FY 2027 Interior-Environment and Transportation-HUD Bills

call this meeting the appropriations committee to order i wanna welcome uh everybody to today's mark up the plan for today is to cover the interior environment and related agencies bill followed by the transportation housing and urban development and related agencies bill tomorrow of course the full house will consider the agriculture appropriations bill on the floor that means we need to complete our work on these two measures today so it will be the intention of the chair just to keep working through until these are done so that we don't have a conflict between markups in here and uh debating one of our measures on the floor uh i will tell you guys i'm i'm generous uh and will continue to be with the gavel and the time but miss Watson Coleman told me you be strict on that clock i want outta here to decent hour so uh i will balance my time with the request of our friend and distinguished member who's now of course in our last uh year on this committee but uh uh again we'll we'll move through as expeditiously as we can uh our first order of business today is consideration of the interior environment and related agency appropriations bill for fiscal year twenty twenty seven i now recognize chairman simpson to present the bill

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm pleased to be here today to mark up the fiscal year twenty twenty-seven Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriation Bill. I'd like to thank Chairman Cole for his leadership and support of this subcommittee. I also want to recognize and thank Ranking Member Deloro for her continued engagement throughout this process. And Ranking Member Pingree who has been a great partner and continues to demonstrate her commitment to the issues in this bill. And I should tell all of you, I wish everybody was here. But I should tell you, uh, Miss Pingree and I talked about trying to create a bipartisan bill. We were never able to get to what Wasserman, Schultz and uh Judge Carter came to, but we tried, we talked about it and in spite of that we decided the best alternative then was to have a bipartisan lunch. So today, lunch is gonna be provided the best of Maine and the best of Idaho. It will be Idaho French fries with Fri- fry sauce and it will be lobster rolls from Maine and i just found out handmade blueberry pies uh miss pingree spent all weekend making those and so it will be a bipartisan lunch and maybe by the end of that we will have a bipartisan vote on this bill who knows anyway

wanna bet

uh well yeah uh with ranking member pingree's uh uh support the subcommittee held nine hearings on this great round table uh on this great uh uh bill uh mister heuer is not here i'm actually saying this for him cause he always brings up that we're not having any hearings in march the subcommittee hosted the annual member day hearing the subcommittee hosted two full days that's four sessions of tribal witness days where we heard from seventy seven tribal members and representatives in april the subcommittee held a round table preserving birds of prey uh and we had an incredibly informative discussion with the Peregrine Fund, followed by a demonstration in this room of some amazing birds. If you didn't make it, oh there's Mister Hoyer. If you didn't make it to that hearing next year, maybe we'll do it again. But we did hold hearings. We also had hearings with uh Chief of the Forest Service, Tom Schultz. Secretary Doug Brueggemann of the uh Department of Interior, Administrator Lee Zeldin from the Environmental Protection Agency, and Clayton Fulton from Indian Health Services. So we have been holding hearings all the way along and I just wanted to These hearings informed the important work of this subcommittee and truly helped shape our appropriations bill. The FY twenty twenty seven interior bill reflects our commitment to our nation's natural resources unleashing American energy dominance and upholding our trust and treaty responsibilities to the tribe. The bill totals thirty eight point nine billion billion dollars. This bill prioritizes investments in Indian country. I have consistently said and will say it again that we refuse to balance the budget on the backs of tribes, or try to balance the budget on the backs of tribes, and this commitment continues with the funding decisions made in this bill. The bill provides one point five five billion to the Bureau of Indian Education, an increase of one hundred and eighty-one point six million above the enacted level, and eight point seven billion for Indian health services, six hundred and thirty-nine point eight million uh increase over enacted. The bill also continues to advocate appropriations for Indian health services, providing six point one billion for advanced appropriations available in fiscal year twenty twenty eight. For the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the bill provides a total of three point two billion, an increase of seven hundred and twenty one million above the enacted level, including seven hundred and seventy four million for public safety and justice programs to support law enforcement in Indian country, a two hundred and four million dollar increase over the enacted level. This includes thirty three million for the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women Initiative, an effort that continues to be very important to me and the members of our subcommittee, and I hope everyone. This bill also fully funds all must-pay costs for the tribes that include contract support costs and section one O five L leases for the states. That's the payment in lieu of taxes program, which provides payments to nearly every state. I think forty-nine out of fifty states receive some payment in lieu of taxes, uh, in this country, uh, for tax exempt federal lands. All of these must-pays came in a much come at a much higher cost for the twenty-seven compared to the twenty-seven twenty-six uh enacted bills. The bill also prioritizes funding for domestic energy production by providing uh the requested increased oil and gas within the Bureau of Land Management and Energy Resources within the US Geological Survey, and by increasing funding for offshore oil and gas development. This funding supports the President's strategy of unleashing America's vast and reduce energy costs for American families. The bill also includes a common sense measure to protect taxpayer dollars and provide parity across all all offshore energy producers. The Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement is required by law to conduct safety inspections for all offshore energy facilities. Right now, the oil and gas industry is required to pay fees for these safety inspections on their rigs. Bessie, as it is known, is also required to inspect the offshore wind facilities, but they are not currently conducting these inspects- but they are currently conducting these inspections for free. This bill includes new language, right below the oil and gas fees, to also charge fees for wind inspections. These fees were proposed in the budget request uh based on estimates of the equipment needed to conduct the inspections. Uh with this provision, no energy source is getting a free ride. This bill also supports streamlining uh firefighting activities, while the bill does not move wildfire fighting activities and funding from the Forest Service. The bill does support the unification of fire throughout the Department of Interior, implementing the Administration's proposal to establish a wild- a US wildland fire service. So we unify all of those fire agencies that are currently within the Department of Interior, that being, the BLM, uh, the BIA, uh, Parks and, uh, uh, the National Parks and Fish and Wildlife Service. We unified them and they are currently within the Department of Interior, but we do not transfer the wildfire fighting from the Forest Service over to the Department of Interior. The bill continues to su- continues support for federal wildland firefighters and provides additional funding for, uh, firefighter pay, helping to improve recruitment and retention. and giving financial certainty to men and women protecting our communities from catastrophic wildfires. Giving these priorities, the bill makes physically responsible reductions to most other appropriations. The EPA is cut by nearly one point eight billion dollars or twenty percent below the enacted level. Even after the enacted level reduced EPA funding by more than three hundred million dollars. As you know, the community project funding in this bill is within EPA. The bill provides funding for almost one thousand two hundred clean and drinking water, infrastructure projects for three hundred and sixteen members, an increase of almost three hundred projects compared to the FY twenty-six house bill. While requests greatly exceeded the funding available for projects, we did our best to provide some funding for all eligible projects, given the impact these dollars will have in communities across the country. Even with funding for CPFs, the bill also continues to protect and provide funding for grants that go directly to states and tribes for water infrastructure projects, and to help fulfill their delegated authority under federal law, like the Clean Drinking Water Act, the Clean Air Act, and the Clean Water Act. This bill provides more funding to states through the SRF's than our FY twenty-six bill did last year. As I mentioned, in order to uphold our commitments to the tribes, to support our f- our federal wildland firefighters and to promote domestic energy production, cuts had to be made, although agencies In title three, Saw Cuts, the bill supports the President's request for the Smithsonian Institution, the National Gallery of Art, the Kennedy Center, the Commission of Fine Arts, and the Holocaust Memorial Museum. While cuts were made to the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities, the bill protects them from elimination and directs funding to the state partnerships that support programs in every congressional district. While some tough decisions had to be made, this bill effectively balances competing priorities while focusing spending where it is needed most. I look forward to working with Ranking Member Pingree and the other members to move the interior bill toward enactment and I'd like to extend my thanks to the members and staff on both sides of the committee which this bill would not get done without their hard work uh and to all of you for the contributions you've made to this uh this bill and the recommendations you've made uh not just the committee staff but all of all of the offices uh in our conference and in Congress. Lastly, I wanna take a moment to thank two guys that aren't here. Representative uh Congressman Amaday uh and Congressman Zinke. This is their last interior mark-up for both of these great subcommittee members. Uh, apparently it was they've got something else going on, I don't know. They have both been leaders on many important issues and assets to this subcommittee. We will truly miss Mister Amaday and Mister Zinke, and we wish them the best of luck in the next chapter of their lives. And I yield back.

I thank the gentlemen, maybe they just knew you were speaking, I don't care. I'd now like to uh recognize my good friend the ranking mem ranking member Pingree for remarks on the bill.

Um thank you Mister Chair for yielding.

Thank you.

Uh first I wanna thank Chairman Cole and Ranking Member DeLauro, and I wanna give a big shout out to the staff on both sides of the aisle who do an incredible job and are wonderful to work with and in particular those that we work with on the Rita Ko, Tyler Ko, and uh the woman who retired from our committee this year, Jocelyn Hunn. Chairman Simpson, I really appreciate our working relationship and that we were able to find common ground last year to enact a bipartisan full year funding bill. Let's hope after today's bipartisan lunch we can do the same. Unfortunately, the bill before us reverts back to the same partisan playbook we started with last year. with grossly inefficient funding and a surplus of poison pill riders. The bill cuts the EPA by twenty percent. This agency has already lost one fifth of its workforce since President Trump took office. The cuts in this bill would completely cripple EPA's ability to fight climate change, to respond to environmental disasters, and to hold polluters accountable. Meanwhile, the administration continues to roll back regulations that protect public health and the environment, including a recent an- announcement that will increase exposure to forever chemicals in drinking water. I am so disappointed that the bill further cuts funding to states for water infrastructure. This is the first year that the states won't have the additional funding provided by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and I believe that it is critical that we don't lose the momentum we built with those investments. I'm also very concerned by the cuts to the National Park Service facilities, operation and maintenance. This is the funding the Park Service uses to maintain and repair its infrastructure. The bill cuts the funding by one hundred and sixty-three million dollars, or seventeen percent. Meanwhile, in the Commerce Justice Science funding bill, the Republicans have provided up to one hundred and fifty-two million dollars to renovate Alcatraz into a functioning prison. I find this completely outrageous. I won't get into the many reasons why I think trying to open, reopen Alcatraz is a farce and a waste of money, but I have to say when I look at that funding and then I look at the bill before us, it's painfully obvious that the majority is prioritizing resurrecting a nineteenth century prison over today's underfunded and understaffed national parks. At the same time, the president is diverting significant resources towards pet projects that most Americans oppose his ridiculous one billion dollar gilded ballroom from which he took the toxic demolition to debris and dumped it on a National Park owned golf course and he's been approving no bid contracts to resurface the reflecting pool, and forging ahead on his so-called Garden of Heroes, the Garden of Heroes, all of which he literally handpicked, and his twenty foot s- his twenty story tall triumphal arch that the veterans groups have literally sued to block. The list goes on and on. How is the president paying for all of these vanity projects? While he might claim that it's all private fundraising, the real answer has seemed to be rating the national park entrance fees that typically go towards maintenance and stealing funding from the National Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities. And speaking of vanity projects, I would be remiss not to mention the absolute mess that the president has made of the Kennedy Center over the past eighteen months.

Mm.

I'm very pleased with the court's confirmation last Friday that it is plainly illegal for him to rename the center after himself and remake it in his own image. But we need real and committed oversight from this committee to protect this critical institution and the artist, workers, and audience that make it so special. So, the president and his administration have spent an inordinate amount of time trying to dictate exactly what it deems artistically and culturally worthy. And at the same time, it's trying to rob our communities of funding for our own local museums, historical societies, and arts education programs by cutting the NEA and NEH. I am vehemently opposed to this bill slashing each endowment by thirty-five percent, or seventy-two million dollars. The bill also cuts funding for cultural institutions, such as the National Gallery of Art and the Smithsonian Institution. Last year we came to an agreement and beat back these cuts, and we must do so again this year. While the administration is focused on building a gilded ballroom and a triumphal arch to appraise the president's ego Americans are facing soaring gas and energy prices. Yet this bill does nothing to rein in the administration's assault on energy projects that states like mine have been counting on. As the administration spends nearly two billion in taxpayer dollars to pay off companies for abandoning offshore wind projects, this bill piles on, adding additional fees for offshore wind companies and drastically cutting funding for renewable energy projects. Finally, I have to express my opposition to the dozens of poison pill riders included in the bill. These riders aim to cripple environmental protection, undermine climate change policies, and override the Endangered Species Act. As written, I cannot support the bill before us today, I oppose the bill, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it, and I yield back. Thank you, Mister Chair.

Thank you, General Lady, for her remarks. I now recognize myself for remarks on the bill. Uh, thank you Chairman Simpson, and thank you to Ranking Member Pengri, uh, Ranking Member DeLore. Again, always a pleasure to work with you and to all the members here. Today we continue our fiscal year twenty twenty-seven appropriations work, a consideration of the Interior and Environment Bill. This measure funds a wide range of agencies and programs, including the Department of the Interior, the US Forest Service and the Environmental Protection Agency. Yet the significance of this measure extends far beyond the departments and programs At its core, this bill is about stewardship. One where we effectively balance conservation, responsible resource development, and the long-term management of our public lands. From the recreation opportunities and strengthening wildfire response to supporting domestic energy and mineral production, we are investing in priorities that impact communities in every corner of the country. Chairman Simpson ensured that each provision and investment reinforces America's natural, cultural and environmental resources. Importantly, this bill also reflects our commitment to upholding our sacred trust and treaty oaths to protect native american communities. This is a national imperative, but also one of personal importance to me. I'm proud of the that the this legislation continues to make meaningful investments in Indian country, building on prior efforts. We continue to strengthen support for the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Indian Education, the bureau of trust funds administration and the indian health service these resources help ensure tribes have the tools and services needed to thrive for generations to come because delivering better outcomes for tribal communities strengthens our nation and supports long-term stability stewardship also means investing in the basic infrastructure that supports public health and the quality of life through district focused investments this bill helps communities modernize aging water systems improve access to clean and safe drinking water and address critical local needs at its best stewardship is about preparing for the future while meeting the challenges of today that's why this legislation takes a long uh takes a common sense approach uh to managing our nation's resources by protecting what should be preserved improving what must be strengthened and responsibly developing the resources that power our economy the bill reduces unnecessary regulatory burdens promotes domestic production and supports the mapping exploration and development needed to bolster american competitiveness and strengthen our national security and throughout it all the measure ensures that americans continue to have responsible access to the lands waters and natural resources that support communities recreation jobs and opportunity across the country chairman simpson has crafted a thoughtful and balanced bill i thank him ranking member pingree and the majority minority staff for their hard work in collaboration and i look forward to advancing this bill out out of the full committee with that i yield back i now recognize my good friend the ranking member delauro for opening remarks on the bill

thank you very much mr. chairman and to you and to chairman simpson and ranking member pingree um i wanna say a thank you to you and to the committee staff to rita culp and tyler coe in the minority maggie earl sarah perry andrea sparksibanga and lucy alfred of the majority uh many many thanks for all the hard work that goes into these bills i oppose the bill we are considering today it is a gift to corporate polluters who would poison our communities in pursuit of even greater profits it saddles cities towns and working families with higher utility bills and it allows president trump to continue rating public funds to pay for his own vanity projects. This bill cuts the EPA's budget by one point eight billion dollars or twenty percent. Keep that one point eight billion in mind. That was the size of the slush fund that was being proposed so the president could get money out to whomever. Um, uh, this is a twenty percent cut to the EPA's budget. It cuts the EPA's enforcement budget nearly in half. This will substantially erode the agency's ability to enforce the laws that help protect the air that we breathe the water we drink and the ground that grows our food last month the trump administration announced they were rolling back restrictions on quote " forever" chemicals uh in our drinking water harmful contaminants that we know can weaken our immune system lead to cancer kidney disease liver disease birth defects but the trump administration has decided that the commercial interest in continued pollution is more important than the public interest and clean drinking water. Administrator Zeldin has abandoned much of the EPA's responsibility. Uh, in my view, he has weakened restrictions on dangerous chemicals in our drinking water, on poisonous pesticides in our farming soil, on particulate matter in the very air that we breathe. The cuts proposed in this bill would make this dereliction of duty permanent, so that when a new administrator steps in, who may believe the job of the Environmental Protection Agency is to actually protect the environment, they will be unable to do so. There are also a number of policy writers in this bill which are designed to further chip away at the EPA's ability to enforce regulations under the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and other laws governing hazardous waste. A safe and clean environment is something that we should all expect. and the United States, it should not be a privilege that depends on your zip code. At a time when more and more families are struggling with rising utility costs, this bill slashes funding for water infrastructure by five hundred and seventy-six million dollars including an eighty-six million dollar cut to states for projects that support clean drinking water and sanitary waste water systems. Eliminating this support will saddle our communities with additional costs. This bill also continues the President's bizarre war on wind power by opposing additional fees on offshore wind projects disincentivizing the production of new energy sources generating more energy is key to bringing down costs and investing in clean energy is how we prepare for the future this administration is instead punishing clean energy companies that innovate while rewarding fossil fuel companies that pollute the bill slashes funding for the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities by seventy-two million dollars each, a thirty-five percent cut. It has been said that robust investment in the in the arts is a mark of an advanced society. The use of public funds for private ends, however, is a mark of a civilization in decline. In its current form, this bill allows the Trump administration to continue raiding public funds, intended to support the arts and humanities, to pay for a two hundred and fifty foot arch dedicated to himself. This funding is supposed to be for libraries and museums and historical sites to educate the public and enrich our culture. But President Trump wants to use it for a vanity project twice the height of the Lincoln Memorial. Last year, the Trump administration took fifteen million dollars from the National Endowment for the Humanities and earmarked it for the arch. If my Republican colleagues objected to the use of their funds, this bill was their chance to stop it. They chose not to. And that choice speaks volumes. At a time when the American people are struggling to make ends meet, this bill makes the problem worse. It does nothing to bring down costs while allowing billionaires and big corporations who have profited by polluting our communities to get even richer. Meanwhile, again, the air we breathe and the water we drink gets less and less safe. I encourage my colleagues to oppose this bill. We are all on this planet together, and we ought to take better care of it. I encourage my friends across the aisle to work with Democrats to craft a bipartisan bill that in fact protects the environment, keeps our community safe and healthy, and helps bring down costs for working families. Thank you and I yield back.

Thank you, General Leidy, for your comments. Uh. the uh gentleman from tucky chairman rogers is recognized for comments on the bill

thank you mister chairman and let me say thank you to chairman cole and simpson and ranking member uh de la roe and ranking member pengray all of your hard work on putting this bill together chairman simpson i know uh that this was a difficult bill to write, but I must compliment you on the protecting vital programs which many of our constituents rely on. I want to personally uh say thank you to all of you, especially Chairman Simpson, for continuing support of the abandoned mine lands economic revitalization program uh to uh that program at the department of the interior the provisions in this bill will continue to support uh the purpose of the program helping communities reeling from the decline of coal by putting former mined lands back into productive use those of us who represent coal country have long been searching for ways to help hardworking people in these communities who are looking for new opportunities. This program uh started in twenty sixteen helps achieve that goal and thanks to your leadership this committee has continued to make strong uh these reclaimed lands and drive long-term economic growth. The Amner Program has bipartisan support in the Congress and remains a strong example of a federal investment that makes a real difference in communities, especially those in my district in East Kentucky. I also wanna thank the Chairman for maintaining full funding of the payments in lieu of taxes program, so-called PILT program. Many counties in my district rely on this program to recover lost tax revenue from large amounts of federal lands. This funding helps ensure that they can continue supporting their schools, emergency services and many other crucial public services. This bill makes responsible cuts while continuing to further the minions of the departments and agencies under his jurisdiction. I urge support and uh you're back.

Thank you gentlemen for his remarks. The gentlelady from Ohio, Miss Captor, is recognized for remarks on the bill.

