smithsonian Institution--has arranged Scholars 
in the Schools programs.
  Through this tremendously successful and well-received educational 
outreach program, the Smithsonian shares its staff--hundreds of experts 
in art, history and science--with the national community at a local 
level.
  The mission of Smithsonian Affiliations is to build a strong national 
network of museums and educational organizations in order to establish 
active and engaging relationships with communities throughout the 
country.
  There are currently 138 affiliates located in the United States, 
Puerto Rico, and Panama.
  By working with museums of diverse subject areas and scholarly 
disciplines, both emerging and well-established, Smithsonian 
Affiliations is building partnerships through which audiences and 
visitors everywhere will be able to share in the great wealth of the 
Smithsonian while building capacity and expertise in local communities.
  The National Science Resources Center (NSRC) strives to increase the 
number of ethnically diverse students participating in effective 
science programs based on NSRC products and services.
  The Center develops and implements a national outreach strategy that 
will increase the number of school districts (currently more than 800) 
that are implementing NSRC K-8 programs.
  The NSRC is striving to further enhance its program activity with a 
newly developed scientific outreach program introducing communities and 
school districts to science through literacy initiatives.
  In addition, through the building of the multicultural Alliance 
Initiative, the Smithsonian's outreach programs seek to develop new 
approaches to enable the public to gain access to Smithsonian 
collections, research, education, and public programs that reflect the 
diversity of the American people, including underserved audiences of 
ethnic populations and persons with disabilities.
  For all these reasons, Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of the Jackson Lee 
Amendment and thank Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for 
their courtesies, consideration, and very fine work in putting together 
this excellent legislation.
  Mr. Chair, I also want to thank you for this opportunity to speak in 
support of my amendments to Division A of H.R. 3354, the Interior and 
Environment Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2018 and to commend 
Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for their leadership in 
shepherding this bill through the legislative process.
  Among other agencies, this legislation funds the U.S. Forest Service, 
the National Park System, and the Smithsonian Institution, which 
operates our national museums including the National Zoo.
  Mr. Chair, my amendment is simple but it sends a very important 
message from the Congress of the United States.
  The Jackson Lee Amendment emphasizes the importance of Urban Wildlife 
Refuge Partnerships and urban forests, and preserves our ability to 
return urban areas to healthy and safe living environments for our 
children.
  Similar amendments were offered and accepted in the Interior and 
Environment Appropriations Acts for Fiscal Year 2017 (H.R. 2822), 
Fiscal Year 2008 (H.R. 2643), and Fiscal Year 2007 (H.R. 5386), and 
were adopted by voice vote.
  Mr. Chair, surveys indicate that some urban forests are in serious 
danger.
  In the past 30 years alone, we have lost 30 percent of all our urban 
trees--a loss of over 600 million trees.
  Eighty percent (80 percent) of the American population lives in the 
dense quarters of a city.
  Reforestation programs return a tool of nature to a concrete area 
that can help to remove air pollution, filter out chemicals and 
agricultural waste in water, and save communities millions of dollars 
in storm water management costs.
  I have certainly seen neighborhoods in Houston benefit from urban 
reforestation.
  In addition, havens of green in the middle of a city can have 
beneficial effects on a community's health, both physical and 
psychological, as well as increase property value of surrounding real 
estate.
  Reforestation of cities is an innovative way of combating urban 
sprawl and deterioration.
  Mr. Chair, a real commitment to enhancing our environment involves 
both the protection of existing natural resources and active support 
for restoration and improvement projects.
  Several years ago, American Forests, a leading conservation group, 
estimated that the tree cover lost in the greater Washington 
metropolitan area from 1973 to 1997 resulted in an additional 540 
million cubic feet of storm water runoff annually, which would have 
taken more than $1 billion in storm water control facilities to manage.
  Trees breathe in carbon dioxide, and produce oxygen.
  People breathe in oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide.
  A typical person consumes about 38 lb of oxygen per year.
  A healthy tree, say a 32 ft tall ash tree, can produce about 260 lb 
of oxygen annually--two trees supply the oxygen needs of a person for a 
year!
  Trees help reduce pollution by capturing particulates like dust and 
pollen with their leaves.
  A mature tree absorbs from 120 to 240 lbs of the small particles and 
gases of air pollution.
  Trees help combat the effects of ``greenhouse'' gases, the increased 
carbon dioxide produced from burning fossil fuels that is causing our 
atmosphere to ``heat up.''
  Trees help cool down the overall city environment by shading asphalt, 
concrete and metal surfaces.
  Buildings and paving in city centers create a heat-island effect.
  A mature tree canopy reduces air temperatures by about 5-10 degrees 
Fahrenheit.
  A 25 foot tree reduces annual heating and cooling costs of a typical 
residence by 8 to 12 percent, producing an average annual savings of 
$120 per American household.
  Proper tree plantings around buildings can slow winter winds, and 
reduce annual energy use for home heating by 4-22 percent.
  Mr. Chair, trees play a vital role in making our cities more 
sustainable and more livable.
  The Jackson Lee Amendment simply provides for continued support to 
programs like Urban Wildlife Refuge Partnerships that reforest our 
urban areas.
  For all these reasons, Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of the Jackson Lee 
Amendment and thank Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for 
their courtesies, consideration, and very fine work in putting together 
this legislation.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.


                Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Grijalva

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 
printed in House Report 115-297.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. 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 2, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $12,000,000)''.
       Page 66, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $12,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 504, 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, my amendment will restore $12 million in 
cuts to the already underfunded Superfund Enforcement program, with an 
equivalent cut to Bureau of Land Management's oil and gas leasing 
program.

[[Page H7138]]

  Superfund Enforcement is the epitome of Federal fiscal 
responsibility. It ensures that polluters pay for the cleanup and the 
mess they have caused.
  For over 35 years, EPA's Superfund Enforcement program has enabled 
thousands of site investigations at cleanups and has required viable 
responsible parties to either conduct the work or pay for the cleanups 
of these Superfund sites, in other words, hold parties accountable for 
the action and correction of their activities.

