[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 186 (Wednesday, November 20, 2019)]
[House]
[Pages H9072-H9074]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    EXTENDING AUTHORIZATION FOR CAPE COD NATIONAL SEASHORE ADVISORY 
                               COMMISSION

  Mr. HUFFMAN. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 182) to extend the authorization for the Cape Cod National 
Seashore Advisory Commission.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                H.R. 182

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

     SECTION 1. CAPE COD NATIONAL SEASHORE ADVISORY COMMISSION.

       Effective September 26, 2018, section 8(a) of Public Law 
     87-126 (16 U.S.C. 459b-7(a)) is amended in the second 
     sentence by striking ``2018'' and inserting ``2028''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Huffman) and the gentleman from California (Mr. 
McClintock) each will control 20 minutes.

[[Page H9073]]

  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Huffman).


                             General Leave

  Mr. HUFFMAN. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  H.R. 182, introduced by Representative Bill Keating from 
Massachusetts, would reauthorize the Cape Cod National Seashore 
Advisory Commission, which expired under current law in September 2018. 
This bill would reauthorize and extend it until 2028.
  Since the national seashore was originally created in 1961, it was 
actually the first national seashore. It is the second most beautiful 
national seashore, but it was the first national seashore created.
  The advisory commission has served as a main forum for consultation 
and coordination between local communities and the National Park 
Service. Comprised of representatives from the six towns within the 
park, Barnstable County, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and the 
Secretary of the Interior, this advisory commission gives surrounding 
communities a voice in the management of the seashore.
  I thank Representative Keating for his leadership in introducing this 
important legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 182.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 182, which extends the 
authorization of the Cape Cod National Seashore Advisory Commission 
until 2028.
  The Cape Cod National Seashore was established in 1961. It comprises 
more than 40,000 acres on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. The enabling 
legislation also provided for an advisory commission comprised of six 
Cape Cod communities located within the seashore and the county to 
consult with the Secretary of the Interior about the development of the 
seashore. This is as it should be.
  The Federal Government must be a good neighbor to the communities 
that its lands impact, and consulting them as partners is a fundamental 
point of this principle.
  One of the unique aspects of this advisory commission is that the 
Secretary of the Interior cannot issue commercial, industrial, or 
recreational permits without the advice of the commission, as long as 
action is taken in a timely manner.
  In addition, the commission meets regularly with the park 
superintendent to discuss specific seashore issues and to advise him 
about seashore programs, facilities, and activities, providing valuable 
local feedback to the national seashore. This feedback helps to promote 
sound park management, improve public access, and it ensures that the 
National Park Service is a good neighbor to its surrounding 
communities.
  This is a model of how the Federal Government's land managers should 
be governed. My only regret is that its provisions don't apply to every 
community affected by Federal landholdings. I cannot help but note that 
the Federal Government owns just 1.2 percent of Massachusetts while 
giving great deference to its local communities. Meanwhile, it owns 46 
percent of my State of California and often gives local communities 
impacted by its lands a dismissive brushoff, which is typical of the 
experience of our Western States.
  In fact, I take this opportunity to ask my colleagues from 
Massachusetts to consider what would happen to their communities if the 
Federal Government took over half of the land in their State, removed 
it from the tax rolls, severely restricted any productive use of that 
land, and then thumbed its nose at the concerns and complaints of local 
communities.
  Thankfully, this administration has taken a cooperative and 
supportive position in recent years and has improved conditions 
greatly, but that doesn't guarantee that future administrations won't 
revert to the Washington-knows-best approach that has produced no end 
of problems for the people of our Western States.
  Madam Speaker, I urge adoption of the measure, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Keating), who is honored to 
represent the second most beautiful national seashore in America.
  Mr. KEATING. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of my bill, H.R. 182, 
to reauthorize the Cape Cod National Seashore Advisory Commission.
  Madam Speaker, I thank the chair from the Committee on Natural 
Resources for yielding, and I thank both of my colleagues from 
California for supporting this bill.
  The Cape Cod National Seashore was created by President Kennedy in 
1961. His vision was to preserve the unique landscape of the outer cape 
for recreation and enjoyment for all Americans forever. Today, more 
than 4 million people, both Americans and those from around the world, 
travel to Cape Cod every year to experience the natural beauty and 
recreation that the Cape Cod National Seashore provides.
  However, when the Cape Cod National Seashore was proposed, it 
presented challenges to residents of Cape Cod unique to locating a 
national park on a peninsula with a limited area and with very small 
communities within that area. In many of the communities in the outer 
cape, the national seashore was designed to occupy as much as 80 
percent of the available land, effectively foreclosing other economic 
development options after the park was established.
  While the promise of President Kennedy's vision for the outer cape 
was realized, with the national seashore drawing millions of people 
from around the world to the cape, the importance of the advisory 
commission to the national seashore and its host communities is still 
important today, as important as it was almost 60 years ago.

  The advisory commission was at the heart of President Kennedy's 
vision for the national seashore, as he recognized that the host 
communities would need a voice in the national seashore affairs after 
the park was formed. To this end, it was important that the host 
communities retained a formal structure to advise seashore leadership 
and the Park Service about how actions taken within the park would 
affect them and their communities.
  The reasons for the powers granted to the advisory commission in its 
enabling legislation are just as persuasive today as they were in 1961. 
Since what happens on the seashore directly affects the lives of 
thousands of my constituents in the host communities, those decisions 
should be made with the input of those communities.
  Some have suggested that the authority regarding the commercial 
activity granted to the National Seashore Advisory Commission in its 
enabling legislation is no longer necessary. This is simply not the 
case.
  Suggestions that the value of having regulatory unity among the 
national parklands and the various advisory commissions are 
unpersuasive when one considers the unique nature of Cape Cod. That 
such a bureaucratic consideration could possibly outweigh the important 
benefits that the National Seashore Advisory Commission provides to my 
constituents is just laughable.
  Today, just as in the 1960s, the unique nature of the outer cape 
presents the same challenges to those who live there with respect to 
the national seashore. The most effective way to address the concerns 
of the outer cape community is to ensure that a functioning advisory 
commission is sitting and can continue to play its important role in 
the community.
  Long ago, President Kennedy envisioned what responsible self-
governance looks like on the outer cape, a balance between the 
seashore, the towns, and a place where all parties could come together, 
again, in the spirit of sustaining the community as a whole. That is 
the vision of the advisory commission.
  Over the past few years, the outer cape region has faced some of its 
toughest challenges. With climate change, coastal erosion, ocean 
acidification, and new concerns about sharks in the waters off Cape 
Cod, Cape Codders are grappling with some of the

[[Page H9074]]

most difficult issues that the communities have seen in years. Under 
these circumstances, the commission's absence is felt every day.
  Madam Speaker, that is why I ask my colleagues to support this 
straightforward piece of legislation, a bill that has been passed by 
this House in the last Congress that will reactivate an effective tool 
that has provided an important role for the Cape Cod community, my 
community, for nearly 60 years.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Speaker, I ask for adoption of this measure, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Madam Speaker, I respectfully request an ``aye'' vote, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Huffman) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 182.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________