[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 22, 2020)]
[House]
[Pages H3642-H3657]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1215
                       TAXPAYER FIRST ACT OF 2019

  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1053, I move 
to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 1957) to amend the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modernize and improve the Internal 
Revenue Service, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendments 
thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration.


 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  July 22, 2020, on page H3642, the following appeared: MESSAGE 
FROM THE SENATE A message from the Senate by Ms. Byrd, on of its 
clerks, announced that the Senate has passed a bill of the 
following title in which the concurrence of the House is 
requested: S. 3989. An act to amend the United States 
Semiquincentennial Commission Act of 2016 to modify certain 
membership and other requirements of the United States 
Semiquincentennial Commission, and for other purposes. -----------
---------- 1215 TAXPAYER FIRST ACT OF 2019 Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. 
Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1053, I move to take from 
the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 1957) to amend the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 to modernize and improve the Internal Revenue 
Service, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendments 
thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration.
  
  The online version has been corrected to read: MESSAGE FROM THE 
SENATE A message from the Senate by Ms. Byrd, one of its clerks, 
announced that the Senate has passed a bill of the following title 
in which the concurrence of the House is requested: S. 3989. An 
act to amend the United States Semiquincentennial Commission Act 
of 2016 to modify certain membership and other requirements of the 
United States Semiquincentennial Commission, and for other 
purposes. --------------------- MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT A 
message in writing from the President of the United States was 
communicated to the House by Ms. Mariel Ridgway, one of his 
secretaries. --------------------- 1215 TAXPAYER FIRST ACT OF 2019 
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1053, I 
move to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 1957) to 
amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modernize and improve 
the Internal Revenue Service, and for other purposes, with the 
Senate amendments thereto, and ask for its immediate 
consideration.


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 


  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Schneider). The Clerk will designate the 
Senate amendments.
  Senate amendments:
       Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Great American Outdoors 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. NATIONAL PARKS AND PUBLIC LAND LEGACY RESTORATION 
                   FUND.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle II of title 54, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after chapter 2003 the 
     following:

 ``CHAPTER 2004--NATIONAL PARKS AND PUBLIC LAND LEGACY RESTORATION FUND

``Sec.
``200401. Definitions.
``200402. National Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund.

     ``Sec. 200401. Definitions

       ``In this chapter:
       ``(1) Asset.--The term `asset' means any real property, 
     including any physical structure or grouping of structures, 
     landscape, trail, or other tangible property, that--
       ``(A) has a specific service or function; and

[[Page H3643]]

       ``(B) is tracked and managed as a distinct, identifiable 
     entity by the applicable covered agency.
       ``(2) Covered agency.--The term `covered agency' means--
       ``(A) the Service;
       ``(B) the United States Fish and Wildlife Service;
       ``(C) the Forest Service;
       ``(D) the Bureau of Land Management; and
       ``(E) the Bureau of Indian Education.
       ``(3) Fund.--The term `Fund' means the National Parks and 
     Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund established by section 
     200402(a).
       ``(4) Project.--The term `project' means any activity to 
     reduce or eliminate deferred maintenance of an asset, which 
     may include resolving directly related infrastructure 
     deficiencies of the asset that would not by itself be 
     classified as deferred maintenance.

     ``Sec. 200402. National Parks and Public Land Legacy 
       Restoration Fund

       ``(a) Establishment.--There is established in the Treasury 
     of the United States a fund to be known as the `National 
     Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund'.
       ``(b) Deposits.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), for 
     each of fiscal years 2021 through 2025, there shall be 
     deposited in the Fund an amount equal to 50 percent of all 
     energy development revenues due and payable to the United 
     States from oil, gas, coal, or alternative or renewable 
     energy development on Federal land and water credited, 
     covered, or deposited as miscellaneous receipts under Federal 
     law in the preceding fiscal year.
       ``(2) Maximum amount.--The amount deposited in the Fund 
     under paragraph (1) shall not exceed $1,900,000,000 for any 
     fiscal year.
       ``(3) Effect on other revenues.--Nothing in this section 
     affects the disposition of revenues that--
       ``(A) are due to the United States, special funds, trust 
     funds, or States from mineral and energy development on 
     Federal land and water; or
       ``(B) have been otherwise appropriated--
       ``(i) under Federal law, including--

       ``(I) the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (43 
     U.S.C. 1331 note; Public Law 109-432); and
       ``(II) the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.); or

       ``(ii) from--

       ``(I) the Land and Water Conservation Fund established 
     under chapter 2003; or
       ``(II) the Historic Preservation Fund established under 
     chapter 3031.

       ``(c) Availability of Funds.--Amounts deposited in the Fund 
     shall be available to the Secretary and the Secretary of 
     Agriculture, as provided in subsection (e), without further 
     appropriation or fiscal year limitation.
       ``(d) Investment of Amounts.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary may request the Secretary 
     of the Treasury to invest any portion of the Fund that is 
     not, as determined by the Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of Agriculture, required to meet the current needs 
     of the Fund.
       ``(2) Requirement.--An investment requested under paragraph 
     (1) shall be made by the Secretary of the Treasury in a 
     public debt security--
       ``(A) with a maturity suitable to the needs of the Fund, as 
     determined by the Secretary; and
       ``(B) bearing interest at a rate determined by the 
     Secretary of the Treasury, taking into consideration current 
     market yields on outstanding marketable obligations of the 
     United States of comparable maturity.
       ``(3) Credits to fund.--The income on investments of the 
     Fund under this subsection shall be credited to, and form a 
     part of, the Fund.
       ``(e) Use of Funds.--
       ``(1) In general.--Amounts deposited in the Fund for each 
     fiscal year shall be used for priority deferred maintenance 
     projects in the System, in the National Wildlife Refuge 
     System, on public land administered by the Bureau of Land 
     Management, for the Bureau of Indian Education schools, and 
     in the National Forest System, as follows:
       ``(A) 70 percent of the amounts deposited in the Fund for 
     each fiscal year shall be allocated to the Service.
       ``(B) 15 percent of the amounts deposited in the Fund for 
     each fiscal year shall be allocated to the Forest Service.
       ``(C) 5 percent of the amounts deposited in the Fund for 
     each fiscal year shall be allocated to the United States Fish 
     and Wildlife Service.
       ``(D) 5 percent of the amounts deposited in the Fund for 
     each fiscal year shall be allocated to the Bureau of Land 
     Management.
       ``(E) 5 percent of the amounts deposited in the Fund for 
     each fiscal year shall be allocated to the Bureau of Indian 
     Education.
       ``(2) Limitations.--
       ``(A) Non-transportation projects.--Over the term of the 
     Fund, within each covered agency, not less than 65 percent of 
     amounts from the Fund shall be allocated for non-
     transportation projects.
       ``(B) Transportation projects.--The amounts remaining in 
     the Fund after the allocations required under subparagraph 
     (A) may be allocated for transportation projects of the 
     covered agencies, including paved and unpaved roads, bridges, 
     tunnels, and paved parking areas.
       ``(C) Plan.--Any priority deferred maintenance project 
     funded under this section shall be consistent with an 
     applicable transportation, deferred maintenance, or capital 
     improvement plan developed by the applicable covered agency.
       ``(f) Prohibited Use of Funds.--No amounts in the Fund 
     shall be used--
       ``(1) for land acquisition;
       ``(2) to supplant discretionary funding made available for 
     annually recurring facility operations, maintenance, and 
     construction needs; or
       ``(3) for bonuses for employees of the Federal Government 
     that are carrying out this section.
       ``(g) Submission of Priority List of Projects to 
     Congress.--Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment 
     of this section, the Secretary and the Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall submit to the Committees on Energy and 
     Natural Resources and Appropriations of the Senate and the 
     Committees on Natural Resources and Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives a list of projects to be funded for 
     fiscal year 2021 that--
       ``(1) are identified by the Secretary and the Secretary of 
     Agriculture as priority deferred maintenance projects; and
       ``(2) as of the date of the submission of the list, are 
     ready to be implemented.
       ``(h) Submission of Annual List of Projects to Congress.--
     Until the date on which all of the amounts in the Fund are 
     expended, the President shall annually submit to Congress, 
     together with the annual budget of the United States, a list 
     of projects to be funded from the Fund that includes a 
     detailed description of each project, including the estimated 
     expenditures from the Fund for the project for the applicable 
     fiscal year.
       ``(i) Alternate Allocation.--
       ``(1) In general.--Appropriations Acts may provide for 
     alternate allocation of amounts made available under this 
     section, consistent with the allocations to covered agencies 
     under subsection (e)(1).
       ``(2) Allocation by president.--
       ``(A) No alternate allocations.--If Congress has not 
     enacted legislation establishing alternate allocations by the 
     date on which the Act making full-year appropriations for the 
     Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies 
     for the applicable fiscal year is enacted into law, amounts 
     made available under subsection (c) shall be allocated by the 
     President.
       ``(B) Insufficient alternate allocation.--If Congress 
     enacts legislation establishing alternate allocations for 
     amounts made available under subsection (c) that are less 
     than the full amount appropriated under that subsection, the 
     difference between the amount appropriated and the alternate 
     allocation shall be allocated by the President.
       ``(j) Public Donations.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary and the Secretary of 
     Agriculture may accept public cash or in-kind donations that 
     advance efforts--
       ``(A) to reduce the deferred maintenance backlog; and
       ``(B) to encourage relevant public-private partnerships.
       ``(2) Credits to fund.--Any cash donations accepted under 
     paragraph (1) shall be--
       ``(A) credited to, and form a part of, the Fund; and
       ``(B) allocated to the covered agency for which the 
     donation was made.
       ``(3) Other allocations.--Any donations allocated to a 
     covered agency under paragraph (2)(B) shall be allocated to 
     the applicable covered agency independently of the 
     allocations under subsection (e)(1).
       ``(k) Required Consideration for Accessibility.--In 
     expending amounts from the Fund, the Secretary and the 
     Secretary of Agriculture shall incorporate measures to 
     improve the accessibility of assets and accommodate visitors 
     and employees with disabilities in accordance with applicable 
     law.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of chapters for subtitle 
     II of title 54, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
     after the item relating to chapter 2003 the following:

``2004.  National Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration200401''.....

       (c) GAO Study.--Not later than 5 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall--
       (1) conduct a study on the implementation of this section 
     and the amendments made by this section, including whether 
     this section and the amendments made by this section have 
     effectively reduced the priority deferred maintenance backlog 
     of the covered agencies (as that term is defined in section 
     200401 of title 54, United States Code); and
       (2) submit to Congress a report that describes the results 
     of the study under paragraph (1).

     SEC. 3. PERMANENT FULL FUNDING OF THE LAND AND WATER 
                   CONSERVATION FUND.

       (a) In General.--Section 200303 of title 54, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 200303. Availability of funds

       ``(a) In General.--Any amounts deposited in the Fund under 
     section 200302 for fiscal year 2020 and each fiscal year 
     thereafter shall be made available for expenditure for fiscal 
     year 2021 and each fiscal year thereafter, without further 
     appropriation or fiscal year limitation, to carry out the 
     purposes of the Fund (including accounts and programs made 
     available from the Fund pursuant to the Further Consolidated 
     Appropriations Act, 2020 (Public Law 116-94; 133 Stat. 
     2534)).
       ``(b) Additional Amounts.--Amounts made available under 
     subsection (a) shall be in addition to amounts made available 
     to the Fund under section 105 of the Gulf of Mexico Energy 
     Security Act of 2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331 note; Public Law 109-
     432) or otherwise appropriated from the Fund.
       ``(c) Allocation Authority.--
       ``(1) Submission of cost estimates.--The President shall 
     submit to Congress detailed account, program, and project 
     allocations of the full amount made available under 
     subsection (a)--
       ``(A) for fiscal year 2021, not later than 90 days after 
     the date of enactment of the Great American Outdoors Act; and

[[Page H3644]]

       ``(B) for each fiscal year thereafter, as part of the 
     annual budget submission of the President.
       ``(2) Alternate allocation.--
       ``(A) In general.--Appropriations Acts may provide for 
     alternate allocation of amounts made available under 
     subsection (a), including allocations by account, program, 
     and project.
       ``(B) Allocation by president.--
       ``(i) No alternate allocations.--If Congress has not 
     enacted legislation establishing alternate allocations by the 
     date on which the Act making full-year appropriations for the 
     Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies 
     for the applicable fiscal year is enacted into law, amounts 
     made available under subsection (a) shall be allocated by the 
     President.
       ``(ii) Insufficient alternate allocation.--If Congress 
     enacts legislation establishing alternate allocations for 
     amounts made available under subsection (a) that are less 
     than the full amount appropriated under that subsection, the 
     difference between the amount appropriated and the alternate 
     allocation shall be allocated by the President.
       ``(3) Recreational public access.--Amounts expended from 
     the Fund under this section shall be consistent with the 
     requirements for recreational public access for hunting, 
     fishing, recreational shooting, or other outdoor recreational 
     purposes under section 200306(c).
       ``(4) Annual report.--The President shall submit to 
     Congress an annual report that describes the final allocation 
     by account, program, and project of amounts made available 
     under subsection (a), including a description of the status 
     of obligations and expenditures.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 200302(c) of title 54, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking paragraph (3).
       (2) Section 200306(a)(2)(B) of title 54, United States 
     Code, is amended by striking clause (iii).
       (c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 
     2003 of title 54, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     the item relating to section 200303 and inserting the 
     following:

``200303. Availability of funds.''.


