[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 12342-12350]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                        PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS

  The following petitions and memorials were laid before the Senate and 
were referred or ordered to lie on the table as indicated:

       POM-52. A resolution adopted by the House of 
     Representatives of the State of Louisiana memorializing the 
     United States Congress to take such actions as are necessary 
     to designate Grambling State University as a United States 
     Department of Agriculture 1890 land-grant institution; to the 
     Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.

                        House Resolution No. 102

       Whereas, a land-grant college or university is a 
     postsecondary education institution that has been designated 
     to receive the benefits of the federal Morrill Acts of 1862 
     or 1890; and
       Whereas, there is at least one land-grant institution in 
     every state and territory of the United States, as well as 
     the District of Columbia, and over the years, land-grant 
     status has been associated with several types of federal 
     support; and
       Whereas, two universities in this state, Louisiana State 
     University (LSU) and Southern University (SU), are designated 
     as land-grant institutions; LSU received this

[[Page 12343]]

     designation in 1862, and in 1890, what is known as the Second 
     Morrill Act conferred land-grant status to several 
     historically black colleges and universities, commonly 
     referred to as ``1890 land-grant institutions'', and SU is 
     among this group; and
       Whereas, Grambling State University, located in Grambling, 
     Louisiana, is seeking designation as an 1890 land-grant 
     institution under the banner of the Second Morrill Act; and
       Whereas, Grambling State University was founded in 1901 by 
     the North Louisiana Colored Agriculture Relief Association; 
     in 1905, it moved to its present location and was renamed the 
     North Louisiana Agricultural and Industrial School; in 1946, 
     it became Grambling College; and in 1949, it earned its first 
     accreditation by the Southern Association of Colleges and 
     Schools; and
       Whereas, in 1974, the school began to offer graduate 
     programs in early childhood and elementary education and 
     acquired the name Grambling State University; over the years, 
     several new academic programs have been incorporated and new 
     facilities added to the 384-acre campus; and
       Whereas, Grambling now offers more than eight hundred 
     courses and forty-seven degree programs in five colleges, 
     including an honors college, two professional schools, a 
     graduate school, and a Division of Continuing Education; and
       Whereas, Grambling combines the academic strengths of a 
     major university with the benefits of a small college, and 
     its students grow and learn in a serene and positive 
     environment; and
       Whereas, in addition to being one of the country's top 
     producers of African American graduates, Grambling is home to 
     the internationally renowned Tiger Marching Band and remains 
     proud of the legacy of the late Eddie Robinson, Sr., a truly 
     legendary football coach; and
       Whereas, Grambling places an emphasis on the value and 
     importance of each student, which is exemplified by its 
     motto, ``Where Everybody is Somebody''; and
       Whereas, after more than a decade since its founding, 
     Grambling remains an important influence in the quality of 
     lives and communities of generations of North Louisiana 
     residents; and
       Whereas, the designation of Ohio's Central State University 
     as an 1890 land-grant institution in the 2014 Farm Bill set a 
     very recent precedent for the addition of a university to the 
     land-grant system; and
       Whereas, the nation's system of land-grant institutions 
     would be strengthened by the inclusion of Grambling State 
     University; and
       Whereas, as a historically black university with a strong 
     record of academics, research, and service, Grambling, with 
     its rich history and traditions, would bring a unique 
     perspective to the land-grant system; and
       Whereas, for one hundred twenty-five years, the 1890 land-
     grant institutions have played a vital role in ensuring 
     access to higher education and opportunity for underserved 
     communities, and as such an institution, Grambling would have 
     access to increased resources that it could direct to serving 
     such communities and to providing research, extension, and 
     public services in North Louisiana, an area where these 
     services are not currently being provided sufficiently; and
       Whereas, such designation would be consistent with 
     Grambling's agricultural origins and its mission and history 
     of service to African American students and the people of 
     Louisiana and would strengthen Grambling's research and 
     teaching in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 
     (STEM) programs and enhance existing programs and facilitate 
     the development of new programs in agricultural business, 
     biotechnology, economics, environment and natural resources, 
     family and consumer science, and engineering technology; and
       Whereas, Grambling State University has made the same 
     extraordinary contributions to the education of African 
     Americans in the state of Louisiana as other 1890 land-grant 
     universities have made in their respective states; and
       Whereas, as the only Historically Black College or 
     University (HBCU) in the University of Louisiana System, the 
     role that Grambling plays in the state is critical; and
       Whereas, a land-grant designation would enhance greatly 
     Grambling's service to the people of Louisiana, and it is 
     appropriate that Congress take all necessary measures to 
     grant such designation to Grambling State University: Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the House of Representatives of the 
     Legislature of Louisiana does hereby memorialize the United 
     States Congress to take such actions as are necessary to 
     designate Grambling State University as a United States 
     Department of Agriculture 1890 land-grant institution; and be 
     it further
       Resolved, That a copy of this Resolution be transmitted to 
     the presiding officers of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives of the Congress of the United States of 
     America and to each member of the Louisiana congressional 
     delegation.
                                  ____

       POM-53. A joint resolution adopted by the Legislature of 
     the State of California memorializing the President of the 
     United States and the United States Congress to recognize the 
     unique military value of California's defense installations 
     and the disproportionate sacrifices California has endured in 
     previous base realignment and closure (BRAC) rounds; to the 
     Committee on Armed Services.

                    Assembly Joint Resolution No. 11

       Whereas, The federal Department of Defense conducted base 
     realignment and closure (BRAC) rounds in 1988, 1991, 1993, 
     1995, and 2005. The previous BRAC rounds resulted in the 
     closure of 25 major bases in California and the realignment 
     of eight other facilities; and
       Whereas, A sixth BRAC round for 2017 has been proposed in 
     the fiscal year 2016 federal budget; and
       Whereas, California has been the state hardest hit by the 
     Department of Defense's previous BRAC rounds. In the first 
     four BRAC rounds, for example, the state absorbed 25 percent 
     of the total base closures nationally and 11 percent of the 
     base realignments; and
       Whereas, California absorbed 54 percent of personnel cuts 
     in the first four BRAC rounds, losing more federal military 
     jobs from the closure of its military bases than the combined 
     losses in all other states. Additionally, 300,000 private 
     sector defense industry jobs in California were eliminated as 
     a result of those base closures; and
       Whereas, These base closures had a severe impact on local 
     governments and communities, some of which continue to 
     struggle with the transition and reuse of these closed bases; 
     and
       Whereas, There are currently more than 30 major federal 
     military installations and commands remaining in California 
     that could be closed or realigned as a result of another BRAC 
     process; and
       Whereas, The Department of Defense and the defense industry 
     represent a major industry in California today, totaling more 
     than $71 billion in direct spending and employing more than 
     350,000 Californians. Total effects on the economy far exceed 
     these numbers; and
       Whereas, For over half of a century, California's workers, 
     businesses, industries, and universities have contributed to 
     our national security, utilizing their talents, capital, and 
     skills to develop and manufacture new technologies, aircraft, 
     satellites, missiles, and advanced weapons systems; and
       Whereas, Military installations provide the foundation for 
     United States defense efforts. Maintaining these 
     installations is, therefore, critical to supporting America's 
     national security. California is vital to the mission and 
     might of our United States military. Our seaports and 
     airports, bases and equipment, research labs and testing 
     grounds support the finest fighting force in the world; and
       Whereas, As our nation faces new security threats in the 
     21st century, California remains ready to confront these 
     dangers. In space, cyberspace, over land, at sea, and in the 
     air, California is helping the military meet the challenges 
     of today and tomorrow. From troop deployment to systems 
     development and cybersecurity, training to logistics, the 
     future of our military is here in California; and
       Whereas, Having been the leader in the nation's defense 
     effort, California state government must lead by articulating 
     the national security imperative of maintaining military 
     installations within its borders; and
       Whereas, In an effort to be proactive in retaining military 
     facilities within California that are essential to national 
     security, and to provide for a single, focused strategy to 
     defend these installations, in March 2013 Governor Edmund G. 
     Brown Jr. established the Governor's Military Council, in an 
     effort to protect and expand the military's vital role in 
     national security and California's economy. The council has 
     met regularly throughout the state since its creation, and is 
     continuing to work to protect California's military 
     installations and operations and to assist in recruiting new 
     defense missions and operations to the state: Now, therefore, 
     be it
       Resolved by the Assembly and the Senate of the State of 
     California, jointly, That California's military installations 
     possess critical military value and that California is ready 
     to help the Department of Defense meet its goals now and in 
     the future; and be it further
       Resolved, That the Legislature of the State of California 
     respectfully memorializes the President and the Congress of 
     the United States, to not only recognize the unique military 
     value of California's defense installations, but also 
     continue to take into consideration all of the following:
       (a) California's unparalleled land, air, and sea ranges 
     that provide the ability to train all types of forces, year 
     round, in every type of warfare effectively, efficiently, and 
     economically.
       (b) California's strategic location in the Pacific Theater 
     is a critical factor in executing the National Defense 
     Strategy strategic shift to the Pacific region by allowing 
     for rapid deployment to trouble spots in Asia.
       (c) California's ability to recruit and train highly 
     skilled and educated personnel.
       (d) The existing synergies between military installations 
     and the private sector.
       (e) The economic impact on existing communities in the 
     vicinity of military installations.
       (f) Our incomparable quality of life, which enhances 
     personnel retention.

