[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 194 (Tuesday, November 18, 2025)]
[House]
[Pages H4715-H4716]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEFENDING THE ARCTIC REFUGE
(Mr. Vasquez of New Mexico was recognized to address the House for 5
minutes.)
Mr. VASQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in defense of the frontier
spirit that is core to the American identity.
I rise today to urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on S.J. Res. 80 and
H.J. Res. 131, two proposals that would forever alter the Coastal Plain
of the Arctic refuge and the special areas of the western Arctic in the
great State of Alaska.
Let me tell you a little bit about this special place, a place in
which I have had the privilege to spend time. The Arctic refuge, the
homeland of Gwich'in and the Inupiat people, offers unmatched, truly
wild fishing and hunting opportunities for all Americans.
It is the only national wildlife refuge that protects an entire
Arctic ecosystem, and it stands as a profound source of pride for this
Nation.
These lands, the birthing and calving grounds of the Porcupine
caribou herd, have been at the center of national debate for more than
a century, ever since Republican President Theodore Roosevelt
established the National Wildlife Refuge System and dedicated himself
to protecting wild places and the wildlife that depend on them.
These lands are where Americans hunt caribou, grizzly bear, and Dall
sheep, where Americans trap wolverines, and where anglers can catch
their first Arctic char.
Most importantly, these lands have provided sustenance to the
Gwich'in and Inupiat peoples since time immemorial.
For the last century, bipartisan lawmakers, including both Republican
and Democratic Presidents, have agreed to protect this place,
safeguarding it from destructive development with a firm resolve and a
desire to leave something behind for the next generation.
That same commitment to conservation has been carried on by
bipartisan leaders in Congress for generations. Today, this tradition
of conservation is being threatened by a careless proposal to roll back
established protections for our wildlife, our waters, and our public
lands, threatening indigenous livelihoods and sovereignty, the
recreational and scientific value of these lands, and an iconic symbol
of American wilderness.
I believe that, in this body, we must preach hope and possibility and
that we must defend our values and the American way of life that has
been meticulously built over centuries, and both parties must work
together to protect the things we love.
These two proposals before you are misguided. This Chamber should not
deepen the chaos it has already created. Instead, we should be working
together to pass legislation that resolves land management conflicts
and restores stability to our public lands planning system. We should
also adequately fund our land management agencies.
That is why, as a hunter, an angler, and someone who cares deeply
about our Nation's incomparable system of public lands and wildlife
habitat, I can't support the reckless destruction of the Arctic tundra
and the Coastal Plain.
For the many private interests that have sought to exploit these
sacred lands, it would be much easier if these species and Tribes never
existed. It would be much easier for them if the last remaining musk ox
hadn't survived the Ice Age or if the Porcupine caribou herd simply
went extinct, just to add a few dollars to their pockets today without
giving a damn about tomorrow.
The truth is, in my district back home in New Mexico, the Permian
Basin is a domestic energy powerhouse, fueling America's energy
independence and bolstering New Mexico's economy, but there are some
places that ought to be left alone because their quality, history, and
identity to us as Americans is far too valuable to be measured on a
balance sheet.
Now, much to my dismay, this administration has already issued an
executive order to rescind the Coastal Plain leasing program, and the
Department of the Interior has already done just that.
Given that the administration has already taken action to overturn
responsible management plans, these bills only make it more challenging
to manage these special lands. It will also expose any future decisions
related to oil and gas in the refuge to significant legal uncertainty.
This is a losing proposal. Simply put, it is bad legislation, no
matter what side of the issue you stand on.
If, like me, you still believe in bipartisanship and revere the
greats like Teddy Roosevelt, who fought to protect special places like
America's Arctic, and you dream that someday you or one of your
children can hunt wild ptarmigan on the Coastal Plain, catch an Arctic
char on the Canning River, or harvest caribou in the Brooks Range, you
should vote against these bills and honor the voices of the indigenous
communities and American citizens who depend on this land for survival.
From New Mexico to the Arctic, people who live in small communities
take care of themselves, and they want to keep it that way. Surely,
anyone who represents a rural district in this Congress can appreciate
that.
I encourage my colleagues to look at this landscape and examine these
bills and their impacts before voting, to see the value of the Arctic
and its worth to all Americans, not to simply brush this off as a
party-line vote.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.J. Res. 131.
[[Page H4716]]
____________________