                              {time}  1730

  Any cuts to these funds clearly places corporate interests over that 
of the health and financial well-being of the American people.
  According to the EPA, the Superfund Enforcement program's efforts to 
negotiate settlement agreements and issue order for cleanup work 
accounts for approximately 69 percent of all the cleanup work currently 
underway at Superfund sites around this country.
  For every dollar the Superfund Enforcement program spends, private 
parties commit $8 toward cleanup work. The enforcement funding is 
essential in saving taxpayer dollars and the scarce resources of the 
Superfund trust fund to address truly abandoned and orphaned sites.
  As of August 1, 2017, there were 1,845 Superfund sites in the 
country. These sites include dangerous and toxic substances not just in 
my backyard but in everybody's backyard.
  Perhaps not surprisingly, Superfund sites tend to be located near 
lower income communities and around communities of color. Approximately 
53 million people live within 3 miles of a Superfund site in this 
country, and 46 percent of them live in poorer communities and 
communities of color. Fifteen percent of those residents live below the 
poverty level.
  According to a National Association of Clean Air Agencies report: 
``Without EPA's enforcement, companies could avoid reporting, or 
minimize the reported amount of toxic materials released to the 
environment.''
  Following one of the most catastrophic hurricanes to hit Texas, the 
EPA found that 13 Superfund sites have been flooded or could face 
damage as a result of Hurricane Harvey.
  Administrator Pruitt has repeatedly tried to justify his cuts to the 
agency by claiming that he wants the agency to go ``back to the 
basics.'' I can't think of anything more fundamental than cleaning up 
the most toxic sites in the Nation to protect the health of the people 
who live nearby in those communities.
  Restoring the ability of the EPA to self-sustain its core mission 
should be a no-brainer for those on both sides of the aisle. In order 
to restore the funding, my amendment will make a modest cut to the 
BLM's oil and gas program. This program is a massive giveaway to the 
very polluters that have made the existence of the Superfund program a 
necessity.
  Currently, 7,950 drilling permits are approved and not being used. 
There are 14.4 million acres of public land under lease and not 
producing. There is no justification to dole out more taxpayer money in 
order to expedite and speed up the permitting or leasing practices when 
we have that amount not being used and over close to 15 million acres 
under lease, as we speak.
  A report by Oil Change International recently found that the U.S. 
Government provided about $6 billion annually in financial support to 
the oil, gas, and coal industries between 2013 and 2015. Meanwhile, oil 
giant ExxonMobil's profits more than doubled in the first quarter of 
this year, which equaled $4.1 billion in profits for just that one 
quarter. They certainly did not need more taxpayer money while 
communities across the United States continue to be exposed to toxic 
and hazardous pollution.
  My amendment restores, in part, EPA's core mission to protect the 
public health of the American people and to hold all polluters 
responsible and liable for the environmental and health risks they 
cause.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment, and I reserve 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Mitchell). The gentleman from California is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I certainly appreciate the gentleman's 
support for robust funding of the Superfund program, particularly the 
cleanup program.
  There is a need for Congress to make progress to address the backlog 
of 1,300 sites on the national priority list. The bill proposes to do 
so with a $47.6 million increase for cleanup work. However, the 
amendment proposes merely to increase EPA's enforcement budget by $12 
million, with a stated objective of reducing BLM's oil and gas 
management program.
  The committee wrote a balanced bill, and I support the wise use of 
Federal oil and gas resources. Therefore, I oppose the amendment and 
urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, this is a prudent, necessary protection 
of public health and the environment. I urge a ``yes'' vote on this 
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I ask Members to vote ``no'' on 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.
  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 
printed in House Report 115-297.


                  Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Bacon

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 
printed in House Report 115-297.
  Mr. BACON. 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 8, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,974,000)''.
       Page 10, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $4,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 504, the gentleman 
from Nebraska (Mr. Bacon) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nebraska.
  Mr. BACON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer amendment No. 5. I plan to 
ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment. However, before I do, 
I would ask to engage Chairman Calvert in a brief colloquy.
  Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. CALVERT. I would be happy to engage the gentleman from Colorado 
in a colloquy.
  Mr. BACON. The Fish and Wildlife Service has a backlog of 49 species 
waiting to be down-listed or delisted. This issue is further compounded 
by the fact that an additional 839 species are overdue for their 
mandatory 5-year status review to determine if ESA protections need to 
continue.
  It is no wonder why States are frustrated that species are put on the 
list and rarely removed. To be more effective in species conservation, 
the Fish and Wildlife Service must address this backlog so States can 
better focus their recovery efforts.
  I respect the committee's progress made on this front, but I hope we 
can make further efforts to ensure the Fish and Wildlife Service is an 
effective ally in species conservation under EPA.
  Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman for his comments and for his 
amendment, and I fully agree with his concerns about the backlogs, but 
I have concerns with the proposed offset and appreciate the intention 
to withdraw it.
  The committee has made a concerted effort in recent years to fix 
these problems and has increased the recovery account by almost $4 
million over the last 2 years.
  Under House Republican pressure over the past 7 years, the Fish and 
Wildlife Service has delisted more species than all other previous 
years combined, but, clearly, we still have a long way to go.

[[Page H7139]]

  The Service has been directed and funded to complete all 5-year 
reviews within the period required by law, and the committee will 
continue to press the Service to see that they eliminate these 
backlogs.
  I thank the gentleman again for raising this issue, and I pledge to 
work with him on this.
  Mr. BACON. I thank the gentleman for his feedback and efforts, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my amendment No. 5.
  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of Ranking Member Lowey, 
I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. O'Halleran).
  Mr. O'HALLERAN. Mr. Chairman, my amendments address critical health 
needs in Indian Country by providing the Bureau of Indian Affairs and 
the Indian Health Service additional funding to complete projects.
  My first amendment ensures communities, including the Hopi Tribe in 
my district, have resources for funding to complete their arsenic 
medication project.
  My second amendment fulfills part of our trust relationship with 
federally recognized Tribes by ensuring Indian Health Service clinics 
and hospitals opening this year receive staffing and operations 
funding.
  In my district, the Gila River Health Care Red Tail Hawk Health 
Center is scheduled to be opened, but has not received staffing or 
operation funding. These healthcare facilities are badly needed to 
increase access to healthcare in the community.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to 
the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Ms. Plaskett).
  Ms. PLASKETT. Mr. Chairman, I am asking that we include my provision 
for raising funds for the Department of the Interior's assistance to 
territories in this en bloc amendment.
  This is a very modest uptick of the $1 million in Federal support for 
the United States territories, namely the Virgin Islands, Guam, 
Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa. It is crucial that the 
Federal Government keep its commitment to address the pressing needs of 
Americans living in these territories as we face grave natural disaster 
and security threats.
  Right now, thousands of people are feeling the effects of one of the 
most catastrophic hurricanes ever to strike the Caribbean region. 
Hurricane Irma has toppled buildings and leveled many homes. Making the 
Virgin Islands whole again will require massive and coordinated efforts 
spanning a long period of time.
  Much of the Federal Government's support for Americans in U.S. 
territories comes out of this territorial assistance account, with 
funding channeled toward necessary community facilities like schools, 
hospitals, and critical infrastructure systems. This support is 
imperative.
  After this hurricane, one of our hospitals is partially destroyed. 
The other faces egregious deferred maintenance issues due, in part, to 
an extremely high proportion of uncompensated care because the 
territories face inequitable treatment in Federal health programs like 
Medicaid and Medicare.
  Construction or repair to schools and hospitals account for much of 
the capital improvement project expenditures that come directly out of 
this assistance to the territories' account.
  We are asking that the territories receive the same funding that they 
have received previously, and please approve this amendment to reverse 
this cut as a simple matter of fairness to the territories.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.