[[Page 12344]]

       (g) The vast intellectual capital that has been developed 
     in California since World War II.
       (h) The disproportionate sacrifices California has endured 
     in previous BRAC rounds; and be it further
       Resolved, That the Chief Clerk of the Assembly transmit 
     copies of this resolution to the President and Vice President 
     of the United States, to the Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives, to the Majority Leader of the Senate, to 
     each Senator and Representative from California in the 
     Congress of the United States, and to the author for 
     appropriate distribution.
                                  ____

       POM-54. A joint resolution adopted by the Legislature of 
     the State of California urging the President of the United 
     States and the United States Congress to enact legislation to 
     establish guarantees by the federal government to support the 
     responsible sale of postearthquake bonds by financially sound 
     residential-earthquake-insurance programs operated by any of 
     the several states on an actuarially sound basis; to the 
     Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

                    Assembly Joint Resolution No. 6

       Whereas, Over the last 30 years, California has experienced 
     1,451 earthquakes of magnitude 4.0 or greater, ranging from 
     16 to 168 per year; and
       Whereas, Most Californians live within 20 miles of a major 
     earthquake fault capable of producing damaging earthquakes; 
     and
       Whereas, On the morning of August 24, 2014, many residents 
     of Napa discovered they lived closer to such a fault than 
     they believed. A magnitude 6.0 earthquake struck American 
     Canyon, south of Napa, at 3:20 a.m., leading to one death and 
     many injuries. The earthquake seriously damaged nearly 100 
     homes, as well as many historic downtown buildings. It cost 
     local wineries millions of dollars in spilled wine and 
     damaged equipment, and numerous people were injured. The 
     overall damage and effects of the earthquake demonstrated how 
     even a moderate-sized earthquake can have a large impact on a 
     community; and
       Whereas, In June 2014, the Los Angeles Times reported that 
     the first five months of the year were marked by five 
     earthquakes larger than magnitude 4.0, after what had been a 
     relatively quiet period of seismic activity for the Los 
     Angeles area. That number of earthquakes at that magnitude 
     had not occurred in a year since 1994, the year of the 
     Northridge earthquake; and
       Whereas, Faced with the certainty of its peril from 
     earthquakes, over the last three decades California has 
     repeatedly shown that smart public policy choices can help 
     Californians prepare for a catastrophic earthquake. Milestone 
     innovations across this era include the following:
       (a) In the year following the 1983 Coalinga earthquake, 
     California passed the Earthquake Insurance Act, requiring 
     residential property insurers to offer homeowners earthquake 
     coverage, to ensure homeowners considered the possibility of 
     protecting their home from earthquake damage.
       (b) In the year after the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, 
     California began examining how a state-based financial pool 
     might be constructed to improve protection for homeowners. 
     This effort, the California Residential Earthquake Recovery 
     Fund (CRERF), was intended to cover the cost of earthquake 
     insurance deductibles. While this plan was repealed in 1992 
     as potentially actuarially unsound, it pointed the way to 
     further innovations.
       (c) Since 1996, the multipart funding mechanism of the 
     California Earthquake Authority (CEA), a public 
     instrumentality of the State of California, has succeeded as 
     the primary source of earthquake insurance for California 
     homeowners seeking to protect their homes from earthquakes; 
     and
       Whereas, Despite the growing successes of the CEA since its 
     1996 formation, how it can be improved has become clear. 
     Almost every news story about California earthquake insurance 
     and the CEA notes that residential earthquake insurance is 
     costly for homeowners and the deductibles are high. The high 
     cost and high deductibles are seen as a key factor behind why 
     only 12 percent of Californians who buy homeowners' insurance 
     also buy earthquake insurance; and
       Whereas, There is no better way to prepare California for 
     the inevitability of disastrous earthquakes than to make 
     earthquake insurance work better for its residents. The 
     limitations of the existing system are well-known. Now is the 
     time for the next key step in policy innovation to make the 
     state's earthquake insurance system work better for renters 
     and homeowners; and
       Whereas, As the CEA approaches two decades of operation, it 
     has become clear that the CEA has pushed the envelope on how 
     a single state-based pool can materially assist in 
     catastrophe readiness. But by law, the CEA's rates must be 
     actuarially sound and based on the best available scientific 
     information for assessing earthquake frequency, severity, and 
     loss; these sensible conditions also temper the CEA's ability 
     to cut the cost of earthquake insurance; and
       Whereas, As a public instrumentality of the state, the CEA 
     must cover all its risks, including the possibility that at 
     any time, a truly catastrophic earthquake might hit the 
     state; and
       Whereas, The CEA's need, as a stand-alone, risk-bearing 
     public instrumentality of the state, to always have a plan to 
     cover the chance of a catastrophic earthquake is what, under 
     the current system, keeps the price of earthquake insurance 
     high. For the level of total exposure the policies represent, 
     the rates yield sufficient premiums to pay for a backstop of 
     reinsurance sufficient to offset expected CEA losses in all 
     but the most catastrophic earthquake; and
       Whereas, A federal policy of certain access to federal debt 
     guarantees for postevent financing would strengthen the risk-
     bearing capacity of actuarially sound state-based disaster 
     programs like the CEA and reduce the preevent expense of 
     providing that insurance. In recent sessions of the United 
     States Congress, a proposed federal partnership limited to 
     prequalified, actuarially sound state earthquake insurance 
     programs has been estimated to expose the federal government 
     to a 10-year cost of only $25 million; and
       Whereas, A state and federal partnership to enhance the 
     ability of prequalified, actuarially sound state earthquake 
     funds to access postdisaster borrowing would enable 
     California and other states using actuarially sound programs 
     to manage risk with a dramatically better tool; and
       Whereas, The CEA's certain access to a federal guarantee of 
     its postearthquake borrowing would ensure access to the 
     private capital markets at reasonable rates, enhancing the 
     claims-paying capacity for a catastrophic earthquake. That 
     lower-cost capacity, in turn, would permit the CEA to adjust 
     its annual purchase of earthquake reinsurance and lower 
     expenses, thus speeding long-term capital accumulation to 
     help CEA modulate its cost of providing basic earthquake 
     insurance across the state: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Assembly and the Senate of the State of 
     California, jointly, That the Legislature urges the President 
     and the Congress of the United States to enact legislation to 
     establish guarantees by the federal government to support the 
     responsible sale of postearthquake bonds by financially sound 
     residential-earthquake-insurance programs operated by any of 
     the several states on an actuarially sound basis; and be it 
     further
       Resolved, That the Chief Clerk of the Assembly transmit 
     copies of this resolution to the President and Vice President 
     of the United States, to the Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives, to the Majority Leader of the Senate, and to 
     each Senator and Representative from the State of California 
     in the Congress of the United States.
                                  ____

       POM-55. A joint resolution adopted by the Legislature of 
     the State of California urging the United States Congress to 
     support legislation reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank of 
     the United States; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and 
     Urban Affairs.

