[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 16]
[House]
[Pages 21294-21295]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 965, CHESAPEAKE BAY GATEWAYS AND 
            WATERTRAILS NETWORK CONTINUING AUTHORIZATION ACT

  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 726 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 726

       Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it 
     shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 
     965) to amend the Chesapeake Bay Initiative Act of 1998 to 
     provide for the continuing authorization of the Chesapeake 
     Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network.   All points of order 
     against consideration of the bill are waived except those 
     arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI.   The bill shall be 
     considered as read.   All points of order against provisions 
     in the bill are waived.   The previous question shall be 
     considered as ordered on the bill, and any amendment thereto, 
     to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one 
     hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair 
     and ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural 
     Resources; (2) the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying 
     this resolution, if offered by Representative Bishop of Utah 
     or his designee, which shall be in order without intervention 
     of any point of order except those arising under clause 9 or 
     10 of rule XXI, shall be considered as read, and shall be 
     separately debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and 
     controlled by the proponent and an opponent; and (3) one 
     motion to recommit with or without instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pastor of Arizona). The gentleman from 
New York is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-
Balart). All time yielded during the consideration of this rule is for 
debate only.


                             General Leave

  Mr. ARCURI. I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 
legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House 
Resolution 726.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 726 provides for consideration of H.R. 
965, the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network Continuing 
Authorization Act. I want to recognize my colleague from Maryland, Mr. 
John Sarbanes, for his leadership on this issue. He has worked 
diligently in a bipartisan fashion to protect the Chesapeake Bay so 
that it remains a vibrant recreational and economic network.
  H.R. 965 will continue the important restoration and conservation of 
the Chesapeake Bay watershed by permanently authorizing the Chesapeake 
Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network. The Chesapeake Bay is our 
Nation's largest estuary. Many people often think of the bay as only 
part of Maryland and Virginia. But the bay's watershed covers 64,000 
square miles in five States and the District of Columbia. In fact, the 
watershed's most northern point, or what we in upstate New York would 
call the starting point, extends into a significant portion of my 
congressional district in the village of Cooperstown.
  As a result of its size and location, the Chesapeake Bay has played 
an important role in our country's history, from early settlement and 
commerce, to military battles and transportation development, as well 
as recreational uses. It truly is worthy of preservation, both for its 
natural beauty and its impact on our Nation's culture and economy.
  The Chesapeake Bay Network is a comprehensive protection program for 
the bay. The programs authorized serve to identify, conserve, restore 
and interpret the natural, historical, cultural and recreational 
resources within the watershed. These programs also educate local 
communities on the significant sites in the region and how their 
community impacts the overall health of the bay. This law requires a 
full matching requirement for grants awarded by the National Park 
Service to State and local agencies and not-for-profit corporations and 
organizations for such projects.
  The resulting network is a system of over 150 parks, museums, 
historic communities, scenic roadways, water trails and water access 
points located within the vast Chesapeake Bay watershed. Each of these 
sites tells a piece of the vast Chesapeake story, while providing 
Federal support for the preservation and improvement of these sites to 
enhance both the historical and recreational user experience. The 
network is overseen by the National Park Service, but the Park Service 
only manages 10 of the network's sites. Other gateways are managed by 
local State and nongovernmental organizations.
  The Chesapeake Bay Network has always been a bipartisan program. The 
legislation that created it in 1998 passed the House on suspension by 
voice vote, was agreed to by unanimous consent in the Senate, and 
signed into law by President Clinton. In 2002, a clean 5-year 
reauthorization received similar unanimous support in Congress and was 
signed into law by President Bush. Last year, an identical bill, H.R. 
5540, passed the House by an overwhelming bipartisan vote.
  H.R. 965 will permanently reauthorize this bipartisan program, which 
the White House Conference on Cooperative Conservation, headed by the 
Department of the Interior, has called a success story. It's worth 
noting that the National Park Service has also recommended permanent 
reauthorization of the network.
  I encourage all my colleagues to vote for this rule and the 
underlying bill and to continue to support the Chesapeake Bay Gateways 
and Watertrails Network.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would like to 
thank the gentleman from New York, my good friend, Mr. Arcuri, for the 
time.

[[Page 21295]]

  I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the House of Representatives is spending 1 hour debating 
the rule that will be used to consider the underlying legislation being 
brought to the floor today, the Chesapeake Bay Watertrails Continuing 
Authorization Act. That simple and noncontroversial legislation, barely 
two pages in length, passed last Congress, as my good friend has 
mentioned, by an overwhelming vote. In fact, it passed by 321-86. That 
is a pretty impressive margin. I believe it will pass today by, at the 
very least, that margin.
  So I would ask why the majority is going through all of this trouble 
of having the House consider a special rule for a two-page bill. Why is 
the House going to spend 2 hours today, approximately, discussing a 
bill that could have been handled in just a few minutes under 
suspension and ultimately pass by an overwhelming majority vote in this 
House?

                              {time}  1030

  I'm not sure of the answer. But I think it's noteworthy that the 
majority spends a week's worth of Congress' precious time on water 
trails and the Chesapeake while Americans face unemployment levels we 
have not seen in 26 years.
  The majority is requiring the House today to consider the Chesapeake 
Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network Continuing Authorization Act, a 
bill that spends $5 million over 5 years through a process that 
requires hours of debate. But yesterday, we considered the Wind Energy 
Research and Development Act of 2009 with only 40 minutes total of 
debate, and that bill authorized the expenditure of $1 billion.
  So I would ask, how is it appropriate for the majority to require up 
to 2 hours of debate to spend $5 million, but it authorizes 40 minutes 
of debate for $1 billion? It may not be appropriate, but it is 
certainly common practice under this majority to rush important 
legislation through the House. I fear we may see that again when the 
House considers the majority's health care reform legislation.
  Consider that this Chesapeake Bay water trails bill was introduced in 
February; it has remained unchanged since then, giving Members months 
to consider and read the two-page bill. And that is consistent with the 
Speaker's pledge, still on her Web site, that ``Members should have at 
least 24 hours to examine bills and conference reports and texts prior 
to floor consideration.'' But will the majority live up to their pledge 
to allow Members time to read the health care bill when it finally 
comes together?
  Perhaps if the majority had lived up to their promise, Members would 
have had time to properly read and consider the cap-and-tax as well as 
the so-called ``stimulus'' bill and voted them down. So let's see, Mr. 
Speaker, let's see if they live up to their promise when we consider 
the health care legislation. I won't be holding my breath.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, we are here today to reauthorize the 
Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network. This is a program that 
did not have a single Member of Congress oppose its creation or its 
subsequent reauthorization. The program has been heralded as a success 
by the Bush administration and was unanimously reauthorized during that 
administration. This rule provides for consideration of the legislation 
that would now permanently extend the authorization for this bipartisan 
program, a move endorsed by the National Park Service.
  We all agree that the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network 
is a good program that has had a positive impact on preservation and 
recreation within the Chesapeake Bay watershed, but it's clear that 
some of us disagree on whether to make the reauthorization permanent, 
which is why we've made in order a substitute amendment that would 
reauthorize the program for 5 years to allow a full debate.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on 
the rule.
  I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question 
on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________