                            Motion to Concur

  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Grijalva moves that the House concur in the Senate 
     amendments to H.R. 1957.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of July 
21, 2020, the motion shall be debatable for 80 minutes, with 1 hour 
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member 
of the Committee on Natural Resources and 20 minutes equally divided 
and controlled by the majority leader and minority leader or their 
respective designees.
  The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) and the gentleman from Utah 
(Mr. Bishop) each will control 30 minutes. The gentleman from Maryland 
(Mr. Hoyer) and the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy) each will 
control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva).


                             General Leave

  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and insert extraneous material on H.R. 1957.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Arizona?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  In February of 2019, I flew to Arizona from Washington to speak about 
my bill to permanently protect the Grand Canyon from uranium mining. We 
wanted to publicly release the legislation on the rim of the canyon to 
show firsthand the lands that we were attempting to protect.
  Unfortunately, the weather had other ideas. That night, before the 
event, it snowed more than it had in decades. But by some small 
miracle, the roads were clear, and we found an easy pathway into the 
park. We made it in time and even found some rangers to help us set up 
in the snow.
  Tribal leaders representing people who have called that land their 
home for a millennia joined us at the event. Standing there with them 
on the edge of the amazing canyon millions of years in the making and 
glistening in the snow, it was hard not to be moved.
  Looking out over the Grand Canyon, you are reminded why we as a 
Nation have dedicated ourselves to protecting the unique and enduring 
landscapes around us. Nowhere else on Earth is there a sight quite like 
the Grand Canyon, or, for that matter, like Yosemite Valley or 
Yellowstone National Park. These places are gems of our National Park 
system, and they show who we are as a people.
  We are judged on what we choose to pass on, and today we have an 
opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to preserving these lands for 
the future and for future generations.
  In a few short minutes we will vote on the Great American Outdoors 
Act, a bill to significantly increase conservation spending in the 
United States. For too long we have allowed our National Parks to fall 
into disrepair. We have underfunded maintenance while park visitation 
has skyrocketed. At the same time, we have failed to meet the full 
promise of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. We have been diverting 
half of this conservation funding stream to other uses for which this 
money was never intended.
  Today, we take the opportunity to remedy both those failures. The 
Great American Outdoors Act provides $1.9 billion per year to maintain 
our National Parks and public lands, ensuring that special places like 
the Grand Canyon are accessible to all Americans as they were to me on 
that February morning.
  The law will also make an enduring commitment to protecting green and 
flourishing open spaces by providing $900 million annually to the Land 
and Water Conservation Fund.
  This funding will mean more parks for inner city families. It will 
allow us to protect forests, wetlands, and marshes from the destruction 
of climate change. It will help protect lands around the National Parks 
from inappropriate development and will expand recreational access and 
opportunity for all Americans. Combined, these two major programs 
amount to one of the biggest wins for conservation in decades.
  We all know that not everyone here agrees about the value of these 
programs. In fact, we disagree almost daily on how best to protect the 
landscapes of our Nation.
  But I hope today we can move past those political differences and to 
honestly consider the value of conservation and the importance of 
stable, predictable funding.
  We have a generational opportunity to ensure America's crown jewels 
are protected. We have a unique chance to ensure that every tool is 
available to help us respond to the climate crisis, so that we can 
protect those landscapes that best protect clean water, clean air, and 
healthy green spaces.
  This bill is a major win for the American people, decades in the 
making, I might add. I have pursued it for years. Some of my colleagues 
have pursued it for years. This didn't happen overnight.
  Now, during a time of national disillusionment, it is perhaps more 
necessary than ever to demonstrate that we can still bridge the divide.
  When it comes to passing along this Nation to our children and to 
theirs, we can still work together to find common ground.
  This bill goes beyond politics. It is about ensuring that we pass 
along a legacy of public lands stewardship and conservation to future 
generations, so they, too, can marvel at the Grand Canyon covered in 
snow.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this important 
measure.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Let's get a couple of things very clear.
  First of all, this is not about the Land and Water Conservation Fund. 
We reauthorized permanently the Land and Water Conservation Fund in the 
last Congress, and in doing that, in a House Republican bill, I might 
add, we took the State-side projects--these are the kinds of things 
like easements and picnic grounds and roads and parks that your 
constituents are all telling you that they like, those are called the 
State-side projects--and we actually increased the funding for those 
programs.

  We also put in that act a limitation on the amount of money that 
could be used to buy more land. This bill is about that concept, the 
limitation of land acquisition. The special interest groups have been 
putting pressure on you and are giving you misinformation about this 
particular thing. They simply want to circumvent the limits that were 
pushed in that bill that was there earlier.
  This is two bills merged together. The first one was the old H.R. 
1225, the backlog maintenance bill that Mr. Grijalva referred to in his 
speech. We

[[Page H3645]]

wanted to see if we could actually help parks and other public lands 
who are having a maintenance backlog that is near $20 billion today.
  Many people, 330 people, cosponsored that bill. Obviously, it was 
popular. But for 1\1/2\ years, Democratic leadership failed and refused 
to move that bill. One of their arguments was, this is key, there is no 
offset for a bill that scored $7 billion. They refused to move it 
because there was no offset.
  That bill would fund parks' maintenance backlogs by taking excess 
revenue from those that come from all the energy development, but 
primarily oil and gas, off-coast as well as on land, and after we pay 
our obligations, the first $1 billion of the excess would be used to 
maintain our parks. That is still a decent bill.
  You have added that, or the Democrats in the Senate have added that, 
to a second bill that is mandatory $900 million of spending. That 
mandatory spending will be from now until eternity, but the goal of 
that is simply to increase the buying power to buy more lands, not to 
create the State-side projects which we increased.
  We are spending trillions of dollars on coronavirus emergency 
spending. We still have to pay for that. If you really think that 
mandatory increasing of our debt is the right policy, I think there is 
a problem there because the CBO did say that this new concoction--bill 
scores at $17 billion. And I want you to notice there is no offset for 
that in this bill.
  Both House Republicans and House Democrats have rules that they will 
not bring a bill to the floor that is not offset. The Blue Dog 
Democrats unanimously wrote a letter to their leadership saying, Do not 
bring a bill to the floor that is not offset.
  This violates the rules of both the Democrats and the Republicans 
clearly and adds $17 billion to the debt, and the reason this is here 
is, well, because.
  Both LWCF, as well as what we want to do with park maintenance, is 
paid for by royalties from those gas and oil explorations. The excess 
was to go to parks. We already have obligations with those royalties. 
GOMESA is an obligation. Historic preservation is an obligation. State 
reimbursement is an obligation. Those are priorities.
  Now, we are also saying in this bill, the $1 billion of money to buy 
more land is now also a priority above and beyond what is happening for 
the parks and what will get there for the parks, which may not in 
normal times be a concern, but in this era, CRS has already certified 
that we are 84 percent lower in the amount of activity and the amount 
of royalties coming in from our energy development than we were a year 
ago. That is 2 million barrels of oil a day less than we were producing 
and getting royalties from them last year.
  So if buying more land is the priority, the maintenance of our 
backlog could be totally left out.
  Now, this is not for wont of what we are trying to do. There were 
amendments to try and fix this, but they were not allowed to be brought 
to this floor. There are amendments in the Senate to fix these 
problems, but they were not allowed to be brought to the floor. There 
will be many on both sides of the aisle, some on our side, who will 
support and defend this bill.
  I will remind you we are having a heat wave here in Washington, D.C. 
For the first time in four years we are coming close to 100 degrees, 
but the heat index is well into three digits. There are a lot of people 
suffering from heat stroke.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Cunningham), a sponsor of the legislation, 
companion legislation to the Senate bill.

                              {time}  1230

  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, the 
Great American Outdoors Act, and to express my gratitude for so many of 
my friends and colleagues, including the 252 cosponsors from both sides 
of the aisle who are working with me to secure the greatest achievement 
for conservation in a generation.
  Mr. Speaker, my bipartisan legislation gives Congress a chance to 
deliver a massive win not only for our irreplaceable parks and public 
lands, but also for this institution as a whole by showing the American 
people that we can work together and keep our promises.
  The Great American Outdoors Act will honor our Nation's commitment to 
conservation in two important ways.
  First, it fully and permanently funds the Land and Water Conservation 
Fund, our most important conservation program. LWCF preserves the best 
of America, ensuring hunting, fishing, boating, hiking, and other 
recreational access for all of our constituents.
  It is the backbone of our $778 billion economy, which accounts for 
over 5 million jobs across this country. It protects working forests 
and the jobs that they support in the woods and the mills. And here is 
the best part: It does it all without spending a dime of taxpayer 
money.
  Despite this, we have consistently fallen short in utilizing the full 
amount of funds in LWCF. Over the past 55 years, we have only spent 
half the money that we have deposited in the fund, thereby creating an 
unsustainable backlog in the Lowcountry and across this Nation. This 
legislation will fix that, ensuring at long last that these funds are 
spent how they were intended.
  Second, it will relieve the growing multibillion-dollar maintenance 
backlog in our national forests, parks, and other Federal public lands. 
From crumbling roads and eroding trails to aging water systems and 
deteriorating historic sites and visitor centers, the widespread 
disrepair of our national treasures is only getting worse. The Great 
American Outdoors Act will address this as well by making essential 
investments to reverse the damage, while creating over 100,000 jobs in 
the process.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation is grounded in two basic principles: 
that Congress should invest funding set aside for conservation towards 
the public good, and that we should pay the maintenance bills we have 
already accrued. It is time that we honor our promises.
  In South Carolina, the LWCF has protected the hallowed ground of Fort 
Sumter, the living outdoor classroom of Congaree National Park, the 
Pitt Street Bridge in Mount Pleasant, the Folly Beach Boardwalk, and 
literally hundreds of other local and State parks.
  In my district, LWCF protected the ACE Basin, which is the largest 
undeveloped estuary on the Atlantic Coast, providing a home for the 
area's incredible wildlife, a source of recreation for sportsmen and -
women, and a natural safeguard for our coastal communities from 
devastating weather events.
  Just this past week, I heard from our veterans about the important 
role that public lands play in the healing process for many men and 
women transitioning back to civilian life. They told me how access to 
nature and the outdoors has helped them find a sense of calm and peace.
  The power of these places to heal and unite us reaches all the way 
back here to Washington, where my bill is supported by the Speaker, by 
the minority leader, and by a large bipartisan majority. Seventy-three 
Senators have already voted for this bill, and President Trump has 
specifically asked for us to send it to his desk.
  In this current climate of division and discord, the Great American 
Outdoors Act is exemplary of the fact that Republicans and Democrats 
can still come together to pursue commonsense solutions, do right by 
our public lands, and keep our word.
  Mr. Speaker, I invite all my colleagues to join me in supporting our 
communities, families, public lands, and economy by voting to pass the 
Great American Outdoors Act.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Idaho (Mr. Simpson) to explain why mandatory spending is good.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend from Utah for 
yielding. I know that was painful.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in favor of the Great American Outdoors Act. It 
makes sense to me that, if we are going to have public lands and 
preserve public lands for Americans, we should also take care of it. 
That is why the LWCF funding and deferred maintenance part of this bill 
are very important and a perfect combination.
  With that in mind, I wrote the LAND Act in 2017, which funded these 
two

[[Page H3646]]

programs without using a dime of taxpayer money.
  Fast-forward to 2020 and the President specifically asked Congress to 
send him a bill that funded both these programs and that he would sign 
it.
  Thanks to Senator Gardner, Senator Daines, Senator Heinrich, and 
Senator Manchin, the Great American Outdoors Act built upon the LAND 
Act and passed the Senate with 73 votes, which brings us to this 
historic day.
  The Great American Outdoors Act creates 100,000 jobs, preserves 
public lands for future generations, and cares for our current national 
parks and trails. All this is funded by energy revenue and the existing 
$20 billion fund--again, not taxpayer dollars.
  The bill does not expand the Federal footprint because 99 percent of 
the LWCF purchases are within existing public lands.
  The bill does not force anyone to sell their property since it is 
willing seller and willing buyer.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of this bill not for me and not for you, 
but for future generations so that they can enjoy our great outdoors.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Cox), a member of the Natural Resources Committee.
  Mr. COX of California. Mr. Speaker, today is a great day for public 
lands, for land conservation, for outdoor recreation, and for every 
American who values these gifts that Mother Nature has provided for our 
country.
  Last year, we made a promise to the American people to protect their 
public lands, our national treasures, by permanently reauthorizing the 
Land and Water Conservation Fund as part of the John Dingell 
Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act. Today, we are poised to 
make good on that promise by passing the Great American Outdoors Act, 
which will permanently and fully fund the LWCF. I am proud to be an 
original cosponsor of that bill.