                    Assembly Joint Resolution No. 14

       Whereas, The Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im 
     Bank) is the official export credit agency of the United 
     States and exists for the purposes of financing and insuring 
     foreign purchases of United States goods; and
       Whereas, The mission of the Ex-Im Bank is to create and 
     sustain United States jobs by financing sales of United 
     States exports to international buyers; and
       Whereas, The Ex-Im Bank is the principal government agency 
     responsible for aiding the export of American goods and 
     services, and thereby creating and sustaining United States 
     jobs, through a variety of loan, guarantee, and insurance 
     programs for small and large businesses; and
       Whereas, The Ex-Im Bank has supported more than $400 
     billion in United States exports in the past 70 years and 
     helps to cover critical trade finance gaps by providing loan 
     guaranties, export credit insurance, and direct loans for 
     United States exports in developing markets where commercial 
     bank financing is unavailable or insufficient. For fiscal 
     year 2014, the Ex-Im Bank provided $20.5 billion in loan 
     guarantees which leveraged $27.5 billion in exports while 
     supporting 164,000 United States jobs. Since fiscal year 
     2009, the bank has supported more than 1.3 million American 
     jobs in all 50 states; and
       Whereas, The Ex-Im Bank is a self-sustaining agency, which 
     operates at no cost to the taxpayer and over the last three 
     fiscal years has generated more than $3 billion in fees from 
     its foreign customers which were deposited in the United 
     States Treasury to reduce the United States deficit and 
     indebtedness; and
       Whereas, The Ex-Im Bank enables United States companies 
     large and small to turn export opportunities into sales that 
     help to create and maintain jobs in the United States that 
     contribute to a stronger national economy. On average nearly 
     90 percent of the Ex-Im Bank's transactions support United 
     States small businesses; and
       Whereas, Exports are particularly important to the 
     California economy as California is currently ranked second 
     in exports among all states. If California's manufacturing 
     base is to grow, we must continue to expand our ability to 
     export goods from California facilities. Given the key role 
     the Ex-Im Bank plays in facilitating export sales, failure to 
     reauthorize it would be devastating to existing industry and 
     to those that we hope to create in the future; and

[[Page 12345]]

       Whereas, Over the past five years, the Ex-Im Bank has 
     assisted more than 967 California companies to export their 
     products. Nearly 200 of those companies are owned by women or 
     minorities and over 700 are small businesses. These companies 
     export their products and services around the globe totaling 
     more than $21 billion in sales. Fifty-two of the 53 
     congressional districts in California had companies benefit 
     from the Ex-Im Bank loans; and
       Whereas, A reauthorization of the Ex-Im Bank is critical to 
     the ability of many United States exporters to compete on a 
     level playing field in a commercial market where current and 
     future competitors continue to enjoy aggressive support from 
     their countries' export credit agencies; and
       Whereas, A failure to reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank would 
     amount to unilateral disarmament in the face of other 
     nations' aggressive trade finance programs that favor their 
     domestic companies over American companies; and
       Whereas, Economic growth depends on increasing exports from 
     both small and large manufacturers and service providers in 
     California and reauthorization means support for California 
     exports and California jobs; and
       Whereas, in the 114th United States Congress, 1st Session, 
     legislation is pending that would continue the Ex-Im Bank's 
     capacity for creating jobs while also making its practices 
     more accountable and transparent, as well as making the bank 
     more solvent and self-sufficient: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Assembly and the Senate of the State of 
     California, jointly, That the Legislature urges Congress to 
     support Export-Import Bank of the United States; and be it 
     further
       Resolved, That the Chief Clerk of the Assembly transmit 
     copies of this resolution to the President and Vice President 
     of the United States, to the Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives, to the Majority Leader of the Senate, and to 
     each Senator and Representative from California in the 
     Congress of the United States.
                                  ____

       POM-56. A concurrent memorial adopted by the Legislature of 
     the State of Arizona urging the United States Government to 
     immediately dispose of the public lands within Arizona's 
     borders directly to the State of Arizona; to the Committee on 
     Energy and Natural Resources.

                     House Concurrent Memorial 2005

       Whereas, at the time of Arizona's Enabling Act, the course 
     and practice of the United States Congress with all prior 
     states admitted to the Union had been to fully dispose, 
     within a reasonable time, of all lands within the boundaries 
     of such states, except for those Indian lands, or lands 
     otherwise expressly reserved to the exclusive jurisdiction of 
     the United States; and
       Whereas, the State of Arizona did not contemplate, and 
     could not have contemplated, the United States failing or 
     refusing to dispose of all lands within its defined 
     boundaries within a reasonable time such that the State of 
     Arizona and its permanent fund for its public schools could 
     never realize the anticipated benefit of the deployment, 
     taxation and economic benefit of all the lands within its 
     defined boundaries; and
       Whereas, Arizona's Enabling Act contemplates that Arizona's 
     temporary suspension of its sovereign right to tax the public 
     lands within its borders for the benefit of its public 
     schools and the common good of the state ends the very moment 
     that the national government discharges of its trust 
     obligation to immediately dispose of Arizona's public lands 
     within its borders; and
       Whereas, under Article I, section 8, clause 17 of the 
     United States Constitution, the national government is 
     constitutionally authorized to exercise right, title and 
     jurisdiction only over lands that are ``purchased by the 
     Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same 
     shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, 
     dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings''; and
       Whereas, the United States Congress never purchased land 
     designated as national parks nor did it ever seek or obtain 
     the consent of the Arizona Legislature as required under 
     Article I, section 8, clause 17 of the United States 
     Constitution; and
       Whereas, because of the failure of the national government 
     to immediately dispose of land within the borders of Arizona, 
     this state bears the burden of the inestimable entanglements 
     and expectations over the multiple use of these public lands 
     that were required to be disposed of that have accumulated 
     for more than one hundred years; and
       Whereas, Arizona should have had total control over its 
     public lands from 1912, plus a reasonable time for 
     disposition of the lands; and
       Whereas, Arizona has been substantially damaged in its 
     ability to provide funding for education because the national 
     government has unduly retained control of much of the land 
     lying within Arizona's borders; and
       Whereas, had the national government sold the land in or 
     about 1912, much of the net proceeds should have been applied 
     to paying down the national public debt, and some should have 
     gone to the state of Arizona's permanent fund for the support 
     of the public schools; and
       Whereas, Arizona consistently ranks high among all states 
     in class size and low in per pupil funding for education; and
       Whereas, had the national government disposed of the land 
     in or about 1912, Arizona would have generated, from that 
     point forward, substantial tax revenues to the benefit of its 
     public schools and to the common good of the state; and
       Whereas, the national government gives Arizona less than 
     half of the proceeds of mineral lease revenues and severance 
     taxes generated from the lands within this state's borders; 
     and
       Whereas, Arizona has been substantially damaged in mineral 
     lease revenues and severance taxes in that, had the national 
     government disposed of land in or about 1912, Arizona would 
     realize 100% of the mineral lease revenues and severance 
     taxes from the lands; and
       Whereas, Arizona has been damaged by the inordinate cost 
     and substantial uncertainty regarding the national 
     government's infringement on Arizona's sovereign control of 
     public lands within its borders; and
       Whereas, County of Shoshone v. United States (unpublished), 
     which confirmed that state law controls in determining what 
     constitutes sufficient public use, Shelby County v. Holder, 
     which clarified that ``the fundamental principle of equal 
     sovereignty remains highly pertinent in assessing [post-
     admission] disparate treatment of states'' and People for the 
     Ethical Treatment of Property Owners v. United States Fish 
     and Wildlife Service, which confirmed the federal 
     government's abuse of the Commerce Clause authority, all lend 
     support to the notion that the public lands within Arizona's 
     borders should be transferred to Arizona: and
       Whereas, because of the breach of Arizona's Enabling Act, 
     and the damages resulting from it, the United States Congress 
     should immediately dispose of the public lands lying within 
     the State of Arizona directly to the State of Arizona; and
       Whereas, the national government has an obligation to 
     present and future generations to pay the public debt, yet it 
     has demonstrated a reckless disregard for the growing 
     national debt even as it continues to worsen at an 
     exponential rate.
       Wherefore your memorialist, the House of Representatives of 
     the State of Arizona, the Senate concurring, prays:
       1. That the United States government immediately and not 
     later than December 31, 2019 dispose of the public lands 
     within Arizona's borders directly to the State of Arizona.
       2. That the United States Congress engage in good faith 
     communication, cooperation, coordination and consultation 
     with the State of Arizona regarding the immediate disposal of 
     the public lands directly to this state.
       3. That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona 
     transmit copies of this Memorial to the President of the 
     United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House 
     of Representatives, the Secretary of the United States 
     Department of the Interior, the Chief of the United States 
     Forest Service, the Chairperson of the United States House 
     Committee on Natural Resources, the Chairperson of the United 
     States Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and 
     each Member of Congress from the State of Arizona.
                                  ____

       POM-57. A concurrent memorial adopted by the Legislature of 
     the State of Arizona urging the United States Congress to 
     vote to approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline; to the 
     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