Good morning, Chairman Cole and Ranking Member Simpson, Ranking Member DeLauro and Pingree. I rise to highlight two key issues of uh importance to those i represent and to my own long-standing work in congress first honoring our greatest generation whom i believe to be the most unselfish generation and then to protect our great lakes the largest body of fresh water on our continent and on earth first the positives chairman simpson and ranking member pingree thank you for your steadfast leadership on this important bill i appreciate that this bill funds the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative administered by the Environmental Protection Agency at no less than the current FY twenty twenty-six level of three hundred and sixty-nine million dollars. And while this falls short of the modest increase requested by the Great Lakes delegation, and short of what is needed to meet real, on the ground and in the water, project demands, it remains a necessary commitment to safeguard the world's largest body of fresh water and its ecosystem. Literally, the Great Lakes sustain life for tens of millions of people on this continent, and are home to more than three thousand five hundred native plant species and animal species, including humans, and hold twenty percent of the world's fresh water. Twenty percent. Continued investments through the Department of Interior and EPA aim to control harmful algal blooms and destructive invasive species, particularly zebra and quagga mussels. And these species disrupt Lake Erie, Ontario, Huron, just look around, the food web, and deplete native populations. Invasives also create billions of dollars of damage to fresh water infrastructure in cities, and towns, and they threaten the livelihoods of our fishing, boating and shoreline communities. They're ugly little creatures actually. They damage craft and all kinds of shoreline facilities. That is why these bipartisan investments make both environmental and economic sense. Intelligent management of our natural resources protects our economy, our communities, and our future. Another essential part of this annual bill is stewardship of America's national heritage. So poignant this year especially, preserving and interpreting the cultural and historic resources that tell America's history. Nowhere is that mission more visible than at the World War Two memorial on our National Mall. I introduced the original legislation to authorize and construct that memorial at the suggestion of my late constituent, Army Tank Commander Roger Durbin. On behalf of him and all his fellow American veterans, which numbered sixteen million four hundred thousand Americans, and they were all heroes. They achieved the twentieth century's greatest gift to us, the preservation of liberty over tyranny. Liberty over tyranny. a challenge we still face today in many ways, globally. This past weekend marked twenty-two years since the memorial's dedication in two thousand four. Four presidents and six presidential terms later, the memorial is showing its age. Over one hundred million visitors have traveled to it to gain closure and also pay their respects to their families and friends. along our Mall of Democracy. It's sited between the Washington Monument, which obviously honors our founding, and the Lincoln Memorial, uh, as both the eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries present our national story. The National Park Service and Friends of the World War Two Memorial face real challenges maintaining the memorial, especially its fountains, given the Park Service's limited resources and a growing maintenance backlog. That is why the President's recent comments, drawing attention to the World War Two memorial, are actually welcome. But ideally, support for the Park Service should come through the regular budget and appropriations process. Only painting the bottom of the fountain blue fails to address the real subterranean plumbing and estimated several millions of dollars in repairs needed for the fountains, pools and required vault underneath due to the memorial's location like the Lincoln Memorial also, their location in a flood plain near the Potomac River. It's a complicated repair job, we know that. I look forward to working with this or any president and any member of this committee to ensure that memorial's repairs to honor the profound achievement in the twentieth century of liberty, over tyranny of our greatest generation. With America's two hundred and fiftieth anniversary approaching, we have a timely opportunity to refurbish one of the three most visited sites in the entire National Park Service. For that reason, I'm encouraged and grateful that Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Pingree included report language this year directing appropriate attention to the major maintenance needs of the World War Two Memorial and its adjoining sites they're interconnected. And while I remain concerned that this bill underfunds the broader National Park Service maintenance backlog this language is a step in the right direction. I just also wanted to say one feature we never got in the original memorial because it was disallowed and uh it had to go through all kinds of clearances. We were hoping that there would be a light that would extend from the World War Two memorial at a certain time of day when the uh image of the washington monument falls on the lincoln reflecting pool and we wanted some type of light feature to connect all three and it was denied, the one they had selected in those days um that it might interrupt airplane flight so i just wanted to put that uh on the table here maybe new invention will make something possible so uh we must work harder as i close to strike the right balance between environmental protection and economic growth we've led the world in doing both and we cannot allow that leadership to wane. Uh finally, on closing, until this bill level funds on the EPA and key interior agencies, including Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, and US Geological Survey, I cannot support at this juncture this bill, but I'll be voting no and urge my colleagues to do the same in hopes that we can improve it as it moves forward. Thank you and I yield back.

Thank you, General Lady. Don't make me choose between Bonnie Watson Coleman and you, cuz you're gonna lose. i'm more afraid of her than any of the rest of you with that uh the chair recognizes uh distinguished gentleman from south carolina mr. kleibern for remarks on the bill

thank you very much mr. chairman thank you ranking member de la roe chairman simpson simpson and ranking member pingree for all of your work on this bill mr. chairman i respectfully and regretfully oppose this bill as written because it cuts vital investments that will take resources away from rural economies and harm our ability to tell the full story of our nation's history. When I was first elected to this August body, the largest economies in my home state were textiles and tobacco. Today, they are transportation and tourism. heritage tourism in particular. Heritage tourism is an economic engine that lifts up rural communities, attracts investments, and helps people connect through learning authentic stories of our rich history and how we fit in the al- already great nation. When I came to Congress, South Carolina had no national parks. Today, we have three, the Congregate National Park, the Fort Sumter and Fort Moultrie National Historical Park, the Reconstruction Era National Historical Park. In twenty twenty four, visitor spending in communities near national parks resulted in a fifty five point six billion dollar benefit to the nation's economy and supported over four hundred thousand jobs that is according to the national park service last year the big ugly bill cut more than two hundred and sixty seven million dollars from the national parks service and bureau of land management that congress previously approved amid the trump administration's reckless staffing cuts around ninety units within the national park reported operational issues including canceled programming shortened hours and unkept restrooms i believe we can do better to maintain appropriate staffing levels for our parks and we should ensure the necessary funding is available for them to do so this is not to mention the national park service's estimated deferral maintenance backlog of nearly twenty four billion dollars which includes park units in need of repair that are entitled or critical to their ability to remain accessible and enjoyable. This administration has spent more than sixty seven million dollars in fees paid by park visitors for unauthorized and unwarranted vanity projects. As we approach the commemoration of our nation's two hundred and fiftyth birthday, I hope that all of our national parks can fully showcase the natural beauty of our country. This begins with ensuring that the National Park Service is both fully funded and staffed. As a former high school history teacher, it is equally important to me that our monuments, sites, and parks accurately reflect the full story of our nation's history. I frequently quote Alexis de Tocqueville's observation that the greatness of America is not that in being more enlightened than any other nation, but rather in her ability to repair her faults. With this, the nearly seventeen million dollar difference between funds enacted in S five twenty-six and this year's request for the historic preservation fund is of concern to me. The Gullah Geecher National Heritage Corridor in particular, which runs from Wilmington, North Carolina down to uh St. Augustine, Florida. The point of preserving history is to learn from it so we don't have to repeat it. Our historic monuments, sites, and parks are America's classrooms and our economic drivers in rural communities and our responsibility for their stewardship extends beyond this anniversary. I love history, and all of us should respect it. We should study it, learn from it, and conduct ourselves accordingly. I know we can do better than this, and I urge my colleagues to vote no on the current elaboration of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time. And I thank Bono Watson Coleman. uh with respect

i thank the gentleman for his remarks gentleman from georgia mister bishop is recognized for remarks on the bill

thank you mister chairman chairman cole i wanna thank also chairman simpson ranking member delano and ranking member pingree and the staffs uh for the extraordinarily hard work that's been put into the fiscal year twenty twenty seven and two year environment and related agencies appropriations act regretfully however i will have to oppose this bill while i'm grateful that it reverses many of the draconian cuts that president trump had originally proposed in his fy twenty seven budget it nonetheless short changes many important initiatives that would help to reduce energy costs preserve the environment protect clean air and water and boast americans involvement with the arts by restricting renewable energy development cutting climate programs and imposing a fee on offshore wind projects many americans who can least afford it will face higher energy bills At the same time, these policies weaken our nation's position in the global marketplace for innovative energy technologies. I'm especially troubled by the seven hundred and thirteen million dollars, or sixteen percent, cut in the EPA's State and Tribal Assistance Grants, which helps states, localities, and tribal governments to pay for their environmental agencies and proj projects. As noted earlier, this is the first year that states will not have additional funding provided by the infrastructure investment and jobs act thankfully the house bill rejected president trump's plan to nearly eliminate the program i may not be the biggest fan of everything that epa does but i don't see how slashing funds that specifically target underserved small and disadvantaged communities to build safe drinking water and waste disposal systems will benefit anyone. I think everyone here understands that when you keep pushing back infrastructure repairs the damage gets worse and a simple fix turns into an expensive headache. It's incredibly short-sighted to do this. I'm also disappointed that the bill makes little investment in the National Park Service's budget. Since twenty twenty five our parks have been burdened by staff cuts, hiring barriers reduced hours at visitor centers and even a tax on how history and science is interpreted. National parks are the lifeblood of many of our rural communities. Uh, they showcase some of the most beautiful terrain in our country. If we want to encourage our children to get outside more and to cherish our heritage, we need to do a do better than funding levels that are provided in this legislation. The bill also cuts funding for the Bureau of Labor. of Land Management the US Fish and Wildlife Service the Geo- the US Geological Survey Uh these agencies are tasked with stewarding our national resources of future generations and the benefit of our country. Finally, the bill makes significant cuts to the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities, both of which play a positive role in creating jobs and supporting cultural institutions nationwide. These funds don't just go to New York City or Washington DC or Chicago or San Francisco. Uh, the places that will be hit hardest by these cuts are the small cities and rural towns that depend on the NEA and the NEH funding to bring people together, to tell our stories. I'd rather see funds be directed to cultural initiatives in our congressional districts than vanity projects like the Arcter Trump plan for the nation's capital. Again, we can do better. We can do better than the funding levels and the many poison pill riders that are enshrined in this bill. I oppose the measure and I again urge my Republican colleagues to engage in dialogue and return to legislating in a bipartisan way so that we together can craft a bill that is worthy of the American people with that I yield back the balance of my time.

i thank the gentlemen for having time to yield back uh that the gentlelady from utah miss will always be recognized for remarks on the bill

mister chair i will do my best to have time to yield back as well um i i rise in support of the fy twenty seven interior environment bill for a lot of reasons i i thank the the chairman and the staff for their hard work there are lot of things in this bill that are good for utah the great salt lake is an integral part of our hydrology in utah and also our identity and the president expressed interest in helping us deal with uh declining water levels in the great salt lake and i appreciate that this bill supports those goals it creates a position at the department of interior to oversee this work and make sure that we are working towards that goal of making the great salt lake great again um abandoned mine remediation We passed the Good Samaritan Abandoned Hard Rock Mines Act last year. This bill provides the resources to be able to stand that up. We have abandoned mines all over this country. Some of them are damaging, drinking water like in my my colleague's district in West Virginia. And I appreciate the committee making sure that we're, uh, prioritizing the ability of third parties to come in and reclaim those mines without taking on the liability that they shouldn't be responsible for. The Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument, in utah this supports our goal of making sure that traditional uses continue and local voices are respected and heard in the management of the monument wild horses and boroughs utah currently has about three times as many wild horses and boroughs as it can sustain i appreciate the committee continuing to prioritize that and giving us the tools to manage that vacant grazing allotments this bill prioritizes with interior and the forest service reopening vacant grazing allotments and making those a u m s available lake powell and glen canyon are really important to utah as well and and this makes sure that local voices are heard in the management of glen canyon national recreation area at lake powell and the people who are recreating on our

mmm

reservoir there are part of the process and how it's managed that's really essential to the economy in my district it fully funds pilt payment in lieu of taxes for areas that have a burden of high amounts of federal land that's not taxable uh it prioritizes geothermal permitting which is important to the west uh wildfire mitigation and prevention grazing there's it it provides funding for to clear the nepa backlog on grazing permit allotments that's really important in the west and and it also prioritizes law enforcement and working with local law enforcement to make sure that our federal lands are managed in a way that's friendly to locals and for all of those reasons, i support the bill and i yield back.

Thank you gentlelady for her remarks, gentlelady from florida like uh not here right now so so we'll come back get your

uh the other gentlelady from florida though is here so

So uh Miss Frankel is recognized for remarks on the bill.

Thank you. Miss Mister Chair, uh I rise in opposition to this uh interior budget bill because it misses a mark on some of our most important priorities and uh I wanna focus on one today and that is our investment in arts and humanities. Uh, this bill cuts funding uh from the National Endowments for the Arts Communities by more than thirty-five percent. And this is not just cutting a line in the budget. It's cutting support for the institutions and the programs that preserve our history, inspire creativity, bring joy to our lives, and connect us as Americans, and also strengthen our economy, things like museums, theater, art, education. And a budget is a statement of our values, and a budget that takes an act to the arts gets those values wrong. Because the arts are not a luxury. They are a part of who we are. They tell our stories. They capture our history. They challenge us, inspire us, and spark our imagination. And for our children, the arts do something even more powerful. They spark creativity. They build confidence and help students develop the critical thinking and problem-solving skills they need to succeed in school and beyond. And whether it's through music or theater or dancing or painting, the arts help people, young people discover who they are and imagine new possibilities. And art is also a way to teach history. A painting can tell the story of a moment in time from Washington crossing the Delaware uh to Picasso's Guernica showing the horrors of war to Norman Rockwell's capturing the courage of a little girl named Ruby Bridges walking into school. Art helps all of us understand where we have been and imagine where we can go. And great artists and thinkers have always understood the power of arts. President Kennedy said, "Arts are not a distraction from the life of nation. They are very close to the center of a nation's purpose." The great writer, Toni Morrison, reminded us that in difficult times, artists must go to work. And Pablo Picasso said, "Arsh, uh, art washes from the soul the dust of everyday life." These words remind us that arts are not extras, to how we tell stories, understand each other, find joy, connect with each other. And at a time when there is so much noise and chaos and division, we should be supporting things that bring us together, not tearing us apart because arts have the unique power to connect us. Sitting side by side at a concert, laughing together in a theatre, or walking through a museum, we may come from different backgrounds and hold different views. But in those moments, we share a common experience and a common humanity. And let's be clear, uh, arts are not only good for the soul, they're good for the economy. In my home county, the arts and culture generate more than three hundred fifty-five million dollars in economic activity every year, uh, bringing so many jobs. And, uh, let me just, uh, conclude by saying this. When we invest in the arts, we're investing our children, in our jobs in our tourism our creativity and the vibrant communities where people wanna live and work and cutting these programs don't make us stronger it makes us less inspired less connected and less enriched let's support these things that bring some joy bring put money in our pocket and really gonna help build great young people and with that mister chair i yield back

thank gentlelady for her remarks the gentleman from washington new house is recognized for marks on the bill.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. I appreciate the recognition. Uh, also wanna uh thank ranking member DeLauro, chairman Simpson, as well as ranking member S- Pingree, um, and the whole committee staff for their hard work on this uh interior uh mark-up bill. Uh, I, in my humble opinion, this is a great bill. It responsibly spends taxpayer dollars. while conserving public lands and and our natural resources, key responsibilities that we have. We increased funding for wildfire response and mitigation programs ahead of what I am sure will be a very bad fire season. The bill also addresses long-standing issues within my district, such as the gray wolf listing with the ESA, which is an apex predator that has long since recovered and is decimating our livestock industry. It also prohibits the introduction of another apex predator, the grizzly bear, back into the North Cascade, something that my constituents have made clear to me that they do do not want to see happen. I'm also happy to see several important projects to include uh improving clean drinking water resources for some of the rural communi communities that I represent. But one thing I wanted to highlight, if I could, Mister Chairman, uh, is something that's included in the report lang- language of today's bill. It says, and if I could quote it, " It is apparent that many activist groups are using the federal court system to stop any activities that they do not support." It is not only apparent, it is obvious, Mr. Chairman, and it's very concerning. In my district, two large dairies in the Yakima Valley had to liquidate their herds, close their doors, because they could not afford the litigation fees resulting from a lawsuit brought on by the previous administration at the behest of these environmental organizations. I want to say that these animal anti-farmer activists want to put an end to animal agriculture, not just in central Washington, but across the the United States. Last summer I had the pleasure of uh showing uh, chairman G. T. Thompson of the agriculture committee, uh, one of the da- dairies in my district, DeRuiter dairy. He raved about their operation, which I think is a model for the rest of the country, one of the best run dairies in the country. And that comes from, uh, not only me, but Mr. Ch- Mr. Thompson, who should know something about dairies as being the chair of the ag committee. And let me just say, once these dairies close, they don't come back. These are the source of uh many good paying jobs. They have a huge impact on local communities. A lot of farmers produce hay and grains for these dairies. Uh, higher dairy prices result be from the closing of these things. These are generational family farms. And once they shut their doors, they're gone for good. So, I just wanted to draw the committee's attention to that language and thank the chairman for including that in there. Just to summarize, we have a a very good bill before us that reduces spending, ensures taxpayer dollars are utilized in a responsible and effective manner. And I appreciate that, and I just wanna thank you, uh, and thank the committee, and I yield back.

Thank the gentleman. He'll be glad to know Chairman Simpson leaned over and said there's nothing humble about his opinion. He's got it exactly right. Gentleman from Texas, Mister Cuellar is recognized for remarks on the bill.

chairman kohl thank you so much uh and uh ranking member delara thank you again and to uh the uh subcommittee chairman uh mr. simpson thank you so much uh and uh ranking member pingree and to all the staff thank you look we know this bill is getting there we still need a little bit more work we know the uh the drill here but i do wanna thank all of you all for putting uh a lot of good uh provisions and i wanna talk about two provisions that are important to my area. The first one has to do with El Camino Real de Las Tejas National Historic Trail. This is one uh that the committee, the subcommittee recognizes how important it is. If you look at this uh history, uh this El Camino Real de Las Tejas uh Los Tejas is one of America's most historically significant trails. Starting off from Mexico City, all the way through my district, all the way to East Texas, the missions. so think about centuries uh ago when the spanish uh conquistadores and the spanish were here and uh and and they were there in mexico and and of course in the united states um and this this particular trail is one of those that connects communities preserves centuries of culture and colonial history and supports the heritage uh tourism that's very important to the south texas east texas economy um this language encourages the national park to include sufficient resources uh for future budget requires to uh ensure that a continued positive visitor experience uh uh is included and certainly i look forward to working with the committee on this the other one has to do with the rio grande as you know the rio grande is a source of water for agricultural municipal's uh needs you have carizo cane which uh we've been trying to address on the homeland security uh the ag also usda and i were asking the us fish and wildlife service to expedite efforts to eradicate the invest of uh species not only the carizo but what's in the river because that has an impact uh not only the quality of water that we have it's a serious threat but uh also to the ecosystem in general uh to the water flow to the water quality to communities and agricultural operations that depend on the rio grande so uh specially the carizo cane it's it's important because um everyday it sucks in millions of water uh gallons of water uh just through this carizo cane uh this carizo cane is an invasive species but it's also for border security because you can have uh the folks are trying to evade and come into the united states uh hide there and this is why we're looking at a uh you know not only homeland not only usda but now the us fish uh water services also uh to uh to look at that because it does choke riverbanks it provides cover as i mentioned for illegal activities and strains the local water resources cause everyday it just sucks up uh millions of gallons of water uh for this so it's important to the agriculture area and certainly for the use municipal area so those two provisions are important i want to thank the subcommittee chair mr. simpson thank you and uh the ranking member miss pingran especially the staff have put in long hours to put this work together so thank you with that i yield back a minute and a half of my time mr. chairman

i thank the gentlemen for yielding back time uh are there others wishing to make remarks on the bill general lady from washington is recognized Thank you, Claire, and, um, thank you.

Um, sincerely thank you to the subcommittee, um, ranking for their support, and we'll speak more on this later. Thank you to our ranking member, Pingree, and ranking member, DeLauro. Um, one thing that I'd I'd like to draw attention to, there's a lot of great work we can do in the Interior bill, um, one of which is supporting our law enforcement. Um, our law enforcement put their lives on the line every day, and, uh, I've made it a priority during my time in Congress to meet with law enforcement across south washington um one of the things that we hear all the time are the horrifying suicide rates of law enforcement they're approximately fifty four percent more likely to commit suicide than the general population and those numbers are almost certainly uh below statistical reality the numbers are horrifying in retirement um and it's uh an unacceptable reality in this country across the nation government and leo organizations individuals are Um, despite the progress uh we are making, the resources available are not meeting the moment uh or the needs of our law enforcement. Our LEOs do not need a chat bot for therapy. They need community and support. Um, beyond that, when officers uh when offered resources, I've heard that officers are scared to be stigmatized or to have their badges taken away for being honest about the mental health challenges they're facing. And solving this is going to require nimble, um, solutions. Last year, Congress, thank God, here in this body, we affirmed that chaplains can access federal funding for law enforcement mental health as appropriate by law. Back home, my chaplains have played a pivotal role in providing some of the worst news that families hear in their lives, and also counseling. Um, so I'm glad that we were able to help do that. But this year, I'd, I'd like to see us continue building on that work by, and I appreciate the inclusion of a provision related to community camp style recreation for law enforcement on federal lands. Research shows that people who are more connected with nature are happier in their life they're more likely to report feeling their lives are worthwhile and our forest system land is meant to be accessible congress has already authorized special use authorizations for special groups or purposes like non-profits such as the boy scouts um we know that this does not have to be burdensome or expensive to ensure law enforcement has um community style camping opportunities on federal land. i appreciate the community for beginning to look into something similar for law enforcement and i look forward to working on this issue in the future i welcome your input i think this is an urgent um crisis to address in our law enforcement and um welcome any input on how we can build on this to ensure that our law enforcement families are able to spend time outside together um i will say candidly there is not better therapy than drinking a beer by the river with your friends and your family And that's something that we can do in this amendment, um, as we continue to work on this legislation. So thank you.

Thank the gentlelady for her remarks, the gentleman from New York, Mister Espio, it's recognized for remarks on the bill.