  These funds have not just protected our Nation's most well-known 
national parks, but, over the years, LWCF dollars have also created 
parks, ball fields, and other outdoor recreational spaces in every 
corner of our country from Alaska to Florida, from Maine to Hawaii.
  This also includes many communities in my district, such as Mendota, 
Huron, Selma, Sanger, Parlier, Lemoore, Corcoran, Allensworth, Shafter, 
Buttonwillow, McFarland, and Arvin, just to name a few.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the bipartisan team of my colleagues and 
activists who have worked hard to make this legislation a reality.
  There is an old East Asian proverb that says: One generation plants 
the trees for another generation to enjoy the shade. Today, we are 
replanting those trees.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this bill.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Ohio (Mr. Stivers).
  Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Great 
American Outdoors Act.
  My district has 120 projects that benefit from the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund, from community parks to the Wayne National Forest, 
to the Hopewell Culture National Historical Park.
  Public lands, forests, and parks give folks the opportunity to 
connect with the outdoors and with each other, especially in this time 
of the coronavirus.
  I also represent a bunch of small businesses, like Rocky Boots in 
Nelsonville that employs 2,800 people and depends on a thriving outdoor 
recreation economy.
  In my district last year, $1.37 billion was spent on outdoor 
recreation. And at a time when there is such a backlog in maintenance, 
this maintenance support will create 100,000 jobs.
  During a time when we have 11.1 percent unemployment, Congress should 
be taking every opportunity it can to create jobs.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill isn't just about conservation, it is about 
jobs and the economy, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
  It is a Senate bill that passed the Senate 73-25. It is not perfect, 
but it is a good bill, and it is a bill we should support.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).
  Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Great 
American Outdoors Act.
  Protecting wilderness reflects the best values of Oregon: 
environmental protection, stewardship of our land, and community 
partnership.
  The Land and Water Conservation Fund represents a bipartisan 
commitment to safeguarding natural areas and providing recreation 
opportunities in the prized outdoor areas that make places in northwest 
Oregon, like Ecola State Park and the Tualatin National Wildlife 
Refuge, so special. Unfortunately, the program has faced significant 
instability in recent years, limiting the long-term planning needed for 
meaningful conservation efforts.
  Last month, I joined my colleagues on the Select Committee on the 
Climate Crisis in releasing a bold, comprehensive, science-based 
climate action plan. Our plan for solving the climate crisis recognizes 
the value of public lands and healthy ecosystems in sequestering carbon 
dioxide and promoting biodiversity, and it calls for a full and 
permanent funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
  The Great American Outdoors Act will help mitigate the climate crisis 
and protect the natural beauty and robust habitats that fish and 
wildlife depend on for survival.
  At a time when our communities are struggling to recover from the 
economic consequences of the coronavirus pandemic, a time when there is 
heightened awareness about the inequities and injustices in our 
society, including inequitable access to our wild places, this bill 
will boost rural economies and expand access to public lands for future 
generations.
  I am also pleased that this bill takes steps to tackle our national 
park maintenance backlog to support treasured places like the Lewis and 
Clark National Historical Park. Oregonians care deeply about protecting 
our parks, forests, scenic areas, and wildlife refuges, and this bill 
takes important steps to safeguard them for future generations.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Grijalva for his leadership, and I urge 
all of my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman 
from Indiana (Mrs. Walorski).
  Mrs. WALORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the Great 
American Outdoors Act.
  Our Nation's public lands have long been treasured sources of 
enjoyment and beauty available to every American. They also play a 
critical role in our economy, with the outdoor recreation industry 
supporting 5.2 million jobs.
  The hardworking Hoosiers I represent know that better than anyone. 
Manufacturers in northern Indiana build products like boats, trailers, 
and 80 percent of the Nation's RVs. That is why Elkhart, Indiana, is 
known as the RV Capital of the World.
  I am a proud cosponsor of the Great American Outdoors Act because it 
will support RV and boat manufacturers and their workers, promote 
conservation, and revitalize our national parks. By investing in long-
delayed maintenance projects, it will ensure our national parks can 
continue to be enjoyed by all Americans for generations to come. By 
enhancing access to our public lands, it will boost tourism, strengthen 
our economy, and support good-paying jobs.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for the Great 
American Outdoors Act.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Costa), the senior member of the Natural Resources 
Committee.
  Mr. COSTA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his efforts to bring 
this legislation to the House floor.
  I rise today to speak on the Great American Outdoors Act and the 
importance of this legislation and why we should move on a bipartisan 
effort to pass it.
  This bill tackles a tremendous deferred maintenance backlog on public 
lands, including our national parks, our treasures, the great American 
national parks.
  This funding will contribute towards making our parks safe and 
enhance the recreational access, such as the great Yosemite National 
Park, the crown jewel in California, as well as Kings Canyon and 
Sequoia National Parks and many others--not only in California, but 
across our Nation--that are

[[Page H3647]]

part of America's heritage and a part of our lasting legacy for future 
generations to come.
  This bill funds the Land and Water Conservation Fund annually at $900 
million and creates a $9.5 billion fund for deferred maintenance on 
public lands.
  We are way in arrears in terms of deferred maintenance that we need 
to do not only for our national parks, but for our public lands. That 
is why this is so important.
  Let me respond to the issue of our deficit.
  Our deficit is a problem. I am a Blue Dog. But let's be clear. After 
16 years here, I have come to the conclusion that trying to address 
incremental issues as they relate to our national deficit is not going 
to get us there.
  Until Republicans are willing to address the issues of revenues and 
Democrats are willing to address the issues of expenditures together 
and jump off that cliff holding hands to balance revenues and 
expenditures, we are just not going to get there. Okay?
  So we should not use that as an excuse not to do what we should do 
for today's generation and future generations. The creation of this 
permanent funding highlights the need for Congress to address the 
deferred maintenance backlog.
  I will admit that we are not doing more to provide funding for our 
aging Federal water infrastructure that also needs to be invested on.
  So let me close. Let's take the moment of this bipartisan success to 
redouble our efforts to address the need for maintenance on federally 
owned projects.

                              {time}  1245

  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  This bill is actually extremely poorly drafted. It assumes basic 
things. But if, for instance, as we said, the royalties don't show up 
as we are anticipating, we don't have that $1 billion to buy more land. 
How do you solve that? Do you prorate that money? Do you take it from 
other sources? Do you put this mandatory spending above other mandatory 
spending, like Social Security?
  CRS said those are good questions, and they don't know because this 
bill is silent on all those questions.
  It says the President is supposed to come up with $900 million of 
projects. What if he only comes up with $800 million? Who gets that 
extra $100 million? Does that go to the Department of the Interior? Is 
that a slush fund?
  Once again, CRS said, Good questions, and no one knows because this 
bill is silent on those types of questions.
  BLM has no idea of how much money they have spent on this program or 
where the land is. The State portion is actually--they are okay because 
they are a percentage. But this is talking about a dollar figure.
  So you are going to hear a lot of platitudes, but somebody, at some 
time, has got to say how this money is going to actually be funded.
  To help us with that, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Nebraska 
(Mr. Fortenberry), a longtime member of this legislature, who can 
address those things.
  Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for the 
time, and perhaps we can continue that discussion in another venue 
because today I am rising in support of this act.
  Mr. Speaker, a while back I was at the Library of Congress and I met 
the famous filmmaker, Ken Burns and he taught me something. He spoke to 
us about the creation of the National Park System last century and how 
it represented a singular defining moment for America; our sense of 
vastness, openness, and endless opportunity, and regenerated for us an 
understanding of an American ethos, this great ideal of conservation, 
caring for what we have and transferring it into the future.
  Mr. Speaker, our National Park sites are majestic places, great 
sources of national pride, and a living heritage for all Americans. But 
here is the problem: We have a backlog of maintenance, but we fix it 
today.
  Along with providing certainty for the future of the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund, this all is a great boost to communities eager for 
innovation and conservation ideals.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
New Mexico (Ms. Haaland), who is vice chair of the full Committee of 
Natural Resources and chair of the Subcommittee on National Parks, 
Forests, and Public Lands.
  Ms. HAALAND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Great 
American Outdoors Act.
  From the day I became the chairwoman of the National Parks, Forests, 
and Public Lands Subcommittee, I have heard from constituents, 
colleagues, and advocates about fixing the maintenance backlog and 
fully funding LWCF and making it permanent.
  LWCF has helped provide recreational opportunities for underserved 
and low-income communities in nearly every Congressional district, and 
last year, we passed an historic permanent authorization.
  In my district, LWCF has supported the Valle del Oro National 
Wildlife Refuge, Petroglyph National Monument, Tingley Beach recreation 
area, the Elena Gallegos Open Space picnic area, and Martineztown Park.
  The great American Outdoors Act will ensure LWCF's full $900 million 
is used every year for conservation and environmental protection, to 
boost local outdoor economies, and to protect intact ecosystems 
essential for adapting to climate change.
  The bill also establishes the National Park Service and Public Land 
Legacy Restoration Fund to provide five Federal land management 
agencies with up to $9.5 billion over 5 years to address the deferred 
maintenance backlog on our public lands.
  These agencies will now be able to aggressively address deferred 
maintenance, improve visitor services, and support Tribal communities 
in places like Carlsbad Caverns, White Sands National Parks, Chaco 
Culture National Historical Park, and El Malpais National Monument.
  Repairing the crumbling infrastructure on our public lands today is 
critical so that future generations can enjoy them. I am proud of the 
work we did to get this bill to this point, and I urge my colleagues to 
invest in our National Parks and public lands, and vote ``yes'' on the 
Great American Outdoors Act.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Hurd).
  Mr. HURD of Texas. Mr. Speaker, Teddy Roosevelt once remarked that:

       We have fallen heirs to the most glorious heritage a people 
     have ever received, and each one must do his or her part if 
     we wish to show that the nation is worthy of its good 
     fortune.

  Passage of the Great American Outdoors Act proves we are worthy of 
the good fortune and glorious heritage of our National Parks.
  Future generations have been counting on us to ensure these treasures 
can be visited for another 100 years and, with the funding secured in 
this bill, we aren't letting them down.
  In 1893, Katharine Lee Bates was inspired hiking up Pikes Peak, and 
she penned the following lines:

     O beautiful for spacious skies
     For amber waves of grain
     For purple mountain majesties
     Above the fruited plain.
     America, America
     God shed His grace on thee
     And crown thy good with brotherhood
     From sea to shining sea.

  Passage of this bipartisan bill is a triumphant act that will benefit 
countless generations to come.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Neguse), a member of the Natural Resources Committee.
  Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to speak today in support of the 
Great American Outdoors Act. I would like to thank my colleague from 
Arizona, the distinguished chairman, Chairman Grijalva, for his 
leadership; and also thank my colleague from South Carolina, 
Representative Cunningham, for introducing this bill.
  The Great American Outdoors Act, as you have heard today, Mr. 
Speaker, would provide full and permanent funding for the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund, and address the significant maintenance 
backlog on our Nation's public lands.
  Since its inception, the LWCF program has established many of our 
Nation's most coveted and incredible public lands. The program has 
invested in over 41,000 parks, including Rocky Mountain National Park, 
Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, Lory State

[[Page H3648]]

Park, and so many other iconic parks in my district, the Second 
Congressional District of the State of Colorado.
  Nearly 1,000 LWCF grants have leveraged over $147 million dollars for 
local government and State park investments in Colorado. In my district 
alone, there have been 191 LWCF projects. Therefore, establishing 
permanent and full funding truly is critical.
  Additionally, deferred maintenance, as you have heard my colleagues 
on both sides of the aisle discuss today, on our public lands is a 
mounting problem that we can no longer afford to ignore.
  As one of our country's most popular National Parks, Rocky Mountain 
National Park faces a significant maintenance backlog of $84 million. 
Our park employees are working incredibly hard, but they can't do it 
alone. We must address this by increasing funds designed to upkeep and 
rebuild infrastructure on our Federal public lands.
  I have consistently urged Congress to fully fund LWCF and address 
these challenges, and I am so heartened to see this collaborative 
effort considered on the House floor today and, of course, grateful to 
the county commissioners, and to so many local officials, conservation 
groups, anglers and outdoor recreation businesses who have come 
together to contribute their time and dedication to this effort. Let's 
get this bill passed.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzpatrick).
  Mr. FITZPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as the lead sponsor of the 
Great American Outdoors Act, and this is a very, very big day for this 
Chamber.
  As my colleagues are aware, I have been pushing to both permanently 
reauthorize and permanently fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund 
literally since the day I entered this Chamber.
  In addition to the LWCF, this legislation tackles the maintenance 
backlog that needs to be addressed on public lands and parks across our 
great Nation.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill will have a positive impact on nearly every 
single Congressional District in this country, and the LWCF has already 
had a positive impact on many sites in my district alone, most notably, 
Nockamixon State Park.
  Hundreds of businesses, recreation, and environmental groups have 
come together to endorse our legislation, including the Backcountry 
Hunters & Anglers, the League of Conservation Voters, the Audubon 
Society, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Ducks Unlimited, Clean 
Water Action, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill is historic; it is bipartisan; it is 
bicameral, with over 250 cosponsors in the House. It overwhelmingly 
passed the Senate, and it will be signed into law by the President. 
That is what is called bipartisan cooperation.
  Mr. Speaker, for those of us who are strong advocates of our 
environment, this is a good day. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Levin), a valued member of the Natural Resources 
Committee
  Mr. LEVIN of California. Mr. Speaker, I am extremely fortunate to 
represent a coastal district with many beloved beaches, lagoons, and 
State parks. In California's 49th Congressional District, our public 
lands bring outdoor recreation and joy to our residents, and also to 
many tourists and visitors looking to catch some of our famous waves or 
hike our scenic trails.
  This defining aspect of California culture continues to make 
communities in my district not only economically stronger, but also 
active, healthier, and happier, with locals and tourists alike enjoying 
all the benefits and spaces that the great outdoors offer.
  The LWCF is famously known as America's most successful conservation 
program. This historic bill is an all-around win for our communities, 
benefiting local economies, and protecting our planet for future 
generations.
  Thus far, California has received approximately $2.5 billion in LWCF 
funding over the last 50 years, which has helped to protect iconic 
places, like San Onofre State Beach, Carlsbad State Beach, San Clemente 
State Beach, Torrey Pines Beach and Nature Reserve, and several 
flourishing lagoons, all in my district.
  We are not just protecting those iconic places with this bill; we are 
also investing in our fight against the climate crisis. By conserving 
natural resources across the country, we are safekeeping critical 
landscapes, fragile ecosystems, and important wildlife habitat which 
are all part of the ecosystem we depend on.
  As we continue to invest in coastal conservation of wetlands, 
estuaries, dunes, and reefs, we are contributing to climate change 
adaptation planning and protecting our coastal communities from extreme 
weather events, sea level rise, and bluff erosion. These efforts to 
combat the climate crisis are incredibly important for the 50-plus 
miles of coastline in my district.
  I am proud to support the Great American Outdoors Act, and I hope 
this historic conservation legislation will soon become law, as it is 
certainly among the biggest bipartisan environmental accomplishments we 
have had in many years.