                    Senate Concurrent Memorial 1006

       Whereas, the United States relies, and will continue to 
     rely for many years, on gasoline, diesel and jet fuel for 
     sources of energy; and
       Whereas. in order to fuel our economy, the United States 
     will need more oil and natural gas in addition to alternative 
     energy sources; and
       Whereas, the United States currently depends on foreign 
     imports for more than half of its petroleum usage and is the 
     largest consumer of petroleum in the world; and
       Whereas, United States dependence on overseas oil has 
     created difficult geopolitical relationships with potentially 
     damaging consequences for our national security; and
       Whereas, oil deposits in the Bakken Reserves of Montana, 
     North Dakota and South Dakota are an increasingly important 
     crude oil resource; and
       Whereas, there is not enough pipeline capacity to deliver 
     crude oil supplies from Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, 
     Oklahoma and Texas to American refineries; and
       Whereas, Canadian oil reserves total 174 billion barrels, 
     of which 169 billion barrels can be recovered from the oil 
     sands using today's technology; and
       Whereas, Canada is the single largest supplier of crude oil 
     to the United States at 3.05 million barrels per day and has 
     the capacity to significantly increase that rate; and
       Whereas, the southern leg of the Keystone XL pipeline ties 
     into the existing Keystone pipeline that already runs to 
     Canada, bringing up to 700,000 barrels of oil a day to 
     refineries in Texas. At peak capacity, the pipeline will 
     deliver 830,000 barrels of oil per day; and
       Whereas, according to the United States State Department's 
     fifth Final Supplemental

[[Page 12346]]

     Environmental Impact Statement (Final SEIS), which was issued 
     on January 31, 2014, the Keystone XL pipeline will be the 
     safest pipeline ever constructed on American soil, will have 
     minimal impact on the environment, will create thousands of 
     much-needed jobs and bolster the United States' energy 
     security; and
       Whereas, according to the Final SEIS, the Keystone XL 
     pipeline will support approximately 42,100 direct, indirect 
     and induced jobs and result in approximately $2 billion in 
     earnings throughout the United States; and
       Whereas, the Final SEIS predicts that the Keystone XL 
     pipeline will contribute approximately $3.4 billion to the 
     United States gross domestic product and provide a 
     substantial increase in tax revenues for local counties along 
     the pipeline route, with 17 to 27 counties expected to see 
     tax revenues increase by 10% or more; and
       Whereas, the Oklahoma-Texas leg of the Keystone pipeline 
     system, also referred to as the Gulf Coast segment, went into 
     service in late January 2014; and
       Whereas, according to a recent economic analysis report 
     conducted by noted economist Bud Weinstein at Southern 
     Methodist University Cox School of Business, the Gulf Coast 
     segment injected $2.14 billion into the Oklahoma economy and 
     more than $3.6 billion into the Texas economy; and
       Whereas, a recent study by the United States Department of 
     Energy found that increasing delivery of crude oil from 
     Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Alberta, as well as 
     Texas and Oklahoma, to American refineries has the potential 
     to substantially reduce our country's dependency on sources 
     outside of North America: and
       Whereas, Canada sends more than 99% of its oil exports to 
     the United States, the bulk of which goes to Midwestern 
     refineries: and
       Whereas, oil companies are investing huge sums to expand 
     and upgrade refineries in the Midwest and elsewhere to make 
     gasoline and other refined products from Canadian oil derived 
     from oil sands, and the expansion and upgrade projects will 
     create many new construction jobs over the next five years; 
     and
       Whereas, 90% of the money used to buy Canadian oil will 
     likely later be spent directly on United States goods and 
     services; and
       Whereas, since 2011, nearly 30 public opinion polls have 
     repeatedly confirmed that building the Keystone XL pipeline 
     is in the best interest of the vast majority of Americans: 
     and
       Whereas, supporting the continued shift towards reliable 
     and secure sources of North American oil is of vital interest 
     to the United States and the State of Arizona.
       Wherefore your memorialist, the Senate of the State of 
     Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring, prays:
       1. That the United States Congress vote to approve the 
     Keystone XL oil pipeline.
       2. That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona 
     transmit copies of this Memorial to the President of the 
     United States, the President of the United States Senate, the 
     Speaker of the United States House of Representatives and 
     each Member of Congress from the State of Arizona.
                                  ____

       POM-58. A concurrent memorial adopted by the Legislature of 
     the State of Arizona urging the United States Congress to 
     oppose the designation of the Grand Canyon Watershed National 
     Monument in northern Arizona; to the Committee on Energy and 
     Natural Resources.

                    Senate Concurrent Memorial 1001

       Whereas, Arizonans value the Grand Canyon as a national and 
     world treasure and as an economic engine; and
       Whereas, there is no threat to the Grand Canyon National 
     Park and its surrounding lands; and
       Whereas, existing laws and regulations, including the 
     National Environmental Policy Act, the Federal Land Policy 
     and Management Act, the Archaeological Resources Protection 
     Act and many others, ensure the protection and responsible 
     use of the Grand Canyon National Park and its surrounding 
     lands; and
       Whereas, as of 2012, Arizona had the third highest total 
     designated wilderness acreage in the United States with 4.5 
     million acres. Additionally, another 5.8 million acres were 
     affected by special land use designations, including national 
     monuments; and
       Whereas, only three members of the eleven-member Arizona 
     congressional delegation and others have requested that the 
     President of the United States use his authority under the 
     Antiquities Act to designate an estimated 1.7 million acres 
     in northern Arizona as the Grand Canyon Watershed National 
     Monument; and
       Whereas, this proposed designation would almost double the 
     amount of acreage designated as national monuments in Arizona 
     and would be the nation's second largest national monument 
     after the neighboring Grand Staircase-Escalante National 
     Monument in southern Utah, which is over 1.8 million acres; 
     and
       Whereas, the federal government granted lands at statehood 
     to the State of Arizona to be held in trust to provide a 
     source of income for schools and other beneficiaries; and
       Whereas, the proposed monument designation would severely 
     impact thousands of acres of state trust lands locked up 
     within its boundaries and deny their beneficial use to the 
     trust; and
       Whereas, this taking of state trust lands within the 
     proposed national monument without just compensation would be 
     a breach of the sacred trust between the State of Arizona and 
     the federal government that was agreed on in this state's 
     enabling act and harms Arizona's school children; and
       Whereas, withdrawal of this vast amount of lands from 
     multiple-use management eliminates or restricts reasonable 
     and thoughtful use of these natural resources for multiple 
     purposes, such as recreation, grazing, mining, energy 
     development and forestry; and
       Whereas, multiple-use management of these lands by the 
     United States Bureau of Land Management and the United States 
     Forest Service is based on resource management plans that 
     were developed with public input and have framed the use of 
     these lands since the passage of the Federal Land Policy and 
     Management Act in 1976; and
       Whereas, responsible use of natural resources provides a 
     substantial economic benefit to northern Arizona and there is 
     no reason to eliminate this benefit for a nonexistent threat; 
     and
       Whereas, the conservation of wildlife resources across 
     Arizona is the trust responsibility of the Arizona Game and 
     Fish Commission; and
       Whereas, the Arizona Game and Fish Commission voted to 
     oppose the proposed Grand Canyon Watershed National Monument 
     on May 11, 2012 and its analysis found that monument 
     designation can lead to restrictions on proactive wildlife 
     management, including hunting and fishing access; and
       Whereas, national monument designation requires a very 
     narrow management regime and could severely restrict forest 
     management activities, such as scientifically established 
     fire management, erosion control and invasive species 
     treatments; and
       Whereas, in addition, Arizona's proper management of state 
     forest lands, which includes selective logging, has made for 
     a healthy and prolific environment for naturally occurring 
     habitat and has proven effective in preventing habitat loss, 
     as has occurred on federally managed forest lands, through 
     wildfire; and
       Whereas, consideration of the effects on the customs, 
     cultures and economic well-being of our local communities as 
     well as important historic and cultural aspects of our local 
     heritage; and
       Whereas, the cost benefit of this proposal must be 
     considered; and
       Whereas, while a minority caucus of three of the eleven-
     member Arizona congressional delegation and a small, yet 
     vocal, group of others advocate to transfer state resources 
     to the federal government, the State of Arizona desires to 
     uphold the congressional designation of the multiple-use 
     policy as per the Federal Land Management Policy Act as being 
     best for our citizens and Arizona's economy.
       Wherefore your memorialist, the Senate of the State of 
     Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring, prays:
       1. That the President of the United States does not 
     designate the Grand Canyon Watershed National Monument in 
     northern Arizona.
       2. That the United States Congress oppose the designation 
     of the Grand Canyon Watershed National Monument in northern 
     Arizona.
       3. That any new monuments, including the proposed Grand 
     Canyon Watershed National Monument, have express state and 
     congressional approval before they are so designated by the 
     President.
       4. That the Governor and the Attorney General of the State 
     of Arizona take appropriate actions to implement this 
     Memorial.
       5. That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona 
     transmit copies of this Memorial to the President of the 
     United States, the President of the United States Senate, the 
     Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, each 
     Member of Congress from the State of Arizona, the Secretary 
     of the Interior, the Governor of the State of Arizona and the 
     Attorney General of the State of Arizona.
                                  ____

       POM-59. A concurrent memorial adopted by the Legislature of 
     the State of Arizona urging the United States Congress to 
     pass H.R. 594; to the Committee on Environment and Public 
     Works.

