[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 13]
[House]
[Pages 17680-17681]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                    VALIDATING NEVADA LANDS TRANSFER

  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 762) to validate final patent number 27-2005-0081, and for 
other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                H.R. 762

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

     SECTION 1. FINAL PATENT AND LAND RECONFIGURATION IN CLARK 
                   COUNTY AND LINCOLN COUNTY, NEVADA.

       Patent No. 27-2005-0081 and its associated land 
     reconfiguration issued by the Bureau of Land Management on 
     February 18, 2005, is hereby affirmed and validated as having 
     been issued pursuant to and in compliance with the provisions 
     of the Nevada-Florida Land Exchange Authorization Act of 1988 
     (Public Law 100-275), the National Environmental Policy Act 
     of 1969, and the Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976 
     for the benefit of the desert tortoise and other species and 
     their habitat to increase the likelihood of their recovery. 
     The process utilized by the United States Fish and Wildlife 
     Service and the Bureau of Land Management in reconfiguring 
     the lands as shown on Exhibit 1-4 of the Final Environmental 
     Impact Statement for the Planned Development Project MSHCP, 
     Lincoln County, NV (FWS-R8-ES-2008-N0136) and the 
     reconfiguration provided for in Special Condition 10 of Army 
     Corps of Engineers Permit No. 200125042 are hereby ratified.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from 
Guam (Ms. Bordallo) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) 
each will control 20 minutes.

[[Page 17681]]

  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Guam.

                              {time}  1445


                             General Leave

  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and to include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Guam?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. BORDALLO. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 762, introduced by Congressman Dean Heller, would 
validate the final patent to lands in Clark and Lincoln Counties in 
Nevada. Congresswoman Shelley Berkley has also worked to advance this 
bill.
  In 2005, the Bureau of Land Management issued a final patent to 
reconfigure certain leased and patented lands slated for development. 
This adjustment was intended to provide habitat for the conservation of 
the endangered desert tortoise.
  However, several groups objected to the process that the BLM used to 
adjust these lands, claiming that it failed to comply with Federal law 
and that it failed to provide appropriate habitat for the tortoise. The 
group sued the BLM and the property owners.
  In 2007, the parties agreed to settle the lawsuit. H.R. 762 will 
implement one of several settlement stipulations by validating the 
final patent to the reconfigured land. All parties to the litigation 
support this legislation.
  In addition to Congressman Heller, I would like to highly commend 
Congresswoman Shelley Berkley for her leadership and tireless efforts 
in getting this bill to the floor today.
  Mr. Speaker, we support H.R. 762, and urge its adoption by the House 
today.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield myself as much time as I might 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I, too, rise in support of H.R. 762. H.R. 762 will 
validate an existing patent for land in addition to the associated land 
configurations located in Clark and Lincoln Counties in Nevada. This 
action best enables the recovery of the threatened desert tortoise and 
other species and their habitats.
  I, too, would like to congratulate Mr. Heller of Nevada for bringing 
this issue to our attention and for moving quickly to resolve this on 
behalf of his constituents.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional requests for time, 
and would inquire of the minority whether they have any additional 
speakers.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 
minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).
  Mr. KINGSTON. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today alarmed at the spending that is going on in 
Washington, D.C. More specifically, I want to talk about the 
President's ignoring article II, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution 
that says, when you appoint somebody in a significant role who is part 
of your administration, you need to have the advice and consent of the 
U.S. Senate. Irrespective of this, President Obama has named 33 czars 
outside of the traditional infrastructure of Washington.
  Now, in its day, czarist Russia had 18 czars over a 300-year period 
of time, but here, in a 7-month period of time, President Obama now has 
33 czars. I guess his vision is a czarist America. I'm not sure. We 
have a Great Lakes czar, a regulatory czar, an automobile czar, a 
Guantanamo closure czar, a TARP czar, a new TARP czar, all kinds of 
different czars, none of whom have gone in front of the U.S. Senate.
  Now, why is going in front of the U.S. Senate important aside from 
the constitutional requirement?
  Well, for one thing, you get an automobile czar who has got some 
shady business dealings--a 31-year-old who doesn't know a spark plug 
from a lug nut. Why do you think this person could turn around Detroit? 
Well, we found out now he's on his way out the door ignominiously. 
Maybe that embarrassment to the administration could have been 
prevented had this 31-year-old boy genius auto czar had to sit in front 
of the Senate as do judicial appointees and cabinet appointees.
  I think a lot of people think, well, yeah, the Senate approves 
Cabinet members, but they also approve deputy under secretaries. 
Hundreds and even thousands of people have to come before the U.S. 
Senate for the constitutional requirement. The Constitution can be 
inconvenient to this administration--I realize that--but again, article 
II, section 2 says you must seek the advice and consent of the U.S. 
Senate.
  How about the energy czar? The energy czar is a member of some wacko 
socialist group who believes the way to deal with global warming is for 
large industrial countries--i.e., the United States of America, and 
this would be non-czarist America--to shrink their economies in order 
to offset their emissions. That's the belief of the group that the 
energy czar belongs to. Wouldn't it be interesting to talk to the 
energy czar and ask her why she thinks this is a good group to be a 
member of? What would the socialist group have to offer to the United 
States of America at this point?
  Perhaps the Senate would like to talk to the stimulus accountability 
czar.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield the gentleman an additional 
minute.
  Mr. KINGSTON. I thank the gentleman.
  The word ``accountability'' attracts my attention because the 
stimulus accountability czar spent $18 million designing a Web page. A 
show of hands of how many of you want some of that action. Eighteen 
million dollars to design a Web page? Talk about stimulating the 
economy. Boy, that was one way to spend our money. Again, the advice 
and consent of the U.S. Senate, article II, section 2, may have avoided 
that type of expenditure.
  What do these people get paid, Mr. Speaker? $172,000 a year. Thirty-
three people times $172,000--not to mention the myriad of staffs and 
entourages that we important people in Washington, D.C., have to go 
everywhere with. You never see somebody just walking in by him or 
herself. You always see the entourage that tells the whole world ``I am 
important.'' Therefore, I get back to the constitutional question:
  If you are important, and if you have to have this big staff that 
costs the taxpayers millions of dollars, why not comply with the U.S. 
Constitution's article II, section 2: advice and consent of the U.S. 
Senate?
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional requests for time and 
would inquire of the minority whether they have any additional 
speakers.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I have no more time or 
people asking for time. If the gentlewoman is the last speaker on that 
side, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I again urge all Members to support this 
very good bill.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 762.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________