  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from North Carolina (Mr. McHenry).
  Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for his 
friendship and his encouragement. Maybe not encouragement on this 
specific bill, but I am proud to support this bill because it does help 
with the maintenance backlog in the National Parks, as well as assist 
with the long-term reauthorization of the Land and Water Conservation 
Trust, which is something I strongly support.
  Since its inception over 50 years ago, the Land and Water 
Conservation Trust has done very important things for my State and our 
Nation in preserving access to public lands and to the great outdoors.
  Also, for the maintenance backlog, I am proud to represent a piece of 
the Blue Ridge Parkway, which runs through my district and was the 
second most visited National Park last year. I think this year would be 
the same.
  In North Carolina alone, we have over 260,000 jobs that are directly 
attributable to the great outdoors; and those millions of visitors that 
come to the State through the Blue Ridge Parkway, they are vital for 
our economy in western North Carolina.
  Passage of this bill will help, both the backlog and with ensuring 
that we have long-term reauthorization on the Land and Water 
Conservation Trust. I encourage a ``yes'' vote.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Michigan (Mrs. Dingell), an effective member and a leader on the 
Natural Resources Committee.
  Mrs. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my wonderful chairman.
  I rise in strong support of the Great American Outdoors Act. This 
historic legislation makes good on our commitment to preserve our 
Nation's environmental heritage for future generations.
  This is an emotional moment for me. It provides full permanent 
funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, landmark conservation 
legislation that my late husband, John Dingell, wrote and helped 
establish in 1964.
  The LWCF funding has protected Michigan and the Nation's critical 
natural resources, while supporting local economies, creating jobs, and 
providing opportunities for outdoor recreation throughout the country.

                              {time}  1300

  LWCF was permanently authorized in 2019 as part of the John D. 
Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act but has 
received full funding only twice in its long history. The permanent 
full funding in this legislation is the culmination of decades of work 
by the conservation community; my late husband; and our wonderful 
current dean,   Don Young, who first advocated for this permanent 
funding through the Conservation and Reinvestment Act in 1999.
  Additionally, the National Parks and Public Land Legacy Land 
Restoration Fund included in the legislation will allow us to finally 
address the $22 billion deferred maintenance backlog in our Nation's 
public lands, a decades-long problem in the making.
  I am proud today to stand with my colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle to

[[Page H3649]]

continue that Dingell conservation legacy--I don't look like the 
greatest outdoors girl, but I know how important they are--which 
represents the boldest, most comprehensive conservation effort in 
decades.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Zeldin).
  Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding. As 
an original cosponsor of this legislation, I would also like to thank 
my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in both Chambers for helping 
lead the charge to get this important victory across the finish line.
  I represent the First Congressional District of New York. It is a 
district almost completely surrounded by water on the east end of Long 
Island. In my district alone, the Land and Water Conservation Fund has 
provided funding for over 65 parks, and that is just one example of the 
impact this program has made all across our great Nation. This supports 
public access, fishing, hunting, recreation, and our environment.
  After securing permanent authorization last year, it is an honor to 
continue the fight today. I am not sure about everyone else, but being 
cooped up over the course of these last few months has probably given 
just about all of us more appreciation for the great outdoors.
  This is an effective program that will go a long way in keeping our 
magnificent outdoors great for generations to come.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, before I yield to the next speaker, let me 
echo the words of Mrs. Dingell. John Dingell was indeed a warrior on 
behalf of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Today is a culmination 
of those efforts in which he played such a huge role, and I would be 
remiss in not thanking him and Debbie Dingell.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Thompson), who is a leader in conservation and access to our public 
lands.
  Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for 
yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this historic 
legislation that I was proud to coauthor. It has been more than 55 
years since the Land and Water Conservation Fund was enacted to 
establish recreation and conservation opportunities. Now is the time to 
ensure that LWCF is fully and permanently funded.
  This bill will create jobs and boost local economies that are 
currently facing significant financial hardships due to the COVID-19 
pandemic.
  It also provides urgent funding of $9.5 billion to fix broken park 
infrastructure and failing facilities. The bill supports parks in every 
State so hikers and anglers alike can visit and enjoy nature across our 
beautiful country. This is desperately needed now for our communities' 
emotional and physical well-being.
  Mr. Speaker, we need to protect and preserve our lands, and this bill 
does that at no expense to our taxpayers. I urge my colleagues to vote 
for this important legislation.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from the State of Washington (Mr. Newhouse).
  Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from 
Utah for letting me weigh in on this important subject.
  Mr. Speaker, the hunters and anglers, farmers and ranchers, and 
hikers and recreationists of central Washington are passionate 
advocates for access to public lands.
  I strongly stand behind my constituents in supporting the restoration 
of our national parks, our public lands, and Federal infrastructure. 
That is why I am proud to cosponsor the Restore Our Parks and Public 
Lands Act to address our country's deferred maintenance backlog in 
those areas. If that bill were brought to the floor before us today, I 
would be a resounding ``yes.''
  Unfortunately, that is not the bill that we are debating here this 
afternoon. So while I agree with many provisions within the Great 
American Outdoors Act, I fear that the sweeping nature of this 
legislation will have unintended consequences for rural communities 
like mine in Washington's Fourth District.
  Mr. Speaker, just 2 weeks ago, I was honored to welcome Secretary of 
the Interior David Bernhardt to the north-central region of my district 
in central Washington. These were the two main takeaways from the 
conversations that we had with citizens in that region: one, a lack of 
trust with the Federal Government; and, two, the need for hope in the 
face of many challenges facing rural communities.
  While I believe the intentions behind this legislation are grounded 
in the desire to improve our public lands, too many of my constituents 
think the approach within this bill is indicative of the same tired 
notion that we have all heard before: I am from the government, and I 
am here to help.
  We have already determined the Federal Government's culpability in 
creating a $20 billion maintenance backlog problem on our public lands. 
So the response is to permanently spend $900 million a year, most of 
which will be spent on what? Get this, Mr. Speaker: purchasing more 
Federal land.
  The farmers, ranchers, and hardworking men and women of my district 
support local management and control of our lands. We have seen 
firsthand the delinquency of the Federal Government, and I think we 
should work to continue to support our national parks but vote this 
bill down.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Mucarsel-Powell).
  Ms. MUCARSEL-POWELL. Mr. Speaker, the Everglades, Dry Tortugas, and 
Biscayne National Parks are three of our south Floridian national parks 
that are magnificent parks that we cherish across our country. They are 
essential to preserving biodiversity, improving air quality, providing 
recreational opportunities, and sustaining our physical and mental 
well-being. They are also essential to our economy, bolstering local 
economies across our Nation, supporting countless jobs, and breathing 
life into our small businesses.
  Unfortunately, our national parks are in need of help. Hiking trails 
are in disrepair, roads are crumbling, visitor centers are falling 
apart, and our lands are in need of protection.
  That is why passing today's bill, the Great American Outdoors Act, is 
so crucial. It will permanently reauthorize the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund to address our severe maintenance backlog and ensure 
that these natural beauties will be there for our children and our 
grandchildren.
  With the passage of this bill, Mr. Speaker, the ecotourism economies 
in both Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties will flourish. I urge support.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Oklahoma (Mr. Kevin Hern).
  Mr. KEVIN HERN of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member 
Bishop for his work on this issue.
  Mr. Speaker, in the wake of a global pandemic unlike anything we have 
seen in our lifetime, we have spent unprecedented amounts of money this 
year. We have already saddled the next generation with unthinkable 
debt. Digging our way out of this hole is going to take time and 
targeted effort. We cannot continue to spend as if our debts don't 
exist.
  This legislation needlessly increases the deficit. The Land and Water 
Conservation Fund, which is already incredibly well-funded, does not 
need an additional $900 million a year in perpetuity. With immediate 
health needs and economic recovery our top priorities, increasing the 
Federal real estate holding shouldn't be on anyone's to-do list.
  A recent report showed that 40 percent of LWCF funds went to projects 
that failed to advance any agency objectives. The oversight and 
accountability of the fund is laughable, but this bill seeks to 
exacerbate the lack of transparency by removing elected officials from 
the situation altogether and handing unilateral power to political 
appointees and unelected bureaucrats.
  There are more productive ways that we should spend our time this 
week, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Louisiana (Mr. Richmond).
  Mr. RICHMOND. Mr. Speaker, let me say that the goal of the bill is 
positive, but how it is achieved is just flat wrong.

[[Page H3650]]

  To pay for this legislation, what we do is go straight to Alabama, 
Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas and take $1.9 billion a year of 
potential revenue to those States to uplift their people to pay for 
this bill.
  Let me be specific about Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana. They 
rank 48th, 49th, and 50th in terms of quality of life for their 
residents. They rank 1, 2, and 5 in terms of their African-American 
population.
  So, what are we doing here, in this time of racial inequity? We are 
going to Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana and taking $1.9 billion a 
year without sharing any of that revenue with their States where: they 
can improve education, where all three rank last; they can improve 
healthcare, where all three States rank last; and they can improve 
their environment, where all three States are in the bottom one-third.
  So, all I am saying is, at some point, equity demands that those 
States get their fair share.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
New Jersey (Ms. Sherrill).
  Ms. SHERRILL. Mr. Speaker, New Jersey might be the Garden State, but 
it is also the most densely populated State in this country. So, New 
Jerseyans know the importance of clean air, clean drinking water, and 
protecting our natural resources. That is why I am proud to lead the 
Great American Outdoors Act with my colleagues.
  Grant funding from the Land and Water Conservation Fund has helped 
protect sites in my district and helped expand conservation efforts 
from the Great Swamp National Wildlife Refuge to Morristown National 
Historical Park. The Great American Outdoors Act will make the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund permanent, ensuring that future generations of 
Americans are able to access our natural wonders.
  For too long, LWCF's promise of protecting our Nation's public lands 
has been broken as the funds have been diverted. The GAOA would, for 
the first time, mandate that such funds are used as intended to protect 
public lands and waters, support public access, and provide an economic 
boost to communities.
  I am so glad Congress has stepped up to expand equitable access to 
the outdoors by investing in our parks and public lands at all levels.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. Graves), who is an active member of our committee, 
is ranking member of another committee, and who can actually 
springboard on Mr. Richmond's comments about this particular issue.
  Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the ranking 
member for yielding.
  ``Quick, there is a global pandemic. Let's spend billions of dollars 
repairing fences, putting up new signs, and fixing toilets at our 
wildlife refuges, parks, and forests,'' said no one ever. Ever.

  I have been sitting here listening to this debate over the last 
several minutes, and I have no idea what planet people are on right 
now.
  There is a global pandemic right now. What this legislation does is 
it takes everything else and puts it on the back burner. That is right. 
Unemployment assistance goes behind this; job opportunities go behind 
this; improving our schools and getting our kids actually educated go 
behind this; medical care for our seniors goes behind this because this 
is mandatory spending.
  Mr. Speaker, I have heard Members sit here and say that we have a $20 
billion maintenance backlog. Do you know why that is? Because we failed 
to appropriate the money because we have determined it is not a 
priority in the appropriations process.
  Why are we now stepping in and circumventing that whole process 
again, Mr. Speaker, in the middle of a pandemic to determine that this 
is the greatest priority?
  Mr. Speaker, let me give you an analogy of what this bill really 
does. This is like someone going over to their neighbor's house, taking 
their credit card, and going out there and using that credit card to 
get a new address sign in their front yard and maybe to get a new 
coating of paint on their house. Meanwhile, that person who took the 
credit card has multiple cars and has an expansive real estate holding 
and never thought once about their own financial situation but instead 
took the credit card of their neighbor who is maybe up to their neck in 
medical bills because their spouse is on their deathbed. That is what 
this bill does.