     Amendments En Bloc No. 2 Offered by Mr. Calvert of California

  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution 
504, as the designee of the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Frelinghuysen), I rise to offer amendments en bloc No. 2. The list of 
the amendments included in the en bloc is at the desk and has been 
agreed to by both sides.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  Amendments en bloc No. 2 consisting of amendment Nos. 1, 6, 24, 28, 
33, 52, 54, and 70 printed in House Report 115-297, offered by Mr. 
Calvert of California:


           Amendment No. 1 Offered by Ms. McSally of Arizona

       Page 2, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $316,000)''.
       Page 64, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $364,700)''.


             Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Mast of Florida

       Page 8, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,200,000)''.
       Page 21, line 07, after the dollar amount, insert, 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.


            Amendment No. 24 Offered by Mr. Mast of Florida

       Page 63, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $979,000)''.
       Page 104 line 10, after the dollar amount, insert, 
     ``(increased by $979,000)''.


           Amendment No. 28 Offered by Ms. McSally of Arizona

       Page 64, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $3,831,000)''.
       Page 81, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 81, line 10, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.


       Amendment No. 33 Offered by Mr. McKinley of West Virginia

       Page 80, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $9,500,000)''.
       Page 81, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $5,000,000)''.
       Page 81, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $5,000,000)''.


            Amendment No. 52 Offered by Mr. Byrne of Alabama

       At the end of division A (before the short title) insert 
     the following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to propose to repeal section 105(a)(2) or section 
     105(b) of the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (43 
     U.S.C. 1331 note).


            Amendment No. 54 Offered by Mr. Burgess of Texas

       At the end of division A (before the short title), insert 
     the following:
       Sec. ____.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used by the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency to hire or pay the salary of any officer or 
     employee of the Environmental Protection Agency under 
     subsection (f) or (g) of section 207 of the Public Health 
     Service Act (42 U.S.C. 209) who is not already receiving pay 
     under either such subsection on the date of enactment of this 
     Act.


           Amendment No. 70 Offered by Mr. Emmer of Minnesota

       At the end of division A (before the short title), insert 
     the following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to withdraw National Forest System lands within the 
     Rainy River Watershed on the Superior National Forest from 
     disposition under United States mineral and geothermal 
     leasing laws.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 504, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Calvert) and the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. 
McCollum) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Minnesota (Mr. Emmer).
  Mr. EMMER. I thank the chairman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to support this en bloc amendment because 
it contains language I offered to support the hardworking people of 
Minnesota.
  Our amendment halts a last-minute effort by the previous 
administration that would restrict all leasing, exploration, and 
potential development of approximately 234,000 acres of Federal land in 
northeast Minnesota.
  If this ban were to take effect, it would have a devastating impact 
on the economy of my State, as well as our Nation as a whole.
  Minnesota's Department of Natural Resources has estimated there are 
roughly $500 billion worth of minerals in the area proposed for 
withdrawal, in addition to nearly $3 billion in royalty revenues for 
Minnesota's Permanent School Trust Fund, which would support almost 
900,000 K-12 students statewide.
  Through this amendment, we have a real opportunity to get the Federal 
Government out of the way so this land can remain available for future 
development to bring much-needed jobs and revenue to the great State of 
Minnesota.
  These efforts have garnered the support of more than 60 members of 
the Minnesota Legislature, from both parties I might add. We also have 
the backing of Chairman Bishop of the House Natural Resources 
Committee, as well as the chairman of the Energy and Mineral Resources 
Subcommittee, Representative Paul Gosar.

[[Page H7140]]

  


                              {time}  1745

  The National Mining Association, Mining Minnesota, and the 
Congressional Western Caucus are in favor of the amendment, and it 
could not be more in line with the current administration's priorities 
to create jobs and reinvigorate the American economy.
  Because we know that somehow, somewhere, someone will find a way to 
mine the precious metals in this area in a safe and environmentally 
responsible way----
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. EMMER. Mr. Chairman, when that happens, Minnesota deserves to 
have that opportunity and the jobs and economic prosperity that will 
ensue.
  Again, I thank the chairman for the opportunity to speak in support 
of my amendment, and I encourage everyone to support the en bloc 
package.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this en bloc 
amendment.
  I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Kilmer).
  Mr. KILMER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to this block of 
amendments, and I do appreciate that this block seeks to increase 
funding to address the National Park Service's $11.3 billion backlog of 
deferred maintenance.
  I firmly believe that we need to increase annual appropriations for 
our parks, but funding shouldn't come at the expense of other critical 
agency accounts.
  In my neck of the woods, the Olympic National Park, alone, has $150 
million in backlogged maintenance needs, so we are not going to 
accomplish this enormous goal a few million dollars at a time. The real 
solution is for Congress to provide a robust and dedicated funding 
source, and that is why I partnered with Representative Hurd and my 
fellow Washingtonian, Representative Reichert, to introduce the 
National Park Service Legacy Act, which will create a dedicated source 
of funding to address the National Park Service maintenance backlog. 
This bipartisan and bicameral bill is funded through unobligated 
mineral royalties and would generate up to $500 million, annually, 
through 2047.
  So, if we are serious about addressing the overwhelming maintenance 
backlog in our national parks, I urge my colleagues to oppose this 
amendment and join me in support of the National Park Service Legacy 
Act.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I am opposed to all these amendments 
included in the en bloc. Many of them use offsets from accounts in the 
Environmental Protection Agency of the Fish and Wildlife Service, and 
they are already severely underfunded.
  I am particularly troubled by one amendment to this group that 
threatens our Nation's most visited wilderness area. Let me tell you 
why I oppose the Emmer amendment.
  The Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, located in northern 
Minnesota, is one of the last truly wild places in America. These 1.1 
million acres of unspoiled woodlands and more than 1,000 pristine lakes 
are beloved by adventurers, canoers, and sportsmen from all across our 
country. This national treasure lies in the vast Rainy River Watershed 
and flows north into Voyageurs National Park and onward towards Canada.
  Recently, there has been a push to conduct sulfide-ore copper mining 
less than 3 miles from the Boundary Waters Wilderness. This mining 
threatens to irreplaceably damage the waters, the wildlife, and the 
landscape. Sulfur ore mining is the most toxic industry in America, 
polluting waterways with acid drainage that contains arsenic, mercury, 
and lead.
  In 2014, the Mount Polley sulfide-ore mine in British Columbia 
failed, dumping billions of liters of toxic sludge and leaving 
permanent environmental damage in its wake.
  To protect the boundary waters from this type of destruction, the 
Forest Service acted last December and launched a thorough 
environmental analysis with public engagement to assess what type of 
mining, if any, is appropriate on Federal lands and this watershed for 
the next 20 years. The Trump and the Obama administrations have both 
agreed we need a thorough, scientific-based assessment of the best 
management of this sensitive ecosystem and conservation of our boundary 
waters.
  The Emmer amendment upends this careful process. It pushes aside the 
Forest Service's ongoing study. It mandates that dangerous copper and 
sulfide mining will be allowed in the watershed, regardless of the 
conclusions of this environmental study, and it intentionally ignores a 
public process that hundreds of thousands of Americans weighed in on 
with comments on both sides of the issue. In my opinion, this amendment 
sets a horrible precedent, wastes taxpayer dollars already invested in 
this study, and threatens a national treasure, and it should never 
become law.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the en bloc and urge 
its adoption.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PAULSEN. Mr. Chair, let me start by acknowledging my colleagues, 
Representatives Emmer and Nolan. I'm proud to call both of you my 
friends, but I'm speaking tonight because I disagree with this 
amendment.
  We can be open to new types of mining in Minnesota when the necessary 
environmental reviews are met, like in the case of Polymet, which I 
support.
  Taconite mining is part of Minnesota's DNA. However, the copper-
nickel mining being proposed on the edge of the Boundary Waters Canoe 
Area is not taconite mining, and has never been done before in 
Minnesota. Earlier this year, the Trump administration said it would 
allow the current environmental review process to proceed to 
completion. I support that decision, and I oppose this amendment's 
effort to defund an ongoing environmental review to protect one of 
Minnesota's natural treasures. Indeed, it's one of our country's most 
spectacular wilderness areas.
  The Boundary Waters is Minnesota's Yellowstone. Hundreds of thousands 
of Americans visit on fishing and canoe trips annually. Some of the 
best memories of my life have taken place in the Boundary Waters, both 
as a child and now as a parent with my daughters.
  The public process that is underway after hundreds of thousands of 
people weighed in with their comments, should not be ignored and tossed 
aside. And, a science-based assessment of the best management practices 
of this sensitive ecosystem should be adhered to. We owe it to future 
generations to understand the impact copper-nickel mining poses to 
Minnesota's most precious water and land before we put it at risk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered 
by the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert).
  The en bloc amendments were agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 8 Offered by Ms. McSally