Thank you, uh, Mister Chairman. I strongly oppose, uh, this fiscal year twenty-seven funding bill, as it favors, uh, polluters. and a large corporation and large corporations of the everyday constituents. At a time when Americans experience a surge in environmental disasters and a growing affordability crisis this bill raises the cost of everyday households and cuts resources to ensure communities stay safe. Most notably the bill cuts EPA funding by twenty percent. limiting its ability to continue critical environmental protection and reversing years of renewable energy development. By shifting costs onto state and local governments and making electricity more expensive through funding cuts, this bill raises utility bills and extorts money from working class communities. This bill also adversely affects EPA community grants that promote local workforce development and remedy environmental injustices, including access to clean air and clean water, and healthy living conditions. These funding reductions undermine not only economic drivers and job creators across the country, but also energy affordability and the country's ability to compete in clean energy, clean energy. Uh, Mr. Chairman, I I cannot support this bill. it does all of that and more uh and i yield back

excuse me i thank the gentleman are there other members wishing to comment on the bill seeing no other members wishing to make opening remarks i'd like to recognize chairman Simpson to offer a manager's amendment

thank you mr. chairman i have an amendment at the desk i ask the clerk uh dispense with the reading

without objection the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman is recognized

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This manager's amendment makes several non-controversial changes to the report that are of interest to many members of this committee. I appreciate the collaboration working with ranking member Pingree and her staff in putting this amendment together. I don't think there's any controversy in this amendment, and I would urge its adoption, and I yield back.

I thank the gentleman, the gentlelady from Maine. Miss Pingree is recognized for comments on the manager's amendment.

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. I rise in support of this amendment. I appreciate the chair working collectively. collaboratively with myself and members of the subcommittee to make tech technical corrections and adjustments where appropriate. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Do any other members seek uh recognition to speak on the manager's amendment? Gentlelady from Washington is recognized.

Thank you, thank you.

Here I rise in strong support of this manager's amendment and profound gratitude. um for the work that was done on this last week in my district um a chemical tank failure at the nippon dynaway packing plant in longview washington took the lives of eleven men who will never come back home to their families and eight more are fighting for their lives in hospital now this is a close-knit community this is a profound loss of life and it's going to have an impact on workers and families and first responders across southwest washington for generations to come A team from the US Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board arrived on site the next day. The CSB is an independent watchdog tasked with investigating disasters just like this one and ensuring that similar families don't get that horrifying text, that families aren't left with texts waiting to find out what happened to their loved ones. The people of Longview deserve answers, and across the country, working people need to know that we are making sure they have safe jobs where they come home every day. The CSB plays a critical role in del- delivering these answers. If we wanna be a country that makes things, things that are worth having, we need to support the people making them. If we lose cardboard and paper in this country, friends, the replacement is plastics. It is plastics from Saudi Arabia. It is microplastics ending up in our fish and in our bodies. Um and and we need to ensure that the CSP that the people who are working in this these mills are part of the investigation. The people whose lives are at risk every day have the greatest incentive to inform um a process where it's not just lab conditions that are being discussed, but the complex interaction between plant infrastructure and those very chemicals. The trades need to have their perspectives heard throughout the investigation and recommendation process. Unfortunately, the president's budget proposed eliminating funding for this independent watchdog agency completely. If this were to happen, the CSB would be unable to conduct the impartial and thorough investigation necessary to provide answers and peace of mind to the people of Longview, and the victims of chemical disasters across the country. We have an aging infrastructure. We are going to continue to see crises like that. We just had a crisis in California. We just had an explosion at a mill. in North Carolina. We will see this across the country, and we have to invest in this infrastructure, or we risk even more environmental catastrophe and loss of life. I am profoundly thankful that my provision to add over five million to the appropriation for CSB was included in this amendment, restoring their funding to the in- to enacted tw- FY twenty-six level. I want to express my deep gratitude to my colleagues who reached out, Um, not just people with meals in their districts, but, um, so many people in this community. I'm so grateful for your support in this. The chairman and the ranking member of both the subcommittee and the full committee, and Rita and Maggie for helping deliver this assurance to my community, and communities who are affected by similar tragedies all too often across this country. And with that, I'll yield back sincerely. Thank you.

Thank you, General Lady, for her comments. Gentleman from Texas, Mister Quayle, is recognized for comments on the Manager's Amendment.

Now, my um Chairman and Ranking Member, thank you again for including my outcome-based program review uh language, that directs the outcome-based program and operational reviews across agencies that are funded by this bill. Consistent with the Government Performance and Result uh Modernization Act that this Congress passed, it calls for the review of existing regulations, internal policies, administrative requirements to identify what is outdated, what's duplicative and not necessarily burdensome. So we can find real opportunities for cost savings and better program and delivery. Basically, we spend a dollar. We wanna know what the bang for the dollar is. And with that, I wanna say thank you and I yield the balance of my time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I thank the gentlemen. Are there others wishing to address the manager's amendment? Seeing none, the gentlemen from Idaho must sentence recognize for one minute to close.

You're back.

eloquent and to the point question is uh on the amendment all those in favor say aye aye all opposed say no opinion of the chair the ayes have it and the amendment is adopted uh gentlelady from maine miss pingree the ranking member of the subcommittee is recognized for an amendment

thank you mr. chair i have an amendment at the desk and i asked it's pingree number one i ask to dispense with the reading

Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentlelady's recognized remarks on her amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chair. So, this amendment is simple. It just says, " No triumphal arch." The President is trying to build a monument to himself. The American people don't support it. Polling found that fifty-two percent of Americans do not support the project. And veterans group supposes. Eh Veterans groups oppose this for its impact on National Arlington National Cemetery. And a lawsuit to stop the arch has been filed on the veterans' behalf. I think we have some veterans in the audience with us today, and I thank you for being here, and I thank you for your service to our country. One of the plaintiffs in this lawsuit, a Vietnam veteran and former diplomat named John Gunderson, warned that the historic view from Arlington National Cemetery should not be desecrated by this arch. This is sacred, hollowed ground. It should not be overshadowed by a monument to one man's ego. Republicans rejected when we had this amendment in MilKom VA, saying it was in the wrong bill. OK, fine. This is the Interior Bill, which funds the National Park Service and covers the public lands and resources, the administration is trying to use for this. So what will be the excuse today? President Trump claimed the arch would be privately funded.

Go for it.

But he then diverted fifteen million dollars from the National Endowment for the Humanities for this arch. That is money that should support history, and culture, and education, museums, and humanities programs across the country in our home districts. National Park Service resources are also being used. And the administration is reportedly planning to bypass public bidding process and use an existing National Park Service contract to start the engineering work. That contract is for a completely different site at the White House complex. A Justice Department filing revealed that Trump has no intention of getting congressional approval. The filing stated, and I quote, "Congress authorized the arch project when it approved the design set out in the Arlington Memorial Bridge Commission's report." It is the height of absurdity to use a report from nineteen twenty four as justification. I yield back.

Thank you, gentlelady, for remarks, uh, gentleman from Idaho, Mr. Simpson, recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. Mainly because this is an appropriation bill. We fund things. We generally don't say what we're not funding, because we're not funding it. there's no money in this bill for the arch no money in this bill for the arch so we're saying don't build an arch in a bill that funds things i i don't understand this but i know people wanna talk about the arch so i will just yield back my time and let you guys rant on about the arch and we'll see where this amendment goes i'm opposed to it

thank you gentlemen gentlelady from connecticut this floor is recognized to address the amendment

well it's a little flip to just dismiss this uh um amendment um it really is um i mean maybe that's the way it's regarded but let's let's put what this the president of the united states is has thrown on the table you know he throws everything at the wall hoping something sticks and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle seem to agree that all of this should stick i rise in support of this amendment it would prevent funds because they're coming back for funds it was like the private donations uh for the ballroom and now it's a billion dollars for taxpayers that they are looking for it was the same with the wall it is over and over again you know insanity uh what's the description of insanity you know you said the same thing over and over again with the same conclusion OK. The so-called uh triumphal arch is not being built for the American people. A reporter asked the president who the structure was intended for, and he answered, for once honestly, and he said, quote, " Me." OK.

Yes.

The new plan, " Me." The new plan calls for a two hundred and fifty foot structure over twice as tall as the Lincoln Memorial reportedly will reach a total height of two hundred and seventy nine feet. It also exceeds, by the way, the two hundred foot height limit established by the National Air Space System. So tall, in fact, even though the Commission on Fine Arts rubber-stamped the proposal, there are reports that FAA is now belatedly evaluating the risk to flight paths in the capital region including from Washington National Airport just two miles away. The airspe- airspace here, as we know, is extremely crowded. With over nine hundred flights every day, pilots must already navigate various ha- hazards as they descend or ascend through the quote " north approach", that flight path that requires them to uh uh to swing, to avoid close encounters uh with the Pentagon, the Washington Monument, and other DC landmarks. The addition of an arch will further complicate flying through this corridor. You know, we all recall last year's tragic collision between an American Airlines plane and a military helicopter. This is not a negligible risk. I wonder, did anyone in the administration consider this risk, or did they simply jump to do the president's bidding? There was an ongoing lawsuit has been mentioned by Vietnam war veterans who are furious that this arch would block the iconic sight line of the symbolic connection between the lincoln memorial and arlington national cemetery and finally it is outrageous to even think about spending taxpayer dollars to build the president any president of the united states in arch and with this president it's an arch and it's a ballroom while the american people are struggling every single day with the cost of living While the president pursues vanity projects, big polluters are lining their pockets and profiting off rising prices. Meanwhile, working families, middle class families, rural vulnerable families are left to struggle on their own. You know, it's clear from this arch and from this administration's actions whose side they are on. And it is not on the side of American families. This arch would be a waste of taxpayer dollars, a risk to air travel, and a colossal eyesore. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back. They will be coming back for the funds. Let's preempt it, my friends.

Thank you, General Lady. General Lady from Ohio, Miss Capters, recognized for comments on the amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, and I rise in strong uh support of this amendment. dear friend, Miss Pingree, uh, the ranking member. In December, twenty twenty five, after a year of uh turmoil and changes by presidential mandate uh at the Kennedy Center, the current president forced a hand-picked board of his own appointees to approve a name change, to add his own name to this memorial to a fallen president, the only one in US history, by the way, with a purple heart. what was known as the john f kennedy center for the performing arts as it was written into law to honor the life and legacy of a great oh i'm so sorry i with i withdraw my time i'm sorry

thank you general lady gentlemen from california mister levin is recognized for remarks on the amendment

chairman thank you thank you thank you i appreciate the This discussion, I rise in support of the amendment, and I wanna speak directly for a minute to my friends across the aisle. You've heard what this arch is and where it would go, and I wanna reinforce the fact CBS reported um, Edo Keefe asked the president who the arch is for and the president pointed at himself and said, me. He didn't point to our vets, he didn't point to the fallen. So set aside taste, set aside design, set aside politics entirely. one question in front of this committee that should unite every member of it, which is who decides? The Park Service manages this land, the Commission of Fine Arts advises on design, the National Capital Planning Commission reviews construction, but not one of those bodies is Congress, which is required by law to have us say in new memorials. And not any of those other bodies holds the power of the purse. The administration's own position, as you've heard, is that it doesn't need us at all. It intends to reach back to a century-old authorization, written for a different structure, to go around this chamber entirely. My colleagues on this committee have long said the power of the purse is Congress's to guard. Mr. Chairman, I still see Article One, Section nine, Clause seven standing there. And this is where that gets tested. A permanent monument on hallowed ground, paid for partially with taxpayer money, going up without a single vote in this room. Once this is built without a vote, that's the precedent.

It's free with you.

And precedents do not retire when administrations do.

You need it in a cell.

But don't take the constitutional argument from me.

But I'm a veteran.

Take the word of the people who earned the right to speak for it. If you're a veteran here today and supported this amendment, please stand.

I didn't say it. What if I sounded like one of those?

Thank you. Colleagues, I wanna share their words with you.

ETA. Would you like to share?

And I I hope you listen to their words. Gary Langston is an army veteran whose parents are interned at Arlington. He says, and I quote, " I'm a veteran and a resident of Washington, D. C. My parents, interred in section sixty-six, were a Vietnam veteran and his army wife. I served for twenty-nine years in the US Army and my wife is a veteran of the Persian Gulf War. We also have several ancestors who served in the US armed forces dating back as far as the War of eighteen twelve. Any memorial at Memorial Circle must respect those interred there, their descendants, current and future future generations, and remain consistent with the solemn symbolism provided by the linkage of the lincoln memorial memorial bridge the drive the hemicycle and the women's military museum within it the eternal flame in the kennedy gravesite in the former arlington house a solemn memorial rather than a monument a memorial rather than a monument is called for here in order to promote a further unification of our country and respect these very hallowed grounds the best way to ensure this is to follow the law collaborate on the design with the affected stakeholders and present the project to the us

yes

congress to do otherwise is disrespectful to the living." Jimmy Shaughnessy is a Marine Corps combat veteran and the veteran's program manager at the National Parks Conservation Association. Jimmy would like to share the following words, quote, "Buried in section sixty is my great grandfather and my great grandmother. He's a combat veteran leading the charge on horseback to bring down Pancho Villa she a combat nurse tending the young men during World War Two." They didn't question why they should serve, they questioned how long they would be allowed to serve. As a young marine I was impressed with their commitment to service and country, values I carried through my enlistment and combat tour. I would lose friends before I could learn their full name. For what died the sons and daughters of America? Was it fame? Will your children line up to be fodder for the vain? A two hundred and fifty foot triumphal arch, topped with golden statues and an observation deck, is an inappropriate disruption at the gates of hallowed ground. The transitory space between service and burial exists at the gates of Arlington. To preserve its integrity, the space must remain as is, unobstructed." That ground was chosen with purpose, my friends. The Memorial Bridge was built to join North and South after the Civil War, to link Lincoln to the Arlington house on a single line of sight, so a divided nation could see itself made whole. A two hundred and fifty foot arch would break that view irreparably, and would be built without this chamber, ever casting a vote. As for the argument that Congress is not appropriating funds for the arch, that's exactly the point, my friends. The administration has no business at all spending fifteen million dollars on this without this body involved. If you believe there shouldn't be appropriated funds or other taxpayer funds used for this vanity project now might be your one time, your one time to speak out and to say so. These two vets asked us to follow the law and to leave that ground unobstructed. They earn the right to ask. The only question is whether we have the will to answer. Thank you and I yield back.

Thank you, gentlemen. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? The gentleman from Maryland is recognized.

First of all, I adopt the comments that Mister Levin just made. Obviously, as usual, thoughtful, well-researched, and I think impactful. But I want to respond to my very dear friend, And he and I have been good friends for a very long time. He's the former Speaker of the Idaho uh House and I'm the former President of the Maryland Senate, many, many, many years ago for both of us. What concerns me is you're not joining the rant to which you refer. I've used the phrase, and I'll repeat it again, we are the authors of our own impotence. The concept that this project would be pursued without congressional authorization, without the voice of the people.

You, my wife.

Without the voice of the people being heard. And we are the voice of the people. That's why the founder said we had to go back to the people every twenty-four months and have our contracts renewed. Because the founders wanted to have our voices, their voices, the voices of the people heard on a regular basis and we would be held accountable on a regular basis. This president treats Washington DC as if it were Mark uh Mar- Mar- Mar- Mar- Mar- Mar- Mar- Mar- Lago North. He treated the White House that way. And without so much as a by-year leave, tore down a significant portion of the White House. I tell my friend I would hope you would join our rant if that's what it is. But I believe the rant to which you refer is trying to ring the bell that article one still exists and that article one needs to be respected, not just by us but by the president of the united states and particularly russell vote who believes that article one is a suggestion as to what the executive department ought to do not a mandate not a law not a directive but simply a suggestion i've said this before but this is another specific example of our being asleep at the switch and just shrugging our shoulders and say what can we do after all trump has said he's gonna do it and as a gentleman from california says even if he does it with private sector money and says the taxpayers aren't paying for it that is irrelevant he has not the power to make that decision on his own And what he has done is fired people who have some oversight over it and replaced it with people who say, yes, sir. And I use the salute advisedly. Ladies and gentlemen of this appropriations committee. If you fail to exercise your authority you will lose it and we are fast having our authority become a thing of the past that's what this amendment says the gentleman shakes his head and i understand why he's saying there's no money in here a good point why is there no language in this bill to say mister president you need to come here because we have ignored the issue and there is not the outrage that should be manifested by all of us, republicans and democrats not about our partisan politics but about our commitment to this committee and the people's voice being heard on a decision of this magnitude that has as the two gentleman who stood such a negative impact on the respect that we have for them, for those we lost. Uh, we just celebrated Memorial Day. Many of those people who lost their lives may be in Normandy, not here. But it is our responsibility, not any president, Democrat or Republican, to simply say I'm going to build a very major structure in the capital of the United States without so much as a by your leave from the Congress support this amendment.

Thank you, gentlemen. Gentlelady from Florida, Miss Wasserman Schultz is recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Mr.

Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sorry, can we move these bags, please? I rise in strong support of my colleague, ranking member, Pingree Semenman. As the ranking member of the Military Construction Veterans Affairs subcommittee which has oversight over Arlington National Cemetery, I have received quite a bit, a lot of outreach on this proposed arch, and none of it is good. Putting aside the fact that we're in the middle of a war in the Middle East, a still ongoing war in Ukraine, and during a cost of living crisis, this president wants the american people to pay for a new arch as his latest vanity project and this location is so deeply offensive to the history and tradition of arlington national cemetery as it's been discussed in this committee and by veterans groups across america the location of this proposed arch would destroy a century old sight line between arlington and the lincoln memorial this vantage point was purposely designed to symbolize reconciliation and unity following the civil war If the president is interested in projects that are more respectful to our veterans, those buried at Arlington, and the families and guests of Arlington National Cemetery, there are plenty of things that need to be done. For starters, we could expand, protect and support the operations at Arlington in our bill, in the MilKom VA bill, with the money and resources that we would dump building the arch to Trump. And if the cost, waste of resources and disrespect to our veterans and our history are not enough to convince my colleagues to vote no, i would also highlight what many people outside of congress have pointed out this oversized arch would be smack in the middle of the flight path for planes landing at dca from the western approach path this project is an unfunded unauthorized oversized disrespectful waste of tax dollars america's two hundred and fifty year birthday should be celebrated but it should not be commemorated by creating divisions i urge my colleague to vote colleagues to vote yes on this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time

thank the general lady are there others wishing to address the amendment

oh you did thank you

sampert sampert

seeing none the uh

yield me some time you yield me some time you yield me some time

the general lady is recognized for one minute to close thank you

could you could you ask for the seats please

general lady is oh do i'm sorry i missed i missed my friend from new york gentleman from new york's recognized to address the amendment thank you

thank you mr. chairman i'd like to uh yield some time to my distinguished friend from maryland

uh uh thanks to gentleman for yielding uh uh listen to my dear friend

yeah

uh listen to my dear friend and he said there there's no money in this bill so this is irrelevant the the reading of the amendment was dispensed with let me read it for the members No monumental arch, triumphal or otherwise, may be constructed within Memorial circuit on the George Washington Memorial Parkway or anywhere else within Lady Bird Johnson Park. Period. Says nothing about none of the funds should be spent. Doesn't reference any funds in this bill. It says you cannot build this.

You'll be.

Heaven forbid that we would have, as the Appropriations Committee of the United States of America, the temerity to say that this can't be built so whatever however he pays for it it can't be done with this amendment so i tell my chairman this is exactly what we ought to be doing exactly what we ought to be doing telling this president who treats us as if we were an afterthought in the constitution of the United States who treats us as if uh by your leave and then who defeats a lot of us in your own party cause he doesn't like the fact that you said oh well maybe I don't agree ladies and gentlemen of this committee if you want this committee to be respected not only by our president of the United States but by the people of the United States we need to stand up and say we are the policymakers. The Constitution says that. We believe it. And whether you like it or not, we're gonna act as if we are the Article one branch of government. This amendment says you can't do. And that is fully within our authority and power. And we ought to exercise it. And we ought to exercise it, not with temerity, but with full-throated thank you

thank the gentleman from new york the gentleman from kentucky is recognized to address the amendment

i yield to the chairman sampson

thank you for yielding you just got me started

great we're gonna have a

because i thought this would be a rant and it is a rant you guys wanna talk about it that's ok talk about it this is an appropriation bill We fund things. There is no money in this bill for an arch. Why don't we also say in there you can't put a man on the moon? Or you can't put a man on Mars? Or you can't put a space station or a sea station at the bottom of the ocean? Why don't we just say that? There's nothing in here to do that. There's nothing in here to fund an arch.

Good morning.

Nothing in this bill. Now you haven't asked me what I think about the arch. i don't particularly like it

yeah it's fifteen million dollars or rest of our realities to fund this

but you know what that's not in this bill that's all i'm saying and i would have a little more sympathetic

i was i didn't know

a little more sympathy to your cause

what

if you were just a little more consistent

huh twenty six

i remember during a previous administration where we appropriated money to build a wall

oh one hundred

democrats took control guess what that disappeared That was appropriated by Congress. Or maybe when the previous administration had said, " We're gonna pay off student loans." Or the Supreme Court said, " No, you can't do that without Congress." And they said, " Let's find a way around Congress to do it." And started doing it that way. Did I hear a word out of any of you? No, not a single word. So maybe if you were consistent, I'd be a little more consistent.

Consistent, but money to spend.

So that's just a bunch of nonsense. There is nothing in this Again. that funds an arch. Nothing. Zero.

Will the gentleman yield?

It's an appropriation bill. No, you've had enough to say.

No, I haven't.

