[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 17425-17451]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




     DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 514 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 2643.
  The Chair designates the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones) as 
Chairman of the Committee of the Whole, and requests the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. McNulty) to assume the chair temporarily.

                              {time}  1106


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 2643) making appropriations for the Department of the Interior, 
environment, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 
30, 2008, and for other purposes, with Mr. McNulty in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered 
read the first time.
  The gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) and the gentleman from 
Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I have waited 30 years for the honor of presenting an 
Interior and Environment bill to the House of Representatives as 
subcommittee chairman. I am very proud to present H.R. 2643 to the 
committee as my first Interior appropriations bill.
  The bill includes $27.6 billion for the Department of the Interior, 
the Environmental Protection Agency, the Forest Service, the Indian 
Health Service and Related Agencies under this Subcommittee's 
jurisdiction. This is an increase of $1.193 billion over the 2007 
enacted level, or about a 4.3 percent increase.
  Mr. Chairman, the recommendations reflected in the 2008 Interior bill 
are the product of a very deliberate and bipartisan process. Our 
Interior and Environment Subcommittee held 38 separate hearings over 3 
months with more than 250 witnesses. The printed record of these 
hearings is included in eight volumes, totaling over 10,000 pages.
  During these hearings, we heard from agency officials, Members of 
Congress and more than 100 Tribal leaders and other public witnesses. 
This testimony made it clear that substantial increases in 
environmental and conservation programs were badly needed. These 
sessions also highlighted the critical health and education needs in 
Indian country.
  While the Office of Management and Budget and other Members of the 
House may criticize the overall size of the bill, I do not know of one 
increase in this package which can't be fully justified based on need 
or on the ability to spend the money wisely. Frankly, I don't think I 
have to remind Members that this bill started in a deep hole created 
more than a decade ago.
  As Members have heard me say many times, and as this chart clearly 
demonstrates, in our hearings and other statements on the floor, 
between 2000 and 2007, based on OMB's own tables, funding for the 
Interior Department fell 16 percent in real terms. EPA has been reduced 
by 29 percent, and the Forest Service nonfire budget by 35 percent when 
adjusted for inflation. Given that history, I believe the 4.3 percent 
increase in this bill is well justified.

[[Page 17426]]

  I might just mention that one of the most important powers that 
Congress possesses is the power of the purse. This is in the 
Constitution. This is one of Congress' major authorities and one way we 
can check the actions of the executive branch.
  Now, while I do not go into all the details, a few of the increases 
and decreases deserve special mention this morning.

                              {time}  1115

  The bill provides a $223 million increase for our national parks, as 
proposed by the President, for the 10-year, $3 billion Centennial 
Challenge effort to restore the parks for the 100th anniversary of the 
founding of the Park Service in 2016. The additional funds will support 
3,000 badly needed new seasonal employees and 590 year-round staff. We 
also provide $50 million of discretionary funds for Centennial 
Challenge projects to be matched by private funds. These funds will 
support enhancements at our parks beyond the funding necessary for core 
operations.
  We provide a $56 million increase for our national wildlife refuges, 
a 14-percent increase above the fiscal year 2007 enacted level. This 
will reverse the current staffing shortfall problem on our refuges, 
which have lost almost 600 staff members since 2004.
  The bill provides a total of $5.7 billion for programs serving Native 
Americans. This is $235 million over the President's request for the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service. To address one 
of the biggest issues facing Indian country, Mr. Tiahrt and I have 
added $35 million above the request for a methamphetamine prevention 
initiative that spans both the BIA and the Indian Health Service.
  The bill provides $2.8 billion for wildfire programs, an increase of 
$200 million over the current level. The President's budget had 
proposed more than $100 million in reductions in critical fire 
preparedness activities, which I believe both sides of the aisle 
considered completely irresponsible. The bill restores those cuts and 
provides an increase of $163 million over FY 2007 for wildfire 
suppression. As we see on television every day, and particularly out in 
the Lake Tahoe area, this year's fire season is shaping up to be one of 
our worst. The funds in the bill are the minimum necessary for the 
wildfire program.
  We have also restored basic funding for the Forest Service, providing 
a total of $2.6 billion for the non-fire programs, which is $92 million 
above 2007 and $355 million above the President's request. This 
maintains important science, cooperative forestry programs, and land 
management, and also includes $65 million for a new Legacy Road and 
Trail Remediation Program to repair damaged roads and decommission 
those that receive little use, particularly in areas where we have many 
endangered species.
  We have provided over $8 billion for the EPA, roughly a $900 million 
increase over the President's completely inadequate request. As Members 
know, the President had proposed more than half a billion dollars of 
cuts for the agency. We restore most of the cuts and provide a number 
of critical increases. Those include a $437 million increase above the 
request for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, $52 million above the 
request to clean up toxic and hazardous waste sites, $220 million for 
Clean Air State grants, $140 million for sewer and water grants in 
local communities, and $50 million for the new diesel emission 
reduction program.
  This bill recognizes the importance of protecting and restoring a 
number of our Nation's most important water bodies by providing an 
increase of $65 million above the President's request for the 
Chesapeake Bay, the Great Lakes, Long Island Sound, Puget Sound, and 28 
estuaries funded through the National Estuary Program and other grants 
for other targeted watersheds.
  The bill provides an increase of $50 million for our cultural 
agencies to get them partially back to where they were in 1994. The 
National Endowment for the Arts will get a $35 million increase to $160 
million and the National Endowment for Humanities would get an increase 
of $19 million for a total of $160 million.
  One of our witnesses this spring, actress Kerry Washington, described 
the role of the arts in offering her a world beyond her inner-city 
neighborhood and giving her ``something to reach for and something to 
reach with.'' Hopefully, the money in the bill for the NEA and the NEH 
will give other young people the same kind of inspiration and 
opportunity.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to draw special attention to our recommendations 
with regard to climate change. It is now clear that global warming is 
occurring and that its effects will likely alter how we live in very 
serious ways. This reality was confirmed at hearings held by the 
Interior Subcommittee in April where witnesses from the Interior 
Department, Forest Service and other agencies described climate-related 
changes already occurring on the Nation's public lands. These impacts 
include increased wildfires, changing precipitation and water 
availability patterns, increasing presence of invasive species, 
changing migratory patterns for many animals and birds and significant 
loss of habitat for many species.
  In response to this challenge, the subcommittee has made a series of 
recommendations.
  First, we included in the bill the same Sense of Congress resolution 
on climate change which I offered last year and which was accepted by 
the Appropriations Committee during the 109th Congress. This appears as 
title V of this bill. It recognizes in statute that climate change is a 
reality, that human activity contributes to it in significant ways, and 
that this country must take action to address this very serious 
problem.
  Second, the bill provides $264 million for various climate change 
activities throughout the bill, an increase of $94 million over the 
2007 level; $199 million is provided for EPA climate programs; $67 
million for the Department of the Interior, principally for the U.S. 
Geological Survey; and $22 million for the Forest Service.
  Third, we set aside $2 million for the EPA to begin to develop the 
framework for regulation of greenhouse gases. The Supreme Court ruled 
in April that the agency has the authority to regulate greenhouse gases 
under the Clean Air Act. This bill does not mandate the form of these 
regulations or set a specific deadline for producing the final 
regulation, but in law it says the process must begin in earnest during 
2008.
  Lastly, we establish a new temporary 2-year Commission on Climate 
Change Adaptation and Mitigation and appropriate $50 million for its 
work. This commission will be chaired by the president of the National 
Academy of Sciences, Dr. Ralph Cicerone, a world-renowned authority on 
climate change, and will focus on the science issues related to how the 
world adapts to the reality of climate change. Its role is essentially 
that of a public-private advisory committee to identify the highest 
priorities for climate science investment for 2008 across the 
government. $5 million is provided to cover the cost of the commission 
for 2 years, with the remaining $45 million to be distributed to jump-
start climate science at the various Federal agencies.
  In summary, the message of this bill with respect to climate change 
is it is time to quit talking about the problem and start doing 
something about it.
  Members should understand that this bill is not all increases. The 
subcommittee bill includes reductions below the 2007 level totaling 
over $400 million. This includes $135 million cut from construction 
programs throughout the bill and termination of a number of programs, 
including the Land Owner Incentive Program and Private Stewardship 
Program at the Fish and Wildlife Service.
  Mr. Chairman, as Members know, consideration of this bill was delayed 
for a while as the committee complied with the agreement to include 
Member projects in committee reports prior to bills being considered on 
the floor of the House. House Report 110-187, part 2, filed on June 22, 
fulfills this requirement. This report lists 228 projects requested by 
the Members of the House

[[Page 17427]]

with a total cost of approximately $114 million. The financial 
disclosure certifications for these projects have been made available 
to the public, and we believe the filing of the report meets all 
requirements under clause 9 of rule XXI.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to emphasize that the $114 million in this bill 
for projects constitutes only four-tenths of one percent of the roughly 
$28 billion in this bill. When Senate projects are counted later, the 
total allocated to such projects will be less than 1 percent, or 
roughly eight-tenths of one percent.
  As I said during the consideration in the full committee last week, 
many Members will, unfortunately, be disappointed by the project list 
included in this report. Based on the agreement reached earlier this 
year with House leadership, funding for Member projects has been 
reduced by 50 percent compared to funding for similar projects in 2006.
  Because of this requirement to reduce funding for projects, Mr. 
Tiahrt and I agreed to concentrate limited funding, with a few 
exceptions, on critically needed water and sewer infrastructure grants 
and historic preservation grants. These are the two areas where we get 
the most requests. Projects requested in these areas were individually 
reviewed on a nonpartisan basis by our joint staffs working together to 
ensure that each project was fully justified based on both the quality 
of the proposal and the needs of the communities. In the end, however, 
due to the limited amount of funding, hundreds of worthwhile projects 
could not be accommodated. I wish we could have done more, but this is 
the hand we were dealt.
  I would just add to that, when Christine Todd Whitman was the head of 
the EPA, she said the backlog on these sewer infrastructure projects 
was $388 billion. So we are spending $140 million. It is just a little 
dent in this huge requirement that we have out there.
  Mr. Chairman, before yielding to other Members for remarks, I want to 
say how much I have enjoyed working with Mr. Tiahrt as the Interior and 
Environment Subcommittee's new ranking member. We sat together for over 
100 hours of hearings over 3 months, and we have met together privately 
with many of the agencies. It has been very hard work, but I think 
because of these efforts, we have a very good bill which should be 
supported by every Member of the House. I look forward to many years as 
chairman working with Mr. Tiahrt as my ranking member, or vice versa.
  I also want to recognize the hard work of our exceptional staff on 
both sides of the aisle who have worked together as a bipartisan team 
throughout this process. I want to mention the staff: Mike Stephens, 
Chris Topik, Greg Knadle, Delia Scott, Beth Houser and Martin Brockman 
on the majority; Deb Weatherly, Dave LesStrang and Steve Crane for the 
minority; Pete Modaff and Kelli Shillito on my personal staff; and Amy 
Claire Brusch on Mr. Tiahrt's staff.
  Before I finish here, I just wanted to say that I am very proud of 
this bill. I think it is a good bill; and as, Mr. Natcher said, it is a 
good bill and everybody ought to vote for it.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, Chairman Dicks is to be commended for the reasonable 
manner in which he has conducted the business of the Interior 
Appropriations Committee and the personal consideration he has given me 
in my role as ranking member. It is a reflection of the experience he 
received while waiting 30 years to become chairman. We should all 
recognize the patience and expertise that Mr. Dicks brings to the floor 
of the House.
  Mr. Chairman, the subcommittee's work this year has been a bipartisan 
collaborative effort. But in spite of the comity reflected in much of 
the subcommittee's work, the minority does have genuine policy 
differences with the Democratic majority and a divergence of views over 
the level of funding necessary to address the critical needs of this 
bill.
  Our 38 subcommittee hearings revealed many unmet needs and urgent 
priorities. Still, while we have an obligation to be good stewards of 
our Nation's environment and public lands for future generations, we 
also have an obligation to be good stewards of our tax dollars. In that 
respect, I believe this legislation falls short.
  The 302(b) allocation for this bill is $27.6 billion, a $1.9 billion 
increase over the President's budget increase and a $1.2 billion 
increase over the enacted fiscal year 2007 Interior bill. The enacted 
fiscal year 2007 Interior bill itself was $400 million over what the 
House passed last fall.
  The initial subcommittee allocation, which was $858 million above the 
fiscal year 2007 enacted level, though very generous, would have 
resulted, I believe, in a better, more balanced bill. The additional 
$335 million added to the subcommittee's already charitable allocation 
is simply unnecessary, and, more importantly, unsustainable. No matter 
how well-intentioned, this overly generous allocation will cause many 
of the same problems down the road that this subcommittee has been 
trying to resolve in recent years, namely, huge backlogs in operations 
and maintenance.
  The circumstance is, in many respects, similar to the homeowner who 
receives a big bonus and uses these extra funds to buy a bigger house 
for his family. The bigger bonus is welcome and unexpected. Buying a 
bigger house seems like a great idea at the time. But down the road he 
realizes he can't depend on getting a bonus every year, and he finds 
himself unable to afford living in this new house. He, like this 
subcommittee, risks becoming overextended and unable to pay the bills. 
The difference is the homeowner goes bankrupt and a new owner takes 
over. The government fails to keep up with the new property, and the 
property soon becomes listed on a maintenance backlog.
  It is human nature that we want to create new programs to build new 
structures, to buy new land. Yet it seems no one worries about the 
future cost of maintaining them. Over the years, this subcommittee has 
learned through good oversight that too little money can do real harm. 
The same is true for too much money.
  We believe that the subcommittee should strive for a balance, and 
that is precisely what the original subcommittee allocation achieved. 
We ought to provide enough money to allow the agencies to carry out 
their primary mission. We should focus on taking care of what we 
presently have in the public trust. We have to give careful, thoughtful 
consideration before purchasing something new. Again, we must strive 
for balance. As this bill goes on to conference with the Senate, I am 
hopeful that the majority will be sensitive and responsive to this 
challenge.
  In many areas this legislation has achieved balance. I applaud 
Chairman Dicks for his focus on the operating accounts within this 
bill. There has clearly been an erosion in this area, due in part to 
the absorption of the pay and fixed costs over the years. However, I 
believe the subcommittee should move more cautiously in providing funds 
for new land acquisition and construction. While there are high 
priority needs in these areas, it is important that we focus on the 
core mission of these agencies and not become overextended.
  The subcommittee risks creating a larger problem down the road by 
hastily expanding current areas that we cannot oversee or creating new 
ones that we cannot maintain. Many will recall that when Congress 
provided these agencies with too much funding too quickly in the early 
to mid-nineties, they lost focus. The result was a huge backlog, 
redundant programs and large unobligated balances, many of which still 
remain, and numerous operational shortfalls. Our job is to provide for 
core needs, be vigilant about oversight, and avoid the mistakes of the 
past.
  I recognize that Chairman Dicks and Chairman Obey have a special 
place in their heart for the great open spaces of this country, and I 
know that they appreciate the grandeur of our national

[[Page 17428]]

parks; and I join both chairmen in support of the $198 million increase 
in the operations budget for the National Park Service.
  I am also very pleased with the needed attention in this bill that it 
provides to the Native Americans. There are many unmet needs in Indian 
country, in education, healthcare, law enforcement, methamphetamine 
treatment and other areas; and this bill does a great deal to address 
those priorities. I also believe it is critically important to restore 
full funding for Urban Indian Health Clinics, and this bill does 
exactly that.
  While this bill is positive in many respects, I would be remiss if I 
didn't outline several specific areas where I would have written the 
bill differently. The fire season is upon us once again and 
catastrophic fires out west are again commanding national headlines, 
like the South Lake Tahoe fire just yesterday. It is appropriate that 
this bill provides additional funding for wildfire preparedness at the 
Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service.
  Subcommittee hearings this year demonstrated that there is a great 
interest and great concern over the ongoing wildfire suppression 
challenge which is presently burning up about 45 percent of the Forest 
Service budget. In light of the large subcommittee allocation and the 
tremendous anticipated need during this fire season, I think the 
subcommittee could have done even more to address fire preparedness and 
fire suppression problems, because being prepared can avoid the need 
for fire suppression.

                              {time}  1130

  Mr. Chairman, while reasonable people may disagree over the cause, 
there is clearly a need for more focused science on climate change. I 
believe Chairman Dicks would agree that our response to climate change 
must look at long-term solutions rather than simply trying to provide 
for a quick fix.
  The USGS is the science agency for the Department of the Interior, 
and I believe they should manage any additional funds directed to 
address this issue for the department. While I have the greatest 
respect for Chairman Dicks, I am concerned about the inclusion of the 
global climate change sense of Congress resolution in this bill. My 
concern is based on the simple fact that it does not reflect a 
consensus opinion of many climate change experts who testified before 
the subcommittee this year. It proposes conclusions and solutions to a 
problem that is not yet fully understood. Historically, mandatory 
market-based limits suggested in the language simply have not worked.
  I believe we need to make wise, science-based decisions rather than 
merely respond to the heated rhetoric of political dialogue of the day.
  As one agency scientist testified this year, our greatest need is to 
focus on the gaps in credible scientific information. Without 
understanding the complete scientific data, we will be unable to solve 
the problems created by climate change, and it will create a false hope 
presenting bad solutions to the wrong problems.
  America needs to secure its own sources of energy, be it from oil, 
natural gas, coal, nuclear, renewable or other sources. A strong and 
vibrant economy and the well-paying jobs that go along with it are 
closely linked to reliable and preferably inexpensive energy sources.
  If we want to help American working families to continue to build and 
strengthen our economy, we must provide them with the tools they need 
to pursue reliable sources of energy. I believe responsible use of our 
resources is precisely the right course. The approximately 43 million 
outer continental shelf acres under lease generally account for 20 
percent of America's domestic natural gas. To address the growing 
demand for domestic sources of natural gas, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Peterson) last year offered a commonsense amendment 
in full committee which was supported on a bipartisan basis.
  Republicans and Democrats alike agreed that the United States needed 
to lessen its dependence on foreign sources of natural gas. Mr. 
Peterson will soon be offering the same amendment on the House floor, 
and I urge its adoption.
  Many heard me say over the past few months how fortunate I have been 
to be selected as the ranking member of the Interior, Environment 
Appropriations Subcommittee. Not only do I have the privilege of 
working with Chairman Dicks, but I have had the pleasure of working 
with a fine appropriations committee staff.
  First, I would like to thank Debbie Weatherly and Dave LesStrang here 
beside me on the Republican staff for all of their hard work and 
dedication not only to crafting this bill, but also preparing me for 
this new subcommittee in this inaugural role as ranking member. This 
spring would have been a very difficult learning process but for their 
guidance.
  Many of you know Debbie and her impeccable stewardship of this 
appropriations bill during the Republican majority. She is also one of 
the most beloved and respected committee staffers I have ever come 
across. The fact that Members across the aisle continue to consult her 
is a testament to her depth of knowledge. I have appreciated all of the 
time she has spent with me over the past few months. I know that her 
husband, Glenn, has missed her, and I am glad he will soon get to see 
her more often.
  I am also extremely grateful to Dave LesStrang who has taken on 
Interior Appropriations as part of his portfolio for Mr. Lewis. Like 
Debbie, Dave is one of the most respected and well-liked staffers on 
the Capitol campus. I thank Mr. Lewis, and especially Dave's wife, 
Elaine, and his sons Matthew and Michael for their patience in allowing 
him to spend so much time on the important work of this subcommittee.
  Let me also commend Steve Crane of the minority staff for his 
guidance on issues related to offshore oil and gas drilling. Steve's 
expertise on these issues is exceeded only by his knowledge of anything 
related to the Boston Red Sox.
  I am also grateful to the majority staff led by Mike Stephens. They 
have been cooperative and effective in not only crafting this bill, but 
also in helping me and my staff become acquainted with the Interior, 
Environment appropriations process. The entire Interior staff is to be 
commended for fostering a spirit of teamwork in crafting this 
legislation. Chris Topik, Delia Scott, Greg Knadle, Beth Houser, and 
Martin Brockman are bright, friendly, dedicated and among the most 
knowledgeable staffers on the Hill. I am pleased that once this bill is 
passed, they will finally have a weekend to themselves.
  I would be remiss if I did not also point out the many contributions 
of Pete Modaff and Kelli Shilito of Chairman Dicks' staff, as well as 
Jeff Kahrs, AmyClaire Brusch, and Melissa James of my own staff.
  In closing, Mr. Chairman, while I have real policy differences and 
spending concerns related to this legislation, it is our hope that 
between now and the conference negotiations with the Senate later this 
year, we can address those issues of disagreement and seek a bipartisan 
consensus on a reasonable, sustainable subcommittee allocation. Our 
sincere desire is to work with Chairman Dicks to fashion a responsible, 
balanced conference report worthy of broad bipartisan support.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kentucky (Mr. Chandler) who is a valued member of our subcommittee.
  Mr. CHANDLER. Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure today to rise to my feet 
to support what I think is a wonderful Interior, Environment 
Appropriations Act, and it has been a tremendous pleasure to work with 
Chairman Dicks who, after 30 years of waiting, is now the chairman of 
this subcommittee and has done a first-rate job on this bill. And the 
staff, I can't say enough about the staff. They are, as Mr. Tiahrt 
said, amongst the best on Capitol Hill.
  Each year Congress considers anew the needs of many Federal agencies 
that carry out essential work on behalf of our citizens. This year our 
subcommittee, under Chairman Dicks' leadership, held extensive hearings 
on