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 
printed in House Report 115-297.
  Ms. McSALLY. 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 15, line 13, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $9,692,000)''.
       Page 15, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $9,692,000)''.
       Page 64, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $12,078,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 504, the gentlewoman 
from Arizona (Ms. McSally) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Arizona.
  Ms. McSALLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in favor of my amendment to 
the Make America Secure and Prosperous Appropriations Act.
  This amendment would approve access to America's prized treasures by 
increasing the National Park Service's Facility Maintenance and 
Operations account by $9.7 million, bringing the funding amount up to 
the fiscal year 2017 enacted level. In doing so, this amendment will 
help address the longstanding deferred maintenance needs of the Park 
Service.
  Currently, the National Park Service has an $11.9 billion backlog, 
which is a figure that has increased steadily since 2009. According to 
the most recent NPS deferred maintenance report, the Yosemite National 
Park, in Chairman Calvert's home State, has a backlog of $555 million. 
Yellowstone has a backlog of $716 million across three States.

[[Page H7141]]

The Grand Canyon's backlog of $350 million makes up a large portion of 
my home State's--Arizona--delayed and deferred projects. In fact, 
Arizona has one of the largest backlogs of any State in the country: 
$565 million.
  This problem doesn't only impact the crown jewels of the park system. 
In my district, maintenance projects require attention at the Saguaro 
National Park of approximately $12.9 million, of which the Chiricahua 
National Monument in Cochise County faces roughly $10.3 million in 
needed restoration projects.
  Mr. Chairman, this country and my State is home to some of the 
world's most renowned landscapes and natural beauty. By providing this 
modest funding increase to address some of the backlog across the 
Nation, my amendment will ensure Americans have unimpaired access to 
their national parks and that the enjoyment of these wonders is 
available for future generations.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I must oppose this amendment that takes 
more money away from an already starved Environmental Protection 
Agency. The EPA's main operating account is already cut by $240 
million.
  The EPA plays a critical role in keeping Americans safe both during 
natural disasters like Hurricane Harvey and on a day-to-day basis. I 
know this because the EPA, right now, is cleaning up a toxic waste site 
that has been recently discovered in my congressional district.
  Unfortunately, the very air we breathe and the water we drink is 
endangered by the funding and policy decisions that are made in this 
bill, and their consequences will be negatively felt in communities 
across this Nation.
  Now, this amendment would increase funding for the National Park 
Service, something I do support. I have just been to Glacier National 
Park, where I saw their backlog, and I agree wholeheartedly that we 
should be investing in our parks, but it cannot be done at the expense 
of our public health.
  Republicans have chosen to put forward an omnibus bill that leaves 
nearly $5 billion of nondiscretionary funds on the table. So rather 
than gutting the EPA farther, we should be using all the resources 
available to us and working on a bipartisan budget agreement.
  Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of Chairman Frelinghuysen, 
I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting Chair. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the gentlewoman's 
amendment. I certainly urge Members to support it.
  This bill maintains the increases provided last year for deferred 
maintenance and increases the construction account by $10 million. This 
amendment will further our efforts to address the longstanding deferred 
maintenance needs.
  I urge an ``aye'' vote on the amendment, and I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Ms. McSALLY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your support of the 
amendment, and I would ask all Members on both sides of the aisle to 
support our national parks and support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. McSally).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment No. 12 will 
not be offered.


                Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Griffith

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13 
printed in House Report 115-297.
  Mr. GRIFFITH. 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 28, line 17, strike ``3'' and insert ``6''.


        Modification to Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Griffith

  Mr. GRIFFITH. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the 
amendment be modified in the form I have placed at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the modification.
  The Clerk read the modification as follows:

       Insert at the end the following:
       Page 28, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $75,000,000)''.
       Page 64, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $80,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is modified.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 504, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Griffith) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. GRIFFITH. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the consideration of what 
was two amendments that we just merged into one because they went hand-
in-glove.
  My amendment restores critical funding to three additional 
Appalachian States, the same number of States currently funded by the 
Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund, for the reclamation of abandoned mine 
lands in conjunction with economic and community development and reuse 
goals.
  Now, let me explain the program quickly.
  This was the brainchild of Chairman Rogers a couple of years back, 
and what the idea was, originally, when they did the Abandoned Mine 
Land program, you could just restore the land. They came up with the 
concept in the hard-hit devastated areas of central Appalachia that we 
should not only allow it to be a restoration of the land, but that that 
land could be used and looked at as an economic purpose, a reuse the 
community could use for community development or economic development, 
and that was important.
  Funding for these reclamation grants was first established in fiscal 
year 2016, but it was originally provided only to the three Appalachian 
States with the greatest amount of unfunded reclamation needs.
  Unfortunately, that didn't, of course, reach all the States, and so 
last year, an additional three States were added, those States being 
Virginia, Ohio, Alabama, the original three being Pennsylvania, West 
Virginia, and Kentucky.
  This year, as things were working through, Virginia, Ohio, and 
Alabama were not currently included. My amendment basically makes sure 
they are included. We have worked with the team on the Appropriations 
Committee to word it correctly. We think we have got it worded 
correctly so that we now have the ability to add in all three States.
  I think this is important. Folks often say to us: Those of you in 
coal country, in central Appalachia, need to transition your economy. 
Well, we can't transition our economy if we have huge blocks of land 
which we can't use because they are unusable due to prior acts that 
left them in a condition where we know they need to be reclaimed, but 
you can't reclaim them looking at economic development.
  So this is a way to retool. Chairman Rogers came up with it. We would 
like to extend it to the other States that would be greatly helped by 
this, the three that I mentioned previously, Ohio, Alabama, and 
Virginia, and that is what my amendments do.
  I would ask all to support this amendment to help those areas that 
are economically devastated in central Appalachia and expand on a 
program which is already showing signs of success.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1800

  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose an amendment that takes 
more money away from the EPA.