                              {time}  1315

  I have heard people say: ``Well, oh, this is not taxpayers' money.''
  Whose money is this? What dream world are you living in? This 
absolutely is funds that are taxpayer funds.
  ``Oh, but it comes from energy revenues.''
  Where do those go? They go into the general treasury. This isn't 
excess money. This isn't some money tree.
  Mr. Speaker, let me tell you about one of the most offensive things 
about this bill that my friend Cedric Richmond, Congressman Richmond, 
talked about. And he tried to address this in committee by proposing a 
bipartisan amendment with Congresswoman Sewell, with Congressman Bennie 
Thompson, with Congressman Scalise, with myself, and others, a 
bipartisan amendment to fix this.
  Virtually all of the money that this bill is spending comes from 
energy production off the coast of Louisiana. This bill, as many have 
said, this goes on in perpetuity. In 5 years, we are spending $1 
billion a year; in 10 years, $1 billion a year; in 50 years, $1 billion 
a year; in 100 years, $1 billion a year.
  Mr. Speaker, do you realize that today 28 percent of this country is 
owned by the Federal Government--28 percent?
  The sensible thing to do is to look at those assets, determine which 
of, for example, the nearly 75,000 different National Park's units and 
assets still make sense today. You just heard my friend talk about how 
40 percent of these funds historically have been used for projects that 
don't advance the mission of the very agency they are supposed to be 
advancing.
  This is a tone-deaf piece of legislation. It is mandatory spending. 
It is putting this as a higher priority than everything else, including 
that we are in a global pandemic. We have record unemployment.
  Whose idea was it to do this? This is absolutely crazy.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to this legislation. I urge common 
sense, and I urge that we sit down and actually address some of the 
priorities.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the distinguished leader.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I came in at the end of my friend from Louisiana's 
discussion. I have great respect for Mr. Graves and I have great 
respect for his concern, but, very frankly, the things he talks about 
have been pending in the United States Senate for 60 days untended.
  The leader of the Senate said the States can go bankrupt. The sense 
of priority apparently does not exist there, and that is regrettable.
  This legislation that I rise in support of is an important piece of 
legislation. If, however, it displaced any of those priorities of which 
the gentleman spoke, I would perhaps share his opinion. We are waiting 
for some of those priorities to be attended to by the Senate, even if 
they defeat them.
  We have talked about healthcare. We have talked about equal rights. 
We have talked about campaign finance reform. We have talked about 
energy. We have talked about so many subjects that are pending silently 
untended in the United States Senate. So the wringing of hands about 
this legislation pressing out other priorities I think is not accurate.
  It is accurate that this is an important piece of legislation that 
will do much good. And I thank Chairman Grijalva on the Committee on 
Natural Resources for steering the legislation before us through his 
committee and working with the Senate to get it passed through that 
body.
  Mr. Speaker, I also thank the ranking member for his concern about 
the maintenance and upkeep of our parks. He and I have spoken about 
that.
  I would especially like to thank Representatives Cummings, Sherrill--

[[Page H3651]]

who just spoke before me--Congressman Cox, Congresswoman Torres Small, 
Congresswoman Horn, and Congressman Golden for leading this legislation 
in the House, along with my good friend  Mike Simpson from the State of 
Idaho.
  It should be noted that the bill before us today bears the name of 
our dear and departed friend John Lewis, who understood that conserving 
America's great outdoors and public spaces went part and parcel with 
protecting the legacy of civil rights.
  Mr. Speaker, he was, as you know, instrumental in protecting the 
childhood home, neighborhoods, and church associated with Dr. Martin 
Luther King, Jr., in Atlanta--one of America's great leaders--as part 
of our National Park System, using the Land and Water Conservation Fund 
as a critical tool in that process.
  The Ebenezer Baptist Church and its visitor center are among the many 
sites in need of repair today. It was, of course, in Ebenezer in 
Atlanta, in 1957, that a young John Lewis joined Dr. King and other 
civil rights pioneers to create the Southern Christian Leadership 
Conference. What an eerie and poignant coincidence the bill before us 
is numbered 1957.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to think that John is still here with us, 
guiding us forward in spirit to continue on the good work he started in 
Congress some 30 years ago.
  Last year, when we enacted a permanent reauthorization of the Land 
and Water Conservation Fund--a great accomplishment of this Congress 
and, yes, this President--we made it clear that doing so was only the 
first of a two-step process.
  The second step was making sure that the Land and Water Conservation 
Fund is permanently paid for. That is what this bill does today, with 
nearly $1 billion annually in mandatory spending to sustain the fund 
and support critical Federal, State, and local conservation projects 
across this Nation.
  Mr. Speaker, not only that, but the bill creates a new fund that will 
help address the maintenance backlog in protecting some of our most 
iconic national parks. The impact of these investments will be felt not 
only in tourism and improved public access to our public lands, but 
also in a cleaner and healthier environment over the long term.

  In my home State of Maryland, we have used the fund to protect some 
of our most historic sites, protecting nature so that every American 
might have the same opportunity to enjoy the sanctity of nature or 
contact with our history.
  I was personally proud to have worked to protect the watershed and 
the viewshed of George Washington's Mount Vernon site permanently 
through the creation of Piscataway Park on our side, Maryland's side, 
of the river.
  We also used the fund to protect the Patuxent Research Refuge 
established to support wildlife research, Douglas Point in Nanjemoy, 
and countless sites throughout the Chesapeake Bay region.
  In all, Maryland has received, over the years, over $230 million from 
the Land and Water Conservation Fund to preserve our State's most 
treasured landscape and historic places.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill before us passed the Senate on a strong 
bipartisan vote 73-25--in other words, three-quarters of the United 
States Senate--and I believe we will demonstrate, hopefully, similar 
overwhelming support in the House later today.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to join in making this 
critical investment in America's public lands that will conserve them 
for the enjoyment of generations to come. I ask them to join me, as 
well, in helping to secure the legacy of our friend   John Lewis.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ to the gentleman from 
Idaho (Mr. Fulcher).
  Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this legislation. 
While I understand the merits of the bill and while some of my 
colleagues support it, I still have concerns.
  I spent a lot of time in the rural counties of Idaho. Residents and 
local governments, understandably, have serious concerns regarding 
additional Federal land acquisition, especially at a time when Federal 
resources are stretched so thin.
  The Federal Government doesn't have the resources to manage the land 
and are often prevented from allowing local involvement. Translation: 
More Federal land equals less land being intelligently managed and, 
often, more wildlife.
  Currently, about two-thirds of Idaho's land mass is controlled by the 
Federal Government. That means less property tax, more D.C. 
bureaucracy, reliance on grant programs like Secure Rural Schools, 
Payments in Lieu of Taxes, and the ramifications of associated strings 
inevitably attached.
  I am also concerned about our growing national debt, now over $24 
trillion. And while I appreciate that this bill utilizes revenue 
streams from future oil and gas receipts, it is still ultimately 
taxpayer money. That authorizes permanent funding, and any time there 
is permanent funding, that also raises a red flag.
  Mr. Speaker, to be a wise steward of the people's money, Congress 
should regularly reevaluate programs that it funds, not automatically 
renew appropriations.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Pelosi), our distinguished Speaker, whom I thank for 
helping guide this important piece of legislation to the floor and to a 
vote today.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
thank him for being a lifelong champion of environmental justice and 
environmental stewardship as chair of the Committee on Natural 
Resources.
  Mr. Speaker, as a Californian, as an American, as Speaker of the 
House, I proudly rise in support of the Great American Outdoors Act, 
one of the most important conservation and public lands bills in 
decades.
  This legislation builds on the progress made here by House Democrats 
and others earlier in our majority when we passed the John D. Dingell, 
Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act, named for our former 
colleague, a fitting testament to Chairman Dingell's legacy, which made 
permanent the authorization for the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
  Mr. Speaker, the Great American Outdoors Act--I love the title--takes 
the next step in our pro-conservation agenda, as it boldly protects our 
country's natural and cultural heritage for our children, our 
grandchildren, and generations to come.
  This legislation reflects the energy and expertise of our freshmen, 
and I particularly salute and thank Congressman   Joe Cunningham of 
South Carolina. Congressman Cunningham is a former ocean engineer, now 
serving on the Committee on Natural Resources, who was the lead author 
on this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, in passing this legislation, Congress is ensuring that 
America lives up to its conservation promises, as we finally 
permanently fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund at levels that 
were promised.

  Over 55 years, the Land and Water Conservation Fund has provided over 
$17 billion in funding for over 40,000 recreational and conservation 
initiatives in every county in the country, creating and protecting 
America's iconic landscapes like the Grand Canyon and historical sites 
like the Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historical Park.
  Some of California's most treasured natural areas benefited from the 
protection provided by the Land and Water Conservation Fund, including 
Joshua Tree, Lake Tahoe, and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area 
in the San Francisco Bay Area.
  The Land and Water Conservation Fund also addresses environmental 
injustice by creating green spaces near low-income communities and 
communities of color across the country, permanently. Funding the LWCF 
will ensure that we preserve our natural heritage in an equitable 
manner to ensure that all communities can benefit.
  The Great American Outdoors Act--I love the name, as I said--also 
makes an urgently needed investment in our national parks, which face a 
crippling $12 billion deferred maintenance backlog. Our parks are 
critical to preservation of our natural and cultural heritage, and we 
must ensure that they can be enjoyed for generations to come.

[[Page H3652]]

  The Great American Outdoors Act enjoys overwhelming bipartisan 
support both in the Congress and across the country. Nearly 900 
national, State, and local groups representing small businesses, 
ranchers, sportsmen, veterans, outdoor recreationists, and conservation 
organizations have written in support of this legislation sharing these 
thoughts:
  ``The Great American Outdoors Act will ensure a future for nature to 
thrive, kids to play, hunters and anglers to enjoy. National parks and 
public lands provide access to the outdoors for hundreds of millions of 
people every year and habitat for some of our country's most iconic 
wildlife.''

                              {time}  1330

  It goes on: ``These treasured places also tell the stories that 
define and unite us as a Nation. Funds provided in this bill will 
secure these vital resources while preserving water quantity and 
quality, sustaining working landscapes and rural economies, increasing 
access for recreation for all Americans no matter where they live, and 
fueling the juggernaut of our outdoor economy.''
  Indeed, the Great American Outdoors Act supports good-paying jobs and 
grows the economy. Nationally, outdoor recreation supports more than 5 
million jobs and adds nearly $780 billion to the economy.
  House Democrats are proud to pass this bill and send it on to the 
President's desk. We hope to do so in the strongest possible bipartisan 
way, as it passed the United States Senate.
  As we do, we will continue our work to protect our environment and 
natural heritage by including calling on the Senate to take up H.R. 2, 
the Moving Forward Act, which rebuilds America's infrastructure, while 
investing in a clean energy future, including by modernizing our energy 
infrastructure, boosting our commitment to renewables, building a clean 
transportation sector, and more.
  Also we want to implement the Select Committee on Climate Crisis' 
action plan, Solving the Climate Crisis, the most sweeping and detailed 
climate plan in decades, which sets out a vision of 30 by 30, 
conserving at least 30 percent of land and ocean in America by 2030 to 
confront the threats of the climate crisis, which the Great American 
Outdoors Act advances.
  And urging the Senate to take up H.R. 9, the Climate Action Now Act, 
our strong response to the American people who are demanding climate 
action by keeping us in the Paris Agreement.
  That is not in this bill. We have a different bill here. We must 
invest in the future we want for our children.
  I just want to put this in a little perspective, Mr. Chairman and Mr. 
Ranking Member. And thank you for your leadership in so many ways, Mr. 
Bishop.
  When our country was founded and when Thomas Jefferson became 
President, he tasked Secretary of the Treasury Gallatin to build the 
infrastructure of America, for an infrastructure plan that would follow 
the Lewis and Clark Expedition. It was Erie Canal, Cumberland Road, all 
kinds of things, and build into the Louisiana Purchase that would 
follow. It was a great undertaking. Gallatin was the Secretary of the 
Treasury, and so many things happened at that time to build the 
infrastructure into the manifest destiny of America and as we moved 
west.
  You wonder why I am bringing that up. 100 years later, at the 
anniversary of that initiative, President Teddy Roosevelt did his own 
infrastructure initiative called the National Park Service. It was to 
build and respect and conserve the green infrastructure of America. It 
was quite remarkable. So much sprang from that initiative of Teddy 
Roosevelt, the great conservationist.
  And now, over 200 years later, this is a tip of the hat to all of 
that. But so much more needs to be done. It is a recognition of the 
importance of the great outdoors, to the quality of life, but also the 
juggernaut of our outdoor economy.
  So, I hope we will have a strong bipartisan vote. I once again thank 
the distinguished chairman, Mr. Grijalva, for his leadership in all of 
this over the years and for this bill. And I, again, salute Mr. 
Cunningham of South Carolina for bringing his expertise as an ocean 
engineer to bear as the lead author of this important legislation, the 
Great American Outdoors Act.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, the Dingell Act, 2 years ago, was 
bipartisan. If this were bipartisan, we would not be here.
  But to illustrate that, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, today is a very swampy day, and I am not 
talking about the weather. Today, Congress will pass a bill that is, 
frankly, a demonstration of everything that is wrong with Washington.
  The Great American Outdoors Act is a product of special interests, 
written not by committees, but in back rooms, full of special interest 
provisions, and now being forced through this Chamber without the 
opportunity for us to amend it.
  This is permanent legislation, yet we can't take an extra hour in the 
House to consider amendments to make this legislation better? Why? 
Because the special interests that have paid nearly $100 million in 
lobbying can't be denied another day from their victory. Well, I guess 
they got what they bought.
  Are we not allowed to amend this bill because House leadership is 
afraid to offend the Senate? We can decide that the Senate isn't 
perfect, their product isn't wonderful, that the House can make 
amendments to make it better.
  Let's be clear. This bill is nearly nothing like the legislation 
introduced by the supporters in the House.
  The gentleman from South Carolina may think he has got a great win, 
but the repeal of the 100th meridian provision, which is in this bill, 
allows the U.S. Forest Service to steer millions of Federal spending 
away from his State.
  Like the Comptroller of the United States told us in December, left 
to their own devices, the U.S. Forest Service will spend 80 percent of 
their funding to the west of the meridian. And that was with 
Congressional oversight. Once passed and set on autopilot, this program 
will only get worse.
  If your goal was to expand recreational opportunities to more 
Americans, then you have failed miserably if you vote for this bill.
  But that is not the only problem with this legislation. I proposed a 
bipartisan amendment that would require the construction done under 
this act to adhere to Buy American provisions.
  It was endorsed by the United Steelworkers, the AFL-CIO, American 
Iron and Steel Institute, and a broad coalition of trade associations 
and unions. The underlying bill includes billions in new spending on 
infrastructure. Those billions could be spent on products manufactured 
by American workers.