[[Page 17429]]

virtually every budget item under the subcommittee's jurisdiction. What 
we found were serious budget shortcomings that require our immediate 
attention.
  In the area of conservation, this bill does wonderful things for our 
environment. It protects habitats through a 14 percent increase in 
funding for national wildlife refuges, and a 10 percent increase in 
funding for the Forest Legacy Program which enables our private forest 
owners to have an economically feasible alternative to selling their 
land for development.
  In addition, the committee's bill also directly protects endangered 
species and migratory birds.
  In the area of environmental protection, Mr. Chairman, in this 
legislation we make strong investments in programs that protect our 
environment. The Superfund program cleans up our Nation's most 
contaminated sites.
  The increasing frequency and cost of wildfires is consuming more and 
more of the Federal budget. We take steps in this bill to prevent fires 
from ever occurring.
  This Congress has paid a lot of attention to the issue of climate 
change, and our subcommittee is no exception. We take steps to advance 
research concerning this critical issue.
  In the area of human health, deteriorating water infrastructure 
across the country endangers the health of our citizens and that of our 
environment. This bill will begin to address the problems in our 
communities by funding the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and the 
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. Funding these programs will allow 
States and localities to upgrade their drinking water and wastewater 
facilities.
  In the area of cultural identity, this bill takes steps to preserve 
our cultural heritage and educate our citizens about our history. The 
National Park Service sees historic funding increases in advance of its 
centennial celebration in 2016. The funding levels of the National 
Endowment for the Arts and Humanities have each been raised by 28 
percent to help these programs recover from deep cuts over the last 
decade.
  The fund for historic preservation is provided with $82 million, 
including $45 million for State historic preservation offices, the 
highest amount in that account since 2001.
  In many ways each of these efforts add significantly to our 
understanding of who we are as Americans. I believe it is incredibly 
important to preserve and to celebrate our heritage, and this is a wise 
investment of the taxpayers' dollars.
  Fiscal responsibility. Being good stewards of the taxpayers' money is 
at the heart of our duty as representatives of the American people. 
After years of fiscal mismanagement, we have restored pay-as-you-go 
rules while investing in critical priorities. Investing in critical 
priorities. Reinvesting our money now, whether through cleaning up a 
town's drinking water or keeping our ecosystems in balance will save us 
money in the long run and will make our country a better place to live. 
That is what being a good steward is all about.
  This is a good bill, and every Member should vote for it. Mr. 
Chairman, I believe that this legislation is a responsible investment 
in our future. It protects our environment, it protects our health, and 
it celebrates our heritage.
  Chairman Dicks and the excellent staff led by Michael Stephens ought 
to be commended for working so diligently to produce this bill. It is a 
tremendous bill. It is, in my view, true stewardship of the resources 
we have been given, and I am very proud to support it.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Lewis), the distinguished ranking member of the Appropriations 
Committee, such time as he may consume.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate both 
the chairman and the ranking member for a fabulous product that is 
reflected in this bill. The Interior appropriations bill is, by 
tradition, one of the most bipartisan bills among all of the bills that 
our committee considers each year. The House is, indeed, fortunate that 
the work of this subcommittee this year falls to Chairman Norm Dicks 
and Ranking Member Todd Tiahrt. They are not only good friends, they 
are capable legislators who recognize the value of bipartisanship. 
Clearly they do not agree on each and every single piece of this bill 
relative to policy or funding; but nonetheless, when they disagree, 
they recognize the value of communication and sharing information.
  What makes this relationship even more valuable is it also extends to 
the professional staff on both sides of the aisle. The working 
relationship of Chairman Dicks and Mr. Tiahrt, coupled with a 
reasonable allocation, could produce a very fine product.
  In this instance, however, an excessive subcommittee allocation has 
thrown this bill out of balance. More money does not always guarantee a 
better bill. In this instance, in fact, just the opposite is true. This 
subcommittee allocation for this bill is $27.6 billion, a $1.9 billion 
increase over the President's budget request, and $1.2 billion increase 
over the enacted fiscal year 2007 Interior bill. This subcommittee 
allocation represents exactly the kind of unfettered spending that so 
closely identifies the differences of philosophies between House 
Republicans and House Democrats.
  And who is going to pay for this increased spending? In fiscal year 
2004, 50 percent of the total Federal tax burden was shouldered by the 
65 million households earning between $24,000 and $65,000 a year. The 
vast majority of these taxes are being paid by individuals between the 
ages of 45 and 54, and with incomes between $55,000 and $77,000 a year. 
These are middle income families, many of them from the sandwich 
generation shouldering the financial burden of supporting both young 
children and aging parents.
  Middle income families end up paying the bill for expanded 
government. The 302(b) allocation for this bill guarantees years of 
payments middle income families do not want it and cannot afford.
  Mr. Chairman, the Interior bill has great potential of being a truly 
bipartisan bill. My hope is that Chairman Dicks and Ranking Member 
Tiahrt will work with their Senate counterparts in conference to 
fashion a conference report that the House can support and the 
President will sign.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, it is a great honor for me to yield 3 
minutes to my friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) 
who has been one of the strongest environmentalists in this House.

                              {time}  1145

  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I thank the gentleman for yielding. 
I want to thank him and the ranking member for bringing this bill to 
the floor and certainly thanking the staff that has worked with all of 
the Members on this legislation. I think this is a very good bill. I 
think this bill reflects the priorities of America, that we would once 
again start reinvesting in the Clean Water Revolving Fund so that 
people and communities can meet their obligations for clean water. And 
as millions of Americans set out across America with their families to 
visit the national parks, this bill makes legislation about the 
importance of those national parks, about the value of those national 
parks and the importance that we lay out a plan over the next 10 years 
to restore them and to reinvest in them so that the visitors a decade 
from now will have the same experience or a better experience when they 
visit the national parks as people do today.
  The national parks have far too much neglect in terms of the backlog 
of projects that need to be done, to enhance them, to improve them and 
to protect the national parks. The stateside of the Land and Water 
Conservation allows the Federal Government to be a partner with local 
communities on their priorities for the protection of open space and 
the enhancement of recreational opportunities, to improve the quality 
of life in our communities. We have seen this very, very successful 
program to enhance the communities, to enrich the experience for 
families in those communities.

[[Page 17430]]

  Finally, I would say in the Indian education programs where again as 
Indian tribes and others have more and more say in the education of 
their young people, where they're bringing about very innovative 
programs, to see us again invest in those programs. What we see now is 
we have a record number of Indian children who have gone on to college, 
who are enrolled in college, who are getting advanced degrees. We've 
got to continue to improve that program and this legislation does it.
  I also want to thank the committee for recognizing the Rosie the 
Riveter World War II Home Front National Park. This is a park that's 
growing in popularity. It tells the incredible and magnificent story of 
the women who came to the shipyards in California to build the ships to 
win the war in the Pacific and what that meant to us as country, as a 
culture, what it meant to the integration of the workforce during World 
War II, and certainly what it meant in terms of supplying our troops 
with the materials necessary to win the war in the Pacific.
  We have seen women from all across the country come with their 
daughters, with their granddaughters, with their great granddaughters 
and explain to them, this is where I worked, this is where we built and 
launched a ship a week in these shipyards. It's remarkable the 
ceremonies that are held there, to see these women, to come there and 
to leave their historical documents, to leave their letters home, to 
leave their welders' cards and their ironworkers' cards with the 
museum, and now we will be able to share all of that with the public as 
part of a greater effort in the National Park Service to develop the 
home front national park system all across the country where those who 
were on the home front during the war enabled us to successfully win 
and prosecute the Second World War.
  I want to thank the committee and the members.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 4 minutes to the 
cochairman of the Parks Caucus, who has a great passion for our 
national park system, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder).
  Mr. SOUDER. I want to thank the subcommittee chairman and ranking 
member for plussing up our National Park Service. We are at a very 
critical junction. We are approaching the 100th birthday, in the year 
2016, of the National Park Service.
  Why do I say we're approaching? Because there are certain moments in 
time where you can gather and build public support for something that 
will last from generation to generation. When the first kind of 
preserved areas were preserved at Yellowstone and the Yosemite Grant 
and a few of those in the 1800s, it took dramatic intervention from 
Theodore Roosevelt and the creation under Stephen Mather of the 
National Park Service. Then it really took in the World War II era, the 
Great Depression era, the different relief projects that built much of 
the architecture in our parks because we put people to work, and much 
of the historic architecture that we see in our national parks came in 
the WPA and CCC programs. Then nothing really much happened until it 
started to approach the 50th birthday. When I say ``started to 
approach,'' when you did Mission 66 and most of the visitor centers you 
see in our parks today, most of the lodging that you see, much of it at 
least in our parks, much of the road infrastructure, the sewage 
infrastructure, everything, came heavily out of this Mission 66 
commitment. But you don't just do that in 1 year. If you wanted to be 
prepared for the 50th birthday, you started a decade ahead. We are 
getting inside that decade. If we are going to have a vision of where 
our National Park Service is going to be at 100 years and where it's 
going to go, we need to start making the investments now.
  I support, as our Parks Caucus does, the Centennial Act, which also 
would as part of this build a better foundation as to how we're going 
to fund parks. But this particular bill puts $50 million in above what 
we would normally get to start this process. Because if we don't start 
now, by the year 2016 we won't be able to be ready for the 100th 
birthday. Part of the question which the National Park Service has been 
going around talking to Americans all over the country is, where do you 
want our Park Service to be? How is it going to be different? We need 
to preserve our natural sites. We have preserved many of those, but we 
can expand that. We need to expand our cultural sites because our 
history is a constantly evolving thing, just as Congressman Miller just 
referred to, the Rosie the Riveter Park and that type of cultural 
heritage. As we look at Hispanic sites, at African American sites, at 
Angel Island and various Asian sites, as we look at more urban sites 
and what's the role of the National Park Service in urban sites, but 
also how are we going to deal with the Internet age. How can we expand?
  The National Park Service has more fish and wildlife, has more 
natural resources at Carlsbad Caverns with bats. How can we use this at 
other places with grizzly bears, with wolves, with frogs, with trees? 
And we can learn much of science. How can we interconnect that with our 
educational institutions? How can we take the Park Service in its 100th 
birthday to the next level? What are we going to do with interpretive 
rangers? What are we going to do with our visitor centers? How can we 
make our heritage, cultural and natural, something that we can preserve 
for generations and generations?
  To do that, we need to do that now. We need to start laying the 
foundation in these appropriations bills, what this bill does. We also 
need to be looking at a permanent way so the Park Service doesn't have 
the up-and-down cycles, where we pass additional land things, they 
don't have money to do it. We give them new homeland security things, 
and they don't have enough money to do it. We say we want this done and 
that done by a Park Service but don't give them the annual funds to do 
it.
  I'm very pleased that it's in this bill. I hope this is the start of 
moving towards the 100th birthday. It's a very good start. I thank the 
chairman and the ranking member for doing that.
  Mr. DICKS. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SOUDER. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. DICKS. I just want to commend the gentleman for his leadership on 
the National Parks Caucus. This issue should never be partisan. I'm 
glad we can work together with Mr. Tiahrt to strengthen our parks and 
to enact the Centennial Challenge.
  Mr. SOUDER. Thank you.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, it gives me great pleasure to yield 4 
minutes to the chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, a fellow 
member of the class of 1976 and also a person who had to wait 30 years 
to be chairman, my good friend from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall).
  Mr. RAHALL. I thank the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee 
for yielding me the time and certainly commend him for his leadership 
as well as that of the full committee chairman, Mr. Obey.
  Mr. Chairman, for over a decade while our Government lingered in 
Republican control, America's investment in itself, in those programs 
that provide for the most fundamental needs of our citizens, has been 
literally on the chopping block. As a result, Americans are coping with 
diminishing services and declining opportunities. Those programs that 
fall under the purview of the Natural Resources Committee, which I 
chair, are no exception. In fact, they have been particularly hard hit. 
As a result, our ability to preserve for future generations these 
unique places that are a rich part of America's past is diminishing. 
Our means of ensuring the thoughtful conservation and balanced 
development of our resources has been undercut. And our ability to 
protect our treasured natural vistas and irreplaceable wildlife has 
suffered mightily.
  But this year we have turned the corner and that is due in large 
part, as I have said, because of the leadership of our distinguished 
appropriations Chair, Dave Obey, and the chairman of the

[[Page 17431]]

Interior appropriations subcommittee, my classmate and dear friend, 
Norm Dicks. I thank and commend Chairman Dicks for his outstanding 
efforts on the bill before us today. It is a good bill, it's a great 
bill that will move us in a positive direction.
  It is most remarkable for its differences from Interior bills of 
recent years. It has been a very long time since we have seen a bill 
that provides funding levels that come anywhere close to providing for 
the Nation's real and growing conservation needs. And while this bill 
is constrained by the government's overall budgetary limitations, it is 
an honest effort that provides needed nourishment to important accounts 
that were on a forced starvation diet.
  I am particularly pleased and encouraged to see that Chairman Dicks 
has substantially increased funding for our national parks, these 
national treasures that hold a special place in the hearts of many 
Americans, but recent funding for them has not reflected their true 
value. This bill reverses years of disinvestment, helping to ensure 
that parks funding does not come at the expense of other programs. It 
also reverses a decline in staffing and visitor services, providing an 
increase in seasonal and permanent employees.
  In addition, support is improved for the endangered species program 
and other accounts that are critical to saving God's creatures from 
extinction. This money will go a long way toward ensuring the 
Endangered Species Act is implemented as it was originally intended.
  In what signals one of the most obvious and commendable departures 
from Republican priorities of recent years, this bill includes a 13 
percent increase for the office of the Inspector General at Interior. 
That increase responds to the kinds of gross problems that I have been 
probing in our committee hearings this year with respect to Interior's 
inexcusable failure to collect moneys due the American people from Big 
Oil.
  This appropriation measure also honors our Federal trust 
responsibilities to Native Americans. It restores badly needed dollars 
for the Indian Health Improvement Fund and the Urban Indian Health Care 
Program. It also recognizes, Mr. Chairman, the importance of the Indian 
Housing Improvement Program by ensuring that the program is not 
eliminated as the administration had proposed. The tribes have suffered 
under the bare-bones budget of recent years, but this bill thankfully 
attempts to set things back on the right course.
  Finally, I am very encouraged to see funding increases for the long-
neglected Land and Water Conservation Fund as well as for Payment in 
Lieu of Taxes. The stateside grants, in particular, have suffered 
greatly at the hands of the administration budget butchers.
  Again, I commend Chairman Norm Dicks for crafting a serious 
appropriation bill that helps our Federal agencies conserve our natural 
and cultural heritage for generations to come, and I commend the 
ranking member, Mr. Todd Tiahrt, for his working with our chairman as 
well.
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, how much time is there on both sides?
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Kansas has 10\1/2\ minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Washington has 3 minutes remaining.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DICKS. I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New 
Mexico (Mr. Udall), who is also a valued member of our subcommittee and 
a very good friend, and a great tennis player.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New Mexico is recognized for 
up to 3 minutes.
  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Let me also say that our chairman is an 
incredible tennis player, and I always like to be on the same side of 
the net with him rather than on the other side.
  I would like to first of all congratulate Norm Dicks and Todd Tiahrt 
for their leadership and their bipartisan cooperation on this bill. We 
haven't seen this kind of leadership in a long time, I think it's very 
impressive, and I want to applaud it.
  Let me also say that we have done some very significant oversight in 
this subcommittee of the appropriations. We have tackled a variety of 
issues. We've had all the Departments in. We've taken a very, very hard 
look at the kinds of things that are going on in these Departments. We 
also haven't seen that in a long time. One of the things that Chairman 
Dicks and Ranking Member Tiahrt have done is restore the public witness 
day. That's something that's very important and hasn't been around for 
about 10 years, where every member of the public can walk in and 
comment and tell us what their point of view is. Much of those points 
of views that were reflected in the committee are specifically in this 
bill.
  I also want to thank Mr. Stephens and all of the staff. They've done 
a pretty incredible job. What this bill is about is the stewardship of 
our natural resources. This is a bipartisan tradition that started many 
years ago, over 100 years ago with Teddy Roosevelt and the first chief 
of the Forest Service, Gifford Pinchot. This was a Republican tradition 
and started out as a Republican tradition, and we hope that Republicans 
will join us in a bipartisan way on this bill rather than picking it 
apart, because this moves the country in a very, very important 
direction, and this bill also reflects the Nation's values that we 
haven't seen reflected in the appropriation bill over the last 6 years.

                              {time}  1200

  Let's just look at what's happened over the last 6 years. The Forest 
Service is down, 35 percent. This bill isn't able to restore all of 
that, but we start working back up. The EPA, a cut of 29 percent.
  There we're talking about law enforcement and doing things about 
cleaning up air and water and toxics, an unconscionable cut in the EPA 
of 29 percent. This bill moves it back in the right direction to 
restore those enforcement capabilities, and a cut in the Interior 
Department of 16 percent over the last 6 years.
  This bill once again starts to move us back in the right direction. 
This bill is about protecting public lands, protecting wildlife, 
recreation, and clean air and clean water.
  One of the other things that I think this bill does that is very 
important is fund the National Park Service. I urge all of my 
colleagues, Republican and Democrat, to support this bill. It's a good 
bill, and they have done a great job at pulling it together.
  Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 2643, the 
proposed Fiscal Year 2008 appropriations for the Department of 
Interior, Environment, and other related agencies. I commend Chairman 
Norman Dicks, and his Appropriations Subcommittee for the work he has 
done in responding to the needs of the Department of Interior in 
carrying out its mission to protect our Nation's resources.
  As Chairwoman of the Natural Resources Subcommittee on Insular 
Affairs which has jurisdiction over all U.S. territories, I want to 
especially acknowledge the work of Chairman Dicks to increase funding 
to Interior's Office of Insular Affairs so it can respond to the 
changing needs and priorities of our U.S. Insular areas and the 
relationships we have with the freely associated states in Micronesia.
  The Subcommittee on Insular Affairs convened an oversight hearing in 
February over that portion of the President's proposed Fiscal Year 2008 
Interior budget which had a direct effect on the Department's ability 
to assist our U.S. territories and freely associated states. In 
addition to the Department officials, the governors of American Samoa 
and Guam, and the Resident Representative of the CNMI provided 
testimony in support of the work of the Office of Insular Affairs with 
a caveat that more resources should be given to them to enhance the 
work it does for U.S. territories.
  I am pleased that the Appropriations Committee was able to increase 
such resources for the Department to expand its efforts in assisting 
economic development. I also point out that the increases in this 
budget will respond to specific requests, such as strengthening the 
judicial systems in the Pacific, addressing the needs of Marshall 
Islanders adversely affected by our nuclear testing program carried out 
in the 1950s.
  Notwithstanding the above, I would be remiss if I did not express my 
strong disappointment that my requests for funding for critical 
infrastructure needs in my own Congressional District was not included 
in the bill. While I