[[Page H7142]]

  As I mentioned before, this bill already severely cuts the EPA's main 
operating account by $240 million. The air we breathe and the water we 
drink are endangered by the policy decisions that are being made in 
this bill. The consequences will be felt in communities across the 
Nation. I understand, for many, cutting the EPA is an easy target, but 
I want my colleagues to understand what this amendment would actually 
be cutting, if adopted.
  This account funds programs that are important to both sides of the 
aisle, including permitting for construction projects across the 
country, toxic risk prevention, parts of the successful Brownfields 
Program, and pesticide licensing.
  So I understand that the money would direct more funding to States in 
Appalachia. Appalachia is suffering. They are suffering from the raging 
environmental harm caused by coal mining. But, unfortunately, I cannot 
support any deeper cuts to the EPA.
  Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. GRIFFITH. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert).
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I understand the gentleman's overall goal 
is to continue funding for the AML pilot project, consistent with a 
fiscal year 2017 enacted level, and structure for the six Appalachian 
States.
  Therefore, we can accept this package of amendments at this time, 
work toward maintaining funding for 6 States in a final fiscal year 
2018 enacted bill. If we are able to achieve that goal, I hope we can 
count on the gentleman's support to pass both this House package and to 
enact the 2018 end-of-year spending bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I encourage my colleagues to adopt this amendment.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, once again, I appreciate the challenges 
that the gentleman is suffering in his State and throughout Appalachia, 
but I cannot support any more deeper cuts to the EPA, so I must oppose 
the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIFFITH. Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues to help us transition 
the economy in central Appalachian support to the amendment, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment, as modified, 
offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Griffith).
  The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of Chairman Frelinghuysen, 
I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 
Jody B. Hice) for the purpose of a colloquy.
  Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I thank Chairman 
Frelinghuysen and Interior Subcommittee Chairman Calvert for their 
efforts on this legislation, and I thank them for the opportunity to 
speak today.
  I am committed to pursuing a comprehensive all-of-the-above energy 
strategy, and I would like to take this time to engage in a colloquy on 
section 438 of this bill, pertaining to offshore wind development. As a 
representative from a coastal area, I want to ensure that all offshore 
energy development is pursued in a pragmatic manner.
  Section 438 restricts funding for the Department of the Interior to 
administer offshore wind leases within 24 nautical miles off the coast 
of Maryland. This language hinders offshore wind development by 
imposing unprecedented and burdensome requirements on three existing 
leases.
  Typically, offshore wind turbines are constructed roughly 12 nautical 
miles from the coastline, which is generally out of sight from shore. 
By doubling the setback, section 438 unreasonably restricts these 
projects and sets a poor policy precedent for future development.
  Furthermore, modifying the terms and conditions of the leases 
violates the sanctity of the lease and creates considerable uncertainty 
for companies pursuing any offshore wind project.
  It is critical that we establish regulatory and contractual certainty 
in all areas of natural resource development. America's offshore wind 
industry is in its infancy, and the policies and precedents that we set 
today will affect investment long into the future.
  The language contained in section 438 is concerning for this reason, 
and I look forward to working with the gentleman from Maryland in the 
future to find a more appropriate solution.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Maryland 
(Mr. Harris) for the purpose of a colloquy.
  Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I thank Mr. Calvert for allowing me time to 
discuss an issue that is important to my constituents in Ocean City, 
Maryland.
  I am proud that Ocean City is home to beautiful beaches and views 
and, as a result, a booming tourism industry.
  I sought the inclusion of section 438 to respond to concerns of Ocean 
City residents regarding the visibility of the proposed wind turbines 
offshore. By siting turbines within 24 nautical miles from the 
shoreline, I am concerned that our beach economy and tourist experience 
will be compromised. I believe every effort must be made to minimize 
the impact of this project on the Ocean City view shed.
  This large scale project requires full consideration of the needs and 
opinions of the local community. I look forward to working with my 
colleagues to develop a practical solution to this challenge.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned at our full committee 
markup, I understood that my colleague, Dr. Harris, was offering his 
amendment to address local concerns from his residents with respect to 
the visibility of offshore turbines. With all of these offshore 
projects, many varying viewpoints need to be taken into account. I 
appreciate that we have been able to discuss many of these views and 
concerns here today.
  It is my hope that we can work with the authorizing committees of 
jurisdiction, the administration, and all interested stakeholders to 
identify some better solutions as we move forward through the fiscal 
year 2018 process.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Tipton). The Chair understands that amendment 
No. 14 will not be offered.


        Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15 
printed in House Report 115-297.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. 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 28, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $32,491,000)''.
       Page 64, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $32,491,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 504, the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of 
the subcommittee for the opportunity to offer this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, prior to the enactment of the Surface Mining Control 
and Reclamation Act of 1977, coal mining played an important role in 
the United States for nearly 2 centuries, providing critical energy and 
jobs for our Nation.
  However, across Pennsylvania and throughout Appalachia, we continue 
to have great needs in reclaiming our abandoned mine lands and 
restoring our waters that have been impacted by historical mining 
activities.
  Since 1977, we have made great gains in restoring our historical mine 
lands, but much more work still needs to be done.
  The Federal Office of Surface Mining has estimated that the unfunded 
liabilities of abandoned mine lands across the Nation exceeds $10 
billion, with nearly half of that obligation located in Pennsylvania.
  To complement the funding from the AML trust fund, which was 
established through SMCRA, this legislation contains appropriations for 
the AML pilot program in order to support additional