Yeah, that's what I figured. Well, I'm done talking. All I'm saying is this is an appropriation bill, let's appropriate money for the Department of Interior and related agencies, and let's not get into all this ancillary stuff that's going on. It is just a period der and der and there are several amendments in here which are just periods to ran so i understand that go ahead uh do all that you want to that's fine i expected it so anyway

good morning

i yield back to the balance of my time i thank the gentleman from yielding

nice

this great gentleman from zuckey yields back his time

i yield back

yield back are there others uh wishing to address the amendment the general lady from pennsylvania is recognized

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, uh, ranking member, uh, and, uh, I do rise in, uh, support of this amendment, uh, even as I rise in opposition to the the underlying bill. I wish I could hear more from you, Mister Chairman, about your opinion about the triumphal arch that the President has put forward.

In his power, I was just wondering if

It is appropriate for us. as appropriators, to have an opinion on it.

Mm.

It's appropriate for us as legislators, as the co-equal branch, to have an opinion on it. And I wish that opinion would be voiced. I wish more would say what you said, and I wish you would say more about that. You said you don't particularly care for it. I don't care for it at all. And the very sad and beautiful arguments that Mister Levin and others have put forward are so salient. We're just coming from Memorial Day.

Mm-hmm.

I can't understand why more people, Republicans and Democrats, aren't saying, Mister President, no, this is too much. It is too much about yourself and not at all about our veterans and our military dead. So I oppose the arch also. And I think it's completely appropriate that we talk about it here. This is not about ranting. This is about doing our job and holding this man to account,

Yes.

holding him in some check.

as he amputated the east wing of the white house as he's putting up a fight i would like to now yield to the ranking member of the full committee thanks general lady and i i i have a plan to continue to

i for me mike hi mike what's the problem not the weight

thank you what a uh thanks general lady and let me just say president trump claimed the arch would be privately funded and then through omb through omb and this was in twenty twenty six They diverted fifteen million dollars from the National Endowment for the Humanities. Does this bill cover the National Endowment for the Humanities? You bet it does. Do you think that they're not gonna do that again? Well, if you do think that, then I got a bridge I will sell you. They continue to do this over and over and over again. Fifteen million dollars for what? for the arch we don't make it up let's deal with the facts of the matter here and then the justice department they a filing from the justice department revealed that trump has no intention of getting congressional approval and the filing stated and i quote congress authorized the arch project when it approved the design set out in arlington memorial bridge commission's report absurd a nineteen uh a n- nineteen twenty-four report as justification, I wanted to say thank you to the veterans who stood up here for their service, for their family's service. Let us listen to what the people of this nation want and not what a megalomaniac would like to do when he says who does this honor? It honors me. My God, if we can't say no to that, who are we? And why do we sit here in this body? Yes, this is appropriations. They diverted fifteen million dollars of appropriations money for this colossal madness. And we don't wanna take it up and say, no, you can't do it. My God. I yield back. And I thank the gentle lady.

Mister Chairman, again I I thank you for your uh visiting on us, your opinion as to the arch. I wish you would ask each of your members what he and she thinks of it, because I think your voices are so important and could be so powerful to turn this president away from this uh very vain idea. I yield back.

Thank you, Don Leidy. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Saying none, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close.

Thank you very much, Mister Chair, and thank you so much for my colleagues for making the point. Thank you to the veterans who have come to uh spend time with us today, and thank you for your service to the country, um and for this important conversation that we're having, about the true role of appropriations. In this moment in time, taking back our power, asking our Republican colleagues to stand up as appropriators, and say the important things. And if we think the president isn't just gonna go ahead, as Rosa said, uh, we got a bridge that we can sell you today. He's already moved ahead to tear down the East Wing of the White House,

Ah.

to change the color of the reflecting pool. We can miss one project after another. He has gone ahead and moved forward on. And this president's obsession with building this monument to himself is very unpopular with the American people, and they expect us to shepherd the proper use of their taxpayer dollars. at a time when Americans are struggling to afford the basic necessities, like groceries and gas and health care, this is what our president is focused on, and we're not going to stop him today? It screams, " Let them eat cake." And I ask all my colleagues to vote in favor of this that just simply says, no, you cannot build an arch and you cannot build one that just glorifies yourself. and i urge my colleagues to vote for this and i yield back my time

good

amen

good good

good job

thank you general lady the question is now on the amendment offered by the general lady for may and all those in favor say aye

aye

aye

aye

all those opposed say no no

uh

being the chair of the no's have it the court of vote's been requested please more hands sufficient number of hands have been raised in support clerk will call the roll

mister adderall

mr. adderhall no mr. aguilar mr. alford mr. amadei mrs. bice mrs. bice no mr. bishop

yes

mr. bishop aye mr. calvert

no

mr. calvert no mr. carter mr. carter no mr. case

aye

mr. case aye mr. siskamani mr. klein

no

mr. klein no mr. cloud mr. cliburn mr. clyde

negative

mr. clyde no mr. cole

no

mr. cole no mr. cuillard miss dean

yes

miss dean aye miss deloro

yes

miss deloro aye mr. diaz-ballart

no

mr. diaz-ballart no mr. edwards mister elzie mister elzie no miss escobar

aye

miss escobar aye mister espiat

aye

mister espiat aye mister fleischman no there's no doctor miss frankel

aye no

miss frankel aye mister franklin mister franklin no mister guest

no

mister guest no mister harder

aye no

i'm sorry mister harder aye doctor harris

we don't change your place doctor

mrs hinson

they are

mister hoyer

aye

mister hoyer aye mister ivy did they bring the same person

yes i didn't know well i look like

mister joyce

they're gonna bring me some

miss captor miss captor aye mister lolota mister lolota no miss lee

no

miss letlow mister levin mister levin aye

aye

miss moly

no

miss moly no miss mccullum

aye

miss mccullum aye miss ming

aye

miss ming aye mr. molinar

no

mr. molinar no mr. moore

no

mr. moore no mr. morelli mr. mervan

yes

mr. mervan aye mr. newhouse

no it's fine no

mr. newhouse no miss perez

yes

miss perez aye miss pingree

aye

miss pingree aye mr. pocan

aye

mr. pocan aye mr. quigley

aye

mr. quigley aye mr. reichenthaler

no

mr. reichenthaler no mr. rogers

no

mr. rogers no mr. rutherford

no

mr. rutherford no mr. shreve

no

mr. shreve no mr. simpson

no

mr. simpson no mr. strong

no

mr. strong no mrs. torres

aye

mrs. torres aye miss underwood

aye

miss underwood aye mr. valadao miss washerman-schultz miss washerman-schultz aye mrs.

aye

Watson-coleman mrs.

aye

Watson-coleman aye mr. womack mr.

no

womack no mr. zinke

no

mr. zinke no

are there any members uh wishing to uh record their vote or change their vote gentleman from west virginia

mister moore no

yeah gentlemen from ohio

no please

mister joyce no

gentlemen from new zealand

no

mister alfred no

gentlemen from arizona

no

mister siskamani no

gentlemen from north carolina hey

no

mister edwards no

gentlemen from texas

no

mister cloud no

gentlemen from tennessee

gentlemen no please

mister fleischmann no

gentlemen from maryland

mister ivy aye

gentlemen from south carolina

aye

mister cliburn aye

alright gentlemen from another gentleman from maryland

doctor harris no

alright gentlemen from nevada

mister amity no

are there other members wishing to vote or change their vote saying none the clerk will tally

mmm

yeah this one's more like a plum oh it's too much and you on this vote the ayes are twenty four the no's are thirty two the amendment is not adopted gentlemen from georgia mister clyde is recognized for an amendment

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk and I ask unanimous consent that the clerk dispense with the reading.

Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment.

Thank you very much, Mister Chairman, I rise today in support of my amendment to reduce the EPA's categorical grant program's budget by just over a billion dollars, consistent with President Trump's fiscal year, twenty twenty-seven President's budget request, and to bring the interior and environment Appropriations Act to slightly below fiscal year twenty twenty six enacted levels. Mister Chairman, as our national debt approaches forty trillion dollars, Washington's addiction to spending is no longer merely irresponsible, it is a threat to our national security and our future generations. So, this spending addiction must end. Consider where we stand. The federal government exceeds, or excuse me, expects five point six trillion in revenue this year, but plans to spend seven point four trillion. That is a one point eight trillion dollar deficit. More than one trillion dollars will go solely to interest payments. That's interest payments, a trillion dollars. Funding no program, building no road, defending no soldier, no household, no business, no institution, and no government could survive this kind of math indefinitely. And yet the bill And yet the spending level in the bill before us today would spend more spending above fiscal year twenty twenty-six enacted levels. President Trump's fiscal year twenty-seven budget charts a very different course, eliminating duplicative programs, cutting waste, fraud, and abuse, and refocusing federal dollars on what actually serves American taxpayers, protects our national security, and keeps American businesses competitive. The president proposed an approximately ninety-one percent reduction in the EPA's categorical grant programs, from over one point one billion to just over a hundred million dollars. the clean air act the clean water act and other major environmental statues that these grants support have been on the books for multiple decades and many states have enacted their own laws to do these exact same things states and local governments are more than capable of funding their own programs in compliance with these laws that they passed so these grants have become a crutch for states at the expense of american taxpayers many of whom receive no benefit from them whatsoever The president's budget eliminates the bloated federally subsidized bureaucracy that states should have long since stood up on their own. For example, the budget also zeros out funding for race-based so-called environmental justice teams doing product certifications in Nevada, a five hundred and eighty thousand dollar expenditure in taxpayer money that had no business going to politically motivated grant programs in the first place. merit and environmental results should drive federal funding decisions, not political agendas. My amendment would bring the EPA's categorical grant funding in line with the president's budget request, returning it to a level that maintains essential support for key programs, while ending the federal handouts to the states that have had decades to replace it with their own resources. The federal government, as the federal government, barrels toward a forty trillion dollar debt, Our committee needs to be leading the way with fiscal restraint. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I thank you and I yield back a minute and forty-two seconds.

I thank the gentleman for the time, and I thank the gentleman for his remarks. The gentleman from Idaho, uh, Mister Simpsons, recognize respond to the amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. Uh.

Mike.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. And, uh, to show my bipartisanship, I rise in opposition to this bill. to this amendment. This amendment would cut funding that goes directly to the states and tribes by ninety percent. This funding, known as Categor- Categorical Grants, is distributed, is distributed to states to carry out their delegated authorities under various federal environmental laws. Not state environmental laws, federal environmental laws like the Clean Water Act, Clean Drinking Water Act, Clean Air Act. This cooperative federalism approach empowers states to issue permits and make decisions that are best for them. State permitting is critical for economic growth as these permits are necessary for new development industry and manufacturing. Similar to the house interior bills over the last several years, the FY twenty-seven house bill again maintains funding for these categorical grant programs. I oppose this amendment. I agree with what the gentleman was stating about our debt and the problem it's solved, uh, the problem it's created. Problem is, it's not because of discretionary spending. is because of entitlement spending. And until this Congress has the nerve to take on entitlement spending, we will never get it under control. You could eliminate, I'm talking eliminate discretionary spending, and you'd still have a budget deficit. That's how bad the entitlement programs have gotten. And we have to address that issue. We're not gonna do it by saving a little bit here and a little bit there, although that's part of the overall problem. But the reality is, this is an important part. We have cut the EPA by twenty percent in this bill. Twenty three percent last year. That's a forty three percent, forty three percent reduction in two years. It's a pretty good reduction in the EPA. And uh, so I oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. Yelba.

Thank you gentlemen. The uh general lady from Maine is recognized to address the amendment.

Uh, thank you, Mister Chair, and I appreciate the subcommittee chair for opposing this in uh the spirit of bipartisanship and I too rise in opposition to this amendment. This bill already includes devastating cuts to the epa that i do not support cutting another billion dollars is literally absurd i encourage my colleagues to vote no on this and i yield back

i thank the general lady the uh general lady from minnesota mr. collins recognized to address the amendment

share and it comes as no surprise to me that the uh chair of the interior appropriations uh subcommittee along with miss pingree oppose this i'm just gonna give two quick examples uh because mister clive gave some examples one was uh we had a chrome factor uh chrome plater in my congressional district and when uh they abandoned the building the minnesota pollution control agency went out the saint paul fire department went out um many of you who served on on the subcommittee will remember this and uh we we weren't up for the task because these things don't happen very often and we were so thrilled the residents who lived right by about the quick response from the epa to come in and help the state out um probably uh saved uh a near disaster from happening it was only one rainstorm away where this water was gonna come through the roof and mix with all these chemicals the other example i'm gonna give because tribal governments are cut in this amendment as many of us on both sides of the aisle go out and visit tribal reservations and they have been short changed on epa grant funding whether it is cleaning up uranium whether it is uh clean water whether it is sewage and they have been underfunded for decades so to cut this would be cutting our uh uh tribal treaty rights and responsibilities so i stand with my my chairman and my ranking member in strongly opposing this amendment and i yield back with over three minutes

i love this like virtuous competition keep it up uh thank you gentlelady for her remarks are there others wishing to address the amendment seeing none the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close

thank you thank you mister chairman um you know as a very strong conservative a fiscal conservative uh who sees that yes this is a small amount of money compared to the amount of our actual national debt which is forty trillion dollars but every little bit helps and so uh i encourage my colleagues to support this amendment uh this money from the budget of the epa and i yield back with forty seconds

as a percentage even better so the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia all those in favor say aye

aye

all those opposed say no

no

opinion of the chair of the no's have it and roll call has been requested

uh i never heard of this one

not not ok uh And the amendment is not adopted. General Lady from Maine, Miss Pingree is recognized for the purpose of an amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chair. I have an amendment at the desk, Pingree number two, and I move we dispense with the reading.

Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The General Lady is recognized for remarks on her amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chair. So, the Kennedy Center is in a very precarious position right now. President Trump took it over. He tried to remake it in his own image. He was correctly slapped down by the courts. And is now apparently planning to wipe his hands of the whole place, despite cheering the board and stuffing it with dozens of his friends and donors. He posted on Friday that he's, quote, " transferring it back to Congress", unquote. Nobody anywhere seems to know what that means or what his next steps are. But we do have, and we always have had, a real oversight responsibility in this subcommittee. This bill supports the capital and facility side of the center on an annual basis. And last year the majority included two hundred and fifty million in the reconciliation bill for the Kennedy Center presumably for renovations, but with almost no direction or guide rails. We have a duty to ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used appropriately here. and there are so many outstanding questions for the administration.

Four thousand dollars.

What is the status of the funding that's already been appropriated?

Huh?

How do court orders impact the construction?

How often does it

If the Kennedy Center is required to stay open, especially if renovation is ongoing, what does that mean for the people who work there, the programming, the artists, the audiences? And if we're gonna successfully negotiate an FY twenty-seven bill, we need real answers. And we're going to have to determine what the Kennedy Center needs, and what needs to change for the Kennedy Center to exist now and into the future. One hallmark of Grinnell's disaster tenure was a shocking lack of transparency. I think we're just at the tip of the iceberg in finding out exactly what kind of disaster he and his cronies left behind. I appreciate that the chair has already included language requiring a quarterly update, and briefings for this committee, but the list of known has grown, the list of unknowns has grown exponentially longer in just the past few days. So, I'm asking if the chair will commit to oversight hearings in the coming months, and working with me in a bipartisan way to get the information that we need to be effective in FY twenty-seven and beyond, and I yield back.

Thank you, gentlelady, for amendment. The gentleman from Idaho, Mr. Simpson, is recognized to address

uh thanks chairman um obviously i'm more than willing to work with you and uh having a hearing on this uh i expect that we're gonna have some hearings uh in september uh whether it's with the smithsonian uh with the kennedy senator with others that we didn't have time to get to previously but i agree with you that there needs to be oversight your bill essentially says we want monthly reports uh or your amendment says we want monthly reports our uh language says that the committee er quarterly reports the committee directs the center to provide quarterly reports and updates i don't know if we have monthly reports maybe we can hire another person just do the reports but i agree that we need to have oversight on on this and what they're doing i know that uh the staff and i believe you have gone down personally have seen the renovations that or what needs to be done i think everybody agrees that the kennedy center needs some renovation Because it is in bad shape in a lot of uh lot of areas. The court case, it's currently before the courts. One of the things that uh i mean One of the things the court said that they had they couldn't close it down to do the reconstruction. I can tell you You're not gonna be able to do the reconstruction without closing it down for a period of time. That's just gonna be necessary. you gotta do the hvac system you gotta do the water systems you gotta do all of that stuff and renovate it the simplest way to do it i mean even if you're re even if you're uh redoing your house my wife did some renovation of my house after it was done i said the next time that happens i wanna know what they're gonna do how long it's gonna take and i'm gonna move for the six months or a year that it takes for them to do it because it would have been much simpler it's the same way here i know that creates challenges we wanna be updated uh we will have a hearing on uh on the kennedy senator and what's going on this fall but i think the language in our bill is sufficient for a quarterly report rather than a monthly report so i'd oppose this amendment and uh but i look forward to working with with the ranking member on it and i go back to balance my time

thank you gentlemen uh are there others wishing to address the amendment Seeing none, the General Lady is recognized for one minute to close.

Well, I thank the Chair uh for speaking about the importance of doing our due diligence and oversight here. And I brought this up truly because so much has changed in such a short period of time, and I just want to emphasize our important role in the oversight here, and in making sure that this treasured institution lasts long into the future. And I'm just going to use my closing time to read from the Trump Truth Social post from Friday, May twenty ninth, to explain what a confusing situation this is. Here's what he said. I cannot be involved in a situation where danger to the public is allowed to flourish in plain plain and open sight. Unless I am free free to do what I do better than anyone else,

Oh, I know.

bring this institution back physically, financially and artistically, I have no interest in continuing what could be a hopeless journey into never never land. There has never been a president of the United States who has been treated so unfairly as by the courts as I. That's okay. I will continue to do what is considered to be a great job for the wonderful people of our country. I have inspected and instructed the Department of Commerce to make all the necessary arrangements with Congress to allow a full and complete transfer of this institution, giving them responsibility for its operation, maintenance and management. Thank you for your attention to this matter. So, we need to pay attention to this matter. And I yield back and i yield i i encourage yes

i thank general lady the question is now on the amendment offered by the general lady from maine all those in favor say aye

aye

all opposed say no

no no

being the chair of the no's have it and the amendment is not adopted gentleman from west virginia mister moore is recognized for the purpose of

thank you mister chairman uh so i wanna begin

the gentleman like the amendment

oh yes i'd ask unanimous consent to have the reading of the amendment dispensed with

without objection the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment

alright thank you mister chairman i wanna start with this this right here this jar this is water that comes out of a faucet in west virginia southern west virginia to be exact a woman named tildy gave us this uh jar of water my staff was down there in mcdowell county i know mister rogers is familiar with that county borders his

oh my god

and tilde is from macdow

do you agree with that mmm

and she goes the way she gets water

mmm we have a great

is she takes a mule

we have a great

and goes down to a natural spring and fills up jugs of water and then packs that mule

yeah i agree with that

and has to bring it back up the mountain because she can't drink the water that she gets out of her own faucet now unfortunately this is not a one-off so that's the water that she is expected to bathe with and cook and clean her clothes and everything else so

ok that's good

in the end uh mr. chairman this is

yeah

people living with a pack mule to get water in the twenty first century in the united states of america is a tragedy it's an unmitigated tragedy and this poor woman actually was using this water got sores and chemical burns uh from using it there's another woman in the town of yeager in west virginia and you'll see my staff's dropping off some of these water samples uh from around the district and um she keeps an eighteen hundred gallon drums outside of her home to catch rain water and her family depends on other members to haul the water from a spring cause she's too old and she can't carry it herself now there's also a man in bradshaw who opened a coffee shop here recently with and the filtration system was supposed to be rated at six months that's how long it would take to change the filter and it only lasted eight days before the water destroyed it now while i have been speaking here hopefully my staff has distributed those jars of water i'd like you all to take a look at that and the one that is empty is the one that we had asked them to fill up and there was no water coming out of it at all and so this isn't one community by the way this isn't one county this is a region of west virginia in the united states uh so my team collected these bottles just last week each comes from a real home in mcdowell county uh on the outside many of them actually wanted to write their names and addresses and phone numbers so you all could see them if you ever wanted to reach out to them to let you know that they are real people that are actually suffering in our country that don't have access to water at all and unfortunately they're still living like that so some bottles look more clear um if you would like you could take the cap off of it and smell it um don't drink it unless you're voting no then you could drink it um but uh mr. chairman the people of southern west virginia they these are the folks that went underground that mined the coal that forged the steel that built the ships that built the tanks that built the planes that won the wars that built the buildings that built this country and all they're asking for at this point is clean water that's what they want and i think as the appropriations committee i think in this bill we're certainly apt to do that they're simply asking that we see them as fellow citizens fellow americans who deserve to be able to pour a clean glass of water for their children and for their grandchildren now we're not gonna solve all the drinking water problems in one appropriations bill certainly that needs to great but this is a great place to start and my amendment would do uh fifty million dollars to address the drinking water and water uh wastewater needs in the community that needs it most it requires that at least fifty percent of the funding go to those nine southern counties and the state has to do a twenty five percent match to get the money now it's i know it's hard to fathom that you fellow americans live like this but they do

mmm

and the family's names who are on those bottles are real people who are actually only living a few hundred miles from here. It's only three hundred miles away. This is like hunger games. It's hard to believe that this is the way that they're having to live. And look, one of the most terrible words in the English language that we have to live with sometimes uh in our human existence is abandonment. And that's what I'm trying to prevent here, is the abandonment of these

thank gentleman for his uh amendment the gentleman from idaho mr. simpkins recognized to address the amendment

aye thanks chairman i rise in opposition to this amendment to be clear i'm not disputing the west virginia's water infrastructure needs

hmm

We understand that. In fact, we could go across country and there are there are needs, water, infrastructure needs all around this country. You could go to various areas and various states, but these are some of the worst, I fully admit that. But a proposal like this needs to be properly vetted with the consensus uh, support from the relevant authorizing committees. And we just don't have that on this proposal right now. I recognize that we do provide dedicated stag funding to the state of Alaska for water infrastructure needs. However, that funding originated as a law passed by Congress in nineteen ninety-five and we have continued to provide funding for that program. Outside of a dedicated authorizing bill, the state of West Virginia, like, just like any other state, still has access to multiple sources of water infrastructure funding throughout the EPA's state and tribal assistance grants, whether it's the state revolving funds, various competitive grants for water infrastructure or community funding projects i look forward to continuing work with my colleague on this but i'm also concerned about where you take the money from the fifty million dollars from agencies that are already substantially reduced uh in this bill uh because we had to meet the other obligations that we have in the bill so i understand where this gentleman is coming from i look forward to working with him as we move forward on this bill if we can do something in As as we move forward, we certainly will. But I have to oppose this amendment. And I yield back to the balance of my time.