[[Page 17432]]

recognize that the subcommittee had difficult choices to make, I look 
forward to continuing to work with the Chairman and Ranking Member 
should there be opportunities to fund additional priority projects as 
the bill moves forward.
  The Department of Interior's budget meant to benefit development and 
accountability in our U.S. territories is a small portion of what is 
being considered today. However, the increases carry out the mandate of 
the Interior Department is significant to improving the lives of our 
fellow Americans in those outlying jurisdictions. Again, I applaud the 
work of the Appropriations Committee and urge passage of H.R. 2643.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, in accordance with House earmark reforms, 
I would like to place in the Record a listing of the congressionally-
directed projects in my home state of Idaho that are contained the 
report of the FY08 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Bill.
  The project provides $500,000 within the Environmental Protection 
Agency, State and Tribal Assistance Grants to the City of Twin Falls 
for the Auger Falls Wastewater Treatment Project.
  Funding such as this is critical to assisting rural Idaho communities 
in upgrading their water and wastewater treatment facilities. In the 
case of Twin Falls, this funding is required to comply with unfunded 
mandates passed down by this Congress and federal agencies. The State 
of Idaho, under court order, has implemented Total Maximum Daily Load 
(TMDL) limits for phosphorus compounds on all significant discharges to 
the river. The City of Twin Falls Wastewater Treatment Plan, with a 
daily discharge of approximately 7.1 million gallons of treated 
wastewater per day, is one of the largest dischargers of phosphorus on 
the Middle Snake River and periodically exceeds the EPA TMDL limit. The 
City is planning to meet its TMDL limits through the use of natural 
treatments on city owned property, in the form of constructed wetlands 
and habitat creation.
  This funding will allow the City of Twin Falls to develop the 
beneficial wildlife habitats that will function as wastewater treatment 
systems to further reduce nutrients in City wastewater. This will 
ensure that the wastewater does not exceed the Environmental Protection 
Agency's Total Maximum Daily Load mandates for the City's wastewater 
discharged into the Snake River.
  I am proud to have obtained this funding for Idaho and look forward 
to working with Idaho's communities in the future to meet their water 
resource challenges.
  I appreciate the opportunity to provide a list of Congressionally-
directed projects in my district and an explanation of my support for 
them.
  (1) $500,000 City of Twin Falls for the Auger Falls Wastewater 
Treatment.
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the 
Interior Appropriations Bill; especially do I support the increase in 
funding for the National Endowment for the Arts.
  I know that we have great concern for National Security, Homeland 
Security, funding for military warlike activities, education, health, 
other social welfare issues, infrastructure improvements, job creation 
and all other aspects of life; however, it is not my feeling that these 
concerns out-weigh the need to keep art and culture high on our list of 
concerns.
  Art is a connector, a bridge builder, a motivator, a stimulator, an 
activator and a way for people, especially our children to have 
experience that otherwise they would never ever have the opportunity to 
have.
  Art is, and should be a great part of every child's learning 
experience and it is our opportunity to make sure that is available.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to any amendments that 
would strike the longstanding existing moratoria on offshore oil and 
gas drilling along the East and West Coasts.
  When you look at these amendments, you see that they are particularly 
empty of any promise to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Right 
now, without these amendments, drilling is already allowed in areas 
holding roughly 80 percent of the estimated oil and gas resources. In 
fact, of the 8,000 active leases oil companies hold in the Gulf of 
Mexico, more than 6,000 have yet to begin producing oil. So if you are 
worried about making sure that the oil and gas industry has access to 
the Outer Continental Shelf, stop worrying. They already have more 
leases than they know what to do with. They have been given the right 
to drill for the vast majority of oil and gas offshore and are not even 
producing from the majority of leases they hold in the Gulf. The oil 
companies should begin producing on the leases they already hold, not 
looking to acquire new ones in environmentally sensitive areas that do 
not even have large estimated oil and gas resources.
  Moreover, let's not forget the Republican leadership just rammed 
through an offshore drilling bill in the waning hours of the last 
Congress as a going out of business bonanza for big oil. That 
legislation opened up additional areas in the Gulf of Mexico holding 
1.26 billion barrels of oil and 5.83 trillion cubic feet of natural 
gas. But barely six months later, drilling proponents are back for 
another bite at the apple, once again attempting to give away our 
important coastal areas away to Big Oil.
  G.O.P still stands for the Gas and Oil Party.
  It is highly misleading to suggest that we can solve the problem of 
our oil dependence or high gas prices with more drilling, when the real 
answer is not more drilling, but using technology to make our cars and 
SUVs more energy efficient. After Congress mandated a doubling of fuel 
economy standards from 13.5 to 27.5 miles per gallon, our dependence on 
foreign oil went from 46.5% in 1977 to 27% in 1985 but we are now back 
up to 60%.
  We should be making our vehicles more efficient, not giving away our 
public lands to big oil companies that are making record profits. Soon, 
this House will have an opportunity to go on Record on the Markey-
Platts legislation, which would mandate a 35 mile per gallon combined 
fleet fuel efficiency standard--an improvement that will allow us to 
reduce our consumption by roughly the same amount of oil that we 
currently import from the Persian Gulf by 2022.
  I am pleased that the underlying bill once again includes language 
authored by myself and Mr. Hinchey that would give oil companies a 
strong incentive to renegotiate the faulty leases from 1998 and 1999. 
The Government Accountability Office has estimated that these leases 
could cost the American taxpayers more than $10 billion. The House has 
gone on record time and time again in overwhelming support of putting 
real pressure to renegotiate on every company holding these leases. 
Last year, the House adopted the Markey-Hinchey royalty relief fix that 
is included in this bill by a vote of 252-165 and earlier this year 
this body passed the royalty fixes contained in H.R. 6 by a vote of 
264-163. It is time to put an end to big oil's free ride. I urge 
opposition to any amendments that would open up our coastlines to 
drilling and strongly support passage of the underlying bill.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, while I am pleased that the 
Interior and Environment Appropriations bill contains funding for many 
programs important to Colorado, I am concerned, about the provision in 
the bill to create a Commission of Climate Change Mitigation and 
Adaptation.
  As has been stated by Science and Technology Chairman Bart Gordon and 
Ranking Member Ralph Hall during the floor debate, this commission 
replicates a bill that I introduced with my colleague, Mr. Inglis, 
earlier this year--H.R. 906, the Global Change Research and Data 
Management Act of 2007. The bill updates and reorients the current U.S. 
Global Change Research Program, USGCRP, which coordinates all Federal 
climate change research and was established by law in 1990.
  My bill would strengthen and streamline Federal global change 
research and make it more user-friendly for State and local 
governments, planners and researchers. My bill affirms the need for the 
continued strong Federal support for global change research, and it 
does map out a new emphasis on production of information needed to 
inform these important policy debates.
  Members of the Science and Technology Committee have been working on 
improving this legislation since I introduced it earlier this year. The 
committee received comments from experts on climate change research 
throughout the country and held a hearing on this issue on May 3, 2007. 
The bill was marked up in the Energy and Environment Subcommittee on 
June 6. It is scheduled to be marked up before the full Science and 
Technology Committee tomorrow.
  We all agree that a interagency climate change working group is 
needed and that the current U.S. Global Change Research Program needs 
to be updated. My bill, H.R. 906, is the best way to address this 
issue. I was pleased to hear assurances from Interior and the 
Environment Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Dicks to Chairman 
Gordon that we will address this issue in conference and that the final 
appropriations bill language will reflect both current law and H.R. 
906. I look forward to working with Chairmen Obey, Dicks and Gordon on 
the final legislation.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, thank you for this 
opportunity to speak in support of H.R. 2643, the Interior and 
Environment Appropriations Act of 2008 and to commend Chairman Dicks 
and Ranking Member Tiahrt for their leadership in shepherding this bill 
through the legislative process. Madam

[[Page 17433]]

Chairwoman, I support this bill because it focuses our efforts on 
global climate change and ensures that America's water and air will be 
cleaner.
  It is said the Arctic region is warming fastest, threatening the 
livelihoods of indigenous hunters by thawing the polar ice-cap and 
driving species like polar bears toward extinction by the end of the 
century. Today, more than one third of the world's population lives. 
within 60 miles of a shoreline. Thirteen of the world's twenty largest 
cities are located on a coast. Because of their precarious location and 
unique meteorology, these cities are particularly vulnerable to the 
effects of global warming. As industrial and commercial centers, many 
are also net contributors of greenhouse gas emissions, extending the 
effects of global warming.
  Given the earth is ``committed'' to rises in temperature over the 
next 30-40 years, it was only rational these futures be built into 
business models. But reducing emissions did not need to be at the 
expense of competitiveness: in fact, carbon trading, clean 
technologies, and sustainable energy generation all promised new 
opportunities for skilled jobs and economic growth.
  Houston is also experiencing more frequent and more powerful storms 
and rain fall, in terms of flooding, some of the old structural 
solutions--the concreted bayous of Houston need additional measures to 
ensure the safety of the population. Unfortunately, Houston's 
development pattern had made such weaknesses more acute. The city 
represented ``classic urban sprawl over coastal ecology.'' With its 
large, low density population and high density roads and impervious 
surfaces the city was highly vulnerable to flooding. Before the 
development arrived, the natural ecology of the Houston delta would 
have managed increases in rainfall and flooding. But the constructed 
environment had pushed back forest and wetland ecologies and undermined 
natural flood alleviation mechanisms.
  The major causes of flooding in the Houston basin are due to 
Houston's highly developed area; the intensity and duration of Texas 
rainfall; and flat topography with little storage. These conditions led 
to Houston suffering heavily at the hands of flooding--most recently, 
the $5 billion price tag after the inundations accompanying Tropical 
Storm Allison. The flooding heavily damaged the urban infrastructure 
and, because of the release of human waste from sewers and medical 
waste from hospitals, posed a severe public health risk.
  Improving the security of our nation's drinking water and wastewater 
infrastructures has become a top priority since the events of 9/11. 
This legislation takes significant actions in assessing and reducing 
vulnerabilities relating to the toxic contamination of our water 
system. The quality of water should be of the utmost importance when it 
comes to the health and well-being of the people in this country but 
the effects of storm water compromises this quality. Individuals who 
swim in front of flowing storm drains are susceptible to earaches, 
sinus problems, diarrhea, fever, and rashes; these individuals are 50 
percent more likely to develop a variety of symptoms than those who 
swim 400 yards away from the same drains.
  In a ranking of environmental risks posed to the metropolitan Houston 
area, an Environmental Foresight Committee has identified water 
pollution as having a relatively high risk. Houston needs to address 
the trash and odor problems in our waterways which. significantly 
affect quality of life, and economic tourism, development.
  Maintaining the biological soundness of the state's rivers, lakes, 
bays, and estuaries is of great importance to the public's economic 
health and general well-being. The fact that greater pressures and 
demands are being placed on the federal government pertaining to 
security of our water resources makes H.R. 2643 paramount to reexamine 
the process for ensuring that these important priorities effectively 
address the maintenance of a proper ecological environment of the bays 
and estuaries of the nation and the health of related living marine 
resources.
  It is time that we as Americans start becoming more aware and better 
activists in keeping the air we breathe clean. Air pollution can damage 
trees, crops, other plants, lakes, and animals. Breathing polluted air 
can make your eyes and nose burn. It can irritate your throat and make 
breathing difficult. Each day, air pollution causes thousands of 
illnesses leading to lost days at work and school. Air pollution also 
reduces agricultural crop and commercial forest yields by billions of 
dollars each year.
  There are 900,000 children in Harris County alone who are at risk of 
the health effects from the pollutants in the air. Children are more 
vulnerable to air pollution than adults because they spend more time 
outdoors than adults, are usually outdoors most in the summer when air 
pollution levels are highest, and have immature immune systems.
  It is time to put a stop to global pollution, it is time to build a 
better and healthier earth and we can do so by supporting H.R. 2643.
  For these reasons I strongly urge my colleagues to support this 
resolution.
  Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to thank 
the Chairman, Ranking Member, and staff of the Interior and Environment 
Appropriations Subcommittee for their continued support of the Florida 
Everglades in the FY08 Interior and Environment Appropriations bill.
  This legislation includes funding for implementation of the Modified 
Waters Deliveries Project. This project is critical to Everglades 
Restoration, and will ensure natural water flows continue through 
Everglades National Park.
  The Florida Everglades is a unique and precious ecosystem that must 
be preserved for future generations. Everglades Restoration is a long-
term investment that will ensure the Everglades is restored and 
protected.
  I am pleased that the Chairman included $72 million for Everglades 
Restoration, which is so critical to ensuring continuation of this 
vital project. The Interior share of funding combined with the 
appropriations made to the Army Corps of Engineers in the Energy and 
Water Appropriations bill will help to ensure restoration moves 
forward. This funding is a step in the right direction, showing the 
continued support of the Committee for Restoration. As the FY08 
Appropriations cycle moves forward, I will work to ensure that 
Everglades Restoration remains a top priority.
  I thank my colleagues from Florida for their continued support of the 
Florida Everglades and Restoration funding. Additionally, I would like 
to thank the President for his steadfast support as well as the 
Governor of Florida. Floridians understand the great benefit the 
Everglades provide not just to our ecological diversity, but also to 
our economy, which is so dependent upon tourism and ecotourism.
  On behalf of the residents of Southern Florida I am so proud to 
represent, I thank the Chairman, Ranking Member, and their hardworking 
staff for their support of this funding.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, the report accompanying H.R. 
2643 urges the Environmental Protection Agency to study the health and 
environmental effects of using trona in air pollution control systems. 
Trona is a naturally occurring, non-toxic mineral widely used in food 
additives, in glass manufacturing, paper, laundry products and 
medicine. It is odorless, non-combustible and stable in the air. Trona 
is a key ingredient of baking soda. In the United States, the Green 
River Basin of Wyoming is home to the world's largest deposit of this 
incredibly useful mineral, and the Wyoming trona industry alone 
produces close to 20 million tons of trona and employs more than 2,000 
people every year.
  For almost 20 years, trona has also played a critical and growing 
role in air pollution control at coal-fired power plants, cement 
plants, municipal incinerators and similar facilities around the 
country, including Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Virginia and Washington. 
Texas-based Solvay Chemicals, Inc. pioneered the use of trona in air 
pollution control systems, and it is the only company in the United 
States that produces trona products for that purpose.
  Trona works in air pollution control systems, and it works well. The 
EPA, which has repeatedly approved the use of trona in air pollution 
control systems since 1989, reports that those systems have actually 
reduced sulfur dioxide emissions by more than 85 percent and 
hydrochloric acid emissions by 95 percent at several power plants 
around the country, without increasing particulate matter emissions.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chair may accord 
priority in recognition to a Member offering an amendment that he has 
printed in the designated place in the Congressional Record. Those 
amendments will be considered read.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows.

                               H.R. 2643

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Department of 
     the Interior, environment, and related agencies for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other 
     purposes, namely:

[[Page 17434]]



                  TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

                       Bureau of Land Management

                   management of lands and resources

       For necessary expenses for protection, use, improvement, 
     development, disposal, cadastral surveying, classification, 
     acquisition of easements and other interests in lands, and 
     performance of other functions, including maintenance of 
     facilities, as authorized by law, in the management of lands 
     and their resources under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of 
     Land Management, including the general administration of the 
     Bureau, and assessment of mineral potential of public lands 
     pursuant to Public Law 96-487 (16 U.S.C. 3150(a)), 
     $888,628,000, to remain available until expended, of which 
     not to exceed $92,129,000 is available for oil and gas 
     management; and of which $1,500,000 is for high priority 
     projects, to be carried out by the Youth Conservation Corps; 
     and of which $2,800,000 shall be available in fiscal year 
     2008 subject to a match by at least an equal amount by the 
     National Fish and Wildlife Foundation for cost-shared 
     projects supporting conservation of Bureau lands; and such 
     funds shall be advanced to the Foundation as a lump sum grant 
     without regard to when expenses are incurred.

  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  I am prepared to yield to my distinguished colleague from Tennessee, 
the chairman of the Science and Technology Committee.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. I want to say that I share the gentleman's 
concern about the issue of climate change and about the impact that it 
may have on our Nation.
  My committee held three hearings on the working group reports, the 
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, released earlier this 
year. The Committee on Science and Technology is marking up a 
bipartisan bill tomorrow authored by Mr. Udall and Mr. Inglis, the 
different Mr. Udall, H.R. 906, to restructure the U.S. Global Change 
Research Program to provide more policy-relevant information to 
Congress and to regional organizations, State and local governments, 
and to businesses and organizations that are developing and 
implementing adaptation mitigation strategies.
  The Global Change Resource Program authorized in the Global Change 
Research Act of 1990 has guided our government's climate science agenda 
for the past 17 years. It has had many successes. Much of the research 
that has been summarized in the IPCC reports emerge from this program, 
and I commend the gentleman for producing a bill that makes additional 
money available for climate change.
  I fully support the allocation of an additional $50 million for the 
important task of developing adaptation and mitigation strategies. We 
need to lessen the impact of climate change on our Nation.
  However, the structure authorized in the bill for determining the 
research agenda and allocating the funds is not compatible with either 
the existing structure of the program or the bill the Science Committee 
will be marking up tomorrow.
  Mr. Chairman, I have a responsibility to lead the Committee on 
Science and Technology in a fashion that produces good, consensus-based 
legislation. I take that very seriously. In the spirit of cooperation, 
and in the interest of comity, I will not support a motion to strike 
the climate change commission language from the bill with the 
understanding that you will agree to work with our committee as we go 
forward to allocate these funds in a manner that is compatible with 
authorizing legislation.
  I am confident that H.R. 906 will provide a solid foundation for 
reaching the goal that you and I share, addressing the challenge of the 
climate change through applications of a solid foundation of science on 
adaptation and mitigation.
  Mr. DICKS. Will the gentleman yield.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Certainly.
  Mr. DICKS. I appreciate your concerns and want to assure the 
gentleman and his committee that we are very open to making changes to 
ensure the funds are spent in a manner which reflects the legislation 
coming from the Science Committee.
  I look forward to working with you and your staff over the next few 
months to coordinate our joint efforts in climate science. I want to 
congratulate the gentleman on working on a consensus basis. We tried to 
do that in the interior bill, and the chairman knows that he has my 
word on this issue, and we will work this out.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Dicks, we do have a bipartisan bill, and 
we look forward to working with you in a bipartisan manner to make this 
good bill even better.
  Mr. KIND. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  I just want to take a moment to congratulate the Chair and the 
ranking member and the entire committee for the wonderful job they did 
in regards to the stewardship of our public lands.
  If you take a look at the budget, and this was eloquently stated by 
my friend from New Mexico, whether it was the National Park Service, 
whether it was the National Wildlife Refuge, if you take a look at 
funding for our public lands in recent years, it has been static at 
best and having severe consequences in regards to the management of our 
national park system but also the national wildlife refuges.
  As one of the cochairs of the Congressional Wildlife Refuge Caucus, 
along with my colleagues, Jim Saxton, Mike Castle, Mike Thompson, we 
have taken it upon us to try to educate our fellow colleagues in both 
the House and the Senate with regard to the real challenges that we are 
facing throughout the refuge system.
  While there are over 500 refuges nationwide right now, over 20 
percent of them are not staffed and not offering any educational value 
to visitors, more refuges being prepared to be mothballed in the 
future, serious staff cuts with the agency budget, given the limitation 
of funds that they have seen.
  Now with this $56 million increase, the first increase since 2003 
when we celebrated the centennial anniversary of the creation of the 
refuge system, this will go a long ways as far as stemming the cuts in 
personnel, staff, educational opportunities, but also the importance of 
maintaining and operating these refuges which are currently facing 
about a $3 billion backlog in routine maintenance and operation.
  I commend the committee, again, for their devotion and their 
attention to this very serious issue. But they are also recognizing we 
have another centennial anniversary coming up, and that's for the park 
service in just a few years, and a lot of work that needs to be done to 
bring that up to par so that they are worthy of the public attention 
and hopefully the increased visits that will lead up to this centennial 
anniversary of the national park system as well.
  I just want to take a moment to commend one park service person in 
particular, who my family and I had the privilege of spending Father's 
Day Sunday with, and that was at the Antietam National Battlefield, 
just outside of Washington here.
  The gentleman's name is Mike Gamble, and he works for the Park 
Service at the Antietam Battlefield. He was a 30-year history teacher 
for a local high school. He has been with Antietam Battlefield now for 
the last 9 years conducting tours and offering services to the 
visitors.
  If there is anyone with greater depth of knowledge of what took 
place, that crucial battle, the Battlefield of Antietam, the bloodiest 
day in American history, I don't know who that could be.
  He was incredibly well versed, extremely interesting, very 
educational, and even for my 9 and 10 year-old little boys, he brought 
that battlefield to life with great personal relevance in their lives. 
It's people like Mike and those who serve in our park service, whether 
it's Civil War battlefields or national parks or in our refuges, that 
really make this the great monuments to civilization that we have in 
this country.
  Mr. DICKS. Would the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KIND. I would be happy to yield.
  Mr. DICKS. I want to commend the gentleman for his leadership, 
particularly on the wildlife refuges. We have had a cut over the last 
few years of over 600 employees. I couldn't believe the testimony this 
year of the people saying these refuges are in dire need, you have got 
to do something.

[[Page 17435]]

  That's why we are trying to put money back into these important 
areas. It's only a small amount, the work is absolutely essential. I 
appreciate the gentleman's leadership and his work in presenting our 
committee with information on the wildlife refuge.
  Mr. KIND. Again, I appreciate this gentleman's leadership and the 
committee's work in regards to refocusing our attention on a great need 
in our Nation.
  I wanted to also mention to my colleagues that I, along with the 
other cochairs of the Wildlife Refuge Caucus, recently introduced 
legislation called the Repair Act. We had a nice hearing before the 
Natural Resources Committee last week that would hopefully provide 
singular focus on one of the great threats facing our refuge system, 
and that's invasive species, plants, animals. What we are trying to do 
is establish an important public and private partnership by working 
with friends groups, with Federal, State, local agencies, but other 
nonprivate organizations, so we can develop a battle plan to deal with 
these invasive species, try to get out ahead of the curve, which is one 
of the great threats facing the entire refuge system today.
  So I would hope my colleagues would take a look at the legislation 
that we have recently introduced. Hopefully we will have the 
cooperation of the committee, be able to move it to the floor for 
consideration, so we can start providing a singular focus and a good 
plan in place to deal with the invasive species threat that we are 
facing in this Nation.
  Again, I thank the committee for the work that they have done, they 
have produced a good product here, and I would encourage its passage.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  One of the issues that we are dealing with this in this particular 
budget deals with the question that we have that deals with both 
immigration as well as the processes of that immigration. We are 
talking this time about immigration, and the devastating impact that it 
has.
  One of the things we missed is the impact on land of immigration. Our 
land managers have documented, pleaded their efforts before and in the 
past on some of the problems that we seem to be facing with 
immigration. We have illegal trails that are going across the desert 
that are leading to erosion. Literally our resources are being washed 
away.
  Where that is not happening, trash is being left behind by illegal 
border crossers. We are talking about plastic bottles, shoes, cars, 
even vehicles at some times. That is not necessarily the habitat of 
endangered species. We seem to be having devastating fires taking place 
started by abandoned camps.
  Even last week, 1,900 acres in the Buenos Aires National Wildlife 
Refuge was burned, and it is believed that its was started by illegal 
immigration cooking fire. The Coronado National Forest, in testimony 
last year before the Appropriations Committee, has 60 miles of 
contiguous border with the Mexican border. In this national forest, 
there are 12 separate rangers, eight wilderness areas, 203 threatened 
and endangered sensitive species, and the staff said that the resources 
are suffering significant adverse impacts due to illegal border 
traffic. Even livestock and closure fences, meant to try to separate 
livestock from endangered species, are being torn down.
  Probably the most specific and egregious of all those examples is 
given by the National Park Service. The Organ Pipe Cactus National 
Monument, one-third of that monument is closed to visitors because of 
the threats of assault by AK-47-packing drug runners is too great. Land 
managers and biologists responsible for the park must be escorted by 
armed personnel to do their work in the park.
  If we had machine-gun toting bandits or terrorists walking through 
Yellowstone or Yosemite, we would not tolerate that. But that is the 
reality that we have today, and the land managers are asking for tools 
to do their job.
  That, indeed, is an issue of significance that needed to be addressed 
in this particular bill. Perhaps at some point in the future we can 
actually address that particular issue and that difficult problem and 
see if we can move forward to a resolution of that and establish 
priorities that we want to have border security and the impact, the 
negative impact it's having on public lands, we need to make sure that 
we move forward as a government to stop that and suppress that.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I will be happy to yield to the ranking member.
  Mr. TIAHRT. I thank the gentleman from Utah for bringing up this very 
important issue.
  We have heard in testimony in the Interior Committee that not being 
able to maintain the security of our borders has had an impact on our 
park service and Interior lands. We need to do a better job of 
maintaining our borders. I thank the gentleman for his efforts in 
trying to make this country more safe by maintaining our borders.


