[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 7]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 10194-10195]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




            H.R. 2578--CONSERVATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. BETTY McCOLLUM

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 27, 2012

  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 
2578. This bill threatens the environmental integrity of millions of 
acres of federal lands, including the Boundary Waters Canoe Area 
Wilderness and Voyageurs National Park in Minnesota. These lands are 
among our state's greatest treasures and must be protected and 
maintained for future generations. This misguided legislation is a 
politically-motivated assault on the environment, not a national 
security imperative as my Republican colleagues claim.
  Instead of protecting our border and our environment, this bill, and 
especially the Title XIV National Security and Federal Lands Protection 
Act in it, causes irreparable harm to our most cherished places. It 
exempts the Department of Homeland Security's Customs and Border 
Protection, CBP, from federal environmental regulations while 
performing border-security operations. It blocks the Department of 
Interior, DOI, and Department of Agriculture, USDA, from enforcing over 
30 environmental protection laws that protect our fish and wildlife, 
national parks, forests, and other historic places. In addition, this 
legislation would give CBP the authority to construct offices, roads, 
fences and other infrastructure within 100 miles of the U.S. border 
with Canada and Mexico--an area that includes at least 54 National Park 
System properties, 228 national wildlife refuges and 122 wilderness 
preserves. It undermines these essential protections based on the false 
premise that it is somehow impossible to secure our national borders 
while also protecting our national heritage.
  According to Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano, this legislation 
is ``unnecessary'' and ``bad policy.'' On July 8, 2011, the U.S. 
Customs and Border Patrol, CBP, testified before Congress that, ``CBP 
enjoys a close working relationship with the Department of Interior and 
Department of Agriculture that allows us to fulfill our border 
enforcement responsibilities while respecting and enhancing the 
environment.'' Importantly, the Border Patrol made clear in its 
testimony that, ``Border Patrol agents have the authority at any time 
to conduct motorized off-road pursuit in the event of exigency/
emergency involving human life, health, safety of persons within the 
area, or posing a threat to national security.'' It is clear that the 
federal agencies that would receive this unfettered authority don't 
want it, don't need it, and shouldn't have it.
  In my state of Minnesota, the National Park Service; U.S. Forest 
Service; and the Red Lake, Grand Portage and Boise Forte Tribal 
Governments work cooperatively and openly with Homeland Security to 
minimize border issues. The National Park Service at Voyageurs National 
Park and Grand Portage National Monument already enjoy a good 
relationship with the local Border Patrol and work with them on a range 
of issues in a cooperative fashion. However, if Border Patrol is exempt 
from following existing protections, resources will be lost and tourism 
important to the local economy will decline.
  Title XIV would also affect the Boundary Waters Canoe Area 
Wilderness, a world-renowned area within the Superior National Forest. 
This legislation would allow the Border Patrol to erect roads and 
bridges in a sacred place where people from around the world come to 
enjoy Minnesota's Great Outdoors.
  We must also recognize the many tribal nations on lands near 
Minnesota's Canadian border, including the Grand Portage Band of

[[Page 10195]]

Chippewa, Red Lake Band of Chippewa, Boise Forte Band of Chippewa. This 
bill unacceptably threatens existing treaties and tribal sovereignty.
  This is an unnecessary and bad bill. I oppose H.R. 2578 and urge my 
colleagues to do the same.

                          ____________________