Thank you, gentlemen, gentlelady from Maine is recognized to address the amendment.

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair, I too rise in a opposition to this amendment that would earmark fifty million dollars for the state of West Virginia for drinking water and wastewater needs. While such an earmark is not appropriate, I do appreciate the gentleman's testimony and his compelling argument about how important it is for his state to have this funding and to have uh reasonable drinking water for their communities.

Thank you.

Um he is bringing this to our attention about how critical this funding is and how important it is to fund the state revolving funds for water infrastructure in all of our states. My colleague from New Jersey will be offering an amendment to increase the overall levels of state revolving funds benefitting all of our states, and I encourage the gentleman from West Virginia and everyone here to support that amendment. But I oppose this amendment and I yield back.

Thank the General Lady for her remarks. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and uh if that revolving fund ever came to West Virginia, I'd certainly support it, but it doesn't, ever. And um that's that's the reason why I have this amendment. Um. look these folks are suffering down there i think this is the appropriate bill i really appreciate the chairman and his remarks on this and he's put together a great bill um but let's not abandon these folks let's not forget about them i mean these are american citizens that literally do not have water as i pointed out to you there's a woman who's fifty seven years old who's gotta hike down a mountain with a mule to get water i mean it it's really a tragedy it is really a tragedy and um yes in last year's bill we did this for alaska alaska got roughly fifty million dollars uh give or take to be able to deal with their water needs uh the three worst counties in america as it relates to water quality and water violations all three of them are in west virginia and they're all three of the three counties that i'm talking about in southern west virginia so i'd really appreciate your support on this amendment and uh mr. chairman thank you i yield back

uh thank the uh gentlemen the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from west virginia all those in favor say aye

aye

all those opposed say no

no

the opinion of the chair the no's have it and the amendment is not adopted uh as all of you can see we're starting to vote but i think we have enough time to move on to another amendment uh if that's agreeable my friend general lady from connecticut miss delores is recognized for the purpose of an amendment

thank you mr. chairman i have an amendment at her desk and i ask unanimous consent uh that the reading of the amendment be dispensed

without objection the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the general lady is recognized for remarks on her amendment

i rise to offer this amendment to prohibit um to i'm sorry to prohibit the closure of two us forest facilities uh uh forest service facilities that are doing critical forest research including anti-invasive species work in my district and to highlight the lack of transparency from this administration regarding the forest service in hampton connecticut the forest service research and development lab has been a at the forefront of fighting invasive insects and diseases that threaten forests in the Northeast. Researchers there have helped combat the spread of species like the spongy moth, the Asian longhorn beetle, and the spotted lanternflies. Invasive species invasive species like these are a major threat to New England, with one recent study finding that invasive insects are now responsible for nearly a quarter of tree deaths across the Northeast. At a time when invasive species are spreading, and an agriculture secretary memo from last december specifically lists quote " protecting the integrity of american agriculture from invasive species" end quote. As a research and development priority, I am baffled by the USDA's attempt to close these facilities without an adequate explanation or a thoughtful plan for how to preserve the research conducted there. And the Hamden lab is not alone. The USDA's broader restructuring plan aims to close at least fifty-seven research facilities across the country consolidating them into a handful of research facilities or co-locate them with other facilities that is in alabama and alaska and and and and and huntsville alabama anchorage alaska monticello arkansas uh in connecticut i mentioned tallahassee in florida um lexington kentucky um louisiana pineville and tioga uh uh utah cedar city logan and ogden texas nacogdoches nash nacogdoches i think i got that right after a while oregon portland ohio macarthur long list fifty seven of them are at risk and they uh are are on a on a on a cutting board here so um i believe if the usda believes the consolidation of forest service facilities is necessary then we ought to get uh as the congress a complete plan for how the usda will insure the continuity of programs at those facilities. We also need to see a full plan for how consolidating facilities would impact the staff who cannot work from different facilities uh than they currently do. Despite the USDA's insistence that this reorganization will not affect research projects, it is not intended to force out researchers. I offer the amendment to protect all of these facilities, which are an example of how consolidating research could have direct effects on existing research projects. invasive species research is not something that can be done from afar it's time and labor intensive it's highly localized requiring frequent trips into the fields and woods where these species live shifting employees and facilities far away adds additional costs and delays

uh-huh

time sensitive research furthermore the agency's insistence that this is not a final decision have left employees and their families in limbo for months wondering if they will have to uproot their lives USDA makes it clear on their website that the list of facilities subject to closure could still grow. I have concern that the administration is handling the reorganization. Many of you may also be concerned about the impacts on your districts. Eager to work with my colleagues to understand how the Forest Service facility closures would affect your districts as well. Uh, I will work to hold USDA accountable for the full reorganization plans for the Forest Service moving forward. And I offer the amendment to address the specific impact we already know this reorganization would have on my home state. Stopping invasive species should be a bipartisan priority. My facilities and others like it should not be shuttered out. I'm proud to uh uh uh uh to to put forward the amendment and I urge my colleagues to support it. I yield back.

Thank you, General Lady, for her amendment, the gentleman from Idaho, Mr. Simpson, is recognized to address the amendment.

Thanks, Chairman. I rise in opposition to the amendment. The administration is currently undergoing a large reorganization with the Forest Service, including moving the headquarters to Salt Lake City. One of those novel concepts that maybe the employees ought to be closer to the lands that they actually manage and stuff. One of the main goals is to transition to a more state-based structure, shifting authority closer to the field by organizing leadership around state-level accountability and creating efficiencies throughout the agency. by making fiscally responsible decisions. One of those efficiencies includes assessing the need for facilities, not only the significant costs associated with leases, but the three billion dollars in deferred maintenance. Several of those facilities don't even have forest service staff uh in included in them. I understand the lady's concern. I think during a reorganization everyone is concerned about how things are moving and what they're my job is to make sure that the forest service is doing their job that they're doing what we want them to be able to do i don't really care how they're organized so much as long as they do the job i want them to do it in the cheapest way possible the most efficient way possible but do the job that we expect them to do so if this reorganization helps them to streamline their operations and be more effective then i'm supportive of what they're doing but i will tell you

you might know how much

when we get through with this appropriation pill where when we get to when we get to september i plan on having the chief come over i have talked to him personally on the phone about the reorganization and stuff but i'd like him to come over for a hearing and explain the efficiencies that they plan on creating with uh this reorganization and how it is supposed to work better and and so forth so i don't have any problem with that but i would oppose this amendment at this time cause i don't wanna tell them i just wanna tell them the job i want done so we will have them come back over and talk to us uh and sit down with the chief and have a hearing on that so uh i currently rise in opposition to this amendment uh and i would encourage my colleagues to do the same

thank you gentlemen for your remarks general lady from may miss pingree is recognized to address the amendment

uh thank you mr. chair i thank the lady uh general lady from connecticut for offering this amendment and urge support. Up to this point, the USDA has provided insufficient information to the committee on its proposed reorganization. I asked the chief of the forest service about this reorganization during the subcommittee's forest service budget hearing, and it is clear to me that the USDA does not have a fully developed plan for this reorganization and how to minimize the impacts that are critical to forest service, work and staff. However, as far as I can tell, it seems like the USDA is moving forward i am concerned about the potential impacts to forest service staff as we have seen in other similar reorganizations and agency headquarter moves staffing often suffers greatly i'm also concerned that the usda is not properly taking into account feedback from the staff the tribes states congress and other stakeholders in its development of this reorganization so i fully support this amendment which highlights some of the pitfalls of this reorganization. And I am concerned about the pitfalls and the concerns and the potential impact on my home state of Maine. Maine as I often tell you is the most forested state in the nation. And it benefits greatly from the services of the forest service such as forest research, which will be impacted by this reorganization. Maine is home to the Penobscot, the Massabesic, the Howland experimental forest. And the research done in these forests has shaped landscapes and sustainable forestry in the Northeast for decades. Other New York Northeast states like New Hampshire and Vermont also have research stations at risk of closing. This type of long-term research cannot be reconstructed. It makes us for- vulnerable to forest health threats that put our timber supply and our forest productivity at risk. The list of potential facility closures is still under development, according to the Forest Service, so even more of our facilities in all of your districts may be impacted moving forward. So I fully support this amendment, I look forward to continuing the oversight of this reorganization plan with my colleagues on the subcommittee and I yield back.

Good idea. Thank you, that's warm.

I thank General Leidy, are there others wishing to address the amendment? Seeing none, General Leidy from Connecticut is recognized for one minute to close.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I I I take the chair at at his word uh i i i too uh if something isn't working or some of these uh uh you know places are not doing their job or they don't have staff or they but we we have not had any opportunity to review uh any any plan and maybe we should uh say please don't shut these facilities down until they we have a uh an opportunity to review the program and the plan and what are the reasons why they're being shut down uh if they not worked if well we we have no idea we are just uh uh being the recipient of a potential list of of of of closings and as the um the ranking member mentioned the list is under development so there are fifty seven now and

uh-huh

um this goes through so many of the districts are the people who are sitting in this room and they are valuable resources uh uh they they they should not be shuttered without any kind of a clear and compelling evidence that the new model can achieve similar success i would think we would want to know that before they start to shut places down countering the rise of invasive species across this country should be it's a bipartisan priority This amendment really affirms that. I I would hope I could have your support on this amendment or and I would just say to to the to the chair are are you willing to talk to the forest service and say we we're not gonna shut these places down until uh there is a review of the uh uh of your your proposal and your reorganizational plan, cause we need to have input into it. Chairman?

Regretfully.

Would you be willing to do that?

are you asking me

i'm asking you

i wou

and to say let's hold let's not shut these places

i would be more than happy to call the chief and have a conversation with him along those lines

ok if that's the case and then i you know i take you at your word uh trust your you know if we can have this hearing you're talking about and and and make our case of why or have them make their case about why we should do that uh then i would uh uh you know say let's do that nothing gets shut down until we have that opportunity good enough and in which case that i would i i then i would withdraw the amendment ok

is that the first live negotiation on television that uh

you you get it while you can mr. chairman

oh as a general well i i'm delighted to see this cooperative uh exchange is the general lady withdrawing the amendment

i withdraw will withdraw the amendment based on my conversation with

i thank the general lady ok uh

yes ok

gentlemen from texas mr. cuillard before you leave actually next up was miss wassilman schultz but she is not here i'm looking trying to balance the time out i don't know how long your amendment would take

so it's gonna be uh one minute

then why don't we allow you to offer your amendment after that we'll go ahead and recess and

ok ok mmm

go down and vote and i will recommend to all of you if you haven't had the blueberry pie

ok

you really should it's really good So, gentleman from Texas, Mister Cuellar is recognized for the purpose of an amendment.

Uh, thank you, Mister Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk and I uh ask that we dispense with the reading.

Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment.

Mister Chairman, uh, there is a program uh that provides funding for border communities, just like our uh friend from uh West Virginia just said a few minutes ago. You know, people don't have water, don't have sewage, uh, sometimes don't even have electricity, third world conditions. uh this is a program that works with the natbank that was set up uh during uh nafta uh program so it provides uh funding and uh it got reduced by uh ten million dollars uh asking that it uh the money uh be put uh back again i'm offer withdraw this amendment and hopefully i can work with the chairman and the ranking members so we can try to add that amendment i mean that uh ten million dollars back to this third world conditions that we have along the us uh border

he's too old no not if he's gonna withdraw but ok

so is the gentleman withdrawing or

yeah so and i'll be happy to work with both the uh chairman and the ranking member on that with that i offer and let's go vote

uh thank you gentlemen uh votes have been called the committee now is in recess and please return properly at the conclusion of the last vote series so we can continue consideration of the bill uh well so yeah well we have to

that all the committee members

committee will reconvene uh gentlelady from florida miss wasserman schultz is recognized for the purpose of an amendment

thank you mr. chairman i have an amendment at the desk and i ask unanimous consent to be considered as read

without objection the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentlelady is recognized for remarks on her amendment

thank you mr. chairman i wanna start by saying that i understand that this is not an ideal situation not for the mikusuki tribe of or for the state of florida or for the committee the house has already done its job but unfortunately that was not an enough to resolve this pressing issue for the mikusuki tribe of florida this is a common sense amendment that would attach provisions that have already passed out of the house natural resources committee and passed off the house floor unanimously everyone in this room has supported these provisions at least once and some of you twice I've spoken to a number of you about this issue in recent months and I came to the interior member day and raised it directly to the chairman and ranking member. Adopting this amendment would allow the Osceola camp to be added to the Miccosukee reservation, and would direct the tribe and interior department to jointly protect the camp from flooding during the ev- ongoing Everglades restoration projects. And I wanna make a couple of things clear right from the start. This would not appropriate or authorize new spending outside of the work we have already approved. The Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that. this is not a change that affords the tribe any special treatment or fast passes from a legitimate process or review the reality is the tribe came to the everglades after being driven from their homes in the early eighteen hundreds as the mikosukis moved to what is now everglades national park they formed temporary camps on tree islands the water that flows through our river of grass was a source of food water and a means of transit depot tiger celebrate sell settled on a tree island at the turn of the twentieth century her son john tiger pool was born there and later helped found the camp but the construction of a new major roadway split their camp and it dried up the water that they relied upon forcing the family to move to a different part of their camp family members still live visit and protect the land where depot tiger's home once stood none of these facts are in dispute what is happening now is we are again changing the direction of the waterway water flow is being restored as we lift the road that split the camp and we're to unwind the damage down to the local environment. But when that water returns, it will put the camp in jeopardy. That is why we give the Department of the Interior the mandate to work with the tribe to protect the camp, and why we should also fix our mistake of the past and recognize this camp as a part of the Miccosukee reservation. Granting this proper status would prevent Congress from having to come back again and pass another change to encompass new work or projections as work on SERP continues. Protecting this land and the Miccosukees' ability to live there must never be sacrificed to party politics. Our nation made a commitment to the Miccosukee and hundreds of other tribes to protect their lands resources and sovereignty. Congress must stand by that commitment and I would like to urge you to do that just that and vote yes on this amendment but we need to make sure that we make a collective commitment and I have been working with the gentleman from Florida Congressman Diaz-Villars on this issue and working to sort this all out so that this can get resolved um if it cannot be resolved in the way that we are going to attempt to resolve it then i will back again to ensure that we do the right thing and ensure that the Miccosukee tribe has rights to land they've always held and that they are able to continue to live with their traditions on the land that has been sacred to them for hundreds of years with that mister chairman i withdraw the amendment

Thank you, General Lady. The amendment has been withdrawn. Gentleman from Wisconsin, Mister Pocan, is recognized for the purpose of an amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk and I ask that it be considered read.

Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. So, um, this is amendment about, uh, whether or not we're gonna have any funds going to what uh i think is officially called the white house east wing monetization project but known uh throughout our districts as the president's ballroom um i heard the committee chair on the arch talk about the job of this committee is not to say what we're not gonna fund it's to fund things um but this is a different situation in many ways because uh the president's already without approaching congress torn down the east wing of the white house uh he he's also got some arches and and a ring ready for u. f. c. fights um we're just missing some cars on cinderbox and uh maybe a banjo we can get to full uh idiocracy of the movie but uh you know right now it looks like a tornado hit uh a theme park is what it's kind of looking like up at the capital and before he can go ahead and fund uh what he wants to fund which would be a a dwarfing ballroom ninety thousand square feet ballroom uh bigger than the white house itself very likely looking like a golden goose flew in and vomited gold on it um before we do that we should have some kind of a say about it and we're not um that's my problem is you know congress uh co-equal branch of government but in charge of the power of the purse court in article one of the constitution is more than silent on this so we're just kinda letting it all happen and you know this is something that people back home i just did six town halls last week one in every county this was one of the top issues people talked about uh the slush fund which fortunately is gone um although i guess the president still gets future uh safety from irs investigations but this is something that is people are having a hard time paying for groceries and everyday goods because of the erratic nature of tariffs and people are having a hard time with healthcare and utilities because of the big beautiful bill and now they're having a hard time paying for gas because of the war in iran uh they're wondering why uh the president at every whim gets an arch uh gets his picture on the passport or a two hundred and fifty dollar bill which hopefully we're we're not gonna do either uh but he just keeps putting his name on things and building things and in this case the ballroom is something significant significant enough and real enough he tore down the east wing this isn't a proposal this is a torn down east wing uh that something is gonna have to happen there and congress does have to have some sort of a say on this and uh this is simply saying uh no funds uh can be used because we wanna ensure congress does have a say in this and uh right now we don't now i know the president said this is about security and everything else he's gonna have eighty five thousand people on the front lawn june fourteenth watching some fights i i you know security may not be as secure in some days as others although if you saw he just said he may keep that up permanently at the white house uh he did say that today he might keep the arches and the uh fighting ring there uh as um

fight

a permanent fixture

you're welcome

look i don't care about having to say on that bluntly but i do if he's gonna say a ballroom that he promised would call tax cost taxpayers nothing was gonna be two hundred million in donations then it became four hundred million in donations and now he wants a billion dollars through the second reconciliation bill that is spending something mister subcommittee chair that so i i i know the last one you said look it's hypothetical we can't do it this isn't hypothetical the east wing of the white house is tore down i don't think they're gonna keep it uh looking like a construction site slash parking lot so something is gonna happen and this is where we should at minimum step up as a co-regal branch of government that has the power of the purse have some say in something like this so that's the argument it doesn't editorialize on it it doesn't say anything else it's simply saying uh let's make sure that no funds go to this until congress has a say and uh i hope that this is something at minimum uh we can do trust me every town hall this came up this is something people are talking about in your district and mine and uh hopefully we can step up as congress together and just make sure that we put back our role in how we spend money because this is gonna be spending money it looks like it could even be a billion dollars and with that i yield back mr. chairman

thank you gentlemen for this amendment gentlemen from idaho mr. Simpson is recognized to address the amendment

thank you mr. chairman surprisingly i'm opposed to this amendment The FY twenty twenty seven interior bill before us today focuses on addressing everyday issues that families across America are talking about. Maybe they're talking about the ballroom back in Wisconsin. You know what they're talking about in Idaho? They're talking about providing additional funding to unlock land for energy development to ensure the delivery of affordable energy to power homes, businesses and vehicles. They're talking about funding to help make our community safer. They're talking about addressing waste, fraud and abuse that's going on around this country. We promote job creation by removing regulatory burdens imposed by the prior administration that have hamstrung manufacturing and economic growth. That's what this bill does. Those are the issues I hear about from my constituents. I don't know what's going on in Wisconsin. But that's what I hear in Idaho. But it seems like others are choosing to prioritize inside the Beltway projects, such as the President's interest in making DC a beautiful and safe place to live. This bill does not provide, I repeat, This bill does not provide dedicated funding for the ballroom. They have mentioned a billion dollars, not for the ballroom. They say about two hundred million of it would be for the ballroom for increased security. About eight hundred goes to the Secret Service, for increased Secret Service. Anybody thinks that e- they don't need increased Secret Service on a president to spend what? How many attempts on assassination attempts on him? So I mean, you know, I don't have a problem with that, but that's not in this bill. So, it does provide, as I said, specified, dedicated funding for energy development, fighting wildfires, and upholding our trust and treaty obligations for tribal nations. I oppose this amendment and I would hope my colleagues would also.

Thank you.

