[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 36 (Monday, February 28, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H1155-H1156]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
COUNTY ELECTIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021 UNDER THE SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS
AND COMMUNITY SELF-DETERMINATION ACT OF 2000
Mr. CORREA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (S.
[[Page H1156]]
3706) to provide for the application of certain provisions of the
Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 for
fiscal year 2021.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
S. 3706
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. COUNTY ELECTIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021 UNDER THE
SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY SELF-
DETERMINATION ACT OF 2000.
Sections 102(b)(1)(D), 102(d)(1)(F), and 102(d)(3)(D) of
the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act
of 2000 (16 U.S.C. 7112(b)(1)(D), 7112(d)(1)(F),
7112(d)(3)(D)) shall be applied for fiscal year 2021.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Correa) and the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Cammack)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
General Leave
Mr. CORREA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. CORREA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 3706. This bill makes
important corrections to the recently passed Secure Rural Schools
reauthorization. Without these corrections, counties would not have the
choice of electing to receive SRS payments or electing to receive
Federal timber harvest receipts. Rather, they would have to take SRS
payments.
Furthermore, the current reauthorization does not allow counties to
elect their allocations in advance of their fiscal year 2021 payments,
meaning all eligible counties would receive 80 percent Title I funds,
20 percent Title II funds, and no Title III funds.
While Title I payments, used for roads and schools, will be the bulk
of the payment either way, it is important to ensure that counties get
access to Title III funds. Title III funds are important because they
can be used for specified county purposes. These purposes can include
law enforcement on Federal land, search and rescue, and wildfire risk
reduction.
This fix will help timber-dependent counties across the country and
ensure continued support for roads, schools, law enforcement, and
environmental benefits.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. CAMMACK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 3706. Under longtime
Federal law, counties located within the National Forest System have
received a share of revenues generated through the sale of timber
harvested from those Federal lands.
This revenue has been critical for forested counties to support
schools, roads, law enforcement, search-and-rescue operations, and
other local activities that benefit both our forests and rural
communities.
However, with the sharp decline in timber harvesting across the
National Forest System since the early 1990s, rural counties have seen
revenues for schools and other important local services plummet as a
result.
To offset this lost revenue, Congress created the Secure Rural
Schools program in 2000 to provide additional funding to participating
counties based on their average historical timber payments.
In my own district in north Florida, Putnam County and Marion County
have received a combined total of more than $624,000 through the Secure
Rural Schools program, thanks to the sale of timber harvested out of
the Ocala National Forest.
{time} 1515
In rural counties like Putnam, this funding provides support for the
county's schools, roads, and other critical services. It is no
different in Marion County.
The recent infrastructure bill, signed into law this past November,
reauthorized the Secure Rural Schools for the next 3 years. However,
due to a drafting error, this reauthorization did not lock in the
payment allocations that participating counties last elected in 2013.
Consequently, payments for this spring will revert to their default
levels in permanent law. This means that county allocations will revert
to 80 percent for Title I, 20 percent for Title II, and zero percent
for Title III.
To correct this problem, S. 3706 will lock in the 2013 elections for
the coming year. In doing so, the bill will provide certainty and
consistency for county payments that will be made in the coming months.
Fundamental errors like this demonstrate how flawed and rushed the
process was to pass the infrastructure bill this last year. It also
demonstrates the need for committee consideration and why committees
should not be bypassed before bringing a bill to the floor.
However, given the great importance of county payments to both
forested counties and rural school districts around the Nation, I
support this commonsense technical fix and urge my colleagues to vote
``yes.''
As we continue to consider how to best steward our national forests
and support forested communities, I would like to add that increasing
timber harvesting across the National Forest System will better support
these counties and reduce the need for this program in the long run.
Regardless of what the critics say, timber harvesting will encourage
forest health and will help prevent the devastating wildfires that have
torn through America's forests in recent years. Our forests are an
important pillar for our rural economies and provide much-needed
revenue to our local counties and schools, like those in my own
district.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CORREA. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time and urge
adoption of this bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Correa) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, S. 3706.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________