[[Page H7143]]

funding for abandoned mine lands for areas that need assistance most.
  This program provides grants to States ``to accelerate the 
remediation of AML sites with the economic and community development 
end uses in mind.''
  Unfortunately, this legislation provides $32 million less for the 
pilot program compared to last year's level.
  My amendment is simple and would not increase Federal spending. The 
amendment would restore funding for the Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation 
pilot program to its 2017 level by reallocating funds from the EPA's 
Environmental Programs and Management by the same amount.
  Mr. Chairman, where these funds are coming from is very consistent 
with the mission of that account that it would to be taken from. But 
the difference is that by putting this into the AML pilot program with 
a laser focus, we are focused on environmental concerns that have been 
identified, and we are funding remediation techniques that are proven.
  We have an obligation to clean up our environment and restore our 
abandoned mine lands and waters, and this program helps us do just 
that.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman and ranking member, and I urge my 
colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose this amendment that 
takes more money, again, away from an already starved EPA.
  This is a duplicate from the last amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Virginia earlier. It cuts another $32 million from the EPA's 
operating accounts.
  Our country right now is dealing with two catastrophes caused by 
hurricanes. The destruction is going to be felt for years. The EPA 
right now is one of the primary Federal agencies responsible for 
protecting human health, monitoring air and water, and managing 
recovery and cleanup, so it would be simply reckless to adopt another 
amendment that would further cripple the EPA.
  These two amendments would cut the EPA by $108 million.
  Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose the amendment, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman 
for those comments.
  My point is, though, that this actually takes $32 million and puts it 
like a laser on an area where we know that environmental damage is well 
documented and we have very effective public-private partnership 
techniques to address.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert), chairman of the 
Appropriations Subcommittee.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I am certainly prepared to accept this amendment. I understand the 
importance of the program to the gentleman from Pennsylvania and other 
Members in the Appalachian region. I look forward to working with him 
and all of the interested Members.
  Mr. Chairman, I encourage adoption of the amendment.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, once again, I understand clearly what the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania is trying to accomplish.
  I wish we could accomplish that goal. But with already a $240 million 
cut to the EPA and all of the challenges on the EPA--we just recently 
agreed on this floor by a voice vote to cut the EPA another $75 
million. This would be another $33 million.
  So I hope that we can reach a place in the funding that the chairman 
and I have where we can address the serious concerns that you bring to 
the floor where you had success with programs. But, at the same time, I 
would be cutting opportunities for cleanup, especially with all of the 
disasters looming--forest fires, disasters, and cleanup I just had 
recently in my district that came out of the blue. The EPA wouldn't 
have money to respond.
  Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose the amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. 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 Pennsylvania 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 18 Offered by Mr. Grijalva

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 18 
printed in House Report 115-297.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. 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 39, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,011,000)''.
       Page 64, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,011,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 504, 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, my amendment will restore $1 million in 
cuts to the Environmental Justice program within the EPA, with an 
equivalent cut to leadership and administration within the DOI Office 
of the Secretary.
  In 1992, the program was created and originally called the 
Environmental Equity Office. It was created after a series of releases 
of reports that revealed polluter sites were disproportionately located 
in low-income communities and communities of color.

                              {time}  1815

  With minimal support, the program has provided communities with 
leveraged resources to do things like revitalize neighborhoods, build 
health centers, expand affordable housing, create green space and 
recreation areas, and, more importantly, raise the awareness of the 
disproportionate treatment in both affected communities and 
decisionmakers.
  Despite this success within the EPA for decades, we are not even 
close to dealing with the issue of environmental justice.
  In 2016, the United States Commission on Civil Rights found that 
racial minorities and low-income communities are still 
disproportionately affected by the siting of waste disposal facilities, 
permitted emissions facilities, and that they often lack the political 
and financial clout to properly bargain with polluters when fighting a 
decision or seeking redress.
  A report by the staff of the House Committee on Natural Resources 
found that clean water access and sanitation infrastructure on numerous 
reservations across the Nation more closely resemble developing 
countries than they do the rest of the Nation. Nearly half of all homes 
on Tribal land lack access to adequate drinking water, sewage, or solid 
waste disposal facilities. As a result, Native families often end up 
drinking unclean water that increases disease risks and impairs Tribal 
economic development.
  Additionally, low-income communities of color have been on the 
frontline of Houston's petrochemical industry for decades, and when 
Harvey struck, they were some of the first to feel the effects as 
chemical plants caught fire, refineries began flaring toxins, and 
polluted floodwater went into their neighborhoods.
  The EPA Office of Environmental Justice helps integrate concerns of 
these communities within the general activities of the agencies. This 
is not a program that can afford to be scaled back, especially as 
concerns of environmental justice continue to arise around Hurricane 
Harvey and now in Irma's path. It is critical that we protect frontline 
communities and communities of color from disparate impacts caused by 
environmental pollution. One million dollars is not a lot of

[[Page H7144]]

money for this task, but it reaffirms the significance of the office 
and our sense of equality.
  Today I ask my colleagues to join in defense of these communities and 
show them that Congress cares about their public health, their housing, 
and their importance as people.
  Mr. Chair, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, given our allocation, which was $824 million 
below the fiscal year 2017 level, we had to find areas to trim. It is 
also important to note that the bill does not support the elimination 
of the program, as has been proposed in the President's budget. It was 
the committee's effort to find some middle ground.
  While I can certainly appreciate the gentleman's interest to maintain 
fiscal year 2017 enacted level, the allocation of the committee doesn't 
support those levels. So, therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote 
``no'' on the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chair, I yield as much time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McEachin), a member of the 
Natural Resources Committee, and ranking member of the Oversight and 
Investigations Subcommittee.
  Mr. McEACHIN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I am proud to rise in support of this amendment to 
restore funding to the Environmental Justice program within the EPA. 
This program enables the agency to better assist frontline communities 
that are disproportionately impacted by pollution.
  Low-income and minority communities face disproportionate levels of 
hazardous pollution and environmental contaminants due to where their 
members live and where they work.
  The harms are real. For instance, higher levels of air pollution 
result in members of minority groups having higher death rates and 
higher numbers of emergency room visits and hospital stays.
  As the cofounder and co-chair of the United for Climate and 
Environmental Justice Task Force, it is my mission to combat these 
environmental injustices and ensure frontline communities no longer 
bear the unequal burden of environmental, economic, and health harms.
  That is why, Mr. Chairman, this amendment is so important.
  The Environmental Justice program leverages Federal funds to greatly 
improve health and quality of life in our most vulnerable communities. 
Since the establishment of the program, communities have been better 
able to revitalize neighborhoods, build health centers, expand 
affordable housing, and create new green spaces and recreational areas.
  I urge my colleagues to show low-income and minority communities that 
we care about their health, housing, and overall well-being by 
supporting the amendment.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chair, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote, 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. Chair, 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.