                    Senate Concurrent Memorial 1004

       Whereas, on April 21, 2014, the United States Environmental 
     Protection Agency and the United States Army Corps of 
     Engineers published a proposed rule in the Federal Register 
     that defines ``Waters of the United States'' under the Clean 
     Water Act; and
       Whereas, the final rule is projected to be published in the 
     Federal Register by August 31, 2015; and
       Whereas, the rule purports to clarify issues raised in two 
     United States Supreme Court decisions, Solid Waste Agency of 
     Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and 
     Rapanos v. United States, that created uncertainty over the 
     Clean Water Act's scope and application; and
       Whereas, the rule will expand the scope of the Clean Water 
     Act, resulting in greater impacts to this state, as well as 
     on local governments, their citizens and their businesses; 
     and

[[Page 12347]]

       Whereas, the rule will subject almost all physical areas 
     with a connection, or a ``significant nexus,'' to downstream 
     navigable waters, including features such as ditches, natural 
     or manmade ponds and floodplains, to the jurisdiction of the 
     Clean Water Act; and
       Whereas, the rule will apply to all programs under the 
     Clean Water Act; and
       Whereas, the rule change will cause significant harm to 
     local farmers, stall the development of businesses and strip 
     local providers of their control of land use for sustainable 
     food production; and
       Whereas, the cost to our municipalities and taxpayers will 
     be enormous; and
       Whereas, the rule is contrary to the ruling of the United 
     States Supreme Court in Rapanos as it appears to rely heavily 
     on the minority opinion's concept of ``significant nexus,'' 
     which was rejected by the Court's prevailing opinion; and
       Whereas, the term ``significant nexus'' does not appear in 
     the Clean Water Act: and
       Whereas, under the rule, groundwater may be used in making 
     determinations of a ``significant nexus,'' which is an 
     overreach of the federal agencies as groundwater systems are 
     under the jurisdiction of the states and should not be 
     broadly used in justifying a determination of jurisdictional 
     water of the United States; and
       Whereas, in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County, the 
     United States Supreme Court stated that the use of ``case by 
     case'' determinations should be the exception, not the rule, 
     and the rule allows for broad use of case by case 
     determinations, which inserts needless uncertainty into the 
     development process; and
       Whereas, the rule grants the United States Environmental 
     Protection Agency and the United States Army Corps of 
     Engineers authorities not specifically granted to them by the 
     Clean Water Act; and
       Whereas, the proposed rule, should it become effective, 
     will hamper beneficial development, increase costs of 
     infrastructure construction and maintenance and result in an 
     unacceptable level of uncertainty in the permitting process; 
     and
       Whereas, the Constitution of the United States was meant to 
     reserve to the states exclusive jurisdiction over their 
     respective nonnavigable, intrastate waters and waterways 
     within their boundaries except as expressly delegated to the 
     federal government by the Constitution or prohibited by it to 
     the states. and the federal government's power to regulate 
     navigable waters cannot constitutionally reach nonnavigable, 
     intrastate waters and waterways that have no significant 
     connection to navigable waters; and
       Whereas, it is impractical for the federal government to 
     regulate every ditch, pond and rain puddle that may have some 
     tenuous connection, miles away, to a body of water that is 
     currently defined as ``navigable.''
       Wherefore your memorialist, the Senate of the State of 
     Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring, prays:
       1. That the United States Congress pass H.R. 594, which 
     prohibits the United States Environmental Protection Agency 
     and the United States Army Corps of Engineers from 
     developing, finalizing, adopting, implementing, applying, 
     administering or enforcing the proposed federal rule that 
     defines ``Waters of the United States'' under the Clean Water 
     Act.
       2. That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona 
     transmit copies of this Memorial to the President of the 
     United States, the President of the United States Senate, the 
     Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, each 
     Member of Congress from the State of Arizona, the 
     Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection 
     Agency and the Commanding General and Chief of Engineers of 
     the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
                                  ____

       POM-60. A concurrent memorial adopted by the Legislature of 
     the State of Arizona urging the United States Environmental 
     Protection Agency to refrain from reducing the ozone 
     concentration standard; to the Committee on Environment and 
     Public Works.

                    Senate Concurrent Memorial 1014

       Whereas, the United States Environmental Protection Agency 
     (EPA) is proposing to reduce the national ambient air quality 
     standard for ozone from 75 parts per billion to 65 to 70 
     parts per billion, while taking comment on a level as low as 
     60 parts per billion; and
       Whereas, the Clean Air Act requires the EPA to review the 
     ozone concentration standard every five years, and the EPA 
     last updated this standard in 2008, setting it at 75 parts 
     per billion; and
       Whereas, if the EPA reduced the standard to 70 parts per 
     billion, nine out of 11 counties monitored for ozone levels 
     in Arizona would be out of compliance; and
       Whereas, if the EPA reduced the standard to 65 parts per 
     billion, all 11 counties monitored for ozone levels in 
     Arizona would be out of compliance, and the four rural 
     counties that are not currently monitored might also be out 
     of compliance; and
       Whereas, a revised ozone standard of 65 to 70 parts per 
     billion would result in widespread nonattainment designations 
     in areas of the nation that already meet the current ozone 
     standards; and
       Whereas, based on 2011 through 2013 monitoring data, the 
     EPA reports that 358 counties in the nation would violate a 
     standard of 70 parts per billion and that an additional 200 
     counties would violate a standard of 65 parts per billion; 
     and
       Whereas, nonattainment area designations would limit 
     economic and job growth by restricting new and expanded 
     industrial and manufacturing facilities, imposing emission 
     ``offset'' requirements on new sources of nitrogen oxides and 
     volatile organic compounds emissions, constraining oil and 
     gas extraction and raising electricity prices for industries 
     and consumers; and
       Whereas, low-income and fixed-income citizens would bear 
     the brunt of higher energy costs and utility bills; and
       Whereas, according to the National Association of 
     manufacturers, the EPA's proposal could be the most expensive 
     regulation ever issued on the American public, costing the 
     nation $270 billion to $360 billion annually; and
       Whereas, according to the National Association of 
     Manufacturers, the proposed ozone regulations could cost 
     Arizona $28 billion in gross state product loss from 2017 to 
     2040, 19,982 lost jobs or job equivalents per year, $639 
     million in total compliance costs and a $520 drop in average 
     household consumption per year; and
       Whereas, the National Association of Manufacturers predicts 
     that the EPA's proposed standards could result in a 15% 
     increase in residential electricity prices, a 32% increase in 
     residential natural gas prices and an 8% reduction in 
     Arizona's coal-fired generating capacity; and
       Whereas, the EPA has identified only 46% of the controls 
     needed to meet the proposed standards, and the remaining 54% 
     would have to be met with unknown controls that the EPA has 
     not yet identified but that would likely have to include 
     early shutdowns and scrappage of existing facilities, 
     equipment and vehicles; and
       Whereas, early retirement and scrappage of power plants, 
     industrial facilities, heavy-duty trucks and equipment and 
     automobiles would be much more costly ways to remove each 
     additional ton of emissions than the controls the EPA has 
     identified; and
       Whereas, air quality continues to improve, and nitrogen 
     oxide emissions are already down to 60% nationwide since 
     1980, which, after adjusting for economic growth, implies a 
     90% reduction in emission rates from the relatively 
     uncontrolled 1990 rates for nitrogen oxide-emitting sources; 
     and
       Whereas, average ozone concentrations have decreased 
     significantly in both urban and rural areas over the past two 
     decades in response to state and federal emission control 
     programs; and
       Whereas, states are on track to be fully in attainment with 
     the current standards, but some have not yet reached full 
     attainment; and
       Whereas, instead of giving states enough time to meet the 
     current standards through ongoing emission reduction 
     programs, the EPA now wants to move the goalpost by imposing 
     a lower standard; and
       Whereas, retaining the current ozone standards would 
     provide for continued air quality improvement throughout the 
     nation as emission reduction programs under existing EPA 
     regulations are implemented.
       Wherefore your memorialist, the Senate of the State of 
     Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring, prays:
       1. That the EPA refrain from reducing the ozone 
     concentration standard from 75 parts per billion to 65 to 70 
     parts per billion.
       2. That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona 
     transmit copies of this Memorial to the Administrator of the 
     United States Environmental Protection Agency, the President 
     of the United States, the President of the United States 
     Senate. the Speaker of the United States House of 
     Representatives and each Member of Congress from the State of 
     Arizona.
                                  ____

       POM-61. A concurrent memorial adopted by the Legislature of 
     the State of Arizona urging the United States Fish and 
     Wildlife Service to focus future Mexican wolf introduction 
     efforts on remote areas within the northern Sierra Madre 
     Occidental mountain range, to halt additional introductions 
     of Mexican wolves in Arizona, and to shift the responsibility 
     for the Mexican wolf introduction to the Arizona Game and 
     Fish Department; to the Committee on Environment and Public 
     Works.