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will remind Members to refrain from 
trafficking the well while a Member is under recognition.


                Amendment Offered by Mr. Bishop of Utah

  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Bishop of Utah:
       On page 2, line 15, insert after the dollar amount 
     ``(increased by $11,055,800)''.
       On page 11, line 21, insert after the dollar amount 
     ``(increased by $4,738,200)''.
       On page 18, line 23, insert after the dollar amount 
     ``(increased by $11,055,800)''.
       On page 67, line 8, insert after the dollar amount 
     ``(increased by $4,738,200)''.
       On page 96, line 14, insert after the dollar amount 
     ``(decreased by $31,588,000)''.

  Mr. BISHOP of Utah (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask 
unanimous consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed 
in the Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Utah?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. A point of order is reserved.

                              {time}  1215

  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Madam Chair, we just mentioned a few things that 
are significant to this particular issue and tried to mention some of 
the important points that we are making. We need greater control on the 
Park Service and BLM land on our border areas that is being devastated 
by illegal border crossing.
  The amendment that I am proposing goes directly to that goal and that 
purpose by committing $30 million towards law enforcement activities. 
Actually, it's $31.5 million toward law enforcement activities by 
agencies who are on our southern border.
  We, as a government, have a responsibility to prevent illegal border 
crossings. We also have a responsibility for land managers to be 
managing the land in that particular area.
  Now, this amendment that I have does move money around. I feel sorry 
for that. The particular area in which I am transferring the money is 
something that bothers me personally.
  I met my wife during a community theater. When I was in the 
legislature in Utah, I was the one that instituted a percent for the 
art programs so that 1 percent of all our construction monies went for 
arts to be considered. I have been a supporter of the Utah Arts 
Council.
  I also think it's appropriate that local dollars fund art programs so 
that local control can be there on the process level.
  With this particular amendment, it still leaves a $4 million, $4.5 
million, roughly $4 million increase in the National Endowment for the 
Arts over last year's funding base, so there still is an increase. But 
in addition to that increase, there is $30 million that will go to 
enforcement of our borders, enforcement of our borders that is 
necessary to protect the land that is there. It is a matter of 
priority.
  Now, CBO has scored this one. I'm convinced there is probably no 
PAYGO efforts, but that may be one of the

[[Page 17436]]

issues we want to talk about. But the bottom line is still this: We 
need to prioritize what we're doing with this budget. And this is a 
tremendous area that has been de-emphasized and needs to be re-
emphasized. And I contend that this is the appropriate way to put that 
emphasis there.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, I make a point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his point of order.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, the amendment filed by the gentleman may 
not be considered en bloc under clause 2(f) of rule XXI. The rule 
states in part that amendments may only be considered en bloc if they 
do not increase either budget authority or outlays in the bill.
  While the amendments proposed by the gentleman are offset fully in 
budget authority, the combined effect of the changes would increase 
outlays by $8 million, in violation of paragraph 2(f). The amendments 
are, therefore, not in order to be considered en bloc.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does any other Member wish to be recognized on this 
amendment?
  The Chair will make a ruling. To be considered en bloc pursuant to 
clause 2(f) of rule XXI, an amendment must not propose to increase the 
levels of budget authority or outlays in the bill. Because the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) proposes a 
net increase in the level of outlays in the bill as argued by the 
chairman of the Subcommittee on Appropriations, it may not avail itself 
of clause 2(f) to address portions of the bill not yet read.
  The amendment is not in order.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       In addition, $20,000,000 is for the processing of 
     applications for permit to drill and related use 
     authorizations, to remain available until expended, to be 
     reduced by amounts collected by the Bureau and credited to 
     this appropriation that shall be derived from $1,866 per new 
     application for permit to drill that the Bureau shall collect 
     upon submission of each new application, and in addition, 
     $34,696,000 is for Mining Law Administration program 
     operations, including the cost of administering the mining 
     claim fee program; to remain available until expended, to be 
     reduced by amounts collected by the Bureau and credited to 
     this appropriation from annual mining claim fees so as to 
     result in a final appropriation estimated at not more than 
     $888,628,000, and $2,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended, from communication site rental fees established by 
     the Bureau for the cost of administering communication site 
     activities.

                              construction

       For construction of buildings, recreation facilities, 
     roads, trails, and appurtenant facilities, $6,476,000 to 
     remain available until expended.

                            land acquisition

       For expenses necessary to carry out sections 205, 206, and 
     318(d) of Public Law 94-579, including administrative 
     expenses and acquisition of lands or waters, or interests 
     therein, $18,634,000 to be derived from the Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund and to remain available until expended.


                Amendment Offered by Mr. Bishop of Utah

  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Bishop of Utah:
       Page 4, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $17,015,000)''.

  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, I reserve a point of order against this 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. A point of order is reserved.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. One of the issues with which we struggle in this 
legislature deals with simply the concept of prioritization. And what 
I'm talking about in this particular issue is money put into the budget 
above and beyond what the President recommended, but money put into 
this budget for new acquisitions, not taking care of what we already 
have, but new acquisitions.
  Now, I'm going to contend here that what we need to do is prioritize 
so that what we do is put our money in what we already have and make 
sure that we are doing the best we have with our parks and public 
lands.
  I have a picture right here of a facility that's not in my district, 
but it is in my State. Dinosaur National Monument is actually in the 
Second District of Utah. This particular facility is a beautiful 
facility. I was there before it was condemned. I was there. So you 
could go in there with all my kids and look at the dinosaur bones that 
are still in place in the mountainside as it has been scraped away so 
you can see the prehistoric history of this country. It's a wonderful 
place. It is a wonderful exhibit. It's a great learning experience, all 
of which has been closed because this building has been condemned and 
we don't have enough money to fix the facility.
  This facility should be fixed before we put 17 million new dollars 
into new programs somewhere else. This facility should be fixed before 
we expand what we are trying to do. We need to take care of what we 
have already identified as important and significant and make sure it 
takes place.
  And that, my fellow Members of this House, is the reason I'm 
proposing this amendment, that we simply reprioritize to do what's most 
important, and we fix what we have first and make sure that is 
functioning before we put any new additional money into acquisition of 
new land, new properties and new proposals.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chair, I withdraw my point of order on this 
amendment, but I would like to be recognized for 5 minutes in 
opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is withdrawn.
  The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes in opposition.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, this amendment, if it were adopted, would 
eliminate nearly all land acquisitions that are high-priority projects 
that need to be done. It would leave only $1.6 million in the 
acquisition account, not even enough to continue to staff the program.
  These are not new projects. These are inholdings. These are 
inholdings within lands that are owned by the Bureau of Land 
Management, and these are very important from both an environmental 
perspective and to lock up land. That's why the BLM favors the 
acquisition of these inholdings.
  So I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Speaker, I move to strike the last word.
  I think that the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) has made a good 
point and reinforced what I was saying in my opening statement that we 
can get overextended in the Park Service and acquire more than we can 
take care of.
  The beautiful building that he used in his example provides a 
wonderful purpose is now closed because we have not been able to 
maintain it. My concern, in getting overextended, is that we build new 
buildings and acquire new land that we are unable to maintain and we 
get into the same problem that we're trying to correct today.
  So I thank the gentleman for offering his amendment, and I think it 
makes a valid point.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop).
  The amendment was rejected.
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last 
word.
  Madam Chair, I was going to offer an amendment today, but would like, 
rather, to speak on the subject of the amendment.
  Madam Chair, I'd like to thank Chairman Dicks for all of his hard 
work on this bill.
  Last week, Madam Chair, I was joined by Representative Gerlach and 
Representative Pitts as we relaunched the Bipartisan Land Conservation 
Caucus. And as one of the new co-Chairs of that caucus, I'm thrilled 
that the Interior Department budget that Mr. Dicks and his subcommittee 
have put together includes a major new investment in open space 
preservation funding, and I applaud their work here.
  But protecting these spaces, once preserved, is a time-consuming, 
expensive, and often complex process. We're lucky in this country, 
especially in New England where I hail from, to have amazing partners 
in this process, which are local land trusts. These land trusts were 
started by community members who want to preserve and protect the 
regional character of their special part

[[Page 17437]]

of the world. Since their creation, they've grown into full-fledged 
partners in the conservation effort. Many of these trusts across the 
country have expanded and now have up to 10 or 20 full-time staff 
members; however, many still remain very small volunteer organizations 
with no staff support. For example, of the 128 land trusts in 
Connecticut, 103 of them are comprised solely of volunteers, the 
largest number of volunteer trusts in the country. It's these small 
land trusts that do most of the on-the-ground work, saving historic 
sites and priceless vistas that are so important to our regional 
character in New England.
  However, in recent years the burden on these small land trusts has 
grown tremendously. In addition to their original task of seeking out 
lands to preserve, they are also now bound by IRS red tape and heavy 
enforcement duties. These land trusts are now responsible for ensuring 
that any conservation donation qualifies for the tax deduction offered 
by the IRS. These tax deductions have caused legions of landowners to 
choose to put valuable conservation easements on their land; however, a 
local volunteer land trust with no paid staffers cannot be expected to 
do the IRS's work for them to evaluate and sign off on every donation.
  In addition, these small land trusts are now required to enforce and 
patrol the easements that they already hold. As more and more land is 
put into easements, more and more burdens are put on local land trusts 
to make sure that these easements are enforced. In Connecticut, there 
are now over 24,000 acres of land with conservation easements, and more 
and more land is added every year.
  If the government is going to rely on these land trusts to do the 
administrative work associated with these easements for programs like 
the Land and Water Conservation Fund and Forest Legacy, it makes sense 
that we should partner with them to help them with these administrative 
duties.
  I had planned on offering an amendment that would have allowed 1 
percent of all land and water conservation funds appropriated by the 
Bureau of Land Management to be available to competitive grants to 
volunteer land trusts across this country. That money could be used in 
order to help them with some of the administrative costs that have been 
imposed.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. DICKS. I want to commend the gentleman from Connecticut for his 
leadership on the land trust. This is close to my heart. My youngest 
son, Ryan Dicks, works for the Cascade Land Conservancy in the State of 
Washington, and I'm very familiar with the work that these important 
agencies do.
  And I want you to know that in our bill we have $62 million in the 
Forest Legacy account, and we also have $268 million for land and water 
conservation grants, of which 50 million is for the Stateside program. 
And though I can't accept your amendment this year, I want the 
gentleman to know that I want to work with you and see if there's some 
way that we can help these important entities do the job that is so 
important in preserving lands that are important to the American 
people.
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Madam Chair, reclaiming my time. I thank 
the chairman very much for his offer to help. This is a historic 
investment in this bill in open space preservation and land 
preservation funding. I thank the chairman and his committee for their 
commitment to this very important issue, and I look forward to working 
with him to make sure that we are doing all we can to help those land 
trusts make the best use of this new historic and incredibly important 
commitment to land preservation and open space preservation.
  Mr. SAXTON. Madam Chairlady, I rise to strike the last word.
  Madam Chairlady, I would like to engage my distinguished colleague 
from Washington, Chairman Dicks, in a colloquy regarding funding for an 
important conservation project in the district I represent.
  The State of New Jersey has only 3 percent Federal land ownership and 
is also the most densely populated State in the country. From national 
parks and wildlife areas to soccer fields and city playgrounds, our 
investments in conservation, preservation, wildlife and recreation pay 
dividends each and every day.
  The coastal areas of our Nation are under extreme pressure for 
development. The Third District of New Jersey, where the Edwin B. 
Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge is located, is no exception. It is 
vital that we assist our States and local governments in a true 
Federal/State/local partnership to purchase tracts of land like the one 
within the Forsythe Refuge boundary, environmentally valuable land that 
can be bought now but most likely will be lost permanently for future 
use in the very near future.
  I appreciate the challenges that the subcommittee faced in this 
difficult budget year; however, I am hopeful that we will recognize the 
importance of this project to the people that I represent and New 
Jersey as a whole.
  We have a responsibility to our children to ensure that green spaces 
remain to provide clean air and water and ample opportunities to enjoy 
wildlife and the great outdoors. The economy of the district I 
represent depends on a vibrant and healthy economy.
  I yield to my friend from Washington.

                              {time}  1230

  Mr. DICKS. I appreciate your yielding.
  Madam Chairman, I thank my colleague from New Jersey for bringing 
this important project to my attention. I will be pleased to consider 
this funding need should additional funds become available in 
conference. And I also want to congratulate the gentleman for his 
outstanding leadership on many important issues dealing with 
conservation and the environment. And I particularly appreciated his 
cosponsorship of our bill that has just been reported out of the 
Natural Resources Committee in protecting our wildlife.
  The gentleman is certainly an important leader from New Jersey, and 
we want to work with him.
  Mr. SAXTON. Madam Chairman, I thank the chairman very much for his 
comments, and I appreciate our ongoing partnership and effort on issues 
such as this.
  Mr. LUCAS. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Madam Chairman, I wish to enter into a colloquy with the 
distinguished chairman of the subcommittee regarding the Indian Arts 
and Crafts Museum funding within the Department of Interior.
  Chairman Dicks, I stand here today in support of the continued 
funding of the 2008 Interior appropriations bill for the three Regional 
Indian Arts and Crafts Museums that are currently operated by the 
Indian Arts and Crafts Board. Congress passed the Indian Arts and 
Crafts Act, which created and charged the Indian Arts and Crafts Board 
with promoting the Indian arts and crafts movement and with protecting 
the integrity of the art from nonIndian counterfeiters selling products 
advertised as ``Indian made.'' To aid in this mission, the board 
operates three regional museums including the Southern Plains Indian 
Museum in Anadarko, Oklahoma; the Museum of the Plains Indian in 
Browning, Montana; and the Sioux Indian Museum in Rapid City, South 
Dakota.
  In 1935 Congress recognized, under the first Indian Arts and Crafts 
Act, the unique and culturally rich art of the American Indian is vital 
to the importance of the economic welfare of tribal communities. The 
production and sale of these items provide an entrepreneurial 
opportunity to one of the most economically challenged groups of our 
society. These three museums play an essential role in promoting the 
ideals set forth in the Indian Arts and Crafts Act by creating interest 
in the Native American heritage, helping Indian artisans gain access to 
an interested market, and bringing members of the Indian arts community 
together to celebrate and preserve this way of life.

[[Page 17438]]

  The collections showcased by the museums are extensive in their 
display of American Indian artwork and artifacts. And to preserve the 
history and integrity of these priceless collections, the museums must 
stay intact and the collections under their roofs must stay in Federal 
control.
  I stand today in full support of appropriations to support the 
mission of the Indian Arts and Crafts Board and insist that the funding 
and operation of the three Regional Indian Arts and Crafts Museums 
remain a continued, imperative part of this mission.
  Mr. Chairman, it is the understanding of the committee that Congress 
charged the Indian Arts and Crafts Board with developing and expanding 
the market for the products of Indian art as well as protecting the 
integrity of such items through prohibiting and investigating instances 
of misrepresentation of ``Indian-made'' products.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LUCAS. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. DICKS. That is correct.
  Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, it is the understanding of the committee 
that the funding and operation of the three Regional Indian Arts and 
Crafts Museums in their housing, preserving, and promoting Native 
American history, art, and culture is clearly an essential part of the 
mission that Congress charged the Indian Arts and Crafts Board with.
  Mr. DICKS. That is correct.
  Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I want to clarify that that it is the intent 
of the committee that the money provided for the fiscal year 2008 
Interior appropriations bill for the continued functions of the Arts 
and Crafts Board does include the operation of those three museums.
  Mr. DICKS. The gentleman is correct. It is the intent of the 
committee to continue the operation of the three museums, and I 
appreciate the gentleman's interest in artwork on this important issue.
  Mr. LUCAS. Madam Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the chairman 
and the ranking member and the committee for their very diligent work 
this year.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                   oregon and california grant lands

       For expenses necessary for management, protection, and 
     development of resources and for construction, operation, and 
     maintenance of access roads, reforestation, and other 
     improvements on the revested Oregon and California Railroad 
     grant lands, on other Federal lands in the Oregon and 
     California land-grant counties of Oregon, and on adjacent 
     rights-of-way; and acquisition of lands or interests therein, 
     including existing connecting roads on or adjacent to such 
     grant lands; $110,242,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That 25 percent of the aggregate of all 
     receipts during the current fiscal year from the revested 
     Oregon and California Railroad grant lands is hereby made a 
     charge against the Oregon and California land-grant fund and 
     shall be transferred to the General Fund in the Treasury in 
     accordance with the second paragraph of subsection (b) of 
     title II of the Act of August 28, 1937 (50 Stat. 876).

               forest ecosystem health and recovery fund

                   (revolving fund, special account)

       In addition to the purposes authorized in Public Law 102-
     381, funds made available in the Forest Ecosystem Health and 
     Recovery Fund can be used for the purpose of planning, 
     preparing, implementing and monitoring salvage timber sales 
     and forest ecosystem health and recovery activities, such as 
     release from competing vegetation and density control 
     treatments. The Federal share of receipts (defined as the 
     portion of salvage timber receipts not paid to the counties 
     under 43 U.S.C. 1181f and 43 U.S.C. 1181f-1 et seq., and 
     Public Law 106-393) derived from treatments funded by this 
     account shall be deposited into the Forest Ecosystem Health 
     and Recovery Fund.

                           range improvements

       For rehabilitation, protection, and acquisition of lands 
     and interests therein, and improvement of Federal rangelands 
     pursuant to section 401 of the Federal Land Policy and 
     Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701), notwithstanding any 
     other Act, sums equal to 50 percent of all moneys received 
     during the prior fiscal year under sections 3 and 15 of the 
     Taylor Grazing Act (43 U.S.C. 315 et seq.) and the amount 
     designated for range improvements from grazing fees and 
     mineral leasing receipts from Bankhead-Jones lands 
     transferred to the Department of the Interior pursuant to 
     law, but not less than $10,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That not to exceed $600,000 shall be 
     available for administrative expenses.

               service charges, deposits, and forfeitures

       For administrative expenses and other costs related to 
     processing application documents and other authorizations for 
     use and disposal of public lands and resources, for costs of 
     providing copies of official public land documents, for 
     monitoring construction, operation, and termination of 
     facilities in conjunction with use authorizations, and for 
     rehabilitation of damaged property, such amounts as may be 
     collected under Public Law 94-579, as amended, and Public Law 
     93-153, to remain available until expended: Provided, That, 
     notwithstanding any provision to the contrary of section 
     305(a) of Public Law 94-579 (43 U.S.C. 1735(a)), any moneys 
     that have been or will be received pursuant to that section, 
     whether as a result of forfeiture, compromise, or settlement, 
     if not appropriate for refund pursuant to section 305(c) of 
     that Act (43 U.S.C. 1735(c)), shall be available and may be 
     expended under the authority of this Act by the Secretary to 
     improve, protect, or rehabilitate any public lands 
     administered through the Bureau of Land Management which have 
     been damaged by the action of a resource developer, 
     purchaser, permittee, or any unauthorized person, without 
     regard to whether all moneys collected from each such action 
     are used on the exact lands damaged which led to the action: 
     Provided further, That any such moneys that are in excess of 
     amounts needed to repair damage to the exact land for which 
     funds were collected may be used to repair other damaged 
     public lands.

                       miscellaneous trust funds

       In addition to amounts authorized to be expended under 
     existing laws, there is hereby appropriated such amounts as 
     may be contributed under section 307 of the Act of October 
     21, 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701), and such amounts as may be 
     advanced for administrative costs, surveys, appraisals, and 
     costs of making conveyances of omitted lands under section 
     211(b) of that Act, to remain available until expended.