I thank gentlemen, uh, general lady, Miss Ping, who is recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chair. I strongly support Mister Pocan's amendment, which says plainly, not one dime can be spent on Donald Trump's ballroom. This was a project that Donald Trump promised the taxpayers would not pay for. That was of course yet another broken promise from the president. Now, are Republicans going to sit back and let him stick the public with the bill? Families in Maine, and I'm sure your districts too, are worried about groceries, gas, housing, health care, Child care. And Donald Trump is worried about chandeliers, gold finishes, and marble floors. The White House is the people's house. He already shockingly bulldozed the East Wing practically overnight without permission or consideration. Republicans keep telling us there's not enough money for clean water, or museums, or climate science, or public lands, or basic services. Just look at the cuts we are making in this bill. But somehow there's always money for Donald Trump's pet projects. There's a tri- there's a choice here. Trump's ego or the public interest. Trump's vanity over the needs of working families. Now, I don't wanna hear about security. Give me a break. If the White House needs legitimate security upgrades, the president can make that case through the normal appropriations process. And Republicans should have no trouble, if he presents us with that, showing us the details. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment

thank you gentlelady are there other members wishing to address the amendment seeing none the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close

thank you mr. chairman uh look this the east wing is torn down something is gonna have to go there and they're gonna have to get money and permission if they follow the appropriate process uh to do so so far he has proven through his unified executive theory or whatever bs that that he and russ vod are coming up with uh that they can do whatever they want doesn't give a damn when we pass something as appropriations uh they're gonna either steal our funds or redirect

mmm

funds so we already are acting like a subservient branch of government

mmm

not a co-eco branch in this case it is highly unpopular to take uh ninety thousand square foot overshadowing ballroom that's gonna look like we know how it's gonna look larger than the white house and do this without any congressional authority whatsoever so this amendment simply says we retain that authority to do our actual authority according to the constitution and i certainly hope you would uh support that and i yield back mr. chairman

thank you gentlemen for his remarks the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from wisconsin all those in favor say aye

aye

aye

all those opposed say no

no

and you're the chair of the no's have it role call has been requested sufficient support has been demonstrated the clerk will call the roll

mister adderholt

no

mister adderholt no mister aguilar mister aguilar aye mister alfred mister alfred no mister amadei missus bice missus bice no mister bishop mister bishop aye mister calvert

no

mister calvert no mister carter mister carter no mister case

no

mister case aye mister siskamani

no

mister siskamani no mister klein mister cloud mister kleiburn mister kleiburn aye mister kleid mister kleid no mister kohl

no

mister kohl no mister qr miss dean

aye

miss dean aye miss deloro

aye

miss deloro aye mr. diaz-ballart

no

mr. diaz-ballart no mr. edwards

mr. bryan

mr. l z miss escobar miss escobar aye mr. espat mr. fleishman miss frankl

aye

miss frankl aye mr. franklin mr. franklin no mr. guest mr. guest no mr. harder dr. harris dr. harris aye mrs. hinson off aye on no for dr. harris mrs. hinson mr. hoyer

aye

mr. hoyer aye mr. ivy mister ivy aye mister joyce mister joyce no miss captor

aye

miss captor aye mister lolota

no

mister lolota no miss lee miss lee aye miss letlow mister levin miss milloy miss

no

miss milloy no miss mccullum miss ming

aye

miss ming aye mister molinar mister molinar no mister moore

no

mister moore no mister morelli

aye

mister morelli aye mister murvan

mmm

mister newhouse

no

mister newhouse no miss perez miss perez aye miss pingree miss pingree aye mister pokan

aye aye

mister pokan aye mister quigley mister quigley aye mister russenthaler

aye no

mister russenthaler no mister rogers

no

mister rogers no mister rutherford uh mister rutherford no mister shreve no mister shreve no mister simpson no no mister simpson no mister strong mister strong no mrs. no torres

aye

mrs. torres aye miss underwood

aye

miss underwood aye mr. valadao miss wasterman schultz

aye

miss wasterman schultz aye mrs. Watson-colman mrs.

aye

Watson-colman aye mr. womack mr. womack no mr. zinke

no

mr. zinke no

are there any members wishing to vote or change their vote gentlemen from new york

aye

mr. espiat aye

gentleman from california

aye

mr. harter aye

the other gentleman from california

i'm sorry i'm sorry

mr. levin aye

gentleman from north carolina

yeah

mr. edwards no

gentleman from texas

mr. cloud no

gentleman from tennessee

mr. fleishman no

gentleman from

did mr. heidman go

mmm yes

that's great

mister emmene

alright gentlemen from nevada

i think it's uh there are three before me as well

mister emmene no

uh gentlemen from indiana gentlemen from virginia

mister shreve oh oops i'm sorry mister mervan aye mister mister klein aye ok

i'm sure

no

did joyce

mister klein no

i didn't vote for that one

did joyce vote

mmm yes mister joyce voted

uh

i voted for that one

are there any other members wishing to vote or change their vote seeing none the clerk will tally

no

no i didn't change harris' name yeah i think he he said yes originally on this vote the ayes are twenty six the no's are thirty one the amendment is not adopted uh general lady from florida miss franklin is recognized for purposes of an amendment

yeah that's the lady over there thank you thank you mr. chair uh i have an amendment at the desk i ask that the reading be dispensed with

without objection to reading the amendment is dispensed with and general ladies recognize her remarks on her amendment

what listen this amendment should not be partisan because it's about something we all have i hope we all have them and that is our teeth this is about our teeth

no

uh my amendment requires that the environmental protection agency's new fluoride assessment be reviewed by the national academies of sciences engineering and medicine one of the nation's most trusted independent scientific institutions uh this assessment comes at a time when a long-standing public health practices including community water fluoridation are being questioned questioned by senior officials in this administration well i think you know who they are uh the the epa has the authority to review fluoride that's not the problem science should always be updated and uh as new evidence emerges. However, concerns are actually being raised by dental professionals, public health experts, not about reviewing fluoride in the water, but about making sure that the assessment is complete, objective, and based on all available evidence. And as proposed, I'm very sad to say, the current assessment assessment ignores fluoride's decades-long record of preventing tooth decay. It fails to distinguish uh between the important difference between higher levels of exposure and the recommended levels used in community water systems and a and a cherry picks which research to consider. And folks, that raises the real risk that it's gonna lead to inaccurate conclusions about fluoride the fluoride's effect on human health, which is happening of course in my home state of Florida. I hope our children grow up with teeth uh i'm worried about that uh but listen this could have far reaching effects as the assessment will be used by local and state governments to inform their policies uh surrounding florida and listen i'm not trying to stop epa from doing their job simply before decisions are made that could affect families across the country let independent experts review the evidence and make sure the science is sound because folks listen you know this if you ever had a tooth pulled it would toothache tooth decay means pain it means infections missed school for children missed work for parents and higher cost for families and for decades flora has florid has has helped prevent cavities and improved oral health especially for children seniors and communities with less access to dental care listen let's get real real cavities hurt dental bills hurt and no one should end up facing a drill or a pool teeth tooth because politics replace proven science so listen epa s new fluoride assessment should be peer reviewed by trusted independent scientific uh hub institution now the good news is this i'm not gonna ask for a vote because we have a real dentist who is in charge of this committee and i talk to him i trust him that we can work together to try to go through a process we can make sure that we work with the authorizing committee and administration to make sure that we're getting good information for our our future health so with that uh thank you for letting me rant and rave and mister simpson i really do look forward to working with you and i would draw the amendment

the amendment is withdrawn

there oh

i'm i'm the other chief you want to

oh they want to speak

ok

ok um general lady from new jersey this watson coleman

chairman i have an amendment at the desk and i ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of this amendment

without objection the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the general lady is recognized for remarks on her amendment

thank you mr. chairman my amendment would restore funding for the state revolving fund including the clean water and drinking water state revolving funds to fy twenty-six levels, including the supplemental funding from the IIJA in FY twenty-six. If there is one thing that my colleagues across the aisle and I sh- should agree on, it's that we are in an affordability crisis. And the state revolving funds are the main source of fu- federal funding for people to have safe and affordable water and reliable wastewater. The latest EPA needs survey found that water and wastewater systems need more than one trillion dollars over the next two decades just to simply comply with existing federal law state revolving funds help lower the costs of necessary water infrastructure projects and ease the burden on households and local businesses with the loss of federal support utilities will have to increase bills even more to comply with federal regulations according to the epa up to twenty million us households that's one in six americans have a unaffordable water service. According to HHS, one in five US households is in water debt, owing money to their water utility. SRF funding is necessary to help protect human and public health. About one hundred and seventy-six million people, more than half of the country, receive drinking water, which is contaminated by PFAS uh chemicals, and each year about seven million people get sick from the exposure. to the unsafe water. We have the power to address this. Without accounting for the state's losses from IIJ A, our progress on water infrastructure will falter. Without IIJ A supplemental funding in this next year, uh fiscal year, Mister Chairman, I should share with you that your state, Oklahoma, will lose fifty six point three million. Mister Simpson, your state of Idaho, thirty seven million Mister Amadeo, your state of Nevada is losing thirty eight million mister rest in chowder chowder your state of pennsylvania loses a hundred and eighty point seven million

uh-huh

mister cloud and mister elizabeth the state of texas is losing three hundred and twelve point two million mister zinke your state of montana is losing thirty seven point one million miss maloy your state of utah is losing thirty eight million and my state new jersey is losing a hundred and forty five point nine million We need to invest in our state's ability to afford water and infrastructure improvements, because all of our citizens d- have a desire and a need and a right to have safe and affordable water to drink. In this room, in this committee, we have an opportunity to make America affordable again. And in this bill, through this amendment, we can make that water affordable and safe. I support this amendment. I ask my colleagues to do so. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.

Thank you, General Lady, for amendment. The uh, gentleman from Idaho, Mister Simpson, is recognized to respond to the amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. I rise in opposition to the amendment. The primary reason I oppose this amendment is because without an offset, this amendment causes the bill to exceed our committee approved allocation. Over the past five years, the SRF's received a surge of supplemental funding totaling forty-three billion dollars. It's forty-three billion dollars, outside of the discretionary appropriation process. Over that same period, also provided fourteen billion to the SRS. This amendment would continue the same level of unprecedented spending to the SRS, which is more than five billion above the FY twenty-six enacted level. We simply have not ha- we do not have that uh allocation, even if even in a final bill we will not have that allocation. The FY twenty-seven interior bill before us today does not cut the SRS by the ninety percent reduction proposed in the budget request. In fact, the FY twenty-seven house bill provides seventeen million more in SRF money to states than our FY twenty-six house bill. I look forward to working with my colleagues on a final SRF funding amount in for the twenty twenty-seven year, but I oppose this amendment and I yield back.

I thank the gentleman and the gentlelady from Maine. Miss Pingree is recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you. I I thank the gentlewoman from New Jersey for this amendment and I urge you all to support it. This bill cuts funding to the states for water infrastructure. And the reason the majority made these cuts is simple, it's because they did not give the interior bill sufficient allocation. That allocation is a policy choice. And that is reflected in the funding cuts across this bill, including those to state revolving funds. These cuts will be felt even more acutely because this is the first year that states won't receive additional funding provided. by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. These programs are so important. They help states deliver safe drinking water, wastewater treatment, and stormwater management to thousands of communities. Reduced funding to all of our states threatens the viability of water infrastructure projects, forcing the states to either delay critical upgrades or shift the cost to the rate payers. Reducing this SRF funding would delay critical upgrades to drinking water and wastewater systems and risk exp to contaminants like PFAS and lead. And underfunded environmental agencies are already facing staffing shortages. So these further cuts would exacerbate the delays in permitting needed for economic development. Congress encourages continues to encourage states to take on greater responsibility for federal programs, yet funding cuts undermine the state's ability to accept or implement those programs' responsibility, responsibly. I know in coastal communities that I represent in Maine, they are facing compounded risks from climate change and aging water infrastructure. And these SRF cuts would limit it, limit the state's ability to respond proactively, and none of our states can handle more in their current budget. So I urge everyone to support this and I yield back.

Thank you, General Lady, for comments. General Lady from Connecticut, Mister Law is recognized to address the amendment.

thank you mister chairman i rise in support of this amendment which would increase funding for the state revolving funds the american people are demanding help with the cost of living that is what we should be focusing on as a committee but instead the majority has chosen to cut the funding that literally helps our communities maintain safe, clean drinking water. All our states rely on revolving funds to help finance water infrastructure projects, which are oftentimes time and capital uh time and capital intensive. Yet the bill before us cuts this funding to the states, cutting it by eighty-six million dollars, or nearly seven percent. This cut is compounded by the loss of infrastructure investment and the Job Acts which ended last year. This reduction of federal support for water infrastructure means that local governments, already struggling for cash due to the president's illegal freezing of so many grants and loan programs, will have to bear the brunt of financing expensive water safety and treatment products projects. Clean water should be available for all Americans, and the funding provided through the Interior Bill for Community Project Funding and State Revolving Funds helps to achieve that mission. CPFs and State Revolving Funds work in concert to address water infrastructure needs. States are able to utilize the state revolving funds to address major issues facing the state, while the community project funds allow members to advocate for our constituents and ensure that funds are directed to local communities that often don't have the resources to compete at the state level. And I want to be clear about something. Funding for community projects community projects does not come at the expense of the state revolving funds. They should both be funded robustly. The majority has chosen to set an allocation for the interior bill that is insufficient. They are making a choice to cut the state revolving funds. The EPA currently estimates that our nation's drinking water and wastewater systems will face over one point two trillion dollars in capital improvements in those needs over the next twenty years, just to maintain current levels of service and safety. Without federal support, the costs get passed on to the American people through utility bills, property or sales taxes, or cuts to other local government services. Americans voted to lower the cost of living, not to spike their water and tax bills. Yet, that is exactly what the majority is forcing on our communities. This is something we should be able to agree on, all of us, water, food, shelter, our bare necessities. Every single person here knows the importance of safe drinking water, and every person here should be. if something went wrong with our community's water supply. Failing septic systems, inadequate wastewater treatment are a matter of life and death. They can lead to contamination of drinking water sources with pathogens like E. coli or other microorganisms, causing waterborne diseases and what Mister Moore pointed out as causing cancer. That is what drinking water st- the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund is about. It is for places like Stockton, Pennsylvania, which had the state's worst water quality until it received funding to install a new water distribution line and prevent contamination of giardia, bacteria, and iron in its old system. It's - it is for small towns like Bessemer, Michigan, with a population of roughly w- eighteen hundred people, but which was able to receive a loan for critical water main and lead service line replacements. And it is for - and it is for protecting places like the Lake Washington Ship Canal, Salmon Bay, and Lake Union in Seattle, which received a hundred and sixty-five point three million dollars in low interest loans to help prevent as much as seventy million gallons annually of polluted storm water carrying toxins such as motor oil, metals, and pesticides directly into these crucial waterways. I know many of us are focused on securing funding for our districts through community projects. I am frustrated by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, who has accused lawmakers of raiding state and turning into grants for congressionally earmarked projects. This is simply not true. When Democrats controlled the house, we made water infrastructure funding a priority. We set an allocation for the interior bill that robustly funded the state revolving funds and provided community projects. Whether it's EPA's draconian budget request or the majority's inadequate allocation, Democrats are going to continue to fight for additional funding for state revolving funds. The American people are expecting us to deliver both, once again, safe drinking water, and this should not be a partisan issue. This is a bare minimum. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has said clean, safe drinking water is a top priority under the agency's powering the Great American Comeback and Quotes initiative. The first pillar of that plan opens by saying, and I quote, "Every American should have access to clean air, land and water, I will ensure the EPA is fulfilling its mission to protect human health and the environment. Yet, here we are again, faced with a bill that would cut the very things this administration claims is their priority. This is a choice, just like the majority's choice to add three or a trillion dollars to the deficit, to finance tax breaks for billionaires and the biggest corporations. Proud to uh to uh support this amendment, I urge my colleagues to support it. With that, I yield back.

Thank you, gentlelady, for comments, are there other members wishing to address the amendment? Seeing, oh, the gentlelady from Florida's

No, one. No, not one.

One. Seeing no other members wishing to address, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute to close.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. I I wanna stand with my colleague from West Virginia and offer this amendment in the gap for West Virginia and all the other states where we have accessed needs and challenges to safe, drinkable and affordable water. And in that in that vein, I offered this amendment and I recognize that how we spend our money is a reflection of our values. I hope that our my colleagues see that this is of value to all of our children and generations to come. I yield back. Thank you.

Thank you, General Leidy. The question is now on the amendment offered by the General Leidy from New Jersey. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

all those opposed say no

no no

thank you chair the no's have it and the amendment is not adopted

no that's fine whatever

general lady from new jersey miss Watson Coleman is recognized for the purpose of an amendment

mr. chairman i have an amendment at the desk and i ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of it

without objection the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the general lady is recognized for her marks on

thank you sir my amendment would restore funding for environmental justice initiatives under the epa which the bill we're considering today completely eliminates the decision to wipe out this funding is a legislative equivalent of sticking one's head in the sand i said that last year here we are again and again i find myself wondering how these funding cuts make life better for american people we're watching the trump administration spend money on vanity projects that everyday Americans did not ask for. We are months into a costly war that Trump started that has no end in sight and no one has asked for. Now our constituents have to worry about more pollution and the illnesses that come with it, because we are digesting from critical research and infrastructure improvements. Instead of standing up to Trump's spending habits, my colleagues on the other side want to offset them by cutting project projection protections that would improve life for people who are just living in a less privileged condition than we are due to the common practice of building pollution generating infrastructure near low income and minority neighborhoods there are racial disparities in air pollution and water quality that lead to disproportionate rates of of pollution linked illnesses such as um uh um asthma which is recognized seven point five times higher than in our white communities in our minority communities. A study from Harvard found that communities with larger black and Hispanic populations are much more likely to have toxic forever chemicals in the water that they're drinking funding environmental justice initiatives ensure that these disparities are accounted for as the EPA seeks to make the environment safer for everyone. And the funding was allocated in response to a real problem. Exactly two weeks ago, Mister Chairman, you were standing right exactly where you are now, and you said in response to my colleague, Mister Esfian, that it would be a really good matter for our authorizing bill to study the impacts of data centers. I happen to have a bill to do just that. And that research would be greatly helped by the reauthorization of funds for environmental justice research grants. Ignoring those disparities, will not make them go away pretending that racial inequality does not exist and pollution rates will not stop it our children will continue to get sicker at higher rates I won't make our drinking water it won't make our drinking water cleaner and it won't make our air quality better with my amendment one zip code will not determine whether or not one has access to clean water to drink and fresh air to breathe everyone has a right to live a healthy life. And the EPA, well, it has a responsibility to protect the environment so that this can become a reality, both now and for the future I inheritors of this planet. I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back.

Thank you, General Lady, for amendment, the gentleman from Idaho, Mister Simpsons, recognized to respond to the amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I rise in opposition of this amendment. First, this amendment does not have an offset and would exceed our allocation. When you offer these amendments you need to have the way to pay for them, somewhere in them. Second, I think we can all agree that everyone deserves access to clean air and clean water. The bill before us today provides funding for programs that benefit the health and safety of all individuals across the country. From the EPA's geographic programs to water and wastewater infrastructure programs to funding directly to states to implement environmental laws, This bill is intended to provide funding to any area that has an environmental issue and needs additional resources. I look forward to working with my colleagues to identify responsible uses of taxpayer dollars in order to conserve our natural resources and protect our environment for all Americans and I hope my colleagues will oppose this amendment.

Thank the gentleman. The gentlelady from Maine is recognized to respond to the amendment.

Thank the gentlelady from New Jersey for her amendment and I urge everyone to support it. This bill in its current form provides no funding for the environmental justice programs at the EPA. Last year the EPA shuttered the Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights, and put all the employees on administrative leave, most of whom have been or will eventually be fired. At the same time, this administration has arbitrarily stopped working on environmental issues, with tribes, low income, and rural populations, communities that have disproportionately been impacted by air and water pollution. President Trump has signed proclamations claiming to exempt some of the largest industrial polluters in the United States from protective health and environmental standards. These polluters are in places such as Louisiana's Cancer Alley and in other historically disadvantaged communities that will continue to suffer harm because this administration thinks environmental justice is a bad word. In the FAFY twenty-six conference, we defeated House Republican efforts to eliminate this program and included thirty million to continue environmental justice grants. Now, the EPA administrator tells us that he wants clean air, water, and land for all of America's communities. But if you are a marginalized community, you will continue to be marginalized. I urge support for this and I yield back.

Thank you, General Lady, for your comments. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? General Lady from Ohio.

Uh, thank you. Uh, Mister Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment offered by the uh, General Lady, our dear colleague, Miss uh Waters uh, Watson Coleman uh, from New Jersey. Let me state that I represent Industrial and Agricultural Production, Production, America. That means heavy rail, heavy metals, heavy trucking, triple tractors, exhaust, smoke, gases, toxic effluent, Uh, no. and legacy waste, We should have a few more minutes. that is, believe me, toxic. The EPA's Office of Environmental Justice was founded And blow that ship one time. uh in nineteen ninety-two under a Republican president, President George H. W. Bush. And since then the office has been operated under both democratic and republican leadership. Yet last year, after more than thirty years of good work, the current administration decided to terminate this program, leaving people and communities to fend for themselves in very negatively impacted and polluted places. Pollution does not recognize politics or political boundaries. Too many of us have toxic environmental damage in containment uh facilities that are not the best, in our districts. Take my district. It sits along the southern shore of fresh water Lake Erie. We have to deal with not just harmful algal blooms, but train derailments with toxic spills, agricultural runoff, strategic metal waste that's been buried for years, polluted wells, you name it, we got it all. The long-term consequences, um, especially with materials like spent beryllium, or aluminum, or lead, and so many other pollutants that are equated with Industrial America before it got smarter, we still have to clean up from the last century. We have engaged citizens from the Junction Coalition, the Lake Erie Waterkeepers, and so many other groups on community-based research to devise solutions to local, state, and federal agencies and institutions of higher learning, frankly, that got a whole lot to learn about our part of America. These intergovernmental partnerships and local collaborations without adoption of this amendment.