  Can Congress consider this today? No.
  Why? Because the Speaker rejected the amendment, rejected American 
workers, and rejected American manufacturing. At a time when America 
needs jobs, a failure to include Buy American provisions in this bill 
is a shame on this House.
  I had amendments dealing with the infrastructure challenges facing 
our Native American reservations, including funding for Indian 
education and Indian health. In areas where COVID-19 was destructive, 
they need funds desperately to get back into the 21st century from 
their current dilapidated state.
  Will Congress consider these amendments? No, because the special 
interests behind this legislation don't want us to consider those needs 
on the floor of the House.
  Considering this legislation sets the Federal Government on a massive 
land buying spree like never seen before, I prepared an amendment to 
protect our counties by ensuring full payment in the Payments in Lieu 
of Taxes program.
  Do you remember that contract? Can we honor it? That won't even be 
considered, as well as anything else.
  This legislation isn't a victory for America; it is a loss. Good 
process builds good policy builds good politics. It is a shame that we 
didn't go there. I ask everybody to vote against this legislation.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Barragan) and thank her for her work on environmental 
justice legislation.
  Ms. BARRAGAN. Mr. Speaker, green spaces should be a right for 
everyone, regardless of where they live or the color of their skin.

[[Page H3653]]

  Unfortunately, for too many Black, Brown, and Native American 
communities, parks are considered a privilege. Today, we can change 
this injustice.
  The Great American Outdoors Act will create more local parks in low-
income and urban neighborhoods. Minority communities across the country 
lack access to green spaces.
  In my district, in Compton, we only have about half an acre of 
parkland for every thousand residents, well below the averages in the 
rest of Los Angeles County and the Nation.
  Voting ``yes'' means more outdoor recreation opportunities, including 
sports fields and trails. Voting ``yes'' means all kids, no matter 
their ZIP Code, have the right to play on green grass and explore the 
natural world.
  I am proud to vote ``yes'' to secure this right for our young people 
today and for future generations.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock), one of the ranking members 
on the committee, who has spent a lot of time on our committee and 
understands these issues.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I represent the Sierra Nevada of 
California. Yosemite Valley, Sequoia and Kings Canyon, and Lake Tahoe 
are all within my district.
  The Yosemite Land Grant Act signed by President Lincoln in 1864 was 
the first time the Federal Government set aside land for ``public use, 
resort, and recreation . . . for all time.''
  Today, the Federal estate has grown to 640 million acres. That is 28 
percent of the land area of our Nation. While the Federal Government 
owns just seven-tenths of 1 percent of New York State and 1.8 percent 
of Texas, it owns 46 percent of my home State of California and 93 
percent of Alpine County in my district.
  Now, we in the Sierra revere our public lands, and we are proud to 
share them with the world. But the Federal Government now holds far 
more land than it can take care of. The Federal lands now face a $20 
billion backlog of deferred maintenance, which makes tourism less 
desirable.
  Now, this is all land that is off the local tax rolls, denying our 
local governments vital revenues. Federal restrictions on productive 
use of these lands has devastated local economies and, worst of all, 
the Federal Government has utterly neglected the management of our 
forests to the point that they have become morbidly overgrown and now 
present a constant threat of catastrophic fire.
  Now, shouldn't we take care of the land we already hold before we 
acquire still more land? And when we have already taken two-thirds of 
Alaska and Utah and four-fifths of Nevada, shouldn't we pause and ask 
for some balance around the country?
  Now, this measure does provide enough money over the next 5 years to 
address about half of our current deferred maintenance needs, and that 
is very good. But then that funding disappears, and we are left with 
locked-in, billion-dollar-a-year mandatory spending in perpetuity for 
new land acquisitions placed outside of Congress' control, while 
removing the requirement that future acquisitions be focused where the 
Federal Government owns very little land.

  It means that unelected bureaucrats will have a billion-dollar-a-year 
slush fund to take private property off the tax rolls with no 
accountability to our local communities, no provisions for long-term 
maintenance, and no reforms to protect our people from the scourge of 
wildfire produced by the continuing neglect of our Federal forests.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Panetta).
  Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Great 
American Outdoors Act.
  In my district on the central coast of California, we protect, we 
promote, and we never put a price on our environment. Partly because it 
is what drives our local economy, but also we appreciate what it means 
for those after us.
  By fully funding the Land and Water Conservation Fund, this bill 
ensures the type of necessary care needed for our National Parks, 
forests, and critical wildlife areas. This is needed today, because 
those treasures have been put under extreme pressure with this 
pandemic, but also previously with increased visitors and decreased 
budgets.
  That is why this legislation is so important, as it will not only 
address needed infrastructure projects and deferred maintenance, but 
also because it will promote conservation, recreation, and access to 
the outdoors.
  By passing this bipartisan bill that ensures investments in our parks 
and forests, we are ensuring that our natural treasures, our postcards 
to the future, actually get delivered to future generations.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Utah (Mr. McAdams).

                              {time}  1345

  Mr. McADAMS. Madam Speaker, Utah is blessed with many treasured 
national areas, from parks and trails to red rock canyons. Conserving 
these places is more important than ever, and today, we take landmark 
action by passing full funding for the Land and Water Conservation 
Fund. This successful conservation program has given us, at no cost to 
the taxpayer, decades of vital funding for national and State parks, 
wildlife refuges, and recreational areas.
  State and local officials rely on the money to improve local parks 
and trails, which see increased demand along the rapidly growing 
Wasatch Front. Utah has five of the country's most beloved national 
parks, including Zion National Park, which has quite literally been 
loved to death and has a $67 million backlog in deferred maintenance. 
This bill provides some desperately needed funding to fill that 
backlog.
  Mr. Speaker, I am proud today to be voting for this legislation and 
the promise it holds for our economy and an excellent quality of life 
in Utah for my children and for future generations.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I won't tell the gentleman from Utah that the Utah 
Association of Counties is opposed to this and all the trails that he 
is talking about come from the State's side of projects. That is beside 
the point.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California 
(Mr. LaMalfa).
  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member and colleague 
from Utah. I appreciate his service and his force with which he does 
things here.
  Mr. Speaker, all right, where are we? Gigantic deficits, yet we want 
to add to the burden of that deficit with a forced $900 million, nearly 
$1 billion, every year in this bill for acquiring new Federal land.
  Now, I come from the West, so we are already ravaged by wildfire, by 
unmanaged lands that are detrimental to the neighbors, to the private 
lands. I have three fires going on in my district right now. A lot of 
this emanates from unmanaged Forest Service lands. So, we want to add 
to their inability to manage even more lands in this legislation.
  Now, the part of the bill that Mr. Bishop had authored is a good 
part, taking care of the backlog that we have in our parks and our 
lands, if you would listen to him, $20 billion worth of backlog that we 
haven't found a way to pay for yet. Yet, instead of finishing our 
dinner, we are already going for the dessert by buying more lands that 
we can't afford and we know we can't manage.
  I will be thinking about this, and my constituents will, as more and 
more forest lands burn each year and threaten communities. These 
forests are gated off because they don't have time to do the 
maintenance and the work that needs to be done so the public can have 
access to these lands because of the $20 billion backlog or the funding 
to take care of the juniper problem that we have in northeast 
California, the wild horse population that needs to be managed so they 
don't die out there of starvation during the draught, the sage grouse 
habitat so they don't become endangered, and our local counties, our 
rural counties, that are already struggling with the lack of PILT funds 
because they have to come back here and beg every year for the payment 
in lieu of taxes to get this place to keep its commitments on that and

[[Page H3654]]

to secure rural schools funds that our rural counties need.
  Mr. Speaker, I say ``no'' on this bill and get back to managing what 
we should manage.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close when the gentleman 
from Utah is done with his speakers.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  We have talked about several of the problems with this particular 
bill. With this particular bill, we have talked about how the poor 
reckoning of its sources there do not say what is going to happen if 
this money does not develop. I think Mr. Graves would be good to talk 
about where this money is coming and how it is being used at the same 
time. And we don't necessarily know what will happen with the lowering 
of the royalties that we are experiencing this year from next year.
  There is one other consideration I hope that people will understand, 
especially for all those who are speaking about it who come from the 
eastern coast. There was a conforming amendment put in the Senate in 
this particular bill, a conforming amendment. In the good old days, we 
used to call them earmarks, but it is a conforming amendment.
  The original bill said that on Forest Service land that would be 
bought, 15 percent of that had to come from west of the 100th meridian 
and 85 percent had to come from east of the 100th meridian. That was 
taken out, quietly and surely taken out. The end result of that means 
that there is a siphoning of billions of dollars that should be and 
could be going to Eastern States.
  I mention that because one of the Democrat speakers did speak about 
the need for urban recreation opportunities. That was what was supposed 
to happen, and with this conforming amendment, that is what is taken 
out of the bill.
  In the 1960s, as this bill was being discussed, Orville Freeman was 
the Secretary of Agriculture for Kennedy. He said at that time that the 
Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission pointed out that the 
greatest need for recreation opportunities lies in the areas adjacent 
to the metropolitan centers in the Eastern States.
  It would be our purpose under this bill to expand about 84 percent of 
what would be available under it for acquisition in the eastern 
national forest acquired under the Weeks Act.
  In fact, that commission went on to say that outdoor opportunities 
are most urgently needed near metropolitan areas. Much of the West and 
virtually all of Alaska are of little use to most Americans looking for 
a place in the Sun for their families on a weekend when the demand is 
overwhelming.
  At regional and State levels, most of the land is where people are 
not. One-sixth is in the sparsely populated Alaska. Seventy-two percent 
of the remainder is in the West, where only 15 percent of the people 
live. The Northeast, where one-quarter of the people live, only 4 
percent of the acreage is there.
  But that language was not put in there by happenstance. There was a 
reason for it. In one iteration of this particular act that we 
introduced a long time ago, there was the idea of putting a specific 
percentage that would go to urban recreation so there would be those 
urban recreation concepts, as was originally designed in the bill. That 
has been taken out.
  What that will mean is that for you who live east of the 100th 
meridian, basically east of Denver, there will be $1.19 billion less 
dedicated to you than there would have been if this amendment had not 
been put in there. That works out to an average of $32 million per 
congressional district of those living east of Denver.
  I am glad that all those who are for this, on whatever side, will 
have a good time to explain to their constituents why they are in favor 
of giving their area $32 million less in recreation opportunity simply 
because you are going to confirm a conforming amendment that was 
slipped into the Senate version of this bill that really hurts this 
process and is not necessarily positive.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Kilmer).
  Mr. KILMER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman and all who worked on 
this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, as someone who grew up on the Olympic Peninsula, I 
learned how important protecting our parks and our public lands is to 
driving tourism and growing jobs and supporting rural economies.
  This is a big day. Permanently funding the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund, providing dedicated funding to make much-needed 
repairs at Olympic National Park and throughout our park system, this 
is progress for ensuring that these natural assets can continue to 
provide amazing visitor experiences and serve as economic drivers for 
rural communities that need these jobs and need these opportunities for 
future generations.
  This is a day to also celebrate the extraordinary coalition of 
environmental groups, outdoor economy groups, and local civic leaders 
that got involved to move this bill forward today.
  I am grateful for all who worked on this. I am proud to be a 
supporter of this bill, and I am encouraging all of my colleagues to 
vote ``yes'' today.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. Graves).
  Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I want to introduce another 
dose of reality, something you have not heard many folks talk about 
today.
  Where is this money coming from? How are we paying for this 
initially--what is it?--$1.9 or $2.9 billion a year in mandatory 
spending?
  This is coming from offshore energy revenues. That is where the 
majority of these moneys are coming from, from oil and gas production. 
I want to be clear: from oil and gas production.
  Now, the majority at the same time and in the same breath is taking 
step after step to decimate or eliminate the domestic energy industry, 
therefore not making us get oil and gas from the United States but 
getting it from places like Russia, as we have seen over and over again 
when these drastic policies have been put forth.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, the other thing is, any time you have energy 
revenues like this produced on Federal land under the Mineral Leasing 
Act, 50 percent of the money goes to those States that host that 
production, and they can use it for whatever they want. They can use it 
for whatever they want to use it for.
  In this case, the Gulf States, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, 
Texas, we get about 4 percent right now.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I have a question. I have a question for my friends 
on the majority. Can they tell me what they are going to say to the 
residents of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida next 
time we have a huge hurricane come through because you have refused, 
under the bipartisan amendment that the Congressional Black Caucus and 
others advocated, you have refused to allow for a larger percentage of 
money to be invested back in the resilience of this ecosystem, the 
resilience of these communities?
  Tell me what you are going to say to them whenever we have another 
Hurricane Katrina, Rita, Gustav, Ike, Harvey, Irma, Maria, Michael, 
Florence. Tell me what you are going to say to them because you are 
taking their money, and you are spending it in other places, and you 
are saying this is for the environment, these environmental groups out 
there advocating for this, when it is a greater environmental 
investment to make it in the Gulf.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to the bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record statements from the U.S. Farm 
Bureau Association and the Cattlemen's Association in opposition to 
this, from the American Energy Alliance in opposition to this, as well 
as the CRS report that analyzes from whence this money comes, whence it 
is going, and how much we probably won't have in the future.
                                                     June 5, 2020.
     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Chuck Schumer,
     Minority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senators: We the undersigned western state Farm Bureau 
     organizations write to express our concerns and areas of 
     opposition to the S. 3422, the Great American Outdoors Act 
     (GAOA). While we recognize the significant benefits that the 
     GAOA would