                    Senate Concurrent Memorial 1003

       Whereas, on January 16, 2015, United States Fish and 
     Wildlife Service (USFWS) issued a revised experimental 
     population rule under section 10(j) of the Endangered Species 
     Act (ESA) that provides for a population objective of 300 to 
     325 wolves in Arizona and New Mexico and expands the areas 
     within which Mexican wolves can occupy and disperse with the 
     goal of phasing the releases westward over a period of twelve 
     years; and
       Whereas, the revised experimental population rule raises 
     concerns regarding the creation of an unmanageable Mexican 
     wolf population, fails to consider state and local interests 
     and remains silent on Mexican wolf recovery; and
       Whereas, Congress enacted section 10(j) of the ESA to 
     mitigate fears that reestablishing populations of endangered 
     species

[[Page 12348]]

     would negatively impact landowners and other private parties, 
     recognizing that flexible rules, developed in consultation 
     with local governments and private citizens, could encourage 
     recovery partners to actively assist in the establishment and 
     hosting of endangered populations on their lands; and
       Whereas, to the maximum extent practicable, section 10(j) 
     rules are intended to represent an agreement between the 
     USFWS, affected state and federal agencies and persons 
     holding any interest in land that may be affected by the 
     establishment of an experimental population; and
       Whereas, the objective of 1982 Mexican Wolf Recovery Plan 
     is the establishment of a viable, self-sustaining population 
     of at least 100 Mexican wolves in the wild; and
       Whereas, at the end of 2014, there were a minimum of 109 
     wolves in the wild in Arizona and New Mexico, all of which 
     were conceived and born in the wild as a direct result of 
     previous wolf introduction efforts; and
       Whereas, the costs to date of this program have exceeded 
     $7.3 million; and
       Whereas, the implementation of the revised experimental 
     population rule will allow additional wolves to be introduced 
     within Arizona and New Mexico; and
       Whereas, the introduction of wolves into Arizona and New 
     Mexico has resulted in significant adverse impacts on private 
     landowners and resource users, as well as hunting and other 
     recreational activities, which are vital to our local and 
     regional economy; and
       Whereas, under its regulations, the USFWS must consult with 
     appropriate state fish and wildlife agencies, local 
     governmental entities, affected federal agencies and affected 
     private landowners in developing and implementing 
     experimental population rules; and
       Whereas, in developing its experimental population rules 
     for the Mexican wolf, the USFWS has failed to meaningfully 
     consult with local governmental entities, whose citizens will 
     be adversely affected by the introduction of wolves, and with 
     private land and resource users who will be adversely 
     impacted by the introduction of wolves; and
       Whereas, the adopted experimental population rule for the 
     Mexican wolf will create even greater conflicts with private 
     landowners and resource users; and
       Whereas, the Arizona Game and Fish Department provided the 
     USFWS and the United States Department of the Interior with a 
     notice of intent to bring a civil action pursuant to section 
     11(g)(1)(C) of the ESA for the Secretary of the Interior's 
     failure to develop a recovery plan for the Mexican gray wolf 
     that meets the legal requirements in section 4(f) of the ESA; 
     and
       Whereas, the federal government has failed to take into 
     consideration the customs, cultures, historic heritage and 
     local and state economic well-being of areas that have been 
     identified as habitats for this species; and
       Whereas, the Secretary of the Interior has a 
     nondiscretionary duty under section 4(f) to develop a 
     recovery plan that incorporates ``objective. measurable 
     criteria which when met, would result in a determination, in 
     accordance with the provisions of this section, that the 
     species be removed from the list.''
       Wherefore your memorialist, the Senate of the State of 
     Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring, prays:
       1. That the USFWS focus future Mexican wolf introduction 
     efforts on remote areas within the northern Sierra Madre 
     Occidental mountain range, which contains substantial habitat 
     suitable for Mexican wolves and, in many places, is largely 
     uninhabited.
       2. That the USFWS halt additional introductions of Mexican 
     wolves in Arizona.
       3. That the USFWS shift the primary responsibility for the 
     administration of the Mexican wolf introduction program in 
     Arizona to the Arizona Game and Fish Department.
       4. That the Secretary of the Interior comply with the 
     Secretary of the Interior's duty under section 4(f) of the 
     ESA to develop a recovery plan that incorporates ``objective, 
     measureable criteria which when met, would result in a 
     determination, in accordance with the provisions of this 
     section, that the species be removed from the list.''
       5. That the Governor and the Attorney General of the State 
     of Arizona take appropriate actions to uphold this state's 
     responsibilities with respect to the recovery plan and defend 
     this state against overreaching federal regulations.
       6. That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona 
     transmit copies of this Memorial to the Director of the 
     United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Secretary of the 
     United States Department of the Interior, the Attorney 
     General of the State of Arizona, the Governor of the State of 
     Arizona, the President of the United States, the President of 
     the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States 
     House of Representatives and each Member of Congress from the 
     State of Arizona.
                                  ____

       POM-62. A concurrent resolution adopted by the Legislature 
     of the State of Arizona commending the nation of Israel for 
     its cordial and mutually beneficial relationship with the 
     United States and with the State of Arizona; to the Committee 
     on Foreign Relations.

                   Senate Concurrent Resolution 1019

       Whereas, Israel has been granted her land under and through 
     the oldest recorded deed, as recorded in the Old Testament, 
     scripture that is held sacred and revered by Jews and 
     Christians alike, the acts and words of God; and
       Whereas, the claim and presence of the Jewish people in 
     Israel has remained constant throughout the past 4,000 years 
     of history; and
       Whereas, the legal basis for the establishment of the 
     modern State of Israel was a binding act of international law 
     established in the San Remo Resolution, which was unanimously 
     adopted by the League of Nations in 1922 and subsequently 
     affirmed by both houses of the United States Congress; and
       Whereas, this resolution affirmed the establishment of a 
     national home for the Jewish people in the historical region 
     of the Land of Israel, including the areas of Judea, Samaria 
     and Jerusalem; and
       Whereas, Article 80 of the United Nations Charter 
     recognized the continued validity of the rights granted to 
     states or peoples that already existed under international 
     instruments, and, therefore, the 1922 League of Nations 
     resolution remains valid and the 650,000 Jews currently 
     residing in the areas of Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem 
     reside there legitimately; and
       Whereas, Israel declared its independence and self-
     governance on May 14, 1948, with the goal of reestablishing 
     its God-given and legally recognized land as a homeland for 
     the Jewish people; and
       Whereas, the United States, as the first country to 
     recognize Israel as an independent nation and as Israel's 
     principal ally, has enjoyed a close and mutually beneficial 
     relationship with Israel and her people; and
       Whereas, Israel is the greatest friend and ally of the 
     United States in the Middle East, and the values of our two 
     nations are so intertwined that it is impossible to separate 
     one from the other; and
       Whereas, there are those in the Middle East who have 
     continually sought to destroy Israel from the time of its 
     inception as a state, and those same enemies of Israel also 
     hate and seek to destroy the United States; and
       Whereas, the State of Arizona and Israel have enjoyed 
     cordial and mutually beneficial relations since 1948, a 
     friendship that continues to strengthen with each passing 
     year; and
       Whereas, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke 
     before a joint session of Congress on March 3, 2015 and urged 
     the United States to stand with Israel to ``stop Iran's march 
     of conquest, subjugation and terror'' and warned the United 
     States that an emerging nuclear agreement with Iran ``paves 
     Iran's path to the bomb'': Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate of the State of Arizona, the House 
     of Representatives concurring:
       1. That the Members of the Legislature commend Israel for 
     its cordial and mutually beneficial relationship with the 
     United States and with the State of Arizona and support 
     Israel as a Jewish state in its legal, historical, moral and 
     God-given right of self-governance and self-defense on the 
     entirety of its own lands, recognizing that Israel is not an 
     occupier of the lands of others and that peace can be 
     afforded in the region only through a whole and united 
     Israel.
       2. That the Secretary of State transmit copies of this 
     Resolution to the President of the United States, each member 
     of Congress from the State of Arizona and the Governor of the 
     State of Arizona.
                                  ____

       POM-63. A resolution adopted by the Senate of the State of 
     Georgia encouraging the representation of diverse populations 
     of different racial and ethnic backgrounds in clinical 
     research and the dedication of additional community resources 
     to increase awareness on the importance of participating in 
     clinical trials, to provide support for patient 
     participation, and to promote effective partnerships with the 
     community to achieve solutions; to the Committee on Health, 
     Education, Labor, and Pensions.