I agree.

And that will mean more cancer,

What a wonderful Right. word.

uh, more kidney and liver diseases, more blood and lung diseases. We know these well. Just go to the Workman's Comp Op uh office in any state capital and find out the people that have died from breathing and living near this stuff or drinking water that's polluted. So our doctors, engineers, toxicologists, uh, scientists work to understand the potential long-term impact of um these waste dumps and legacy toxic sites, trying to prove why these people are dying. We must ensure the communities most affected have access to federal programs to clean them up. Maybe we need more women in Congress, maybe we're used to cleaning more things up, I don't know. But we have to have more consciousness of what is going on in our communities. The EPA's Office of Environmental Justice has helped advance environmental policy and force civil rights laws deliver grants and provide technical assistance to communities most impacted by environmental contamination we must ensure the continuation of this office and its grant program so that federal resources can reach and protect all impacted communities and the people that live in them. I encourage all of my colleagues to support this amendment. Thank you and I yield back.

Thank you, General Lacey, for your remarks, and the lady from Florida, Miss Washington-Chilts is recommend uh recognized for comments on the amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in strong support of Congresswoman Watson Coleman's amendment to restore funding for environmental justice efforts at the EPA. Environmental justice is not just some abstract comment, concept. It is not quote, the Green New Deal, it's not socialism, or the latest far right boogeyman. It is a simple question of whether everyone, not just the wealthy, are truly entitled to clean air and clean water, no matter where they live or how much they earn. whether a neighborhood threatened by industrial pollution or toxic exposure, receives the protection and resources it deserves. It should surprise no one that the burdens of pollution tend to fall more harshly on low-income and historically marginalized populations. Cancer clusters, asthma, breathing problems, and a myriad of other health problems are common in communities that have unjust environmental impacts because they are next to data centers or electric utility monitors and so many other large scale industrial impacts. For too long and even now, black, Hispanic, and tribal communities, rural areas, and low income neighborhoods of every race feel the brunt of that pollution burden. And it's a weight that only deepens all the existing health and economic disparities. But the Republican bill before us eliminates environmental justice funding entirely. And that is an is an uncountable act in any year. But it's especially dangerous when President Trump's EPA systematically dismantles protections against toxic pollution. Trump declared an emergency on the first day of his administration to functionally discard the Clean Water Act. His EPA repealed restrictions on mercury and other extremely dangerous pollutants that give Americans brain damage and cancer when exposed. They've proposed repealing safeguards against ethylene oxide, a cancer-causing chemical that threatens communities living near commercial sterilization facilities. And it's moving to roll, roll back drinking water standards for PFAS forever chemicals, which are linked to cancer and neurological disorders. Yet where is the Maha outrage? While President Trump's EPA shreds restrictions on carcinogens, forever chemicals, mercury, and other toxic pollution, this bill adds insult to injury? by eliminating the last line of defense for the people most exposed to those dangers. These impacts hit especially hard in places like South Florida, where every day we feel the impacts of ignoring the effects of human behavior on our ecosystem. This amendment restores funding to carry out that work. It says we do not have to choose between clean air and clean water, between public health and economic security, or between one vulnerable community and another. Republicans characterize this funding as irresponsible spending. But nothing could be further from the truth. When we fail to confront the harsher impacts that pollution has on black Hispanic tribal and rural communities, their families will continue to unfairly suffer, resulting in sickness and death. And that is not hyperbole. But we all pay orders of magnitude more down the road to make up for the devastating damage that we do to our larger environment. I urge support of the gentlelady's amendment, and I yield back.

Thank the gentlelady for her remarks. Are there others wishing

mr. chairman i think that uh this amendment that i'm offering speaks volumes about who we are we already know the whole world knows that donald trump doesn't care about people of color and doesn't care about people who are not very wealthy he there are questions about whether or not all the members of congress believe that also But to not vote for this amendment, to agree that you eliminate all effort to establish equality in environmental protection, speaks volumes as to who you are and what you stand for. And I, um, I hope that you stand up here and support this amendment, because it's for your community and my community. and every community across this country. I yield back.

Back to the General Lady. Uh, the question's now on the amendment offered by the General Lady from New Jersey. All those in favor say aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed say no.

No.

No.

Paying the chair, the no's have it. Roll call has been requested. Sufficient support has been demonstrated. Clerk will call the roll.

Mister Adderhall. Mister Adderhall, no. Mister Aguilar. mister alford

alfred yes

mister amade mister amade no mrs. bice mrs. bice no mister bishop

ok

mister bishop aye mister calvert mister calvert no mister carter

no no

mister carter no mister case

aye

mister case aye mister siskamani mister klein mister cloud mister cloud no mister kleiburn

uh-huh

mister kleibern aye mister kleid mister kleid no mister kohl

no

mister kohl no mister cuillard mister cuillard aye miss dean mister loro

aye

mister loro aye mister diaz-belart mister diaz-belart no mister edwards mister lz mister lz no miss eskabar miss eskabar aye mr. espayot

aye

mr. espayot aye mr. fleishman

no

mr. fleishman no miss frankl

yes

miss frankl aye mr. franklin

no

mr. franklin no mr. guest

no

mr. guest no mr. harder

aye

mr. harder aye dr. harris

aye

dr. harris no mrs. hinson mrs. hinson no mr. hoyer

aye

mr. hoyer aye mr. ivy

aye

mr. ivy aye mr. joyce miss captor

aye

miss captor aye mr. lolota

no

mr. lolota no miss lee

miss l

miss lee aye miss letlow

aye

mister levin

aye

mister levin aye miss malloy

no

miss malloy no miss mccullum miss ming

aye

miss ming aye mr. molinar

no

mr. molinar no mr. moore mr. moore no mr. morelli

aye

mister morelli aye mister murvan

aye

mister murvan aye mister newhouse mister newhouse no miss perez miss pingree

aye

miss pingree aye mister pokan mister pokan aye mister quigley

aye

mister quigley aye mister russenthaler mister russenthaler no mister rogers

no

mister rogers no mister rutherford mister rutherford no mister schrieff

no no

mr. shreve no mr. simpson

no

mr. simpson no mr. strong mr. strong no mrs. torres

aye

mrs. torres aye miss underwood

aye

miss underwood aye mr. valadao mr. valadao no miss washington schultz

aye

miss washington schultz aye mrs. watson coleman

aye

mrs. watson coleman aye mr. womack mr. womack no mr. zinke

no no

mr. zinke no

are there other members wishing to no are there other members wishing to vote or change their vote gentlemen from ohio

mister joyce no

gentlemen from virginia

no vote mr joyce for virginia

mister klein no

gentlemen from missouri

no votes

mister

aye

miss dean aye

are there others wishing to record their vote or change their vote seeing none the clerk will tell thank you on this vote the ayes are twenty six and no's are thirty three the amendment is not adopted the ayes are twenty six and no's are thirty three the amendment has been made i'm sorry My understanding there's still discussion going on in the Republican-on-block, so we're gonna move to the gentleman from New York. Mister SBI is recognized for the purpose of an amendment.

Chairman, I have an amendment on the desk and I ask unanimous consent to dispense a reading of such.

Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and the gentleman is recognized for remarks on his amendment.

Mister Chairman, I'm deeply concerned about the cuts to environmental justice programs and how these cuts continue to exacerbate health outcomes in disadvantaged communities. My amendment urges the EPA to report on the projected public health consequences of any reduction in environmental justice related programs and staffing. For far too long, Mister Chairman, low income communities and communities of color have disproportionately borne the burden of pollution, toxic waste, and environmental hazards. These communities in my district, Mister Chairman, take public transportation. They conti- they contribute far less to pollution. And yet, they're hurt far more. They're often the same communities that already face high rates of asthma, cardiovascular disease, cancer, and other chronic conditions. Children and seniors are specifically especially vulnerable to poor air quality and environmental contaminants. Environmental Justice Program help identify these disparities and direct resources towards addressing them. They're critical to the health of a young boy or girl suffering from asthma. The asthma pumps are not blue. They're not red. They are in blue states and red states. And we must give them to all children. When we cut these programs, we are not only reducing a line item in the budget. We are reducing our ability to prevent illness before it actually occurs. More exposure to pollution means more asthma attacks. We have asthma alleys in many poor neighborhoods where children miss school, where children and seniors also miss appointments. even with their doctors because they cannot make it when they have a serious respiratory attack. This means higher health care costs, missed days of schools and work, and increased strain on the local health care system. Environmental justice is not just, as I said before, for blue states, it is often very pronounced in red states. Investing in this program protects everybody in our country. This must be a bipartisan issue. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I believe that we have an obligation to protect our most vulnerable citizens. This includes investing in better health care and better health outcomes. If we take away funding, we should understand the consequences of these actions. For these reasons, Mister Chairman, I ask for the support of this important amendment, and I yield back.

Thank the gentleman for his amendment, the gentleman from Idaho, Mister Simpson, is recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you Mister Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment, similar to the amendment we just discussed. I again reiterate that this bill provides funding for health and safety for all individuals across the country. In some instances the funds, uh the funding is distributed to States first and the States

thank you gentlemen general lady from may miss penguins recognized to address the amendment

thank you mr. chair i thank the gentleman from new york for submitting this amendment We had an extensive discussion of environmental justice in the last amendment, and it is so clear that environmental justice funding is critical to protecting marginalized communities that suffer disproportionate impacts of environmental pollution. If the majority was unwilling to provide funding for the program, I hope they will be willing to allow a report that measures the impact of its elimination. Oh yeah, sure, sure, sure. I support this amendment, and I yield back.

Thank the gentlelady. The gentlelady from Pennsylvania is recognized to address the um uh amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I rise in support of this amendment and I thank the good gentleman from New York for offering it. The amendment would require that EPA prepare a report on public health impacts of significant cuts to environmental justice programs. It's a report Don't we wanna know what works and what doesn't work? Don't we wanna know when we fund something, if it worked? And when we cut those funds, what impact that has? It's only a report. As my colleagues have discussed, this bill yet again imposes massive cuts to the Environmental Protection Agency, twenty percent. Within those cuts, environmental justice programs are hit especially hard. These are programs that help address the reality that communities of color, poor communities, uh, continue to face higher levels of environmental pollution and the resulting health impacts such as higher rates of respiratory illness, heart disease, and other chronic preventable conditions. If you've heard me speak before, you probably have heard me talk about Article One Section Twenty-seven of the Pennsylvania Constitution. It is a beauty. I wish we had such an amendment here at the federal level. It says that the people of Pennsylvania have the right to clean air, pure water, and the preservation of the natural, scenic, historic, and aesthetic values of our environment. Pennsylvania's public That's true. natural resources are the common property of all the people, including generations to come. As trustees of these resources, the Commonwealth shall conserve and maintain them for the benefit of all the people. The constitutional amendment, Pennsylvanians, and the obligations it articulates guide my work

Thank you, General Leidy. Thank you, General Leidy. Are there other members wishing to address the Are there other members wishing to address the Seeing none the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close Gentleman from New York is recognized

Thank you Mister Chairman. Again this is an important amendment These programs these uh programs that come out of environmental justice funding are very often, Mister Chairman, local. Very often, they clean up an area that's producing um an environmental condition that's adverse to children's health and seniors' health. And the funding has been cut. The communities are left empty-handed to address environmental justice issue at the local level. at the local level. This is not a super fun type of effort to clean up toxic sites as although that must happen as well. This reaches down to local communities like Harlem in my district and East Harlem in my district where you have an asthma alley impacting children on a daily basis. And you can see the drop in attendance in the schools. Children often have to miss miss school for weeks as they get a prolonged asthma attack. So, I urge all my colleagues to consider the health of our seniors, our children, and vote in favor of this amendment. I yield back, Mister Chair.

Thank you, gentlemen. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York. all those in favor say aye

aye aye

all those opposed say no

no

painting chair the no's have it roll call is requested sufficient support has been demonstrated the clerk will call the roll

mister adderhall

no

mister adderhall no mister aguilar

aye

mister aguilar aye mister alfred mister amadei

no

mister amadei no mrs. Bice mrs. Bice no mister bishop

no

mr. bishop aye mr. calvert

no

mr. calvert no mr. carter

no

mr. carter no mr. case

aye

mr. case aye mr. siskamani mr. klein

no

mr. klein no mr. cloud

no

mr. cloud no mr. kleibern

no

mr. kleibern aye mr. kleid mr. kleid no mr. kohl

no

mr. kohl no mr. quayar

aye

mr. quayar aye miss dean miss dean aye mr. loro

aye

mr. loro aye mr. diaz-ballard

no

mr. diaz-ballard no mr. edwards

no

mr. edwards no mr. elzey mr. elzey no miss escobar miss escobar aye mr. espiat

no aye

mr. espiat aye mr. fleishman

no

mr. fleishman no miss frankl

aye

miss frankl aye mr. franklin

no

mr. franklin no mr. guest

no

mr. guest no miss harter mr. harter

aye

mister harter aye doctor harris doctor harris no mrs. hinson mrs. hinson no mister hoyer

aye

mister hoyer aye mister ivy

aye

mister ivy aye mister joyce mister joyce no miss captor

no aye

miss captor aye mr. lolota

no

mr. lolota no miss lee miss lee aye miss letlow mister levin

aye mmm

mister levin aye miss molloy miss molloy no miss mccullum

aye

miss mccullum aye miss ming

aye

miss ming aye mr. molinar

no

mr. molinar no mr. moore

no

mr. moore no mr. morelli

aye

mr. morelli aye mr. mervan

aye

mr. mervan aye mr. newhouse mr. newhouse no miss perez miss pingree

aye

miss pingree aye mr. pokan mr. pokan aye mr. quigley

aye

mr. quigley aye mr. reichenthaler

no

mr. reichenthaler no mr. rogers

no

mr. rogers no mr. rutherford

no

mr. rutherford no mr. shreve

no

mr. shreve no mr. simpson

no

mr. simpson no mr. strong

no

mr. strong no mrs. torres

hmm aye

mrs. torres aye miss underwood

aye

miss underwood aye mr. valadao

no

mr. valadao no miss weissman-schultz no miss Washtenberg-Schultz aye miss Watson-Coleman miss Watson-Coleman aye mr. Womack mr. Womack no mr. Zinke mr. Zinke no

are there any members wishing to vote or change their vote gentlemen from missouri

no

mr. Alford no

are there other members wishing to vote or change their vote saying none the clerk will tally

do quayle vote

on this vote there the ayes are twenty seven the no's are thirty three the amendment is not adopted a gentleman from uh uh gentle lady excuse me from nevada miss lee is recognized

thank you mister chairman i have amendment at the desk and i ask that the reading be dispensed up

without uh objection the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the general lady is recognized for remarks on her amendment

uh thank you mister chairman um folks this amendment's pretty simple for decades my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have said that we need to take an all of the above approach when it comes to our nation's energy demands and in fact nearly twenty years ago the former speaker of the house john boehner said there's no question that we're ever going to begin to seriously move towards energy independence which is good for our national security and frankly very good for our economy that we have to do all of the above and i agree and that's what this amendment does it ensures equal treatment of all forms of energy as part of the permitting process at the department of interior It does not give any special treatment to solar or to wind or anything else. It simply ends the political gamemanship that is raising costs for all of our constituents. Families across the country are seeing their electricity bills increase by an average of thirteen percent. And listen, rising energy costs impact all of our districts, whether they're Democrat or Republican. And it doesn't have to be this way. We can come together as appropriators and provide real permitting certainty. and real permitting fairness, and let investors, not Washington, pick the winners or losers. In my home state of Nevada, the sun shines for more than three hundred days a year. Solar is the cheapest and most abundant and most accessible source of energy in my state, and among those in our country. And, uh, Democrats and Republicans alike, including the Energy Secretary, Chris Wright, agree that solar is part of our energy future. But last July, the Interior Department actively chose to wrap the biggest piece of red tape around its energy permitting process that we've ever seen, publishing a memo that now requires the secretary or his personal office to sign off on every permit related to solar and wind energy. In my home state, our Republican Governor, Joe Lombardo, joined me. in sounding the alarm, telling the secretary in a letter shortly after this memo was implemented, quote unquote, that it not only stopped solar development on federal lands in Nevada, but also on private lands where federal approvals are required. More broadly, permitting reponization of politically driven attacks on America's solar and storage industry alone, continue to threaten over four hundred and fifty projects that could be powering sixteen million homes. Together these projects represent more than a third of all new planned power capacity in the US through the year twenty thirty. So, let's put a stop to the tit for tat for good. Uh, while my amendment would help solar and wind today, I'd emphasize to my Republican colleagues that when I say this amendment is all of the above that's exactly what I mean by voting to ensure a level

Thank you, General Leidy. The gentleman from Idaho, Mr. Simpson.

Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment for the second year this bill supports the President's strate uh strategy strategy strategy to unleash American energy, create jobs and enhance our national security. We support the administration's requested increase to the Bureau of Land Management oil gas and coal development activities. For many years the fossil fuel industry has suffered under the burdensome regulations and de facto bans that prevent those abundant and valuable resources from being harnessed in service of the American prosperity and and security. Under the current administration we finally have forward progress in rebalancing our energy sector and catching up from years of neglect. The administration has a process for reviewing projects. I am not inclined to tell the department what I, what it can and cannot consider when it reviews projects. And some aspects of this process are being reviewed by the courts. I'm inclined to let the courts, let that process play out for those reasons I oppose this amendment, and I yield back I would encourage my members to oppose that amendment, oppose this amendment.

Thank the gentleman, the gentlelady from Maine, Miss Pengrish, recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chair, thank you to the gentlelady from Nevada for submitting this very good amendment. Despite what some people might claim, it is clear this administration is not promoting an all of the above energy approach. Instead, this administration is repeatedly taking actions to stack the deck against clean energy and protecting large fossil fuel companies. This House bill before us today allows the administration's request to institute new fees on offshore wind companies, even while the Department of Interior fails to issue new leases and has paid companies nearly two billion dollars to abandon their current leases. Onshore renewable energy clearly has much of the same story, with roadblocks for renewable energy while protecting fossil fuel companies. I support this report language because it addresses those issues and s- furthers committee oversight of energy development by mandating additional reporting on the funding this committee provides and the status of permit processing. How are states and utilities supposed to plan for the future? if the Department of Interior unevenly carries out permitting actions for renewable energy projects for which this committee provides the funding. Americans are facing rising gas and utility bills. If we are serious about addressing those issues, we should not allow political objections to clean energy to stand in the way of increased energy production. I urge support for this and I yield back.