[[Page H3655]]

     provide in addressing the extensive maintenance backlog for 
     federally-managed lands, we also write to express our 
     collective concerns with funding further expansion of federal 
     land ownership in the west.
       Farm Bureau members are significantly and directly impacted 
     by federal land ownership, land-use policies and decisions. 
     Throughout the West, our members hold public lands grazing 
     permits, own property adjacent to federal lands and engage in 
     public and private land forestry. For many ranchers, access 
     to public lands grazing is economically and ecologically 
     essential to their operation and provides access to land that 
     may not otherwise be available to new or beginning farmers 
     and ranchers.
       Legislation or regulation that could be used to curtail 
     viable multiple use access to these public resources is a 
     threat to America's farming and ranching families. Historical 
     experience illustrates, in many cases, that expansion of 
     public land ownership over time leads to new policies that 
     further limit multiple uses of land such as livestock grazing 
     or create additional restrictions on access and rangeland 
     improvements. Further, additional federal land acquisition 
     does not adequately consider the reduction in economic 
     activity and the loss of jobs in resource-dependent 
     communities. For these reasons, Farm Bureau believes that it 
     is essential for agricultural stakeholders to be represented 
     on any sort of planning and/or advisory committees formed for 
     federal land expansion especially in those areas where 
     private or state land is proposed for purchase or exchange.
       American farmers and ranchers have always demonstrated 
     their fortitude and resilience in adapting to the ever-
     changing landscape--both political and ecological. While the 
     resources made available through federally managed lands 
     provide opportunities for ranchers to add value to their 
     businesses, availability of private land is essential for 
     successful business and commerce. The federal government 
     already owns over 640 million acres, which is approximately 
     28% of the 2.27 billion acres of land in the U.S.
       Since enactment of the LWCF in 1965, Congress has 
     appropriated $18.9 billion (not adjusted for inflation), of 
     which $11.4 billion was for federal land acquisition. Over 5 
     million acres of private land has been purchased by USDA and 
     DOI agencies.
       The Federal government already owns more land than it can 
     effectively maintain and manage. In the west, the federal 
     government owns roughly every other acre of land and many 
     counties have more than 75% of their land in federal 
     ownership. Further federal and ownership erodes the available 
     tax-base and limits the ability of local governments to 
     effectively provide critical government services.
       The second title of the GAOA establishes the Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund as a trust fund with permanent 
     authorization and without annual appropriations oversight. 
     The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the price tag 
     for the first year of this legislation could be upwards of 
     $20 billion. In this midst of the current pandemic and 
     related economic crisis, we are concerned with the additional 
     financial burden this legislation would create.
       We believe, at this time, that funds allocated by the Land 
     and Water Conservation Act (LWCA) would be better utilized to 
     manage existing federal lands and request Congress amend the 
     GAOA to allow for LWCA funds to instead be allocated to 
     individual state foresters for their use in fire suppression, 
     fire management and conservation efforts instead of utilizing 
     funds to acquire additional private property. We request that 
     you consider the following amendment requests:
       1. Sunset in five years. This would allow the Congress to 
     evaluate the program and decide whether to reauthorize, 
     modify, or eliminate it. A five-year sunset would conform the 
     LWCF title of the bill with the $49.5 billion maintenance 
     title.
       2. Limit land acquisition to states with less than the 
     collective average of those western states with federal 
     owned/administered lands.
       3. Require that all federal and acquisitions be subject to 
     approval of the relevant state legislature, Governor, and 
     county commissions.
       4. Require notice of any potential land acquisition be 
     given at least 90 days before title can be transferred to the 
     state legislature, Governor, and county commissioners. Notice 
     should include the annual loss of property tax revenues that 
     will result; or if the land is already held by a tax-exempt 
     owner, such as a land trust, the notice should include the 
     tax revenues lost if the property were subject to property 
     taxes.
       5. Require that priority be given to the maintenance 
     backlog, forgoing any acquisition requests in those instances 
     when revenues are limited.
       Additionally, our organizations would welcome the 
     opportunity for inclusion of additional maintenance and 
     enhancement projects that would benefit critical natural 
     resources to the West. We ask that you consider including the 
     provisions of S. 2044, the Water Supply Infrastructure 
     Rehabilitation and Utilization Act. This amendment would 
     create an aging infrastructure account within the Bureau of 
     Reclamation (BOR) to provide loans to local water managers to 
     perform extraordinary maintenance on the federal BOR 
     infrastructure they manage. Initially, $40 million per year 
     over five years ($2 billion total) would be provided to this 
     account from the Reclamation Fund. No taxpayer funds would be 
     used to fund the account and water users would be required to 
     repay the loans received to repair and replace water 
     facilities with interest. The repaid funds would be available 
     to BOR to fund additional extraordinary maintenance projects, 
     essentially creating a revolving fund.
       The GAOA provides deferred maintenance for every federal 
     asset agency within the Department of Interior except BOR. 
     Yet, BOR is facing significant issues with deferred and 
     maintenance needs at federal water supply facilities. 80% of 
     BOR's facilities are more than 50 years old and are in need 
     of major upgrades or replacement costs beyond regular 
     maintenance. Since water managers do not own the 
     infrastructure, they are unable to bond against it and 
     therefore have limited access to other sources of capital for 
     major repair projects. Creating this account within BOR would 
     allow water managers to perform repairs, repay cost over time 
     and ultimately ensure that our aging federal water 
     infrastructure remains viable to serve the billions of 
     dollars of agricultural and other economic activity that 
     depends on it.
       Our organizations are happy to further discuss the GAOA, 
     our recommendations and the opportunity for inclusion of 
     additional maintenance projects. We thank you in advance for 
     your consideration and look forward to continuing this 
     important conversation.
           Sincerely,
       American Farm Bureau Federation, Alaska Farm Bureau 
     Federation, Arizona Farm Bureau Federation, California Farm 
     Bureau Federation, Colorado Farm Bureau Federation, Idaho 
     Farm Bureau Federation, Montana Farm Bureau Federation, 
     Nevada Farm Bureau Federation, New Mexico Farm and Livestock 
     Bureau, Oregon Farm Bureau Federation, Washington Farm Bureau 
     Federation, Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation.
                                  ____


           [From the American Energy Alliance, July 22, 2020]

                        Key Vote No on H.R. 1957

       The American Energy Alliance urges all members to vote NO 
     on H.R. 1957 as amended by the Senate with the text of the 
     Great American Outdoors Act. The federal government already 
     owns far more land than it can adequately manage, which is 
     part of the reason for the large maintenance backlog this 
     bill tries to address. However, the Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund is simply a vehicle for buying up even more 
     land for the federal government to mismanage.
       By buying up land, the federal government hems in and 
     impoverishes local rural communities by removing taxable land 
     and limiting space for economic activity. Land procured 
     through the LWCF that is later placed off limits to 
     development further harms the local communities as well as 
     harming the larger economy. While the LWCF itself is 
     questionable policy, at least the current structure of the 
     fund allows for congressional input into the land acquisition 
     process through appropriations. Making LWCF funding permanent 
     removes this last Congressional check on federal land 
     acquisition. Permanent funding of the LWCF should be opposed.
       The AEA urges all members to support free markets and 
     affordable energy by voting NO on H.R. 1957 as amended with 
     the Great American Outdoors Act. AEA will include this vote 
     in its American Energy Scorecard.--Thomas Pyle, President, 
     American Energy Alliance.
                                  ____


                     [From CRS Reports & Analysis]

  Effect of COVID-19 on Federal Land Revenues, July 13, 2020 (R46448)


    Effect of COVID-19 on Energy and Mineral Operations and Receipts

       The COVID-19 pandemic and accompanying recession have 
     significantly affected energy and mineral prices, production, 
     and consumption. Many observers expect energy consumption 
     will remain below 2019 levels through at least 2021 . . . 
     These expectations stem from reported and ongoing reduced 
     demand for liquid fuels for the transportation sector and 
     reduced demand for coal and natural gas associated with the 
     reduced demand for electricity and industrial activity.
       Royalties are the largest contributor to federal energy and 
     mineral revenues. Royalty rates are set by statute, 
     regulation, or for specific leases, but the rates are rarely 
     altered once a lease has been issued. The revenues from 
     royalties reflect the product of the royalty rate and the 
     market value of the commodity produced. The pandemic and 
     accompanying recession have resulted in reduced demand for 
     oil, gas, and coal, which has resulted in lower prices and 
     lower production for these commodities in recent months, 
     relative to 2019.
       For May 2020, ONRR reported onshore oil and gas royalty 
     collections of $170 million, a decline of 53% from May 2019. 
     ONRR reported offshore oil and gas royalty collections of 
     $100 million, a decline of 84% from royalty collections for 
     the same month in 2019. The royalty collections for May 
     reflect production and sales in April. ONRR reports new 
     monthly data on an ongoing basis.
       To the extent that royalties and other revenues are reduced 
     due to impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic and recession, 
     disbursements to states and some federal programs would 
     decline accordingly. The severity of these impacts on program 
     funding and state budgets depends on the portion of total 
     revenue coming from energy and mineral disbursements and on 
     other factors. Some programs (e.g., the LWCF) receive 
     disbursements up to a specified limit; in such cases,

[[Page H3656]]

     royalties could fall but remain sufficient to fund such 
     programs. Reductions in energy and mineral revenues also 
     could affect the funds remaining in the U.S. Treasury as 
     miscellaneous receipts.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time I 
actually have left here.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Utah has 3\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my 
time.
  We have heard all sorts of platitudes about this bill today. Whether 
it passes or not is actually irrelevant. It is not bipartisan, and it 
has all sorts of flaws. There are questions about the future source of 
funding.
  We have heard speaker after speaker come up and say: We are not 
talking about taxpayers' money. This is only royalties that are off 
there.
  One of the problems we have to face is that all the royalties that 
come from offshore development and onshore development from energy and 
gas, those royalties are placed in the general fund. In fact, the 
second largest source of funds that go into the general fund is from 
these royalties, second only to the IRS taxes that go in there. If 
these revenues weren't deposited in LWCF, they would be deposited in 
the general fund of the U.S. Treasury. If that is not taxpayer money, I 
don't know what is.
  We have talked about the need for, actually, urban recreation areas. 
We would like to do it, but unfortunately, this bill diminishes that 
opportunity and puts it in limbo, which is not good.
  I have heard speaker after speaker come up here with pretty pictures 
about our national parks, reservation lands, BLM land, resource lands, 
all these things that need to be helped. A lot of them talked about all 
the wonderful programs that are on State lands, that are parks, roads, 
picnic areas, and all those things which we are already doing.
  When we permanently reauthorized the LWCF last Congress, that is when 
we put more money into those types of things everyone says is 
wonderful.