                         Senate Resolution 590

       Whereas, developing new medicines and other treatment 
     options is a complex process that involves clinical trials to 
     explore whether a medical strategy, treatment, or device is 
     safe and effective for humans; and
       Whereas, volunteer participation is necessary to evaluate 
     potential therapies for safety and effectiveness in clinical 
     studies; and
       Whereas, often the enrolled patient population is not 
     representative of United States demographics or 
     subpopulations impacted by the particular disease; and
       Whereas, groups such as African Americans and Hispanics are 
     significantly underrepresented in clinical trials; according 
     to the Food and Drug Administration, African Americans 
     represent 12 percent of the United States population but only 
     5 percent of clinical trial participants, and Hispanics 
     comprise 16 percent of the population but only 1 percent of 
     clinical trial participants; and
       Whereas, despite a congressional mandate that research 
     financed by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) include 
     minorities, non-whites comprise fewer than 5 percent of 
     participants in NIH-supported studies; and

[[Page 12349]]

       Whereas, certain medical conditions have been known to 
     affect particular demographic groups more than others, 
     including Type 2 diabetes for which African Americans and 
     Hispanics are twice as likely to be diagnosed on average; and
       Whereas, according to the Centers for Disease Control and 
     Prevention, sickle cell trait is common among African 
     Americans and occurs in about one in 12, and sickle cell 
     disease occurs in about one out of every 500 African American 
     births, compared to about one out of every 36,000 Hispanic 
     American births; and
       Whereas, race and ethnicity have also been demonstrated to 
     affect the efficacy of and response to certain drugs, such as 
     antihypertensive therapies in the treatment of hypertension 
     in African Americans and antidepressants in Hispanics; and
       Whereas, many barriers exist that account for the low rate 
     of participation among diverse communities, including patient 
     fear of experimentation and lack of understanding or 
     education with regard to the importance of clinical trials in 
     creating new treatments and cures: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate, That the members of this body 
     encourage the representation of diverse populations of 
     different racial and ethnic backgrounds in clinical research 
     and the dedication of additional community resources to 
     increase awareness on the importance of participating in 
     clinical trials, to provide support for patient 
     participation, and to promote effective partnerships with the 
     community to achieve solutions; and be it further
       Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate is authorized 
     and directed to make appropriate copies of this resolution 
     available for distribution to the President of the United 
     States, the Vice President of the United States, the Georgia 
     delegation to the United States Congress, and other federal 
     and state government officials as appropriate.
                                  ____

       POM-64. A concurrent resolution adopted by the Legislature 
     of the State of Iowa urging the United states Congress to 
     repeal the Act of June 30, 1948, Public Law Number 846, 62 
     Statute 1161, which conferred on the State of Iowa 
     jurisdiction over offenses committed by or against Indians on 
     the Meskwaki Settlement and to take whatever steps are 
     necessary to achieve such a repeal; to the Committee on 
     Indian Affairs.

                     Senate Concurrent Resolution 5

       Whereas, the Sac and Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa 
     (the Meskwaki) is a federally recognized tribe organized in 
     accordance with Section 16 of the federal Indian 
     Reorganization Act of June 18, 1934, 48 Stat. 984, as amended 
     by the federal Act of June 15, 1935, 49 Stat. 378, under a 
     Constitution and Bylaws approved by the Secretary of the 
     Interior on December 20, 1937; and
       Whereas, in 1857, the Meskwaki purchased 80 acres in Tama 
     County which was held in trust by the State of Iowa as 
     permitted by then Governor James Grimes and for the next 30 
     years the Meskwaki governed themselves virtually free from 
     interference from both the federal and state governments; and
       Whereas, the jurisdictional status of the Meskwaki during 
     this period of time was unclear as the tribe was recognized 
     by the federal government but also had a continuing 
     relationship with the State of Iowa due to the Meskwaki's 
     private ownership of land which was held in trust by the 
     Governor of the State of Iowa; and
       Whereas, in 1895, in order to clear up any ambiguities, the 
     State of Iowa ceded to the federal government all 
     jurisdiction over the Meskwaki with the stipulation that 
     nothing in the transfer of the tribal lands would prevent the 
     State of Iowa from exercising jurisdiction over crimes 
     against the laws of Iowa committed either by Indians or 
     others on the Meskwaki Settlement; and
       Whereas, during what is now known as the Indian Termination 
     Era, the United States government tried to end its 
     trusteeship over Indian reservations throughout the country 
     and in part passed the federal Act of June 30, 1948, which 
     conferred jurisdiction over criminal offenses committed on 
     the Meskwaki Settlement to the State of Iowa; and
       Whereas, the federal Act of June 30, 1948, was passed at a 
     time when there was a perception that there was lawlessness 
     on the Meskwaki Settlement and an absence of adequate tribal 
     institutions for law enforcement; and
       Whereas the passage of the federal Act of June 30, 1948, 
     provided no federal funding to the State of Iowa to assume 
     this responsibility which has amounted to an unfunded federal 
     mandate and the resulting cost over the years has been 
     unfairly borne by the taxpayers of Tama County; and
       Whereas, in the past 67 years much has changed at the 
     federal, state, and tribal levels in the area of criminal law 
     enforcement and in the development of laws in general on the 
     Meskwaki Settlement; and
       Whereas, the federal Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010, Pub. 
     L. No. 111-211, authorized Indian tribes to expand the 
     prosecution and punishment of criminal offenders if certain 
     due process requirements were followed; and
       Whereas, Indian tribes have recently achieved more 
     authority to prosecute criminal offenses committed on tribal 
     lands as evidenced by the enactment of the federal Violence 
     Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013, Pub. L. No. 113-4, 
     which for the first time allowed tribal enforcement over non-
     natives who commit domestic violence on tribal lands; and
       Whereas, the State of Iowa was the first in the nation to 
     pass Native American grave protection legislation, commonly 
     known as the Iowa Graves Protection Act, 1976 Iowa Acts, ch. 
     1158, Sec. 7, that came into law before the federal version 
     and before the more recent passage of Iowa's Recognition and 
     Enforcement of Tribal Civil Judgments Act, 2007 Iowa Acts, 
     ch. 192, which followed the development of the Meskwaki 
     Tribal Court System in 2005, with its first case being tried 
     in 2006, and 2003 state legislation, 2003 Iowa Acts, ch. 87, 
     recognizing the Meskwaki Tribal Police and allowing them to 
     participate in the Iowa Law Enforcement Academy and to become 
     state certified; and
       Whereas, the Meskwaki has greatly enhanced at its own 
     expense the tribe's criminal justice system and now provides 
     a fully functioning court system through the establishment of 
     a state certified police force, legally trained and licensed 
     public defenders, prosecutors and judges, and a full-time 
     probation officer, and provides for the publication of its 
     tribal laws; and
       Whereas, the Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault and the 
     Iowa Coalition against Domestic Violence have noted that the 
     victims of domestic violence on the Meskwaki Settlement 
     prefer that prosecution and other court services be handled 
     by the tribal court of the Meskwaki Settlement: Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate, the House of Representatives 
     concurring, That the Iowa General Assembly urges the members 
     of the United States Senate and the United States House of 
     Representatives to repeal the Act of June 30, 1948, Pub. L. 
     No. 846, 62 Stat. 1161, which conferred on the State of Iowa 
     jurisdiction over offenses committed by or against Indians on 
     the Meskwaki Settlement and to take whatever steps are 
     necessary to achieve such a repeal; and be it further
       Resolved, That upon passage of this resolution, the 
     Secretary of the Senate shall transmit copies of this 
     resolution to the President of the United States Senate, the 
     Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and 
     the members of Iowa's congressional delegation.
                                  ____