        Amendment No. 21 Offered by Mr. Price of North Carolina

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 21 
printed in House Report 115-297.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. 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 63, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $104,235,000) (increased by $104,235,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 504, the gentleman 
from North Carolina (Mr. Price) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would restore 
the EPA's Science and Technology account to 2017 levels.
  I offer this amendment to underscore the importance of environmental 
research to the health and safety of the American people, as well as 
thousands of jobs in my district and across the country.
  This amendment is framed in increase-decrease terms for the simple 
reason that, given the subcommittee's inadequate allocation, there is 
simply no place to turn for an offset.
  The EPA's Science and Technology account funds research and 
development activities within the agency, supporting the work of the 
world's leading environmental research enterprise and informing the 
environmental policies that Congress enacts.
  The bill on the floor today would cut this account by $105 million, a 
15 percent reduction. About the only good thing I can say about that is 
that it isn't as bad as the Trump budget, but it is still a deep and 
devastating cut. Mr. Chairman, we have to restore these funds as this 
bill moves through the remaining stages of the process.
  The EPA's Office of Research and Development funded by this account 
not only supports EPA programs in air, water, toxicology, and energy 
research, but it also facilitates innovative partnerships with some of 
the premier higher education and research institutions in the country.
  EPA research facilities employ more than 2,000 people, supports some 
700 affiliated jobs in my district alone. This includes advanced 
laboratory scientists, administrative personnel, also blue-collar jobs 
in maintenance, custodial, and security positions.
  The EPA research that this agency conducts, world class research, it 
allows us to remain proactive in protecting the air we breathe, the 
water we drink, resources, whose safety we must never, ever take for 
granted.
  Now, I know the EPA is continually a scapegoat when it comes to 
spending cuts. In times of crisis, however, we don't hesitate to call 
on them to respond quickly to events that could pose a threat to the 
environment and public safety.
  Just last week in the devastating wake of Hurricane Harvey, sites 
containing dangerous chemicals and contaminants were severely flooded 
and damaged. Research from this office, the office being cut in this 
bill, proved invaluable in putting together a safe and effective 
response.
  In other words, the EPA is part of the first line of defense to 
respond to events that pose threats to public health and safety. It 
follows that if we gut the EPA's research budget, we are putting 
ultimately the American public at risk.
  The EPA research cuts underscore, I think, how fraudulent the claim 
is that this is a bill that would make America secure and prosperous. 
Really? In reality, it would cripple investments that Americans count 
on each and every day to keep them safe and healthy.
  Mr. Chairman, I remain hopeful that a bipartisan budget agreement 
will be reached that will allow us to restore this research funding and 
do right by the people we represent.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I certainly appreciate my friend's support 
for the research conducted at the EPA, and particularly the Research 
Triangle Park. I am a supporter of the world class research that occurs 
at RTP with respect to the computational toxicology program. That 
research has helped to identify alternative high throughput testing 
methodologies that have reduced the number of animals used in 
laboratories.
  Given the current allocation, however, which is $824 million below 
the

[[Page H7145]]

fiscal year 2017 level, we had to find areas to trim. We certainly 
don't have a funding level that can support the fiscal year 2017 
enacted levels, but we tried to do the best we could to find common 
ground.
  I certainly look forward to working with the gentleman in the future, 
if we happily come to some kind of budget agreement, where we can 
reallocate funds to something as important as this. But, again, because 
of our allocation, I must oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues 
to vote ``no'' on the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I have to acknowledge that 
the chairman did a pretty good job of describing some of the research 
that we have underway in North Carolina and around the country, and I 
know he understands that and wants to support it.
  I also know that we have got to do better than the allocations 
represented in this eight-bill omnibus effort. So I pledge to work with 
him and other colleagues to achieve that kind of agreement, and then 
also to revisit this account and other accounts that we know need 
attention if we are to do our duty as representatives of our 
communities and also maintain the investments a great country must 
maintain.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price).
  The amendment was rejected.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of Chairman Frelinghuysen, 
I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Lance) for the purpose of entering into a colloquy.
  Mr. LANCE. Mr. Chairman, I thank both Chairman Calvert and Chairman 
Frelinghuysen for their work on this legislation. I greatly appreciate 
the committee's efforts to fund the National Endowment for the Arts and 
the National Endowment for the Humanities.
  I stress the importance of Federal investments in the arts and 
humanities. The numbers speak for themselves. The NEA and the NEH each 
consist of only .003 percent of a nearly $4 trillion Federal budget, 
yet for every dollar the United States spends on Federal arts 
initiatives, nine nonFederal dollars are leveraged, generating roughly 
$600 million in matching support.
  Federal arts and humanities funding is a catalyst for the economic 
development and job creation that we all need, having a powerful 
multiplier effect not only in New Jersey, the State I represent, but 
throughout the entire Nation.
  The arts and humanities also engage nearly every community. In April, 
I visited the Paper Mill Playhouse in Millburn, New Jersey, in the 
district I serve, to see its ``Theater for Everyone'' project in 
action, an autism-friendly program supported by the NEA. It provides a 
creative outlet for children with developmental disabilities and for 
their families. Seeing these performances reinforced the importance of 
our continued investments in the NEA and in the NEH.
  Mr. Chair, I also thank both Chairman Calvert and Chairman 
Frelinghuysen for including funding for the Delaware River Basin 
Restoration project authorized just last year to coordinate private 
investments, regional partnerships, and local knowledge, and develop 
strategies to protect and restore the watershed's ecological and 
recreational assets and historical significance.

                              {time}  1830

  Throughout the four States that are involved--New Jersey, New York, 
Pennsylvania, and Delaware--the Delaware River Basin supplies 15 
million people with clean water and supports approximately $25 billion 
in economic activity each year. It is imperative that we preserve these 
resources for future generations, and I look forward to working with 
the committee on this initiative.
  Let me repeat my deep thanks to Chairman Calvert and to Chairman 
Frelinghuysen.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from New York 
(Ms. Slaughter).
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank Chairman Calvert and Chairman 
Frelinghuysen for their commitment to the arts. I greatly appreciate 
the subcommittee's efforts to fund the National Endowment for the Arts 
and the National Endowment for the Humanities.
  The NEA's mission is to strengthen the creative capacity of our 
communities by providing all Americans with diverse opportunities for 
arts participation. Of critical importance, the NEA has expanded their 
reach to help servicemembers who have been diagnosed with TBI, 
traumatic brain injury, and other psychological conditions. This new 
partnership is critically important.
  The NEA Creative Forces Military Healing Arts Network is a 
collaboration with the Department of Defense which supports music, 
writing, and visual art therapy at military care facilities. They are 
finding that the best treatment for PTSD is yoga, which doesn't cost us 
anything.
  The Creative Forces program places the creative arts therapies at the 
core of patient-centered care in military medical facilities and 
invests in research on the impacts and benefits of these innovative 
treatment methods. The cost-effective, noninvasive arts therapy of 
those programs rank consistently in the top five ``helpful'' and ``wish 
to continue'' programs on patient satisfaction surveys of the men and 
women who have gone through the programs, and over 85 percent of 
military patients said art therapy was helpful to their healing.
  We may even be learning here that this might be the best thing, as 
Mr. Lance was pointing out, for autistic children.
  But throughout the art therapy programs and the work that they are 
doing, our servicemen and -women are being able to transition away from 
the basketful of prescription drugs that they carry around with them 
and lived on and are rejoining their families and life. So when they 
wheel out of that healing, that psychological skill-building, self-
expression, and self-esteem that comes from these programs, that 
obviously is certainly something that we need to continue.
  As part of the NEA's mission to increase access to the arts for all 
Americans, Creative Forces enables more servicemembers, veterans, and 
military families to benefit from creative art therapies and community 
arts activities.
  NEA is so cheap it is surprising. For the small amount of money we 
put into it, we would get about $9 billion back and many people who 
have been employed. We don't do anything with a better return than the 
money we spend for the arts.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, as the designee of Ranking Member Lowey, I 
move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina 
(Mr. Price).
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member 
for yielding. I thank Chairman Calvert for engaging in this colloquy 
with Mr. Lance and Ms. Slaughter and me.
  We are highlighting the importance of the National Endowment for the 
Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities and the importance 
of robust funding for the work of those agencies. There is no more 
efficient dollar spent in the entire Federal budget. I will say in a 
minute what I mean by that.
  I am very happy to be co-chairman, with Mr. Lance, of the 
Congressional Humanities Caucus, to be a member of the Congressional 
Arts Caucus, which Ms. Slaughter and others have led, and proud to 
support the missions of these two agencies.
  Federal support for the arts and the humanities affirms America's 
rich and diverse cultural and artistic heritage. It really is an 
investment in the quality of life of our people. I think we should see 
it that way, and we need to