                        wildland fire management

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses for fire preparedness, suppression 
     operations, fire science and research, emergency 
     rehabilitation and hazardous fuels reduction by the 
     Department of the Interior, $806,644,000, to remain available 
     until expended, of which not to exceed $4,000,000 shall be 
     for the renovation or construction of fire facilities: 
     Provided, That such funds are also available for repayment of 
     advances to other appropriation accounts from which funds 
     were previously transferred for such purposes: Provided 
     further, That persons hired pursuant to 43 U.S.C. 1469 may be 
     furnished subsistence and lodging without cost from funds 
     available from this appropriation: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding 42 U.S.C. 1856d, sums received by a bureau or 
     office of the Department of the Interior for fire protection 
     rendered pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1856 et seq., protection of 
     United States property, may be credited to the appropriation 
     from which funds were expended to provide that protection, 
     and are available without fiscal year limitation: Provided 
     further, That using the amounts designated under this title 
     of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior may enter into 
     procurement contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements, for 
     hazardous fuels reduction activities, and for training and 
     monitoring associated with such hazardous fuels reduction 
     activities, on Federal land, or on adjacent non-Federal land 
     for activities that benefit resources on Federal land: 
     Provided further, That the costs of implementing any 
     cooperative agreement between the Federal Government and any 
     non-Federal entity may be shared, as mutually agreed on by 
     the affected parties: Provided further, That notwithstanding 
     requirements of the Competition in Contracting Act, the 
     Secretary, for purposes of hazardous fuels reduction 
     activities, may obtain maximum practicable competition among: 
     (1) local private, nonprofit, or cooperative entities; (2) 
     Youth Conservation Corps crews, Public Lands Corps (Public 
     Law 109-154), or related partnerships with State, local, or 
     non-profit youth groups; (3) small or micro-businesses; or 
     (4) other entities that will hire or train locally a 
     significant percentage, defined as 50 percent or more, of the 
     project workforce to complete such contracts: Provided 
     further, That in implementing this section, the Secretary 
     shall develop written guidance to field units to ensure 
     accountability and consistent application of the authorities 
     provided herein: Provided further, That funds appropriated 
     under this head may be used to reimburse the United States 
     Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries 
     Service for the costs of carrying out their responsibilities 
     under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 
     seq.) to consult and conference, as required by section 7 of 
     such Act, in connection with wildland fire management 
     activities: Provided further, That the Secretary of the 
     Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture may authorize the 
     transfer of funds appropriated for wildland

[[Page 17439]]

     fire management, in an aggregate amount not to exceed 
     $9,000,000, between the Departments when such transfers would 
     facilitate and expedite jointly funded wildland fire 
     management programs and projects: Provided further, That 
     funds provided for wildfire suppression shall be available 
     for support of Federal emergency response actions.

                       administrative provisions

       Appropriations for the Bureau of Land Management shall be 
     available for purchase, erection, and dismantlement of 
     temporary structures, and alteration and maintenance of 
     necessary buildings and appurtenant facilities to which the 
     United States has title; up to $100,000 for payments, at the 
     discretion of the Secretary, for information or evidence 
     concerning violations of laws administered by the Bureau; 
     miscellaneous and emergency expenses of enforcement 
     activities authorized or approved by the Secretary and to be 
     accounted for solely on the Secretary's certificate, not to 
     exceed $10,000: Provided, That notwithstanding 44 U.S.C. 501, 
     the Bureau may, under cooperative cost-sharing and 
     partnership arrangements authorized by law, procure printing 
     services from cooperators in connection with jointly produced 
     publications for which the cooperators share the cost of 
     printing either in cash or in services, and the Bureau 
     determines the cooperator is capable of meeting accepted 
     quality standards.
       Section 28 of title 30, United States Code, is amended: (1) 
     in section 28 by striking the phrase ``shall commence at 12 
     o'clock meridian on the 1st day of September'' and inserting 
     ``shall commence at 12:01 ante meridian on the 1st day of 
     September''; (2) in section 28f(a), by striking the phrase 
     ``for years 2004 through 2008''; and (3) in section 28g, by 
     striking the phrase ``and before September 30, 2008,''.
       Sums not to exceed one percent of the total value of 
     procurements received by the Bureau of Land Management from 
     vendors under enterprise information technology-procurements 
     that the Department of the Interior and other Federal 
     Government agencies may use to order information technology 
     hereafter may be deposited into the Management of Lands and 
     Resources account to offset costs incurred in conducting the 
     procurement.

                United States Fish and Wildlife Service

                          resource management

       For necessary expenses of the United States Fish and 
     Wildlife Service, as authorized by law, and for scientific 
     and economic studies, maintenance of the herd of long-horned 
     cattle on the Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge, general 
     administration, and for the performance of other authorized 
     functions related to such resources by direct expenditure, 
     contracts, grants, cooperative agreements and reimbursable 
     agreements with public and private entities, $1,104,572,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2009 except as 
     otherwise provided herein: Provided, That $2,500,000 is for 
     high priority projects, which shall be carried out by the 
     Youth Conservation Corps: Provided further, That not to 
     exceed $18,763,000 shall be used for implementing subsections 
     (a), (b), (c), and (e) of section 4 of the Endangered Species 
     Act, as amended, for species that are indigenous to the 
     United States (except for processing petitions, developing 
     and issuing proposed and final regulations, and taking any 
     other steps to implement actions described in subsection 
     (c)(2)(A), (c)(2)(B)(i), or (c)(2)(B)(ii)), of which not to 
     exceed $12,926,000 shall be used for any activity regarding 
     the designation of critical habitat, pursuant to subsection 
     (a)(3), excluding litigation support, for species listed 
     pursuant to subsection (a)(1) prior to October 1, 2007: 
     Provided further, That of the amount available for law 
     enforcement, up to $400,000, to remain available until 
     expended, may at the discretion of the Secretary be used for 
     payment for information, rewards, or evidence concerning 
     violations of laws administered by the Service, and 
     miscellaneous and emergency expenses of enforcement activity, 
     authorized or approved by the Secretary and to be accounted 
     for solely on the Secretary's certificate: Provided further, 
     That of the amount provided for environmental contaminants, 
     up to $1,000,000 may remain available until expended for 
     contaminant sample analyses.

                              construction

       For construction, improvement, acquisition, or removal of 
     buildings and other facilities required in the conservation, 
     management, investigation, protection, and utilization of 
     fishery and wildlife resources, and the acquisition of lands 
     and interests therein; $31,653,000, to remain available until 
     expended.

                            land acquisition

       For expenses necessary to carry out the Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund Act of 1965, as amended (16 U.S.C. 460l-4 
     through 11), including administrative expenses, and for 
     acquisition of land or waters, or interest therein, in 
     accordance with statutory authority applicable to the United 
     States Fish and Wildlife Service, $43,046,000, to be derived 
     from the Land and Water Conservation Fund and to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That none of the funds 
     appropriated for specific land acquisition projects can be 
     used to pay for any administrative overhead, planning or 
     other management costs.

            cooperative endangered species conservation fund

       For expenses necessary to carry out section 6 of the 
     Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), as 
     amended, $81,001,000, to remain available until expended.

                     national wildlife refuge fund

       For expenses necessary to implement the Act of October 17, 
     1978 (16 U.S.C. 715s), $14,202,000.

               north american wetlands conservation fund

       For expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of the 
     North American Wetlands Conservation Act, as amended, (16 
     U.S.C. 4401-4414), $42,646,000 to remain available until 
     expended.

                neotropical migratory bird conservation

       For expenses necessary to carry out the Neotropical 
     Migratory Bird Conservation Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 6101 
     et seq.), $5,000,000, to remain available until expended.

                multinational species conservation fund

       For expenses necessary to carry out the African Elephant 
     Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 4201-4203, 4211-4213, 4221-4225, 
     4241-4245, and 1538), the Asian Elephant Conservation Act of 
     1997 (16 U.S.C. 4261-4266), the Rhinoceros and Tiger 
     Conservation Act of 1994 (16 U.S.C. 5301-5306), the Great Ape 
     Conservation Act of 2000 (16 U.S.C. 6301-6305), and the 
     Marine Turtle Conservation Act of 2004 (16 U.S.C. 6301-6305), 
     $10,000,000, to remain available until expended.

                    state and tribal wildlife grants

       For wildlife conservation grants to States and to the 
     District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the United States 
     Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, 
     and federally-recognized Indian tribes under the provisions 
     of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 and the Fish and 
     Wildlife Coordination Act, for the development and 
     implementation of programs for the benefit of wildlife and 
     their habitat, including species that are not hunted or 
     fished, $85,000,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That of the amount provided herein, $7,000,000 is 
     for a competitive grant program for Indian tribes not subject 
     to the remaining provisions of this appropriation: Provided 
     further, That $5,000,000 is for a competitive grant program 
     for States, territories, and other jurisdictions with 
     approved plans, not subject to the remaining provisions of 
     this appropriation: Provided further, That the Secretary 
     shall, after deducting said $12,000,000 and administrative 
     expenses, apportion the amount provided herein in the 
     following manner: (1) To the District of Columbia and to the 
     Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, each a sum equal to not more 
     than one-half of 1 percent thereof; and (2) to Guam, American 
     Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth 
     of the Northern Mariana Islands, each a sum equal to not more 
     than one-fourth of 1 percent thereof: Provided further, That 
     the Secretary shall apportion the remaining amount in the 
     following manner: (1) one-third of which is based on the 
     ratio to which the land area of such State bears to the total 
     land area of all such States; and (2) two-thirds of which is 
     based on the ratio to which the population of such State 
     bears to the total population of all such States: Provided 
     further, That the amounts apportioned under this paragraph 
     shall be adjusted equitably so that no State shall be 
     apportioned a sum which is less than 1 percent of the amount 
     available for apportionment under this paragraph for any 
     fiscal year or more than 5 percent of such amount: Provided 
     further, That the Federal share of planning grants shall not 
     exceed 75 percent of the total costs of such projects and the 
     Federal share of implementation grants shall not exceed 50 
     percent of the total costs of such projects: Provided 
     further, That the non-Federal share of such projects may not 
     be derived from Federal grant programs: Provided further, 
     That no State, territory, or other jurisdiction shall receive 
     a grant if its comprehensive wildlife conservation plan is 
     disapproved and such funds that would have been distributed 
     to such State, territory, or other jurisdiction shall be 
     distributed equitably to States, territories, and other 
     jurisdictions with approved plans: Provided further, That any 
     amount apportioned in 2008 to any State, territory, or other 
     jurisdiction that remains unobligated as of September 30, 
     2009, shall be reapportioned, together with funds 
     appropriated in 2010, in the manner provided herein.

                       administrative provisions

       Appropriations and funds available to the United States 
     Fish and Wildlife Service shall be available for repair of 
     damage to public roads within and adjacent to reservation 
     areas caused by operations of the Service; options for the 
     purchase of land at not to exceed $1 for each option; 
     facilities incident to such public recreational uses on 
     conservation areas as are consistent with their primary 
     purpose; and the maintenance and improvement of aquaria, 
     buildings, and other facilities under the jurisdiction of the 
     Service and to which the United States has title, and which 
     are used pursuant to law in connection with management, and 
     investigation of fish and wildlife resources: Provided, That

[[Page 17440]]

     notwithstanding 44 U.S.C. 501, the Service may, under 
     cooperative cost sharing and partnership arrangements 
     authorized by law, procure printing services from cooperators 
     in connection with jointly produced publications for which 
     the cooperators share at least one-half the cost of printing 
     either in cash or services and the Service determines the 
     cooperator is capable of meeting accepted quality standards: 
     Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, the Service may use up to $2,000,000 from funds 
     provided for contracts for employment-related legal services: 
     Provided further, That the Service may accept donated 
     aircraft as replacements for existing aircraft: Provided 
     further, That, notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     the Secretary of the Interior may not spend any of the funds 
     appropriated in this Act for the purchase of lands or 
     interests in lands to be used in the establishment of any new 
     unit of the National Wildlife Refuge System unless the 
     purchase is approved in advance by the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations in compliance with the 
     reprogramming procedures contained in the statement of the 
     managers accompanying this Act.

                         National Park Service

                 operation of the national park system

       For expenses necessary for the management, operation, and 
     maintenance of areas and facilities administered by the 
     National Park Service (including expenses to carry out 
     programs of the United States Park Police), and for the 
     general administration of the National Park Service, 
     $2,046,809,000, of which $9,965,000 is for planning and 
     interagency coordination in support of Everglades restoration 
     and shall remain available until expended; of which 
     $100,164,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009, 
     is for maintenance, repair or rehabilitation projects for 
     constructed assets, operation of the National Park Service 
     automated facility management software system, environmental 
     studies, and comprehensive facility condition assessments; 
     and of which $4,000,000 shall be for the Youth Conservation 
     Corps and the Public Lands Corps (Public Law 109-154) for 
     high priority projects.


          Amendment No. 16 Offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida

  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 16 offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida:
       Page 18, line 23, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $1,000,000) (increased by $1,000,000)''.

  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Chairman, I rise today to offer an 
amendment with my good friend, Congressman Michael Castle of Delaware, 
to the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2008.
  Our amendment designates $1 million of the increase in appropriations 
to the National Park Service for operations and grants affiliated with 
the National Underground Railroad Network to Freedom.
  Madam Chairman, Members on both sides of the aisle agree that the 
National Underground Railroad Network to Freedom is a phenomenal 
resource of the National Park Service. Interest in the network 
continues to grow within affiliates in 28 States and the District of 
Columbia now operating since its inception in 1998. More opportunities 
than ever are now available for families throughout the Nation to 
engage in interpretive learning experiences related to the significant 
triumph of the underground railroad.
  Madam Chair, the President's request of $493,000 for the operation 
demonstrates a slight increase for the network, but the true problem 
lies in the lack of grants for affiliates. The grant opportunities for 
network affiliates have only been funded three times since the 
establishment of the network in 1998 and woefully less than the $2.5 
million authorized in the establishing legislation.
  Our amendment is not just about preserving black history. Madam 
Chair, it is about preserving American history, and we cannot let our 
history be forgotten. Indeed, once Congress establishes a phenomenal 
program such as this, it should be ready to take the necessary action 
to ensure its perpetuity. This is our past and we must be faithful 
stewards of it.
  I would like to thank Chairman Dicks and Ranking Member Tiahrt for 
their help in bringing this timely amendment to the floor today.
  Madam Chairman, I would like to, at this time, yield to my friend, 
Mr. Castle.
  Mr. CASTLE. Madam Chairman, let me thank the gentleman from Florida 
tremendously for his work on this. And I, too, rise in strong support 
of the Hastings-Castle amendment expressing congressional intent that 
the operations and grants budget for the Underground Railroad Network 
to Freedom program receive adequate funding.
  I understand Chairman Dicks and Ranking Member Tiahrt are willing to 
accept the amendment; so I will be brief.
  By helping local communities share the stories of the men and women 
who resisted slavery through escape and flight in the underground 
railroad, the Network to Freedom is a tremendous historical resource. 
Without continued and adequate funding, efforts to operate and provide 
grants to support a variety of underground railroad preservation and 
interpretive projects throughout the United States will be greatly 
diminished.
  Promoting programs and partnerships to commemorate this time in 
history and educating the public about the historical significance of 
the underground railroad are vital. It is for this reason we offer this 
amendment today.
  Again, I would like to thank the distinguished gentleman from 
Florida. We in Delaware have a lot of involvement with the underground 
railroad during that time. I think it is a significant part of our 
history.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman from Florida yield?
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, we are prepared to accept the amendment.
  I want to commend the gentleman from Florida and the gentleman from 
Delaware for their outstanding leadership. This is a very important 
issue. And as we understand it, this would come out of existing funds 
within the park service?
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. That is correct.
  Mr. DICKS. With that understanding, Madam Chairman, we accept the 
amendment.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Kansas.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from 
Florida and commend him on his leadership on this issue and also the 
gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle).
  I think this is a very important time in American history that we 
need to capture and preserve for future generations. So 
congratulations. We have no objection to this amendment.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Reclaiming my time, thank you, Chairman 
Dicks, Ranking Member Tiahrt, and Governor Castle.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 32 Offered by Mr. Weiner

  Mr. WEINER. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 32 offered by Mr. Weiner:
       Page 18, line 23, insert ``(increased by $1,000,000)'' 
     after the first dollar amount.
       Page 39, line 17, insert ``(reduced by $1,000,000)'' after 
     the first dollar amount.

  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WEINER. Madam Chairman, I doubt I will take the full 5 minutes.
  As remarkable as it might seem to anyone who is listening to these 
remarks, there is one national park in our country that was closed 
after September 11 that remains closed to this day.
  We all remember that after September 11, there was kind of a general 
lockdown. We weren't sure what was going to happen next. National parks 
throughout the country were closed. That included this building. It 
included the White House. It included, frankly, monuments, memorials, 
and parks throughout the country.
  Almost immediately thereafter, with some changes to security, some 
more

[[Page 17441]]

enhanced like this building, some less so like some national parks, 
every single one of the national parks and institutions was reopened, 
except for one: the Statue of Liberty. Perhaps the single most symbolic 
of all parks, the Statue of Liberty remains closed to this day. It is 
true you can take a ferry and go around the Statue of Liberty. It is 
even true that you can go to its base, walk inside, and tap Lady 
Liberty's toes. But the Statue of Liberty and its iconic stairway that 
leads to the very top, to the crown, where all of us or so many of us 
remember standing on our tiptoes to see that regal view, remains closed 
today.
  Now, my colleagues, you might be wondering how could it be nearly 7 
years after September 11 the park is still closed? Let me tell you a 
few reasons why it is not the case.
  First of all, there has been plenty of money. This committee and 
private beneficiaries have raised over $20 million for security 
enhancements, for changes. In fact, we all remember after September 11 
a foundation was formed, Folger's and American Express and all kinds of 
institutions, the Daily News, my hometown newspaper. Kids were 
gathering up pennies and dimes and nickles. So there was no shortage of 
money. But we do know what there appears to be a shortage of, and that 
is imagination or courage on the part of the National Park Service.
  We in this House, by a resounding fashion last year, 266 of us voted 
to say open up Lady Liberty to her crown. But the National Park 
Service, after years of kind of thinking about it and scratching their 
chin and twiddling their hair and flipping through papers, last year, 
at the urging of Mr. Dicks and others, finally sent this body a letter 
that said, ``we have concluded that the current access patterns reflect 
a responsible management strategy in the best interests of all our 
visitors.''

                              {time}  1245

  Well, that is bureaucratic speech, saying to Congress and the 
American people, take a hike, we're going to do what we want. Saying to 
the chairman of the committee, the ranking member, 266 of us, We don't 
care what your views are, we don't care about the private donations, we 
don't care about the reasonable accommodations that can be made, we're 
not opening up the Statue of Liberty.
  And I say reasonable accommodations because there are things that can 
be done. Look, there is no doubt about it, there are narrow staircases, 
there are narrow passageways, not as narrow as this building, and there 
are sensitive locations, not as sensitive as the White House, but we've 
figured out ways to accommodate visitors, although in a limited 
fashion, in those places.
  My colleague, Congressman Sires, who is here today to offer this 
amendment with me and who I, regretfully, have to admit, according to 
the Supreme Court, that the Statue of Liberty is in his district. 
Although I would point out that Lady Liberty's caboose faces New 
Jersey, not her proud crown. But I want to thank him for all that he 
has done and for seeing that this is a national issue.
  Let me just say this in closing: you know, we have heard it thrown 
around a lot, We mustn't let the terrorists win, We mustn't let the 
terrorists win. Can you imagine the symbolic sacrifice and the symbolic 
surrender we have made by saying that, because there are security 
concerns, we're not going to reopen the Statue of Liberty? How many of 
us don't remember the experience of climbing those narrow staircases?
  So what does this amendment do? This amendment says, you say you 
can't do it? We're going to give you another million dollars to do it. 
It takes $1 million and strikes it from the administration's account, 
puts it in the National Park Service account and says, if you need more 
money, here it is.
  I also want to thank my colleagues on the Resources Committee, 
subcommittee Chairman Grijalva, full committee Chairman Rahall, for 
considering and tentatively agreeing to do hearings to look into this.
  This is simply wrong. And to my chairman, Mr. Dicks, and to my 
ranking member, Mr. Tiahrt, there are no stronger advocates for the 
National Park Service than they, no stronger protectors of the national 
budget than they.
  This is not a frivolous idea. This is Lady Liberty. This is making 
sure we restore the dignity of our National Park Service everywhere, 
but particularly in this most symbolic place.
  Mr. SIRES. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  I really want to thank Congressman Weiner, this has been an issue 
that is close to his heart, for offering this amendment.
  Let me start my remarks talking a little bit about 9/11. I was the 
mayor of a small community across from New York, and I was a citizen. I 
watched as the Towers burned. I will never forget that vision in my 
mind. It was a symbolic blow to the Nation's spirit. But we have 
recovered our spirit. Today, America stands strong and proud again. And 
an important part of the recovery is due to the fact that we were able 
to get back to work. In short, we got back our lives.
  As the Secretary of the Interior, Ms. Norton, said on September 12, 
2001 while standing at the Hoover Dam, ``Even though atrocities such as 
those of September 11 can affect us, they cannot close us down.'' That 
is why I am cosponsoring this amendment today.
  The only national park that remains closed from 9/11 is the crown of 
the Statue of Liberty. I hope that with this amendment we will open up 
the crown for visiting once again.
  Yes, it is symbolic, but symbols are important. And let me say that 
there are three sites that most immigrants, when they come to the area, 
like to look at. One is the Statue of Liberty, the other is going up 
the Empire State Building, and the other is Niagara Falls. We can go to 
the other two, but we cannot go all the way up to the Statue of 
Liberty.
  I thank my friend from New York for proposing this amendment and for 
his time.
  Mr. DICKS. If the gentleman will yield, I want to commend the 
gentlemen from New York and New Jersey for their leadership, and I urge 
that the committee adopt this amendment.
  Mr. WEINER. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SIRES. I will yield.
  Mr. WEINER. I want to offer my gratitude to the chairman, who has 
been helpful to us all throughout, and the ranking member, Mr. Tiahrt, 
for all that they have done.
  Mr. DICKS. And by the way, we have a new director of the National 
Parks Service. I think it may be good to give her an opportunity to 
review this, too. So I think we ought to give her another chance to 
look at this.
  Mr. SIRES. We do have the Statue of Liberty in New Jersey, and we 
have the better side facing New Jersey.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SIRES. Absolutely.
  Mr. TIAHRT. I would like to say I have no objection to this, and I 
appreciate the gentlemen from New York and New Jersey for attempting to 
open up the steps of Liberty once again.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. OLVER. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  First I want to commend the chairman and the ranking member for 
bringing forward a very good bill. And I want to also commend the 
chairman and the ranking member for agreeing to the amendment that has 
just been adopted. But I want to put that a little bit in context here.
  I have to say that I was surprised and somewhat chagrinned by the 
characterization of the ranking member of the full committee when he 
described this legislation, this whole legislation, as having an 
excessive and overgenerous allocation. I don't really think that that 
is the case, and the Park Service programs within this bill are a 
perfect example of that.
  We are coming up on the 100th anniversary of the National Park 
Service and have a lot of work to do to bring that up to a state of 
good repair, the facilities of the National Park Service up to a state 
of good repair.