       POM-65. A concurrent memorial adopted by the Legislature of 
     the State of Arizona urging the United States Congress to 
     enact legislation similar to the Mohave County Radiation 
     Compensation Act of 2013; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

                     House Concurrent Memorial 2004

       Whereas, the United States conducted nearly 200 atmospheric 
     nuclear weapons development tests from 1945 to 1962; and
       Whereas, essential to the nation's nuclear weapons 
     development was uranium mining and processing, which was 
     carried out by tens of thousands of workers; and
       Whereas, following cessation of the tests in 1962, many of 
     these workers filed class action lawsuits alleging exposure 
     to known radiation hazards; and
       Whereas, these suits were dismissed by the appellate 
     courts, but the United States Congress responded with the 
     Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA), which devised a 
     program allowing partial restitution to individuals who 
     developed serious illnesses after exposure to radiation 
     released during the atmospheric nuclear tests or after 
     employment in the uranium industry; and
       Whereas, RECA presents an apology and monetary compensation 
     to individuals who contracted certain cancers and other 
     serious diseases following exposure to radiation released 
     during the atmospheric nuclear weapons tests or following 
     occupational exposure to radiation while employed in the 
     uranium industry during the Cold War arsenal buildup; and
       Whereas, RECA was designed to serve as an expeditious, low-
     cost alternative to litigation; and
       Whereas, Mohave County was not included as an affected area 
     for purposes of making claims under RECA based on exposure to 
     atmospheric nuclear testing; and
       Whereas, in 2013, United States Representative Paul Gosar 
     introduced H.R. 424, known as the Mohave County Radiation 
     Compensation Act of 2013, which sought to include Mohave 
     County as an affected area for purposes of making claims 
     under RECA; and
       Whereas, H.R. 424 was not enacted.
       Wherefore your memorialist, the House of Representatives of 
     the State of Arizona, the Senate concurring, prays:
       1. That the Members of the United States Congress enact 
     legislation similar to United States Representative Paul 
     Gosar's Mohave County Radiation Compensation Act of 2013 that 
     adds Mohave County as an affected area for purposes of making 
     claims under RECA.
       2. That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona 
     transmit copies of this Memorial to the President of the 
     United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House 
     of Representatives and each Member of Congress from the State 
     of Arizona.
                                  ____

       POM-66. A concurrent memorial adopted by the Legislature of 
     the State of Arizona urging the Congress of the United States 
     and

[[Page 12350]]

     Department of Veterans Affairs to review the disability 
     rating process; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

                    Senate Concurrent Memorial 1008

       Whereas, military veterans with similar disabilities are 
     receiving disparate disability ratings because of different 
     standards, policies and procedures used by the physical 
     evaluation boards operated by the military departments; and
       Whereas, achieving consistent disability ratings regardless 
     of service is an important objective that will ensure service 
     members are treated equitably; and
       Whereas, disability significantly increases the veteran 
     poverty rate; the rate of increase is nearly twice that of 
     the nonveteran disabled population; and
       Whereas, even those veterans who receive Social Security 
     Disability or Supplemental Security Income benefits have 
     incomes under $9,000 per year; and
       Whereas, 60% of hiring organizations polled in a June 2010 
     Society for Human Resource Management survey said that 
     translating military skills to a civilian job experience 
     could pose a challenge in hiring veterans and 46% said the 
     same about hiring those who suffer from post-traumatic stress 
     disorder and other mental health issues; and
       Whereas, while service members are often promised saleable 
     skills and job opportunities they would not have access to 
     otherwise, the reality is that veterans often feel 
     discriminated against and overlooked in the workplace; and
       Whereas, veterans who are granted a Total Disability Rating 
     Based on Individual Unemployability are subject to earning 
     restrictions.
       Wherefore your memorialist, the Senate of the State of 
     Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring, prays:
       1. That the United States Department of Veterans Affairs 
     review the disability rating process to ensure that similar 
     disabilities are rated similarly.
       2. That the United States Department of Veterans Affairs 
     review the limitations on employment of veterans with 
     disabilities and the ways in which veteran benefits are 
     impacted if a veteran with a disability becomes employed to 
     ensure that veterans with disabilities are not hindered from 
     joining the workforce.
       3. That the United States Department of Veterans Affairs 
     remove the earning restriction associated with the Total 
     Disability Rating Based on Individual Unemployability.
       4. That the United States Department of Veterans Affairs 
     develop programs and incentives to encourage employers to 
     hire veterans with disabilities.
       5. That the United States Congress enact legislation that 
     codifies into the United States Code the text of 38 Code of 
     Federal Regulations section 4.16, which provides that 
     employment in a protected environment is not considered 
     substantially gainful employment for the purposes of a Total 
     Disability Rating Based on Individual Unemployability.
       6. That the United States Congress define ``protected 
     environment'' to include businesses that make special 
     accommodations for veterans with disabilities.
       7. That the United States Congress enact legislation that 
     prevents the United States Department of Veterans Affairs 
     from decreasing a Total Disability Rating Based on Individual 
     Unemployability if the veteran is marginally employed in a 
     protected environment.
       8. That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona 
     transmit a copy of this Memorial to the Secretary of the 
     United States Department of Veterans Affairs, the President 
     of the United States, the President of the United States 
     Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of 
     Representatives and each Member of Congress from the State of 
     Arizona.
                                  ____

       POM-67. A joint resolution adopted by the Legislature of 
     the State of Maine memorializing the Congress of the United 
     States to pass necessary legislation that will help all our 
     veterans, from all our wars and conflicts, from World War II 
     to present-day Iraq and Afghanistan to the extent necessary; 
     to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

                       Joint Resolution S.P. 474

       We your Memorialists, the Members of the One Hundred and 
     Twenty-seventh Legislature of the State of Maine now 
     assembled in the First Regular Session, most respectfully 
     present and petition the United States Congress as follows:
       Whereas, military personnel from the State of Maine have 
     answered the call to serve our Nation many times and Maine is 
     estimated to be 3rd in the Nation per capita for military 
     service. According to Veterans Administration records, Maine 
     has had 11,531 military members serve since the tragic events 
     of 9/11; and
       Whereas, members of the Maine National Guard and Reservists 
     have been deployed many times over and many have returned 
     from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan needing assistance and 
     medical care; and
       Whereas, 55 of Maine's services members have been killed in 
     action in Iraq and Afghanistan; and
       Whereas, more than 320 have received the Purple Heart for 
     wounds received in combat; and
       Whereas, many have returned home with post-traumatic stress 
     disorder, traumatic brain injury, hearing problems and other 
     physical and mental disabilities; and
       Whereas, many communities in Maine need someone who can 
     meet with veterans and survivors to explain benefits and to 
     get the word out to veterans and their families concerning 
     frequently changing Veterans Administration benefits and 
     eligibility; and
       Whereas, major issues for returning veterans concerning 
     increasing suicide rates, homelessness, unemployment and 
     education were brought before the 113th Congress with little 
     or no substantive results; and
       Whereas, as the 114th Congress begins, veterans and their 
     families in Maine and across the Nation hope that the new 
     Congress will be responsive and helpful and aggressively 
     address the many issues facing the veterans of the wars in 
     Iraq and Afghanistan; and
       Whereas, the men and women who serve our State and Nation 
     so faithfully deserve to have access to care, housing, 
     medical treatment and mental and physical therapy: Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved, That We, your Memorialists, on behalf of the 
     people we represent, take this opportunity to urge the United 
     States Congress to take the lead in passing necessary 
     legislation that will help all our veterans, from all our 
     wars and conflicts, from World War II to present-day Iraq and 
     Afghanistan to the extent necessary; and be it further
       Resolved, That suitable copies of this resolution, duly 
     authenticated by the Secretary of State, be transmitted to 
     the President of the United States Senate, to the Speaker of 
     the United States House of Representatives and to each Member 
     of the Maine Congressional Delegation.
                                  ____

       POM-68. A resolution adopted by the California State Lands 
     Commission supporting S.414, the California Desert 
     Conservation and Recreation Act of 2015; to the Committee on 
     Energy and Natural Resources.
       POM-69. A concurrent resolution adopted by the Legislature 
     of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico expressing firm support to 
     the decision of the President of the United States to restore 
     diplomatic relations between the government of the United 
     States and the government of the Republic of Cuba; to the 
     Committee on Foreign Relations.

                          ____________________