                              {time}  1400

  What we didn't put more money into is buying Federal land, buying 
more land to put into the Federal estate. As everyone talks about how 
important it is actually to now start putting money into park 
maintenance, into maintenance of the backlog, what this bill does is 
put that at the very lowest rung on priorities of where this royalty 
money is spent.
  You will spend it first on GOMESA. You will send it to the States. It 
will go to historic preservation. You will spend it on buying up more 
land before you ever come to anything that helps the parks and helps 
the public lands. That is because we have disproportionately done this.
  This bill is not about funding our public lands. This bill is about 
circumventing the limitations that we put in in the last Congress on 
buying more land. The only thing this bill is about is how we can find 
another way to buy more property.
  We can't even afford the property we already have. There is a $20 
billion maintenance backlog. But what this is attempting to do is find 
a way to put more money into buying more land so we can exacerbate that 
problem.
  Now, you can say all you want to about how wonderful it is, how good 
it is, and, I am sorry, most of those platitudes were misstated. They 
were talking about things that either already exist or are actually 
being de-emphasized by this particular bill.
  What this bill is about is: Are you going to put more money into 
buying more land before you put more money into actually maintaining 
the land we already have? That is really the only issue of this bill, 
and that is why we are fighting this strongly about it.
  Last year, when we did the Dingell Act, that was bipartisan. We had 
worked together to come up with a lot of bipartisan stuff. This was not 
a bipartisan bill. Mr. Kilmer, I appreciated his work with me on the 
parks. That was bipartisan. This is not bipartisan. It is still about 
how do we buy more land. That is the goal of this piece of legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Arizona has 7\1/4\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, the process of this legislation reaching this point on 
the floor to be voted upon has, to those of us involved, been 
difficult. It has been frustrating. Yet, the possibility of it being 
done was always there, and that was the goal. I think the overwhelming 
support in the Senate for a clean bill to come to the House was 
bipartisan.
  I think today would have been--I didn't feel it was necessary to 
engage in the same arguments that we have been engaging about with the 
Land and Water Conservation Fund in particular and the backlog. This 
legislation is not about robbing Peter to pay Paul. It is not about 
taking money from the East to give to the West. It is not about denying 
coastal States their share.
  If we do transition, as we transition, which we need to urgently, to 
clean energy in the future, future Congresses, I think, will have the 
foresight to look at this legislation and deal with how we move forward 
with it and continue to fund it.
  When I went to visit Land and Water Conservation Fund sites, I went 
to a park in south Phoenix, the only green space and recreation area 
for close to 8,000 families who live in that general area, Land and 
Water Conservation Fund; and when I went to other locations in urban 
areas across this country, Land and Water Conservation Fund.
  That continues to be a priority for reasons of public health, equity, 
and access.
  Mr. Speaker, in a strange procedural trick of the House, we have 
spent this afternoon debating the Great American Outdoors Act, but the 
bill we refer to as H.R. 1957 began as something else.
  H.R. 1957 was originally a bill to protect taxpayers by ensuring fair 
treatment under the law. It was introduced back in March 2019 by our 
late friend and colleague, Representative John Lewis.
  Now, I can't personally speak to Representative Lewis' thoughts on 
conservation spending. But I do believe our late friend would be happy 
with the work that we have done here today and the vote that we are 
about to take.
  Representative Lewis truly believed in a government by and for the 
people, all the people. He challenged us to leave petty partisanship at 
the door and to consider the essential pursuit of justice and equity 
that we have long sought and failed to meet in this country.
  I am proud to have called Representative Lewis my friend. I am proud 
that we can honor his legacy with the passage of this bill.
  There is much work left to be done to ensure real equity and justice 
in the United States, and I look forward to working with all my 
colleagues across the aisle in continuing that work in the future.
  But when we come together as we have today, as the people's 
representatives working toward the common goal of protecting future 
generations, then perhaps there is hope we might see Representative 
Lewis' vision realized.
  I thank all of my colleagues who spoke on behalf of this legislation. 
I thank leadership for bringing it to the floor and all the members of 
the committee and Members not on the committee who worked very hard to 
bring this legislation forward. It is historic. It is important. It is 
necessary. And it is an essential step. I urge us to vote ``yes'' on 
H.R. 1957.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my support for the 
Senate amendment to H.R. 1957, the Great American Outdoors Act. This 
legislation will establish permanent funding for the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund and establish a National Parks and Public Land Legacy 
Restoration Fund supporting deferred maintenance projects on federal 
lands. The funding authorized by this legislation will assist many 
states, including my home state of Rhode Island, in improving state 
parks and beaches, and preserving open spaces and wildlife habitats. 
Additionally, funding for deferred maintenance projects within the 
National Park System will help ensure that resources remain available 
to Rhode Island in the future for required improvements and 
developments for sites like the Roger Williams National Memorial and 
the Blackstone Valley National Historic Park.


 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  July 22, 2020, on page H3656, the following appeared: Mrs. 
CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my support for the 
Senate amendment to H.R. 1957, the Great American Outdoors Act.
  
  The online version has been corrected to read: Mr. CICILLINE. 
Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my support for the Senate amendment 
to H.R. 1957, the Great American Outdoors Act.


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 


  While I support this legislation, I am hopeful that the Natural 
Resources Committee, as well

[[Page H3657]]

as the House Appropriations Committee, will work to improve funding 
outcomes for coastal states under the Land and Water Conservation Fund. 
Per-capita, coastal states receive approximately forty cents on the 
dollar compared to funding received by inland states. Rhode Island's 
coastal economy generates more than $2 billion annually, and supports 
more than 41,000 jobs, while New England as a whole supports nearly a 
quarter of a million jobs through its coastal economy. As a result of 
geography, coastal states face a number of challenges which many inland 
states do not face, including beach erosion, migrating fish stocks 
which impact commercial fisheries, and vulnerability to tropical storms 
and other weather-related disasters. All of these challenges are 
further exacerbated by the effects of climate change.
  Congress needs to be able to support critical programs like the Land 
and Water Conservation Fund and also ensure that coastal communities 
are able to receive necessary funds to preserve their coastlines, 
protect wildlife, and support workers who rely on jobs supported by 
ocean economies. I look forward to working with Chairman Grijalva to 
discuss ways in which we may be able to achieve this going forward.
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the bipartisan Great 
American Outdoors Act, which, among other things, would address the 
National Park Service's (NPS) deferred maintenance backlog, a problem 
that disproportionately affects the National Capital Region and, 
especially, the District of Columbia. Twenty percent of the District 
consists of parkland, almost 90 percent of which is under the 
jurisdiction of NPS.
  National parks are some of America's greatest treasures, yet NPS, the 
agency that maintains our federal parks, has a $12 billion maintenance 
backlog. One-sixth of all projects in the backlog are in the National 
Capital Region, with $1.3 billion in D.C. itself. The National Mall and 
Memorial Parks have the highest number of deferred maintenance projects 
in the nation, with more than $840 million in needed repairs still 
outstanding, according to Pew Charitable Trusts. The most significant 
deferred maintenance projects involve refurbishing memorials and making 
necessary repairs for supporting infrastructure. Although these parks 
are located in D.C., they are of national significance. The National 
Mall and Memorial Parks accommodate more than 36 million visits each 
year and roughly 30,000 people use their 15 softball fields, eight 
volleyball courts, two rugby fields and the Washington Monument grounds 
for sporting events nearly year-round. This heavy use has caused a $13 
million repair backlog for the Mall grounds.
  In addition to the National Mall and Memorial Parks, NPS owns most of 
D.C.'s neighborhood parks, including 156 small green spaces and many 
circles, squares and fountains throughout D.C. Also included in the 
backlog are historic sites such as Ford's Theatre, the FDR Memorial, 
East and West Potomac Parks, the Carter Barron Amphitheatre and the 
Belmont-Paul Women's Equality National Monument. I support passage of 
the Great American Outdoors Act so that NPS can properly maintain all 
of our incredible national parks.
  Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support Senate Amendment to H.R. 
1957. The Great American Outdoors Act is landmark legislation that will 
clear the maintenance backlog at our National Parks, protect our 
country's ecosystems, and permanently fund the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund (LWCF). The permanent funding of the LWCF has been 
one of my longtime goals. When I was Chairman of the Natural Resources 
Committee, I introduced the Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA) 
with my dear friend, the late Chairman John Dingell by my side. Today 
marks the culmination of our work, and I am proud to have accomplished 
this with the help of John's wife, Congresswoman Debbie Dingell. My 
enthusiasm for permanent LWCF funding is as strong now as it was then. 
In recognition of this day, Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the 
following op-ed that I authored in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner on 
July 4, 2000 in support of CARA.

      [From the Fairbanks (Alaska) Daily News-Miner, July 4, 2000]

               Legislation Bestows Lasting Alaska Returns

                             (By Don Young)

       There's been a lot of interesting speculation about my 
     legislation called the Conservation and Reinvestment Act. 
     Numerous stories and editorials have been written about what 
     this landmark bill would do and why I led the effort to pass 
     such a major conservation package.
       Even News-Miner columnist Fred Pratt has devoted a 
     significant amount of attention to CARA and my participation 
     in this process. In his most recent column, he speculated 
     that I wrote the bill to benefit Alaska Native corporations. 
     This was a new and novel theory, but unfortunately, not 
     accurate.
       The truth is actually very simple--CARA is good for all 
     Alaskans.
       In Alaska and throughout the nation, CARA will increase 
     funding for federal and state conservation and recreation 
     programs, urban parks, historic preservation, and wildlife 
     conservation. The bill also resolves a major inequity 
     regarding the disposition of funds generated from Outer 
     Continental Shelf activities.
       Currently, states receive 50 percent of the revenues for 
     onshore oil production but nothing from the federal waters 
     six miles and beyond a state's coast. CARA corrects this 
     problem by creating new programs that benefit coastal states 
     with the OCS revenues, which have averaged between $4 to $5 
     billion annually. Under CARA, $2.8 billion of this funding 
     will go toward important recreation, wildlife and 
     conservation programs each year.
       In addition, CARA creates new private property protections 
     which go beyond existing law.
       Alaska will receive about $2.5 billion during the 15-year 
     period included in CARA for these programs. Each year, Alaska 
     would receive: $87 million for coastal conservation programs; 
     $38.5 million for state and federal land conservation under 
     the Land and Water Conservation Fund; $17.5 million for 
     wildlife conservation; $9.8 million in PILT payments; $9 
     million for federal and Native land restoration; and about 
     $1.5 million for historic preservation and endangered species 
     programs.
       In previous years, the LWCF has helped fund several popular 
     Alaska projects including Alaskaland in Fairbanks, the 
     Coastal Trail in Anchorage and Eagle Crest in Juneau. The 
     increased funding for the state programs under the LWCF will 
     allow for local communities to determine how these funds are 
     spent in their own communities based upon their local 
     priorities, rather than federal dictates.
       Despite inaccurate claims by fringe groups like the 
     American Land Rights Association, CARA also includes new 
     private property protections that go beyond existing law. No 
     new federal land can be acquired under CARA without the 
     specific approval of Congress. The federal government can 
     only purchase land from willing sellers--condemnation is not 
     allowed under CARA unless it is specifically approved by 
     Congress. CARA also created new requirements to protect land 
     owners who do not want to sell their land from new 
     regulations.
       Additionally, the administration must seek to use land 
     exchanges and conservation easements as alternatives to 
     acquisition. These new protections were included to enhance 
     private property rights in all 50 states.
       Despite the noisy opposition by some fringe groups, CARA is 
     supported by thousands of organizations and officials 
     throughout the nation. Last month, CARA was overwhelmingly 
     approved by the U.S. House by a 315 to 102 vote with a 
     majority of both Republicans and Democrats voting for passage 
     of the bill. CARA is supported by all 50 governors, the U.S. 
     Conference of Mayors and the National Association of 
     Counties. CARA has also been endorsed by more than 4,500 
     organizations including numerous conservation, hunting, 
     fishing, and recreation groups like the National Rifle 
     Association, and other organizations like the U.S. Chamber of 
     Commerce and the National Association of Realtors.
       Alaskans know that over the past 27 years, I have lead the 
     effort for the authorization of the trans-Alaska pipeline, 
     oil development in Prudhoe Bay and the Coastal Plain, a 
     strong mining industry, and numerous other economic programs 
     in every region of the state.
       During this same period, I have also authored numerous 
     important conservation bills including the reauthorization of 
     the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Act and a 
     comprehensive improvement of America's national wildlife 
     refuge system.
       In addition, I have authored and supported dozens of bills 
     to promote hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation in our 
     state and the entire nation.
       Fred Pratt is correct. CARA and its expanded conservation, 
     wildlife and recreation programs is consistent with my 27-
     year congressional record of working for Alaskans.
       Don Young has served as Alaska's sole representative in 
     Congress since 1973.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 1053, the previous question is ordered.
  The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Grijalva).
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution 
965, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question 
will be postponed.

                          ____________________