[[Page 17442]]

  The Park Service embarked on a program to try to repair some damage 
that has been done, particularly in the fiscal years 2005 and 2006. The 
reduction in budget compared with what would be, including inflation, 
the necessary funding to keep the maintenance of service in the Park 
Service programs is close to 20 percent in those two fiscal years. And 
in fiscal year 2007, we were able to virtually level fund the budget 
for programs within the Department of the Interior and the Park Service 
at just no increase. But now this year, with this legislation, there is 
an additional $105 million in the legislation for the increase in the 
Park Service's base funding which should allow them to begin to make 
some additions in the maintenance, the backlog of maintenance, which is 
so well described in the previous amendment, and the need at one of our 
greatest, most important national monuments, the Statue of Liberty, to 
make that available to the public.
  We have hundreds of millions of people in total that visit our 
national parks, our national monuments, our historic sites, our fish 
and wildlife refuges, and the maintenance backlog is in the billions of 
dollars level, of which $105 million to deal with the backlog needs in 
the Park Service's accounts is only a small portion of what is needed 
to bring up our facilities that serve those hundreds of millions of the 
public who visit at all these variation locations each year, to bring 
them up to a state of good repair. So I think that it is important that 
we provide those monies.
  I know there will be other amendments. I will be supportive of those 
amendments, which also increase the amounts that can go, reasonably, 
into state of good repair for our facilities under the Park Service for 
those national parks, historic sites and national monuments that we so 
badly need in good repair for the visitation and for the education of 
the public.
  The Park Service system is a national treasure, and it must be 
preserved and valued for our future generations.


                 Amendment Offered by Mr. King of Iowa

  Mr. KING of Iowa. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. King of Iowa:
       Page 18, line 23, insert ``(increased by $100,000,000)'' 
     after the first dollar amount.
       Page 58, line 3 insert ``(reduced by $62,000,000)'' after 
     the dollar amount.
        Page 59, line 3 insert ``(reduced by $160,000,000)'' after 
     the dollar amount.
       Page 66, line 23, insert ``(reduced by $1,000,000)'' after 
     the dollar amount.

  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chair, I reserve a point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman reserves a point of order.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Madam Chair, the amendment that I offer here today 
is an amendment that reaches out and directs $100 million to the 
National Parks Service for the purpose of putting up barriers on our 
border. This comes from one of my multiple trips down to the region 
where I sat and talked with a number of the park officers and visited 
the border parks that we have. And I can take you down through the 
pieces of this argument, but I think the centerpiece of it was 
addressed by Mr. Bishop of Utah, when he talked about one-third of the 
Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument being set aside off limits to 
American citizens, to American tourists because it has been so 
inundated by illegals and by drug smugglers and drug traffickers and 
litter that when I asked to go to that area, they said it's not safe, 
we don't have the personnel to take you. So it's essential that we 
protect these national treasures that we have, these national parks and 
national monuments.
  I want to reflect upon an example here, Madam Chair, and that is this 
poster that I have. This shows the entrance to the lesser long-nosed 
bat cave. It's one of four maternal bat caves in the United States. And 
this is an endangered species. This is a location where illegals used 
to go in and hole up. And their constant presence there drove the bats 
out. The 4,000 bats that lived here were driven to other places. They 
found $75,000 in their budget and volunteer labor and went to build and 
construct this barrier around the bat cave to keep the illegals out. 
The bats returned, thankfully. But we have other species, and we have 
this precious area.
  And if I can reflect back, Madam Chair, just upon my notes with a 
meeting with the director of one of our national parks on the border. 
First, he said we were concerned about disease, hoof and mouth disease, 
for example, as I am. But from 1978 to 1984, there wasn't much of a 
problem with illegal traffic. By 1989, activity had picked up. By 1999, 
13 miles of fence were stolen. By the year 2002, ``everything went 
haywire.'' The numbers increased dramatically, 20 to 25 cars at any one 
time abandoned, litter all over the parks, 20,000 pounds of drugs 
recovered just on that refuge alone. And his question is not, what are 
you going to give me? But what can I cut in order to save these 
national parks?
  So I've made a recommendation on what to cut, Madam Chair, and it 
reaches out into three different areas to come up with $100 million so 
that we can protect these national parks along our border from this 
traffic. When it gets so bad that the litter is so bad that we won't 
let Americans drive by on the road and look, when it gets so bad that a 
Member of Congress can't get an escort with enough armed personnel to 
go down into one-third of the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, the 
location where Park Officer Chris Eggle was killed in the line of duty 
in order to intercept a drug smuggler across the border, I call upon 
this Congress, Madam Chair, to do something. And the director of this 
park said to me, a year or two or five ago, I would have said don't 
build a fence, don't build a wall, I don't want that mark across my 
monument. Today I say, that's what will preserve the rest of it.
  So I think that makes my strongest argument. We need to find the 
funds to protect our precious national resources. There should be not 
one square foot of a national park that an American citizen is off 
limits to because we can't protect it from infiltrators that come from 
across the border to smuggle drugs and commit crimes.
  So I would urge adoption of this amendment.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  First of all I want to say that I am a strong supporter of our 
national parks. And our committee takes a back seat to no one. My 
problem with this amendment is the source of the offset.
  The bill provides a $223 million increase for our national parks, for 
the 10-year $3 billion Centennial Challenge effort to restore the parks 
for the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Park Service.

                              {time}  1300

  The bill also includes $50 million in discretionary funds for the 
Centennial Challenge projects. These funds will support enhancements in 
our parks beyond the funding necessary for core operations. This is the 
best bill for the parks in decades, but I cannot support a wholesale 
gutting of the important work done by the Environmental Protection 
Agency. The gentleman's amendment would severely cut two of EPA's most 
important programs. He proposes to reduce by $160 million the Superfund 
program that cleans up toxic waste sites across our country.
  Currently, there are over 1,400 Superfund sites. More than 6 million 
people live within 1 mile of a Superfund site and 76 million live 
within 4 miles of these sites.
  Our bill increases Superfund above the request. Why? Because as the 
Superfund program matures, the remaining sites are more complex, take 
longer to clean up, and require more funding. How do we explain the 
proposed reduction to those 76 million Americans? Do you ask them to 
wait even longer to remove the hazardous substances in their 
neighborhoods?
  The amendment would also cut EPA's core environmental programs, those 
funded through the environmental programs and management account.
  The account funds the activities which are the backbone of the 
Nation's

[[Page 17443]]

environmental programs. EPA sets pollutant abatement standards. It 
issues permits to control these standards. It enforces those permits to 
ensure compliance with environmental standards. This account funds 
programs that control toxic air pollutants which threaten to poison our 
cities.
  This account funds the Energy Star program, a program that most 
Americans know by name and trust, a program that has saved Americans 
$12 billion in energy costs in 2005 alone. This account funds the 
programs which license pesticides that control harmful exposures. This 
account funds programs which protect children, our most precious 
resource, from indoor air pollutants. With the geographic programs 
funded through this account, EPA helps to protect the great, and 
unfortunately threatened, waterways of our Nation
  Madam Chairwoman, I am certainly a great supporter of the parks. I 
believe the underlying bill is proof of that. But I cannot support an 
effort to reduce the programs that are the fundamental basis for our 
Nation's environmental protection.
  I urge a no vote on the gentleman's amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman withdraw his reservation of a point 
of order?
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, yes, I withdraw my reservation.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Iowa will be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:


                          centennial challenge

       For expenses necessary to carry out provisions of section 
     814(g) of Public Law 104-333 relating to challenge cost share 
     agreements, $50,000,000, to remain available until expended 
     for Centennial Challenge signature projects and programs: 
     Provided, That not less than 50 percent of the total cost of 
     each project or program is derived from non-Federal sources 
     in the form of donated cash, assets, in-kind services, or a 
     pledge of donation guaranteed by an irrevocable letter of 
     credit.

                  national recreation and preservation

       For expenses necessary to carry out recreation programs, 
     natural programs, cultural programs, heritage partnership 
     programs, environmental compliance and review, international 
     park affairs, statutory or contractual aid for other 
     activities, and grant administration, not otherwise provided 
     for, $62,881,000.

                       historic preservation fund

                     (including transfers of funds)

       For expenses necessary in carrying out the Historic 
     Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470), and the 
     Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 (Public 
     Law 104-333), $81,500,000, to be derived from the Historic 
     Preservation Fund and to remain available until September 30, 
     2009; of which $20,000,000 shall be for Save America's 
     Treasures for preservation of nationally significant sites, 
     structures, and artifacts and of which $10,000,000 shall be 
     for Preserve America grants to States, Tribes, and local 
     communities for projects that preserve important historic 
     resources through the promotion of heritage tourism: 
     Provided, That any individual Save America's Treasures or 
     Preserve America grant shall be matched by non-Federal funds; 
     individual projects shall only be eligible for one grant; and 
     all projects to be funded shall be approved by the Secretary 
     of the Interior in consultation with the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That Save 
     America's Treasures funds allocated for Federal projects, 
     following approval, shall be available by transfer to 
     appropriate accounts of individual agencies.

                              construction

       For construction, improvements, repair or replacement of 
     physical facilities, including the modifications authorized 
     by section 104 of the Everglades National Park Protection and 
     Expansion Act of 1989, $201,580,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That funds provided under this 
     heading for implementation of modified water deliveries to 
     Everglades National Park shall be expended consistent with 
     the requirements of the fifth proviso under this heading in 
     Public Law 108-108: Provided further, That funds provided 
     under this heading for implementation of modified water 
     deliveries to Everglades National Park shall be available for 
     obligation only if matching funds are appropriated to the 
     Army Corps of Engineers for the same purpose: Provided 
     further, That none of the funds provided under this heading 
     for implementation of modified water deliveries to Everglades 
     National Park shall be available for obligation if any of the 
     funds appropriated to the Army Corps of Engineers for the 
     purpose of implementing modified water deliveries, including 
     finalizing detailed engineering and design documents for a 
     bridge or series of bridges for the Tamiami Trail component 
     of the project, becomes unavailable for obligation.

                    land and water conservation fund

                              (rescission)

       The contract authority provided for fiscal year 2008 by 16 
     U.S.C. 460l-10a is rescinded.

                 land acquisition and state assistance

       For expenses necessary to carry out the Land and Water 
     Conservation Act of 1965, as amended (16 U.S.C. 460l-4 
     through 11), including administrative expenses, and for 
     acquisition of lands or waters, or interest therein, in 
     accordance with the statutory authority applicable to the 
     National Park Service, $99,402,000, to be derived from the 
     Land and Water Conservation Fund and to remain available 
     until expended, of which $50,000,000 is for the State 
     assistance program.

                       administrative provisions

       If the Secretary of the Interior considers that the 
     decision of any value determination proceeding conducted 
     under a National Park Service concession contract issued 
     prior to November 13, 1998, misinterprets or misapplies 
     relevant contractual requirements or their underlying legal 
     authority, then the Secretary may seek, within 180 days of 
     any such decision, the de novo review of the value 
     determination by the United States Court of Federal Claims. 
     This court may make an order affirming, vacating, modifying 
     or correcting the determination.
       In addition to other uses set forth in section 407(d) of 
     Public Law 105-391, franchise fees credited to a sub-account 
     shall be available for expenditure by the Secretary, without 
     further appropriation, for use at any unit within the 
     National Park System to extinguish or reduce liability for 
     possessory interest or leasehold surrender interest. Such 
     funds may only be used for this purpose to the extent that 
     the benefiting unit anticipated franchise fee receipts over 
     the term of the contract at that unit exceed the amount of 
     funds used to extinguish or reduce liability. Franchise fees 
     at the benefiting unit shall be credited to the sub-account 
     of the originating unit over a period not to exceed the term 
     of a single contract at the benefiting unit, in the amount of 
     funds so expended to extinguish or reduce liability.
       A willing seller from whom the Service acquires title to 
     real property may be considered a ``displaced person'' for 
     purposes of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real 
     Property Acquisition Policy Act and its implementing 
     regulations, whether or not the Service has the authority to 
     acquire such property by eminent domain.
       Section 3(f) of the Act of August 21, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 
     463(f)), related to the National Park System Advisory Board, 
     is amended in the first sentence by striking ``2007'' and 
     inserting ``2009''.

  Mr. KIRK. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Madam Chairman, I rise today just to support this legislation which 
increases funds, provides programs that protect our national forests 
and parks and enhance our clean water infrastructure. The bill also 
provides more than $1.3 billion for Great Lakes restoration and 
protection programs and an increase of $32 million over fiscal year 
2007.
  Providing water, jobs, food and recreation for more than 40 million 
people, the Great Lakes are one of our Nation's most valuable natural 
habitats. It is critical that we continue to support programs and 
provide funds that ensure the restoration and preservation of this 
National treasure.
  Now, in this bill we fund the Great Lakes Legacy Act, which is a 
critical component of this ecosystems restoration. It provides funds 
for the cleanup of the most polluted sites in the region. There are 26 
of these sites designated officially as areas of concern located wholly 
within the United States and then five more inside Canada. From six of 
the projects that we receive funding since the program's inception, the 
EPA estimates that over 1.2 million cubic yards of contaminated 
sediments will be removed.
  Madam Chairman, I really want to thank Chairman Dicks and ranking 
member Tiahrt for working with me to increase funds above the 
President's request to provide $37 million for this program, which is 
an increase of over $7 million last year.
  I also want to thank these gentlemen for providing an increase of 
roughly $3 million to the National Great Lakes

[[Page 17444]]

Program Office to fund additional staff to implement the Legacy Act. 
The aid will help us to eliminate the backlog in reviewing proposals to 
speed up the cleanup of polluted sites.
  Madam Chairman, I just want to thank the two gentlemen. I am in favor 
of this legislation.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, first of all, 
I appreciate the gentleman's support for our overall bill, but I want 
to acknowledge his leadership on the Great Lakes. We have some 
incredible programs in the Great Lakes. The gentleman has come to us 
and offered a very positive amendment. We are concerned in my part of 
the world about Puget Sound. Our vice chairman, Mr. Moran, is concerned 
about the Chesapeake Bay. We are concerned about all of our National 
estuaries. But the Great Lakes are particularly important, and I 
appreciate the gentleman's input on this issue.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I also want 
to congratulate the gentleman from Illinois for his persistence in 
pursuing environmental issues in the Illinois area as well as across 
the United States. It is very important that we have clean air and 
clean water for our children and grandchildren.
  The gentleman's leadership has been excellent. Also I want to 
acknowledge his special recognition of the Great Lakes and taking care 
of them. He has been worried about the fish life as well as the quality 
of the water. I congratulate the gentleman in these efforts there.
  Mr. KIRK. Madam Chairman, reclaiming my time, this is a very good 
bill. I want to thank both these gentlemen. I want everyone who is part 
of the 40 million Americans that depend on the Great Lakes for their 
drinking water to know that this appropriations bill is pro-Great 
Lakes.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                    United States Geological Survey

                 surveys, investigations, and research

       For expenses necessary for the United States Geological 
     Survey to perform surveys, investigations, and research 
     covering topography, geology, hydrology, biology, and the 
     mineral and water resources of the United States, its 
     territories and possessions, and other areas as authorized by 
     43 U.S.C. 31, 1332, and 1340; classify lands as to their 
     mineral and water resources; give engineering supervision to 
     power permittees and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
     licensees; administer the minerals exploration program (30 
     U.S.C. 641); conduct inquiries into the economic conditions 
     affecting mining and materials processing industries (30 
     U.S.C. 3, 21a, and 1603; 50 U.S.C. 98g(1)) and related 
     purposes as authorized by law; and to publish and disseminate 
     data relative to the foregoing activities; $1,032,764,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2009, of which 
     $63,345,000 shall be available only for cooperation with 
     States or municipalities for water resources investigations; 
     of which $32,150,000 shall remain available until expended 
     for satellite operations; of which $8,023,000 shall be 
     available until expended for deferred maintenance and capital 
     improvement projects; and of which $187,114,000 shall be for 
     the biological research activity and the operation of the 
     Cooperative Research Units: Provided, That none of the funds 
     provided for the biological research activity shall be used 
     to conduct new surveys on private property, unless 
     specifically authorized in writing by the property owner: 
     Provided further, That no part of this appropriation shall be 
     used to pay more than one-half the cost of topographic 
     mapping or water resources data collection and investigations 
     carried on in cooperation with States and municipalities.

                       administrative provisions

       From within the amount appropriated for activities of the 
     United States Geological Survey such sums as are necessary 
     shall be available for reimbursement to the General Services 
     Administration for security guard services; contracting for 
     the furnishing of topographic maps and for the making of 
     geophysical or other specialized surveys when it is 
     administratively determined that such procedures are in the 
     public interest; construction and maintenance of necessary 
     buildings and appurtenant facilities; acquisition of lands 
     for gauging stations and observation wells; expenses of the 
     United States National Committee on Geology; and payment of 
     compensation and expenses of persons on the rolls of the 
     Survey duly appointed to represent the United States in the 
     negotiation and administration of interstate compacts: 
     Provided, That activities funded by appropriations herein 
     made may be accomplished through the use of contracts, 
     grants, or cooperative agreements as defined in 31 U.S.C. 
     6302 et seq.: Provided further, That the United States 
     Geological Survey may enter into contracts or cooperative 
     agreements directly with individuals or indirectly with 
     institutions or nonprofit organizations, without regard to 41 
     U.S.C. 5, for the temporary or intermittent services of 
     students or recent graduates, who shall be considered 
     employees for the purpose of chapters 57 and 81 of title 5, 
     United States Code, relating to compensation for travel and 
     work injuries, and chapter 171 of title 28, United States 
     Code, relating to tort claims, but shall not be considered to 
     be Federal employees for any other purposes.

                      Minerals Management Service

                royalty and offshore minerals management

       For expenses necessary for minerals leasing and 
     environmental studies, regulation of industry operations, and 
     collection of royalties, as authorized by law; for enforcing 
     laws and regulations applicable to oil, gas, and other 
     minerals leases, permits, licenses and operating contracts; 
     for energy-related or other authorized marine-related 
     purposes on the Outer Continental Shelf; and for matching 
     grants or cooperative agreements, $153,552,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2009, of which $82,371,000 
     shall be available for royalty management activities; and an 
     amount not to exceed $135,730,000, to be credited to this 
     appropriation and to remain available until expended, from 
     additions to receipts resulting from increases to rates in 
     effect on August 5, 1993, from rate increases to fee 
     collections for Outer Continental Shelf administrative 
     activities performed by the Minerals Management Service (MMS) 
     over and above the rates in effect on September 30, 1993, and 
     from additional fees for Outer Continental Shelf 
     administrative activities established after September 30, 
     1993: Provided, That to the extent $135,730,000 in addition 
     to receipts are not realized from the sources of receipts 
     stated above, the amount needed to reach $135,730,000 shall 
     be credited to this appropriation from receipts resulting 
     from rental rates for Outer Continental Shelf leases in 
     effect before August 5, 1993: Provided further, That not to 
     exceed $3,000 shall be available for reasonable expenses 
     related to promoting volunteer beach and marine cleanup 
     activities: Provided further, That notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, $15,000 under this heading shall be 
     available for refunds of overpayments in connection with 
     certain Indian leases in which the Director of MMS concurred 
     with the claimed refund due, to pay amounts owed to Indian 
     allottees or tribes, or to correct prior unrecoverable 
     erroneous payments: Provided further, That for the costs of 
     administration of the Coastal Impact Assistance Program 
     authorized by section 31 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands 
     Act, as amended (43 U.S.C. 1456a), MMS in fiscal years 2008 
     through 2010 may retain up to three percent of the amounts 
     which are disbursed under section 31(b)(1), such retained 
     amounts to remain available until expended.

                           oil spill research

       For necessary expenses to carry out title I, section 1016, 
     title IV, sections 4202 and 4303, title VII, and title VIII, 
     section 8201 of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, $6,403,000, 
     which shall be derived from the Oil Spill Liability Trust 
     Fund, to remain available until expended.

                       administrative provisions

       The eighth proviso under the heading of ``Minerals 
     Management Service'' in division E, title I, of the 
     Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108-447), 
     is amended by inserting ``and Indian accounts'' after 
     ``States'', replacing the term ``provision'' with 
     ``provisions'', and inserting ``and (d)'' after 30 U.S.C. 
     1721(b).
       None of the funds in this Act shall be used to transfer 
     funds from any Federal royalties, rents, and bonuses derived 
     from Federal onshore and offshore oil and gas leases issued 
     under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 
     et seq.) and the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) 
     into the Ultra-Deepwater and Unconventional Natural Gas and 
     Other Petroleum Research Fund.
       Notwithstanding the provisions of section 35(b) of the 
     Mineral Leasing Act, as amended (30 U.S.C. 191(b)), before 
     disbursing a payment to a State, the Secretary shall deduct 2 
     percent from the amount payable to that State and deposit the 
     amount deducted to miscellaneous receipts of the Treasury.

          Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

                       regulation and technology

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the 
     Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, Public 
     Law 95-87, as amended, $117,337,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2009: Provided, That the Secretary of the 
     Interior, pursuant to regulations, may use directly or 
     through grants to States, moneys collected in fiscal year 
     2008 for civil penalties assessed under section 518 of the 
     Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 
     1268), to reclaim lands adversely affected by coal mining 
     practices after August 3, 1977, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided further, That appropriations for the 
     Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement may 
     provide for the travel and per diem expenses of State and 
     tribal personnel attending Office of Surface Mining 
     Reclamation and Enforcement sponsored training.

[[Page 17445]]



                    abandoned mine reclamation fund

       For necessary expenses to carry out title IV of the Surface 
     Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, Public Law 95-87, 
     as amended, $52,774,000, to be derived from receipts of the 
     Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund and to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That pursuant to Public Law 97-365, the 
     Department of the Interior is authorized to use up to 20 
     percent from the recovery of the delinquent debt owed to the 
     United States Government to pay for contracts to collect 
     these debts: Provided further, That amounts provided under 
     this heading may be used for the travel and per diem expenses 
     of State and tribal personnel attending Office of Surface 
     Mining Reclamation and Enforcement sponsored training.

                        administrative provision

       With funds available for the Technical Innovation and 
     Professional Services program in this Act, the Secretary may 
     transfer title for computer hardware, software and other 
     technical equipment to State and tribal regulatory and 
     reclamation programs.

                        Bureau of Indian Affairs

                      operation of indian programs


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For expenses necessary for the operation of Indian 
     programs, as authorized by law, including the Snyder Act of 
     November 2, 1921 (25 U.S.C. 13), the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975 (25 U.S.C. 
     450 et seq.), as amended, the Education Amendments of 1978 
     (25 U.S.C. 2001-2019), and the Tribally Controlled Schools 
     Act of 1988 (25 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.), as amended, 
     $2,093,545,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009 
     except as otherwise provided herein, of which not to exceed 
     $80,179,000 shall be for welfare assistance payments: 
     Provided, That in cases of designated Federal disasters, the 
     Secretary may exceed such cap, from the amounts provided 
     herein, to provide for disaster relief to Indian communities 
     affected by the disaster; notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, including but not limited to the Indian Self-
     Determination Act of 1975, as amended, not to exceed 
     $149,628,000 shall be available for payments for contract 
     support costs associated with ongoing contracts, grants, 
     compacts, or annual funding agreements entered into with the 
     Bureau prior to or during fiscal year 2008, as authorized by 
     such Act, except that federally-recognized tribes may use 
     their tribal priority allocations for unmet contract support 
     costs of ongoing contracts, grants, or compacts, or annual 
     funding agreements and for unmet welfare assistance costs; of 
     which not to exceed $487,500,000 for school operations costs 
     of Bureau-funded schools and other education programs shall 
     become available on July 1, 2008, and shall remain available 
     until September 30, 2009; and of which not to exceed 
     $66,822,000 shall remain available until expended for housing 
     improvement, road maintenance, attorney fees, litigation 
     support, the Indian Self-Determination Fund, land records 
     improvement, and the Navajo-Hopi Settlement Program: Provided 
     further, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     including but not limited to the Indian Self-Determination 
     Act of 1975, as amended, and 25 U.S.C. 2008, not to exceed 
     $44,060,000 within and only from such amounts made available 
     for school operations shall be available for administrative 
     cost grants associated with ongoing grants entered into with 
     the Bureau prior to or during fiscal year 2007 for the 
     operation of Bureau-funded schools, and up to $500,000 within 
     and only from such amounts made available for school 
     operations shall be available for the transitional costs of 
     initial administrative cost grants to grantees that enter 
     into grants for the operation on or after July 1, 2007, of 
     Bureau-operated schools: Provided further, That any forestry 
     funds allocated to a federally-recognized tribe which remain 
     unobligated as of September 30, 2009, may be transferred 
     during fiscal year 2010 to an Indian forest land assistance 
     account established for the benefit of the holder of the 
     funds within the tribe's trust fund account: Provided 
     further, That any such unobligated balances not so 
     transferred shall expire on September 30, 2010.

                              {time}  1315


                 Amendment No. 30 Offered by Mr. Shays

  Mr. SHAYS. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 30 offered by Mr. Shays:
       Page 31, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(decreased by $1,000,000) (increased by $1,000,000)''.

  Mr. SHAYS. Madam Chairman, this amendment would designate $1 million 
for the Office of Federal Acknowledgment, bringing the total for the 
office from $1.9 million to $2.9 million, enabling the bureau to hire 
two additional teams of investigators to speed up the review process 
for petitions. Presently, there are seven active petitions and nine 
waiting petitions, but there are 79 uncompleted petitions and there are 
letters of intent for 147.
  The fact is in the last 10 years they have granted to only two tribes 
through the process, and, as I remember, seven tribes were denied, out 
of a total of nine. This is a long process. It requires individuals 
with tremendous expertise to evaluate these petitions.
  I would note that when we create an Indian tribe, we create a 
sovereign nation. We create an independent nation within these United 
States. So this is very serious business.
  I would just point out that already this year we have bypassed the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs in one legislation that created acknowledgment 
for six tribes, and in a second legislation acknowledging another 
tribe. The argument was that the Bureau of Indian Affairs simply 
couldn't act as quickly as it needs to.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, the gentleman 
has raised an important issue here, and we are prepared to accept his 
amendment.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I want to 
thank the gentleman from Connecticut for working with the committee on 
this very important issue. Truly they have a backlog. Without your 
looking into this issue, we never would have made the kind of progress 
that is going to be made because of your efforts. So I want to 
congratulate the gentleman, and I have no objection to the amendment.
  Mr. SHAYS. Madam Chairman, reclaiming my time, I just want to 
acknowledge the good work of both the chairman and ranking member, not 
just on accepting this amendment, obviously, but the tremendous work in 
terms of the arts, in terms of our natural resources.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                              construction


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For construction, repair, improvement, and maintenance of 
     irrigation and power systems, buildings, utilities, and other 
     facilities, including architectural and engineering services 
     by contract; acquisition of lands, and interests in lands; 
     and preparation of lands for farming, and for construction of 
     the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project pursuant to Public Law 
     87-483, $207,983,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That such amounts as may be available for the 
     construction of the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project may be 
     transferred to the Bureau of Reclamation: Provided further, 
     That not to exceed 6 percent of contract authority available 
     to the Bureau of Indian Affairs from the Federal Highway 
     Trust Fund may be used to cover the road program management 
     costs of the Bureau: Provided further, That any funds 
     provided for the Safety of Dams program pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 
     13 shall be made available on a nonreimbursable basis: 
     Provided further, That for fiscal year 2008, in implementing 
     new construction or facilities improvement and repair project 
     grants in excess of $100,000 that are provided to grant 
     schools under Public Law 100-297, as amended, the Secretary 
     of the Interior shall use the Administrative and Audit 
     Requirements and Cost Principles for Assistance Programs 
     contained in 43 CFR part 12 as the regulatory requirements: 
     Provided further, That such grants shall not be subject to 
     section 12.61 of 43 CFR; the Secretary and the grantee shall 
     negotiate and determine a schedule of payments for the work 
     to be performed: Provided further, That in considering 
     applications, the Secretary shall consider whether such 
     grantee would be deficient in assuring that the construction 
     projects conform to applicable building standards and codes 
     and Federal, tribal, or State health and safety standards as 
     required by 25 U.S.C. 2005(b), with respect to organizational 
     and financial management capabilities: Provided further, That 
     if the Secretary declines an application, the Secretary shall 
     follow the requirements contained in 25 U.S.C. 2504(f): 
     Provided further, That any disputes between the Secretary and 
     any grantee concerning a grant shall be subject to the 
     disputes provision in 25 U.S.C. 2507(e): Provided further, 
     That in order to ensure timely completion of replacement 
     school construction projects, the Secretary may assume 
     control of a project and all funds related to the project, 
     if, within eighteen months of the date of enactment of this 
     Act, any grantee receiving funds appropriated in this Act or 
     in any prior Act, has not completed the planning and design 
     phase of the project and commenced construction of the 
     replacement school: Provided further, That this Appropriation 
     may be reimbursed from the Office of the Special Trustee for 
     American Indians Appropriation for the appropriate share of

[[Page 17446]]

     construction costs for space expansion needed in agency 
     offices to meet trust reform implementation.

 indian land and water claim settlements and miscellaneous payments to 
                                indians

       For payments and necessary administrative expenses for 
     implementation of Indian land and water claim settlements 
     pursuant to Public Laws 99-264, 100-580, 101-618, 107-331, 
     108-447, 109-379, 109-429, and 109-479, and for 
     implementation of other land and water rights settlements, 
     $39,136,000 to remain available until expended.

                 indian guaranteed loan program account

       For the cost of guaranteed and insured loans, $6,276,000, 
     of which $700,000 is for administrative expenses, as 
     authorized by the Indian Financing Act of 1974, as amended: 
     Provided, That such costs, including the cost of modifying 
     such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That 
     these funds are available to subsidize total loan principal, 
     any part of which is to be guaranteed, not to exceed 
     $85,506,098.

                       administrative provisions

       The Bureau of Indian Affairs may carry out the operation of 
     Indian programs by direct expenditure, contracts, cooperative 
     agreements, compacts and grants, either directly or in 
     cooperation with States and other organizations.
       Notwithstanding 25 U.S.C. 15, the Bureau of Indian Affairs 
     may contract for services in support of the management, 
     operation, and maintenance of the Power Division of the San 
     Carlos Irrigation Project.
       Appropriations for the Bureau of Indian Affairs (except the 
     revolving fund for loans, the Indian loan guarantee and 
     insurance fund, and the Indian Guaranteed Loan Program 
     account) shall be available for expenses of exhibits.
       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no funds 
     available to the Bureau of Indian Affairs for central office 
     oversight and Executive Direction and Administrative Services 
     (except executive direction and administrative services 
     funding for Tribal Priority Allocations and regional offices) 
     shall be available for contracts, grants, compacts, or 
     cooperative agreements with the Bureau of Indian Affairs 
     under the provisions of the Indian Self-Determination Act or 
     the Tribal Self-Governance Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-413).
       In the event any federally-recognized tribe returns 
     appropriations made available by this Act to the Bureau of 
     Indian Affairs, this action shall not diminish the Federal 
     Government's trust responsibility to that tribe, or the 
     government-to-government relationship between the United 
     States and that tribe, or that tribe's ability to access 
     future appropriations.
       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no funds 
     available to the Bureau, other than the amounts provided 
     herein for assistance to public schools under 25 U.S.C. 452 
     et seq., shall be available to support the operation of any 
     elementary or secondary school in the State of Alaska.
       Appropriations made available in this or any other Act for 
     schools funded by the Bureau shall be available only to the 
     schools in the Bureau school system as of September 1, 1996. 
     No funds available to the Bureau shall be used to support 
     expanded grades for any school or dormitory beyond the grade 
     structure in place or approved by the Secretary of the 
     Interior at each school in the Bureau school system as of 
     October 1, 1995. Funds made available under this Act may not 
     be used to establish a charter school at a Bureau-funded 
     school (as that term is defined in section 1146 of the 
     Education Amendments of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 2026)), except that a 
     charter school that is in existence on the date of the 
     enactment of this Act and that has operated at a Bureau-
     funded school before September 1, 1999, may continue to 
     operate during that period, but only if the charter school 
     pays to the Bureau a pro rata share of funds to reimburse the 
     Bureau for the use of the real and personal property 
     (including buses and vans), the funds of the charter school 
     are kept separate and apart from Bureau funds, and the Bureau 
     does not assume any obligation for charter school programs of 
     the State in which the school is located if the charter 
     school loses such funding. Employees of Bureau-funded schools 
     sharing a campus with a charter school and performing 
     functions related to the charter school's operation and 
     employees of a charter school shall not be treated as Federal 
     employees for purposes of chapter 171 of title 28, United 
     States Code.
       Notwithstanding 25 U.S.C. 2007(d), and implementing 
     regulations, the funds reserved from the Indian Student 
     Equalization Program to meet emergencies and unforeseen 
     contingencies affecting education programs appropriated 
     herein and in Public Law 109-54 may be used for costs 
     associated with significant student enrollment increases at 
     Bureau-funded schools during the relevant school year.
       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including 
     section 113 of title I of appendix C of Public Law 106-113, 
     if in fiscal year 2003 or 2004 a grantee received indirect 
     and administrative costs pursuant to a distribution formula 
     based on section 5(f) of Public Law 101-301, the Secretary 
     shall continue to distribute indirect and administrative cost 
     funds to such grantee using the section 5(f) distribution 
     formula.

                          Departmental Offices

                        Office of the Secretary

                         salaries and expenses

     For necessary expenses for management of the Department of 
     the Interior, $136,413,000, of which $35,262,000 for 
     activities related to the Financial and Business Management 
     System shall remain available until expended, and of which 
     not to exceed $15,000 may be for official reception and 
     representation expenses, and of which up to $1,000,000 shall 
     be available for workers compensation payments and 
     unemployment compensation payments associated with the 
     orderly closure of the United States Bureau of Mines.


                 Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Dicks

  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 14 offered by Mr. Dicks:
       Page 39, line 17, after each dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $5,000,000)''.
       Page 55, line 22, after the second dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $5,000,000)''.
       Page 58, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $5,000,000)''.
       Page 60, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $15,000,000)''.
       Page 61, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $15,000,000)''.

  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, I offer this amendment on behalf of myself 
and a number of distinguished Members from the Border Caucus. The 
committee has supported EPA's Mexican Border Program since its 
inception in 1995. Since that time, we have provided over $800 million 
for infrastructure projects along the border. I am proud of that and 
believe this program is an important one.
  The bill as reported by the committee included $10 million for water 
and waste water infrastructure projects along the U.S.-Mexican border. 
This is the amount requested by the President, but $40 million below 
the level provided last year. Our committee took this action because of 
concerns about a slow spending rate in the program. Since that time, a 
number of Members, including a distinguished member of the committee, 
Mr. Rodriguez of Texas, have provided new information on this program.
  Specifically, the reforms recently made to the design, approval, and 
construction process will ensure the funds are spent more quickly. 
Because of that information, I am pleased to offer this amendment on 
their behalf, which provides an additional $15 million for this 
program, for a total program of $25 million in fiscal year 2008.
  It is never easy to find offsets for these types of amendments. That 
said, my amendment includes three programs in order to provide the 
necessary increases for the border program. The reductions are as 
follows:
  Within the Department of Interior Salaries and Expense Account, $5 
million from the Financial and Business Management System, which has 
been delayed by the Department.
  Within EPA's Science and Technology Account, $5 million from the new 
Water Technologies Breakthrough Fund.
  Within EPA's Environmental Programs and Management Account, $5 
million from Operations and Administration.
  With this additional funding, I hope we will see many new water and 
waste water infrastructure projects along the border. This committee 
has been and will continue to be very supportive of this important 
program.
  Again, I thank the Members from the border States, especially Mr. 
Rodriguez, a member of the full committee, for bringing this issue to 
my attention. I urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I do not 
have any objection to this amendment, and I would commend the chairman 
on his leadership in this area.
  Mr. HINOJOSA. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of the 
amendment offered by my friend, Chairman Norman Dicks. I want to 
commend him for the wonderful job he did in putting this bill together. 
I also want to thank him for his willingness to work with me and the 
other members of the House Border Caucus to address a serious need in 
the border region.

[[Page 17447]]

  This amendment would increase funding for the U.S.-Mexico Border 
program to $25 million. This program was created under the NAFTA treaty 
to help border communities cope with the environmental effects of the 
treaty. Since its inception, the fund has been used to improve 
wastewater and drinking water infrastructure. It has provided technical 
assistance to 130 communities. It has eliminated 300 million gallons 
per day of untreated or inadequately treated discharges, equivalent to 
that of 6.8 million persons. A recent audit found that for every dollar 
placed into the BEIF fund, $1.85 has been leveraged from other sources. 
Every dollar used under the fund by the U.S. is matched dollar for 
dollar by Mexico.
  This funding is desperately needed to begin the planning for new 
water and wastewater projects along the U.S.-Mexico border. Most of the 
communities in my district are very small with the majority of 
residents living below the poverty level. They don't have the financial 
means to build water and wastewater infrastructure on their own. The 
U.S.-Mexico Border program is their only avenue to protect the health 
of their citizens and bring economic development projects to their 
community.
  While the U.S.-Mexico Border program has had some institutional 
problems, which have hindered its ability to release funds to these 
communities, Congress has made reforms to the program and funds are 
finally flowing to communities. All of the funds currently in the 
program are allocated to projects and by the end of 2008 all of the 
money will have been disbursed. Without the funds in this amendment, 
new communities would not be able to begin the 5-year process.
  In my district, several communities like Mercedes, Donna, Weslaco, 
Pharr, and others have received help from the U.S.-Mexico program to 
build and modernize their wastewater systems. As a result, large 
economic development projects are underway because the communities 
finally have the infrastructure to provide services to new employers.
  Again, I want to thank Chairman Dicks for offering this amendment and 
urge all of my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. ORTIZ. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of the Interior 
Appropriations bill before us today which includes money for South 
Texas to address water and wastewater issues along the Border.
  I particularly thank Chairman Norm Dicks--who, on behalf of the 
Congressional Border Caucus, offered to increase funding for the 
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Mexican Border program for safe 
drinking water grants by $15 million, providing a total of $25 million 
for these important grants.
  NAFTA brought both challenges and windfalls to South Texas. As South 
Texas became the front door for international trade, the unemployment 
rate--at that time in double digits--fell to its present rate as jobs 
and opportunities became more widely available.
  NAFTA also brought about greater growth and entire new industries, 
some cross-border industries. Congress' concerns about the border 
infrastructure for water and wastewater brought about the Border 
Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) as part of the North American 
Development Bank. BECC funding has become a resource for border 
communities, whose infrastructure now bears the national burden of 
NAFTA; and NAFTA benefits the entire national economy.
  These funds added to the Interior Appropriations bill today assist 
communities in addressing public health and environmental conditions 
along the U.S.-Mexico border. This money has been instrumental in 
getting almost seven million people connected to improved water and 
wastewater systems, ensuring improved living conditions for the 
residents of Texas, as well as other border states. Through these 
funds, 54 wastewater projects and 16 drinking water projects have been 
built.
  In my South Texas district the City of San Benito, the Brownsville 
Public Utilities Board, Olmito Water Supply, El Jardin Water Supply 
Corporation and the City of Los Fresnos have benefited from these 
funds.
  Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chairman, I commend Chairman Norm Dicks and 
Ranking Member Todd Tiahrt for putting forward a good piece of 
legislation.
  I want to especially thank Chairman Dicks for offering his amendment 
to increase funds for Border Environment Infrastructure Fund (BEIF).
  Since 1997, this important program has provided essential funding 
support for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure in the U.S.-
Mexico border region.
  Every project receiving BEIF, whether located in the U.S. or Mexico, 
has provided an environmental and human health benefit for American 
citizens.
  $491 million of BEIF, 54.2 percent to U.S. projects and 45.7 percent 
to projects in Mexico, for the implementation of 54 certified projects 
valued at $1.4 billion, many of which are located in rural communities 
and designated colonias.
  The need in these communities is great.
  The projects resulting from the BEIF allocations have provided a 
direct benefit to around 7.5 million people.
  Even with such significant accomplishments, the need for water and 
wastewater infrastructure continues to exist along the U.S.-Mexico 
border.
  Nearly $1 billion of existing water infrastructure needs have been 
documented.
  Even with the leveraging strength of BEIF, which has historically 
brought $1.85 to each BEIF $1.00, we anticipate that less than 5 
percent of these eligible needs will have an opportunity for funding 
without this amendment.
  Without the opportunity to access these sources of funding, the 
health and environment of our communities will continue to suffer.
  I want to once again thank Chairman Dicks for offering this 
amendment, and urge my colleagues to support his action.
  Mr. REYES. Madam Chairman, I rise today in strong support of an 
amendment by my friend and colleague, Chairman Dicks, to increase 
funding for the Border Environment Infrastructure Fund, or BEIF, under 
the U.S.-Mexico Border Program by $15 million.
  I also want to thank Chairman Dicks for producing a good piece of 
legislation and for being so responsive to me and other concerned 
Members from border districts. His willingness to listen to and take 
into account new information regarding the program are true marking of 
a fine chairman. As my friend the chairman noted, BEIF has recently 
instituted measures to ensure that program funds are disbursed more 
quickly. I am happy that his concerns regarding the balance of 
obligated but unspent funds have been resolved. It is an efficient 
program with strong fiduciary controls. I was pleased to work with Mr. 
Dicks on this amendment.
  BEIF, which was created under the North American Free Trade Agreement 
(NAFTA), makes environmental infrastructure projects affordable for 
communities throughout the U.S.-Mexico border region by combining grant 
funds with loans or other forms of financing. It was created with the 
understanding that a healthy and economically strong border region is 
critical to a secure border and to the flow of commerce. Economic 
development rests on a foundation of strong infrastructure. In many 
poorer border communities, however, the capital does not often exist to 
build water and wastewater infrastructure. BEIF funds go toward 
increasing water and wastewater capacity--bringing services to people 
who have not previously had them, improving public health, supporting 
economic development in poor border communities, and ultimately 
strengthening our southern border.
  Every million dollars in BEIF water and wastewater investment results 
in the following over 10 years: $11.1 million in private sector 
investment, 221 new jobs, $1.7 million in tax revenue, and $52.2 
million in goods produced by the private sector. Generally, BEIF and 
accompanying efforts have aided 185 projects that have benefitted over 
7.5 million residents.
  In my own district of El Paso, Texas, water and wastewater projects 
have received about $65 million in funding under the U.S.-Mexico Border 
Program. That funding has gone toward innovative water planning for a 
growing city in the middle of the desert, toward technical assistance 
for smaller waterworks, and toward bringing water and wastewater 
infrastructure to unincorporated settlements, or colonias. This 
irreplaceable funding source for border communities must be maintained.
  Let's bring water and wastewater to those who don't have it. Let's 
bring economic development to poor communities in the U.S.-Mexico 
border region. Let's invest in a strong and secure border. I urge my 
colleagues to join our chairman, Mr. Dicks, and me in supporting this 
critical amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Cannon

  Mr. CANNON. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Cannon:
       Page 39, line 17, insert ``(decreased by $23,000,000)'' 
     after the first dollar amount.