[[Page H7146]]

be steadfast in our support and our investment. It is one of the most 
efficient we make, as I said. It leverages private, nonprofit, and 
corporate dollars.
  In 2015 alone, for example, Federal NEH museum grants leveraged $104 
million in outside funding from only $33 million in Federal funds. That 
is a pretty good return for the taxpayer.
  They support millions of jobs, these endowments do, and the projects 
they fund, hundreds of millions of dollars in direct economic activity, 
and the American public loves them. Participation all over this 
country, in communities large and small, rural and urban, is widespread 
and enthusiastic.
  So again, I thank the chairman for his attention to these important 
lines in the budget. I hope we can bolster our commitment to the arts 
and humanities and do even better as the appropriations process moves 
forward.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I want to also commend the chairman and 
working with the whole committee to make sure that the arts and 
humanities receive the funding that they did.
  Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. I want to quickly thank the gentlewoman from the 
great State of Minnesota, thank the gentleman from California, and just 
very quickly say that I come with my amendments, but I also come just 
to acknowledge the pending storm in Florida and Hurricane Harvey 
because our arts communities were underwater, and they are still 
underwater.
  I offered amendments that deal with preservation of heritage areas, 
urban reforestation, and the Smithsonian outreach. I thank my 
colleagues for putting it in the en bloc.
  But as I do so, I want to take note of, again, all of the debris and 
be able to say that, in the course of hurricanes, historic entities are 
impacted.
  We are looking to establish an emancipation trail, and one of my most 
important amendments is to ensure that there is national policy to 
preserve, for public use, historic sites, buildings, and objects of 
national significance for the inspiration and benefit of people of the 
United States.
  My community is looking for that emancipation trail, but it starts 
from Galveston. We have not yet been able to assess whether any of 
those historic markers and places were destroyed by Hurricane Harvey. 
So the funding for the Interior Department and the aspects that come 
under the Interior Department, the jurisdictional issue is very 
important to us because we will have to look to see if our historic 
entities have been preserved.
  In the midst of debris and danger that our constituents face, this is 
equally important, and it is equally important to restore the symphony, 
to restore the ballet and our theater, all of them underwater in my 
congressional district.
  I hope, as we move forward, H.R. 3686, Hurricane Harvey supplemental 
appropriation that we have filed that will embrace all of these issues, 
will be considered.
  I thank my colleagues for those amendments. And, again, in the course 
of a storm, the history of people is jeopardized, and my amendments 
deal with preserving the history of our people. Maybe, as we come out 
of this, we will create the emancipation trail that is part of my 
amendment.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.


                Amendment No. 27 Offered by Mr. Langevin

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 27 
printed in House Report 115-297.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. 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 64, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 64, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 67, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 73, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $1,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 504, the gentleman 
from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Rhode Island.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, before I actually get to my amendment, I 
just want to say in reference to the previous discussion about properly 
funding the National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities, I commend 
the discussion on both sides and the commitment to properly fund those 
programs.
  The National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the 
Humanities holds a special place in Rhode Island in that both of those 
programs were championed by and helped to have been created by our late 
senior Senator Claiborne Pell. We understand the importance of the arts 
and humanities in Rhode Island, the jobs they create, the quality of 
life they enhance, and I wholeheartedly support properly funding both 
of those programs.
  I had led a Special Order when the President's budget came out and 
those programs had been zeroed out in funding. Several of my colleagues 
and I got together and talked about the impact the arts and humanities 
have on our States, on our districts, and on the country as a whole. I 
just want to reiterate my support for the National Endowment for the 
Arts and Humanities and all they do for the country.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment that we have before us would restore some 
funding to the southern New England estuaries program, which is 
currently zeroed out in the underlying bill.
  This program, part of the EPA's geographic programs, has been a 
thriving success, and anyone who has been to New England knows the 
beauty of where the ocean meets the land. Our estuaries are in South 
County, Rhode Island, and all along the Narragansett Bay; along Mount 
Hope Bay and Buzzards Bay and throughout Cape Cod.
  These areas are the lungs of our coastal areas and sustain the 
diversity of plant and animal life. These funds are vital to conserving 
this wetland habitat which is frequently under attack by human and 
natural damage. So I implore the majority to support this program, as 
they have supported similar programs for Puget Sound, the Chesapeake 
Bay, and other areas.
  I am proud to be joined by Representatives Cicilline, Keating, and 
Kennedy as cosponsors of this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, finally, I just want to say that I intend to offer and 
withdraw this amendment provided that my colleague, Chairman Calvert, 
is open to continuing the discussion on the importance of this program.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CALVERT. While the amendment itself is drafted in order as a 
general increase to EPA geographic programs, the gentleman proposes to 
fund a program that was not requested in the budget and is not 
authorized.
  Further, he proposes to reduce grants from DERA, the DERA program, 
which is a key program for improving air quality in areas like mine 
that are in a nonattainment area with existing standards.
  For those reasons, I oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues to 
vote ``no'' on this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, as I said, I have offered to withdraw the 
amendment as long as the chairman would continue discussion with me.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I am sorry. I didn't hear the gentleman, and 
I happily accept his offer to withdraw the amendment. I will happily 
work with him to see if we can't work some time in the future to find 
room for this program that the gentleman is obviously supportive of.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. I thank the chairman, and I am grateful for his 
consideration, and I look forward to working with him.
  I yield back the balance of my time and withdraw my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.
  The Committee will rise informally.
  The Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Katko) assumed the chair.

                          ____________________