[[Page 17448]]

       Page 44, line 23, insert ``(increased by $20,148,000)'' 
     after the first dollar amount.

  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, I reserve a point of order on this 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. A point of order is reserved.
  Mr. CANNON. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment that 
I offered on behalf of myself, Mr. Mark Udall, Mr. Rob Bishop, Mr. 
Matheson, Mr. Heller, Mr. Salazar, and Mrs. Musgrave. This bipartisan 
amendment will redirect roughly $20 million in departmental salaries 
and expenses to the Payment in Lieu of Taxes program to bring the total 
appropriation to nearly $253 million.
  I am pleased to be working with this bipartisan group and thank my 
colleagues for their support. All of us have something in common. We 
represent some of the 1,900 counties spread across every State but 
Rhode Island that have public lands that rely on the Payment in Lieu of 
Taxes program to mitigate the impact of the lost tax revenue resulting 
from Federal land ownership.
  The Federal Government owns nearly 650 million acres of land, mostly 
in the West. We have a map here that shows all the land owned or held 
in the trust by the government in red. It is important to see exactly 
how much of the land in the West is owned by the Federal Government. In 
fact, the amount of land owned by the Federal Government is amazing.
  This is an amazing amount of Federal ownership and control by the 
Federal Government. That means that we do not tax those lands and that 
means that in the Western United States we pay less per child for 
education, but we tax our people more per family because we are 
supporting the Federal Government. In other words, we don't tax these 
lands; we tax ourselves more.
  As the chairman of the Western Caucus, I know all too well that my 
fellow colleagues throughout the West are struggling with these issues, 
and also in many districts in the East, where there is a great deal of 
public lands.
  It is only fair that we pay a reasonable amount in lieu of taxes to 
cover this shortfall. The Payment in Lieu of Taxes program was created 
in 1976 to provide payments to counties to make up for property taxes 
they were prevented from collecting on Federal lands located within 
their boundaries.
  This year, the administration's budget proposal proposed to cut PILT 
by $34 million, to a paltry 56 percent of the authorized level. The 
past few years have seen Congress achieve historic levels of PILT 
funding. We are grateful to Chairman Dicks and Ranking Member Tiahrt 
for their efforts to restore PILT to the fiscal year 2007 enacted 
level.
  While the appropriation currently in the bill is significantly above 
the administration's recommendation, it is far from what it should be, 
and our counties are bearing the brunt of it. While the Department's 
administrative budget has nearly doubled since 2001, PILT funding 
levels have not kept pace, and this is not acceptable.
  It is imperative that we raise funding so that our rural counties 
won't have to continue to foot the bill for lands owned by the Federal 
Government. I urge all my colleagues to support this bipartisan 
amendment to bring PILT funding levels to nearly 70 percent of the 
authorized amount and to support the counties that host public lands.
  Although I will continue to fight for full funding for PILT, this 
amendment is a step in the right direction and adds a modest sum to the 
PILT program, a sum that is important to Americans who live in public 
lands communities, as well as to all the visitors who visit our public 
lands.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I rise to say 
that we will be willing to accept this amendment.
  I do want to point out to the gentleman, though, this bill already 
funds PILT $43 million above the level requested by the President. We 
have heard over and over again from various speakers on your side of 
the aisle that we have to get this bill down, not up.
  But this is a very important program in the West, and therefore I am 
willing to accept it. But I want the gentleman to think about this in 
that context.
  Mr. CANNON. Madam Chairman, reclaiming my time, I very much 
appreciate the gentleman's point. The fact is, this is much higher than 
the President's proposal. I appreciate that. Our job here is to balance 
how we fund these various programs. The inequity that has been 
perpetrated on Western counties, where you see these massive amounts, 
including in your State, of public lands that are not adequately 
supported by a tax base is very important.
  I thank the gentleman very much for his support thus far.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I want to 
thank the gentleman from Utah and also the gentleman from Washington, 
Mr. Dicks, the chairman of this subcommittee, for understanding the 
depth of this problem. We do need to put additional funds into PILT, 
because the Payment in Lieu of Taxes has created shortfalls for school 
systems, for local municipalities and for counties.
  I want to commend the gentleman from Utah for his effort. We have no 
objections to his amendment.
  Mr. CANNON. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman, and urge support 
of my amendment.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, I withdraw my reservation.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Madam Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity of just saying a word on 
this particular amendment. I am also very grateful to both the ranking 
member as well as the chairman of the subcommittee for understanding 
the significance of this important amendment.
  Let me say that this is another map that is similar to the one that 
was already done, except this time I chose the blue color. Everything 
that is in blue is the amount of land owned and controlled by the 
Federal Government in each State. You will notice that there is a 
proclivity of this kind of blue color in the West.
  Some of those that don't live in the West don't really understand 
what the significance or the problem is in dealing with the Federal 
Government on so much particular land.
  I also want you to know that this was not necessarily the way it was 
supposed to be. When every one of these Western States entered the 
Union, their enabling act said the land would go to the Federal 
Government until such time as it shall be disposed and each State was 
supposed to get a cut of the amount of money gotten by the Federal 
Government. So this is not the way it was supposed to be.
  But it was changed in the 1970s when the Federal Land Management 
Policy Act was produced. The trade-off in that was for Payment in Lieu 
of Taxes. So this land would be compensated, in exchange for the 
Federal Government keeping those lands, without having to go back 
through the States to deal with it.
  Now, we would actually be more happy if we had all the lands. If 
indeed these Western States that have their lands controlled by the 
Federal Government could tax them at even the cheapest open value 
space, this is the amount of money that we would be able to accommodate 
for ourselves and solve our own problems.
  This bill has $232 million for PILT, Payment in Lieu of Taxes right 
now. So you look at it. If Idaho was simply able to put a tax on the 
Federal land in their State, they would create more than that money by 
themselves. Utah could get $116 million every year by ourselves, Nevada 
$118 million every year by themselves; and that is only for public 
education. It would be even more for general taxes. So the States could 
actually handle it themselves.
  What I am trying to say is I appreciate everyone finally realizing 
that PILT money is not free, it is not loans, it is simply not welfare 
for the West. It is money that was really owed to these particular 
States and that our goal should not be simply the $22 million more in 
this particular amendment, but to fully fund PILT, which should be $375 
million in the first place, or allow the States to have the flexibility 
to actually go after the true value of these types of lands that happen 
to be there.

[[Page 17449]]

  So I appreciate everyone recognizing the significance of this, and I 
appreciate everyone realizing that this is money that is owed to the 
States so they can control and they can actually pay for the services 
they have to provide, even though they don't have the land resources to 
deal with it.
  Mr. HELLER of Nevada. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of this 
important bipartisan amendment.
  The PILT program compensates counties for the loss of income 
resulting from Federal lands.
  This is something my constituents know a lot about because nearly 85 
percent of Nevada's land mass is owned by the Federal Government.
  PILT funds are used for critical services on public lands counties 
such as search and rescue on public lands, infrastructure, education, 
and many other important functions.
  For many years the PILT program has been woefully underfunded.
  Again this year, the administration requested a paltry $198 million 
for this program, which is more than $150 million less than the 
authorized level.
  While the $20 million we are seeking to raise PILT funding by will 
not entirely make up for the funding shortfall, every penny counts to 
the counties and families that live in public lands States.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, prioritize the PILT 
program, and take a step towards adequately compensating the 
communities that host public lands.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Cannon).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                            Insular Affairs

                       assistance to territories

       For expenses necessary for assistance to territories under 
     the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior, 
     $78,292,000, of which: (1) $69,816,000 shall be available 
     until expended for technical assistance, including 
     maintenance assistance, disaster assistance, insular 
     management controls, coral reef initiative activities, and 
     brown tree snake control and research; grants to the 
     judiciary in American Samoa for compensation and expenses, as 
     authorized by law (48 U.S.C. 1661(c)); grants to the 
     Government of American Samoa, in addition to current local 
     revenues, for construction and support of governmental 
     functions; grants to the Government of the Virgin Islands as 
     authorized by law; grants to the Government of Guam, as 
     authorized by law; and grants to the Government of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands as authorized by law (Public Law 94-
     241; 90 Stat. 272); and (2) $8,476,000 shall be available 
     until September 30, 2009 for salaries and expenses of the 
     Office of Insular Affairs: Provided, That all financial 
     transactions of the territorial and local governments herein 
     provided for, including such transactions of all agencies or 
     instrumentalities established or used by such governments, 
     may be audited by the Government Accountability Office, at 
     its discretion, in accordance with chapter 35 of title 31, 
     United States Code: Provided further, That Northern Mariana 
     Islands Covenant grant funding shall be provided according to 
     those terms of the Agreement of the Special Representatives 
     on Future United States Financial Assistance for the Northern 
     Mariana Islands approved by Public Law 104-134: Provided 
     further, That of the amounts provided for technical 
     assistance, sufficient funds shall be made available for a 
     grant to the Pacific Basin Development Council: Provided 
     further, That of the amounts provided for technical 
     assistance, sufficient funding shall be made available for a 
     grant to the Close Up Foundation: Provided further, That the 
     funds for the program of operations and maintenance 
     improvement are appropriated to institutionalize routine 
     operations and maintenance improvement of capital 
     infrastructure with territorial participation and cost 
     sharing to be determined by the Secretary based on the 
     grantee's commitment to timely maintenance of its capital 
     assets: Provided further, That any appropriation for disaster 
     assistance under this heading in this Act or previous 
     appropriations Acts may be used as non-Federal matching funds 
     for the purpose of hazard mitigation grants provided pursuant 
     to section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
     Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170c).

  Mr. BOREN. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last words.
  Madam Chairman, I would like to engage in a colloquy on the subject 
of community tribal schools.
  In 1969, Congress declared that Indian education programs run by the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs were a national tragedy and a national 
challenge. No one could dispute the fact that decades of neglect had 
left both programs and facilities in shambles.
  Starting with the Self-Determination Act of 1975 and tribal local 
control of programs, the extent of the problem became apparent. 
Congress, to its credit, stepped up with increased facilities programs 
for schools serving Indians.
  To ensure objective distribution of scant resources and to better 
serve students, Congress directed BIA to create a priority-based 
ranking system. BIA did so, but only with a facilities program which 
assessed then-current programs and looked to the adequacy and safety of 
facilities. Failure in either area meant an unhoused student ranking 
and a priority ranking on the list.
  After the Tribal Schools Grant Act in 1988, tribes began taking over 
BIA schools and reworking their programs. They expanded services and 
also added new attendance areas. These changes had an unanticipated 
effect. They impacted the BIA ranking system, as the formula did not 
properly account for new students, listing them as unhoused students 
and skewing the BIA ranking system.

                              {time}  1330

  In 1995, Congress instituted a temporary moratorium on new programs 
in order to freeze current rankings and to allow the BIA time to catch 
up to the increasing demand for repairs. The moratorium was to last 
just one Congress with the BIA making policy recommendations on how to 
address this growing problem.
  The BIA, unfortunately, never made the recommendations and the 
moratorium preventing modified tribally run academic programs has 
continued for over a decade.
  Madam Chairman, Indian country remains concerned that public school 
academic programs are not enough for many Native American children who 
so often have special needs due to family, social, academic, and other 
problems. There are numerous cases where a tribe is in better condition 
to operate a school, providing first-class education while also meeting 
the cultural sensitivity needs these students may have.
  But even if the tribe is willing to fund all construction and 
maintenance costs for a first-class facility, the moratorium prohibits 
them from being able to operate as a Federal grant school. The BIA has 
also interpreted the moratorium language as prohibiting the 
reestablishment of a preexisting program.
  Chairman Dicks, children are the future of any nation, including 
tribal nations, and community tribal schools are an important step for 
a tribe's successful future. I ask that you would work with me to 
address this problem and that Congress require BIA to adhere to the 
fiscal year 2006 Interior Appropriations bill directive to develop 
recommendations to adjust the ranking system to allow for new schools, 
new students, and expanded programs.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BOREN. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. DICKS. I appreciate the gentleman's interest in improving Indian 
education. This is an issue that both Mr. Tiahrt and I have great 
interest in, and we have made a special effort to increase funding for 
education programs in this bill.
  I would be happy to work with the gentleman on the issue that he has 
raised here today, and thank him for his dedication to Indian country 
and better education for young students.
  Mr. BOREN. I thank the chairman.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  Chairman Dicks, I am very appreciative of your willingness to address 
in the conference report for the fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill a 
concern that you share with me for the humane treatment and preventive 
management of wild horses and the condition of western range lands.
  I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. DICKS. Yes, the gentleman is correct, I share his concern.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. As you know, Mr. Chairman, there have been 
significant advancements in the development of technologies that allow 
safe and effective application of contraceptive medicines to wild 
horses to allow

[[Page 17450]]

wild horse populations to be maintained at sustainable levels. I 
believe these medicines have been used in pilot programs running for 
years as a result of the partnering of private organizations like the 
Humane Society of the United States with the Bureau of Land Management.
  Mr. DICKS. The gentleman is correct.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. I believe that contraceptives could 
potentially be effective and also would be a more humane approach to 
managing wild horses than the current strategy that relies primarily on 
rounding up wild horses and placing them in pastures where they must be 
fed for years until they die of old age at a cost of over $20 million a 
year.
  It is also my understanding that the BLM signed a memorandum of 
understanding in October of 2006 outlining a large scale pilot program 
that will expand the pilot wild horse management effort.
  I would like to thank you for working with me to see that the Wild 
Horse and Burro Management Program does not get such a large budget cut 
as was proposed by the administration. It is my understanding that BLM 
will be able to move forward with that pilot program under this act; is 
that correct, Mr. Chairman?
  Mr. DICKS. Yes, the gentleman is correct.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. I wish to thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for 
your help in clarifying these points and for your willingness to 
address this in conference to ensure more humane and effective 
management of our treasured wild horse herds, while maintaining our 
public range lands in a sustainable manner which protects watersheds 
and native plants and wildlife.
  Mr. DICKS. Again, I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Moran) who is the vice chairman of our committee and very valued and 
esteemed member and someone whom I have enjoyed working with for many 
years, going back to our staff days in the other body.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. The enjoyment is mutual, and I learned so much 
when you were chief of staff to the chair of the full committee of the 
Senate, and I could not be more pleased that you are chairing this 
bill.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Madam Chairman, I understand the gentleman from Virginia's concern 
about Northern Virginia being overrun by horses, but there are those of 
us in Kansas who do enjoy seeing those flowing manes and hearing those 
pounding hooves across the plains. So in your attempt to move towards 
horse contraception, I hope you are not going to be horsing around too 
much with the population so that we can still have those beautiful 
animals running across the plains of Kansas.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. TIAHRT. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. The gentleman's wit is deeply appreciated by 
the Member from Virginia. I don't think we have a current problem with 
being overtaken by wild horses in Northern Virginia; but I appreciate 
your support as well for this humane approach in dealing with the wild 
horse and burro population.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chairman, reclaiming my time, I am looking forward 
to working with the gentleman from Virginia in satisfying the needs of 
controlling our wild horse population.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  I wish to enter into a colloquy with the chairman of the Interior 
Appropriations Subcommittee.
  Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased that this legislation increases the 
funding for loan repayment for health professionals within the Indian 
Health Service. As a dentist, I am keenly aware that the IHS dental 
program has the highest vacancy rate at 34 percent. The loan repayment 
program has proven to be a successful recruiting and retention tool for 
dentists and others. However, there is a related issue that I would 
like to discuss.
  Within the next few years, 65 percent of the IHS dental specialists, 
including pediatric dentists and oral surgeons, will be eligible for 
retirement. These dentists are in great demand because Indian people 
have some of the highest oral disease rates in the world. A 1999 IHS 
survey found that 79 percent of Indian children 2-4 years old had a 
history of dental decay; 68 percent of adults had untreated dental 
decay; and 61 percent of elders had periodontal disease.
  The dental specialists are a vital component in the IHS dental 
program. In addition to treating patients, they also train the general 
dentists for treating complex cases that arise daily in IHS hospitals 
and clinics.
  I hope it is possible to provide additional support for the dental 
residency program so they can fill these vacancies before reaching 
crisis proportions.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SIMPSON. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. DICKS. I thank the gentleman for highlighting the issue and for 
his concern for improving Indian health care. We agree this is an 
important issue, and we will work with you to address it.
  I might mention that one of the programs over the years that I have 
been a big supporter of is the National Health Service Corps, which 
allows people to be trained and work in rural areas. I think there is a 
multitude of ways to attack this problem, and I appreciate the 
gentleman's leadership on this issue and guarantee him that we will 
work hard to do as much as we can because we agree with you that the 
need for dental care is a very high priority in Indian country.
  Mr. SIMPSON. I thank the chairman of the subcommittee.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SIMPSON. I yield to the gentleman from Kansas.
  Mr. TIAHRT. I want to thank the gentleman from Idaho for hitting on a 
topic that was very important in our hearing process because we heard 
from not only dentists, but also the medical community that we have a 
shortage in many other parts of the medical industry including nurses, 
anesthesiologists, et cetera. But dentistry is one area where they had 
an acute shortage. And so your leadership is very important in this 
area. We want to work with you in support of these efforts to make sure 
that we have enough medical providers in Indian country.
  Mr. SIMPSON. I thank the ranking member and the subcommittee.
  Mr. DINGELL. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Madam Chairman, I rise in strong support of the legislation. I want 
to commend and congratulate and thank my two good friends, Chairman 
Dicks and Obey for their extraordinary leadership. They have produced 
the finest Interior Appropriations bill I have seen in years, and we 
owe our two colleagues a great debt of gratitude.
  First of all, there is a large increase in the Fish and Wildlife 
Service to address problems like staffing of refuges of which 221 of 
the 547 have no staff whatsoever. It will provide $56 million which 
will give our refuges the staff necessary to keep this wonderful system 
the national treasure it is.
  It is also a wonderful piece of legislation by giving $223 million 
more to the Park Service, a desperately needed situation. The Clean 
Water State Revolving Loan Fund is funded at $1.1 billion over the 
President's request, desperately needed in a time when our Nation is 
seeing our waters get dirtier and less safe and less enjoyable for our 
people.
  The bill reverses years of budget neglect, and provides much-needed 
increases for public health programs administered by EPA. It increases 
funding for Superfund toxic waste cleanups, something which is a 
massive problem to our people, both in terms of safety and the 
environment. It brings forward brownfield revitalization efforts and 
addresses the problem of leaking underground storage tanks and will 
protect the health and environment of the American people.
  I want to tell my good friend how grateful we are and thank him for 
what he has done. I would also like to express my support for Eddie 
Bernice

[[Page 17451]]

Johnson's amendment to prevent EPA from finalizing a proposed change in 
existing rules limiting toxic air pollution.
  This is a great bill and I salute the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Dicks) for his extraordinary ability, remarkable hard work, and great 
service.
  Mr. DICKS. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DINGELL. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. DICKS. I want to thank the gentleman for his extremely kind 
words. I just want to say to him that I have appreciated working with 
him over the years; and we in the Pacific northwest appreciate his 
great efforts on behalf of the salmon recovery initiatives and our 
Northwest Power Act and all of the other major environmental 
legislation that the gentleman from Michigan, the dean of the House, 
has enacted during his long and illustrious career. I am proud to work 
with him and with anyone else who wants to make the environment of the 
United States better for all of our citizens. I thank him for his great 
leadership.
  Mr. DINGELL. I thank the gentleman for his kind words.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DINGELL. I yield to the gentleman from Kansas.
  Mr. TIAHRT. I would like to thank the grand gentleman from Michigan 
for coming down here and talking about the importance of this bill; and 
also acknowledge what a leader you have been on environmental issues 
over the years and we appreciate your service to the country and your 
leadership here on the floor.
  Mr. DINGELL. I thank the gentleman for those kinds words, and I want 
to utter in return the great respect and affection I have for the 
distinguished gentleman and for the outstanding work he does here. I am 
proud he is my friend.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will rise informally.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Castor) assumed the chair.

                          ____________________