Thanks, General Leidy, gentlemen from California, Mister Levins, recognized to address the

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my friend, Representative Lee's amendment that ensures that when we say America is an all of the above country, that we actually mean it. Uh, Mr. Chairman, the strategy that this administration is employing doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. We've seen for the past year and a half the administration do literally everything in its power to stifle clean energy, the fastest growing and most affordable source of electricity. We've heard a lot about an energy emergency and skyrocketing energy prices, yet the administration is blocking the best sources of energy that can be built fast and can meet growing demand and can be built cheaply to keep our constituents' energy bills in check. I'm disappointed that this bill in many ways just fans the flames by imposing hefty inspection fees on offshore wind projects that are leagues higher than the inspection fees for offshore oil and gas projects. At the Interior Department, We've seen an all-out assault against wind and solar, despite the fact that these energy sources are vital to blunting the rising electricity costs across the country. Secretary Burgum has issued order after order, stacking the cards of bureaucracy against clean, affordable energy. Most egregiously, it's included in order to require virtually every single activity related to permitting wind and solar energy facilities to receive his personal sign-off as the Secretary of Interior. It's impeding projects on both public and private lands in red states and blue states alike. Secretary Burgum has also issued an order directing DOI to consider the quote capacity density of an energy project as part of these part of the permitting decisions. But what that does in practice is systematically disadvantage clean affordable energy. Then the department began to issue stop work orders for offshore wind projects all across the country. That hurt economic growth in jobs in red states and blue states alike. But here's the thing that's important. Whether you agree with that strategy or not, I would offer to you that they're doing all this in clear violation of the law. The courts have blocked the administration from enforcing DOI's actions that have effectively stalled federal permitting for wind and solar projects nationwide, because these actions were likely unlawful. And the plaintiffs faced irreparable economic harm from continued enforcement. The court struck down the administration's attempts to suspend work on offshore wind projects multiple times, finding that DOI's order was arbitrary and capricious. But this administration doesn't really want to listen to the courts. When this came up at congressional hearings in both the House and the Senate, it called the court order to resume permitting of wind and solar projects. And when the administration couldn't just issue the stop work orders to stop the projects, they started to pay companies billions of taxpayer dollars to walk away from their offshore wind projects. That would have delivered clean, affordable and reliable power to homes across the country. You know, for years we've had good bipartisan conversations here in Congress about reforming our permitting laws and we must continue those conversations. There are many who believe that now is the time to get a permitting reform deal done. But right now I can tell my friends that the most significant obstacle to permitting reform is the Department of Interior's obstruction of any hope of reaching a consensus around permitting reform we've gotta know that there's not a thumb on the scale of the permitting system. my friend representative lee's amendment would help us get on the right track to regaining the confidence that our government will permit energy projects in a fair and timely manner and for everybody in this room who has ever professed to support all of the above energy and i think most of you if not all of you have i hope you can join us in passing this amendment because that's exactly what it would do so i thank my friend representative lee for her partnership on this and mr. eminem i'll yield back

thank the gentleman for his comments are there others wishing to address any amendment gentlemen montana is recognized

you know as i as i sit here listening to reliable affordable clean energy and i listen to the levelized cost of energy uh well let me remind you what affordable reliable energy looks like it's called base load Alright? So when the wind doesn't blow, and the sun doesn't shine at night, how you gonna make up the base load? Well, you got a few, you got a few options. You can store it. Of course, that adds cost. Then the supply chain, oh, made in China. That's a, that's a problem. But affordability is about reliability and the base load in energy. And so, yeah, I agree with with all with all the above and every every energy source has its place. But you can't undo base load and say we're gonna make it up with sustainable, unless you're gonna do hydro and we're tearing down dams. So when you wanna talk about affordable energy, yeah, wind is the most affordable in a given situation if you knock out depreciation, you knock out the assets and you go, we're gonna make this, but As long as the wind blows, it it it makes sense. But again, when the wind doesn't blow, when the sun's not shining, you gotta make that energy up. And right now, the most affordable energy, uh, reliable, it's consistent, is fossil fuel. And until we move forward on nuclear, many nuke, and other options, the rest of it is just simple fantasy. And with that, I yield.

thank the gentleman are there any others wishing to address the amendment seeing none the gentlelady is recognized for one minute oh i'm sorry uh gentleman from georgia bishop is recognized to address the amendment

as in support of the amendment and i'd like to yield my time to mister levin

can't get in the way

i i thank my friend uh the gentleman from georgia and i thank my friend from montana as well uh frankly i wish you were still and the job uh because we'd have a a good and reasonable discussion and and i don't think he would have done a lot of the things that are being done right now so my personal belief is that you know you hear you hear a lot that renewables only look cheap because you hide all the cost of connecting them to the grid but the market already prices a lot of that into their decision making and renewables still win so the utilities the grid operators the people that i talk to they're not ideological about this. They're business people. And they buy the cheapest reliable power they can. And in recent years they keep choosing wind and solar and batteries because even after adding the storage and transmission costs, the delivered cost beats new gas today. Gas also has its own hidden cost that you don't hear about, which is fuel price volatility. When gas spikes, rate payers eat it. the sun and the wind don't sell a fuel bill or send a fuel bill they don't get more expensive when there's a war in iran or there's a constraint on a pipeline and a grid heavy on renewables is a hedge against exactly the price shocks that we are seeing now that fossil dependent systems continue to provide i would also say base load has become a concept that is relied on by opponents of wind and solar. But the reality is the grid no longer needs every plant running flat out around the clock. It needs the supply to match the demand minute by minute, and a flexible portfolio does that better than a pure base load portfolio. Sometimes big thermal f- plants fail as well, and sometimes they drop with no warning. So, distributed renewables, they, when they fail, they fail very predictably and very gracefully. We know when the sun sets. And, if you take a look at, um, the, the geopolitical argument is the other one that I hear sometimes. So, the fuel that you have to keep buying, you have to keep transporting, it's a permanent dependency on bad geopolitics. Sunlight and wind, they're domestic. they're free they can't be embargoed yes we have to onshore battery and and panel production we were trying to do that in the last administration that's an industrial policy problem that we're trying to solve but it's not a reason to lock in decades of fuel purchases once you build a wind farm the fuel is weatherproof it's price proof as far as land use i heard that and wind coexists today with farming and ranching i hear from farmers all the time that they appreciate having the renewable portfolio as part of their overall revenue um rooftop and brownfield solar uses land that's already developed so look i i i don't wanna continue here but what i will tell you in the year twenty twenty six um not having wind and solar as a fundamental part of a energy strategy in this country just makes no sense whatsoever and i appreciate my my colleague's words uh and i'll turn it back over i have nothing nothing else to say about this i think it's a straightforward amendment

i yield back my time

thank you gentlemen are there others wishing to address the the general lady from ohio is recognized to address the amendment

thank you uh very much mr. chairman i just have to stand up and say that um i believe in an all of the above energy policy and uh without it we don't have real competition uh either regionally or or nationally um so i'm not against the gentleman's uh uh remarks on the other side of the aisle regarding uh fossil fuels however uh i represent the most important domestic solar manufacturer in the united states of america i had the privilege of meeting the scientist inventor who created it and i believe that he will be the thomas alva edison of the twenty first century be aware that our grid is old All over the country it sags, we've had brownouts, all these things are happening. The great thing about solar is you can do it behind the grid. We're about to dedicate in Toledo, Ohio another small field, it's all been agreed to by everybody and it will probably save the local food bank forty to fifty thousand dollars a year. Solar development is moving forward at such a fast pace, and if we don't do it, believe me, the Chinese will and our. And we can't be in that kind of world. We gotta compete on all fronts, on all keys on the energy piano. We are growing as a country. And we have to be able to provide competitive power to our people. Our energy bills, if it hadn't been for some of the installations we've got locally, I mean, they've been doubling and tripling with these AI centers. And frankly, if it were up to me, I'd make sure that every one of these developers would bring in the power pack with them, because Our energy bills are going up for people who aren't going to directly use the AI uh immediately. So there are energy challenges around uh our country. There's also thermal recovery, I won't get into all of that, but again, you can do it behind the grid. And you can save a lot of money for your companies, when you when you have huge industries um, automotive manufacturing, steel manufacturing, beryllium, titanium things that we do in our area we need power and we need it regularly at affordable prices um the uh if it's properly sited if it's properly sited and you have to go through that locally you can do so much for your community and i just watch i watch solar develop from a platform about this big until now four massive corporations employing thousands of people with domestic solar so to me Uh, you know, I don't come from the richest community in America, but it might be one of the smartest, because we don't depend on, excuse me, a lot of government money. Uh, we try to make it in the market, both in industry and agriculture, and the fact that this is rising out of the glass city of Toledo, Ohio, I'm just so proud of it. And I'm so proud of everybody that works so hard to compete in a very on-level playing field globally. So, um, I just wanted to stand and put those comments, uh, on the record, and to say that, um, Uh, I hope when you vote today, you vote for the future, not the past. Thank you so very much. And you vote for an all of the above energy policy for our country. I yield back.

Thanks, gentlelady. Are there others wishing to address the amendment? The gentleman from.

Yeah, just real quick. Uh, when we're talking about energy scarcity, anybody have an idea of how many gigawatts of coal-fired power we took off the grid in the United States in last twenty years? Any idea? a hundred and seventy gigawatts of coal-fired power we took off the grid that's why we have energy scarcity problems right now in the united states that's enough to power a hundred and fifty million homes in this country that's why we're having energy scarcity issues

oh

and through really perverse investment incentives specifically in esg that coerce dollars towards political ideas instead of returns for companies is how we got all this money push towards this green energy nonsense now me personally all the above i'm for all the below the ground that's my that's my energy policy coal gas oil uranium that's what i'm about because that is base load energy and part of the problem you have with wind and solar is in peak hours you cannot ramp it up you cannot increase the amount of wind that's blowing or the amount of sun that is shining this is why coal and gas are so critical when you have peak hours and requirements when it's really hot or it's really cold that's why we're having brownouts though is because democrat policies took a hundred six seventy gigawatts of coal-fired power off the grid And now we got all these AI data centers eating up a smaller portion of the pie without reliable energy sources that are consistent reliable and non-intermittent. That's the problem on top of this. This is intermittent energy that can't meet the needs. We heard about China? China's gonna put more coal-fired power on their grid than we have in this entire country in the next twenty years. They're building two new coal-fired power plants every month. we're moving in the opposite direction so i just to me this whole thing doesn't even make any sense i and uh mr. chairman yield back thank you

thank you gentlemen are there others wishing to address the amendment uh general lady from illinois is recognized to address the amendment

mr. chairman i support the amendment and i would like to yield some time to my colleague from california mr. levin

ok so i'd i'd love to uh entertain um a discussion with my friend from west virginia on this but my understanding forgive me if i'm wrong about this but the dominant driver of retiring the hundred and seventy seventy gigawatts of coal plants was mostly the cheap natural gas from the shale boom which started around twenty O eight twenty ten utilities closed a lot of those plants cause gas was cheaper lot of the coal plants were old most built in the seventies and eighties they faced expensive maintenance It happened under both Obama and under Trump. Cole kept retiring through twenty seventeen to twenty twenty during Trump, uh, during a time when the president was then actively trying to save it. And there's strong evidence the cause was market forces, not regulation, that a president could just switch off or switch on. So those retirements happened under both parties. Some of the largest annual coal retirements occurred during Republican administrations. If policy were the lever you would expect that those retirements would track who was in the oval office but they don't they track gas prices they track plant age

that's right

and at the same time the capacity was retired but it was substantially replaced by gas and yes by wind and by solar the green didn't didn't lose a hundred and sixty or a hundred and seventy gigawatts of supply it swapped the fuel sources total us generating capacity has grown not shrunk So I think coal declined by roughly the amount, that is true, driven primarily by cheap gas, by aging plants, by the shale boom. Retirements continued under Republican presidents who tried to stop them. The capacity was replaced, continues to be replaced, rather than simply lost. If I'm wrong about this, let me know. I yield back.

You're wrong.

Well, I really thank, I really thank my colleague, Mister Levin, for those important points, and I thank my colleague from Miss. firstly for introducing this amendment that has been such a hot topic on our committee today and with that i yield back

thank the gentlelady and the gentleman are there other members wishing to address the amendment a gentlelady from iowa

to the gentleman from west virginia for a few rebuttal points thank you mister chair

thank you very much um you might remember during that same time in the obama administration everybody remember the clean power plant roll that shut down all those coal plants that's why they shut down because they put standards in that were impossible for any coal plant to meet and but oh yeah that's a hundred percent true and by the way if coal doesn't work why is china building it why is china building so many coal-fired power plants can somebody explain that to me why would they be doing that there's a reason they're doing that and because it's also it's also strategic you cannot export wind you cannot export the sun it's everywhere you cannot ramp it up when you need to but go back and look at the obama rule when that clean power plant uh rule came in and the war on coal was taking place in the obama administration the state of west virginia in two years lost direct and indirect coal mining jobs thirty thousand in two years direct and indirect so it didn't just happen obviously gas became competitive certainly it became competitive as competitive source but there's a reason though the chinese continue to build these plants because they know and for some reason we don't so i yield back thank you

i yield back mister chairman

i thank you uh are there other members wishing to address the amendment gentlelady from texas

thank you mister chairman i rise to support the amendment and i yield my time to mister levin

all right

please please go in the next room you

to my to my to my friend to my friend in west virginia i just i just looked at what china built in twenty twenty five this is newly added capacity china built three hundred eleven gigawatts of solar a hundred nineteen gigawatts of wind and seventy eight new gigawatts of coal So they built four hundred thirty gigawatts of new wind and solar, seventy eight gigawatts of new coal. They didn't do it out of the goodness of their heart. They did it because it made the most economic sense. So, I understand your argument, if you truly wanna be all of the above, if you truly wanna compete with China, but to, to kneecap solar and wind completely runs contrary to our, what I think are our shared objectives. One is energy security. That's, that's all China cares about. So, you know, again, sun and wind are domestic. Um, and I totally understand the intermittency and I, I think that the market factors that in and people have made their decisions. These utility folks are smart people. Uh, every gigawatt of renewables that we invest in is a gigawatt that can't be cut off by a blockade, can't be cut off by sanctions. So, you know, I think also China owns the supply chain. They made these really smart investments in the, in the supply chain, so it's cheap for them to do it. And, uh, they also care a great deal about having a a export dominant, um, clean energy supply chain, just as we presumably did and should again. It shouldn't just be energy dominance if it's one type of energy or another. Energy dominance ought to mean clean energy, it ought to mean every kind of energy. I don't see why that's controversial. I'll yield back.

Thank you, Mister Chair, I yield back.

Thank you, gentlelady.

are there other members wishing to enable the debate between west virginia and california to continue gentleman from maryland recognize

yes chairman i uh rise in support of the amendment as as the mister levin said it makes sense to broaden your supply from whatever source i happen to drive a uh uh a hybrid car sometimes it's electric sometimes it's gas it decides which is the good time to have each we ought to do the same and i yield my balance of my time to the gentlelady from ohio

i thank the gentleman

thank you

i thank the gentleman and uh obviously in support of the amendment but i did wanna say i sympathize with west virginia because that's what happened to us in ohio Not in coal, although we had coal plants close, but in industry in general, steel, automotive, crash. Neither Republican nor Democratic presidents gave a damn. And we've been building back since that happened. And I wait for the president, any president, that will look at our part of the country and help us more quickly, and help us with some intelligence out of that White House because we don't get government help, we build from the scratch up. We're not a capital city, we're not a financial center, we're not a big university center, and we've had to build our way back. So I'm saying this to the people who aren't necessarily in this room, but might be listening to us and thinking of running for president. We need somebody committed in that position who really cares about Industrial America and doesn't make us fall to the ground. That's why our politics is so mixed up around this country, because people worked their hearts out and they didn't benefit financially in their home communities. and it has been it has been a living hell and you've experienced the same thing so i just wanted to put that on the record at least i've said it thank you god bless you all and i support the amendment

oh mercy oh mercy oh mercy we need to be prepared for this

are there any others wishing to address the amendment i just issued an open invitation to my friend from west virginia my friend from california some evening when you have a lot of time come by smoke a cigar have a couple bourbons and i'll be your audience and you guys can keep at it

do it

but since there are i wanna recognize to close the uh gentle lady who started this this charitable discussion

i i i didn't realize although i have realized because we've had this conversation thank you mister chairman

gentle lady is recognized as well

i've had this conversation in many committees and um basically what i hear today is let's let the market decide right let's let's be for free markets well if we're for we're for free markets why is our industrial we're using permitting as industrial policy in this country to literally tip the scale. And I get it, oil and gas got the raw end of the stick under previous administrations. This isn't about the past, it's about the future. So let me just say this, now that you brought up China. China leads global installation, adding more solar capacity in a single year than the entire world combined. The sheer volume of deployment has allowed renewables to make up the majority of China's newly added generation capacities driving down their costs rapidly. Solar and wind installations in China increased seven point three times faster than they did in this country. You guys, this is literally about not tipping the scales. And I know there's a lot of bad feelings about oil and gas and coal But the bottom line is we are in a race. For energy. And we're in a race against China. And they're kicking our ass. And with that, I'll yield back. And I. Hope you support it.

I thank the gentlelady. Uh. The question is now on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from Nevada. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed say no.

No.

Opinion of the chair of the no's habit. roll call is requested sufficient support has been demonstrated the clerk will call the roll

mister adderhold mister adderhold no mister aguilar

aye

mister aguilar aye mister alford

no

mister alford no mister amity

no

mister amity no mrs. bice mrs. bice no mister bishop

aye mmm

mister bishop aye mister calvert

no

mister calvert no mister carter

no

mister carter no mister case

aye

mister case aye mister siskamani mister klein

no

mister klein no mister cloud mister kleibern

uh

mister kleibern aye mister kleid

negative

mister kleid no mister kohl

no

mister kohl no mister quayar

aye

mister quayar aye mister dean

aye

mister dean aye mister loro mister loro aye mister diaz-belart

l z

mister diaz-belart no mister edwards

no

mister edwards no mister lz mister elzie no miss escobar miss escobar aye mister espiat

aye

mister fleischman

no

mister fleischman no miss frankel

aye

miss frankel aye mister franklin

no

mister franklin no mister guest

no

mister guest no mister harder

aye

mister harder aye doctor harris

no

doctor harris no mrs. hinson mrs. hinson no mister heuer

aye

mister heuer aye mister ivy

aye

mister ivy aye mister joyce mister joyce no miss captor

aye

miss captor aye mister lolota miss lee

aye

miss lee aye miss letlow mister levin

aye

mister levin aye miss molloy

mmm oh yeah

miss mccullum

aye

miss mccullum aye miss ming

aye

miss ming aye mr. molinar

no

mr. molinar no mr. moore

aye no

mr. moore no mr. morelli

aye

mr. morelli aye mr. mervan

aye

mr. mervan aye mr. newhouse mr. newhouse no miss perez miss pingree

aye

miss pingree aye mr. pokan

aye

mr. pokan aye mr. quigley mr. quigley aye mr. reichenthaler

aye no

mr. reichenthaler no mr. rogers miss mr. rogers no mr. rutherford

no

mr. rutherford no mr. shreve

no

mr. shreve no mr. simpson

no

mr. simpson no mr. strong

no

mr. strong no mrs. torres

aye

mrs. torres aye miss underwood

aye

miss underwood aye mr. valadeo

no

mr. valadeo no miss washington schultz miss washington schultz aye mrs. watson coleman

aye

mrs. Watson-Cullman aye mr. Womack mr. Womack no mr. Zinke mr. Zinke no

are there any members wishing to vote or change their vote gentlemen from new york

no

mister lolota no

it's uh gentleman from the other gentleman from new york

aye

mister espia aye

general general lady from pent uh excuse me washington

miss perez aye

uh gentleman from texas

mister cloud no

gentleman from washington

uh the he voted

newhouse audiology is very difficult as for getting up so wave a hand or something if you haven't voted

miss miloy

general lady from utah

miss miloy no

are there others wishing to vote or change their vote obviously at the end of this vote uh we'll go in recess please come back as quickly as you can after the votes with that saying no others wishing to record their vote uh the clerk will talent

twenty eight for the day i was thinking twenty eight

i know it's funny but it's twenty eighteen i guess yeah i'm i'm a bit disappointed in it i'm i don't know if that's true

i don't know if that's true

yeah this is this is trippy to be true to me like i could grab a big piece of salmon and then just this is the one that i just didn't understand the whole thing

this vote the ayes are twenty eight the no's are thirty three the amendment is not adopted votes uh having been called the committee now will assess please return promptly to conclusion of the last vote series so we can continue to consider the legislation

i'm taking on a family matter ok so am i

well you're damn near the only democrat here to listen The committee is uh reconvened. I now recognize Chairman Simpson to offer a Republican on Block amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, uh, I uh, this has been a while getting this together to make sure we have all the language in it that we that we need. I ask that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and Chairman Simpson is recognized to explain the amendment.

This en blanc amendment includes several common sense provisions that reinforce the goals and priorities of the bill and of the administration. This first provision is one that we've included in this Republican en blanc amendment in the past it prevents the EPA from developing or issuing assessments under the Integrated Risk Information System or IRIS this language is consistent with what the administration is currently doing on IRIS to insure the program is not inappropriately used the second provision simply reiterates and protects the rights of mine claim holders who paid their mining claim maintenance fees to the Bureau of Land Management. The subcommittee was recently made aware of potential abuses of various processes that left valid claim holders vulnerable to theft and this provision seeks to remedy that situation fully within the scope of existing law. The third provision is report language that flags for DOI are concerns about the potential impact on communities on communities and agriculture of a potential ESA listing of species. And the fourth provision asks the agency to provide a report on new wind inspection fees that we include in the bill which are based on agency estimates of the necessary cost to conduct these inspection inspections. You've heard it said several times during the debate in this committee that we are somehow trying to make wind energy more expensive by imposing fees. Bessie uh is required to do inspection fees on oil and ga- or to do inspections, safety inspections on oil and gases uh uh platforms and so forth uh offshore. They are also required to do them on offshore wind. The interesting thing is is they have to pay a fee, the oil and gas due, for the inspections but they do it for free for wind because there's no provision for inspection fees. So this provides the fees that uh that are require or that will be required under this. And we've based it on what the cost of doing the inspection is, the same as we did with oil and gas. The fees are a little different, not to punish one or uh give favor to one, it is what it costs the department, what it costs Bessie to do these inspections. So That's all we're doing is the same for wind uh offshore wind that we do for oil and gas and stuff. That's uh to explain this and we wanna make sure that we know how they came about uh the the level of fees that they do with the wind inspection uh safety inspections uh for offshore. It's uh I think uh four provisions that are pretty simple uh and I would hope my colleagues would support this amendment and I would yield back the balance of my time.

Thank you, gentlemen. General Lady from May, Miss Pingree, has recognized respond to the amendment.

Thank you, Mister Chair. I rise in opposition to this amendment.

Huh?

This bill already includes more than fifty poison pill riders, and this adds even more. In particular, it adds a provision to prohibit funds to develop, finalize or issue assessment under the EPA's integrated risk information system known as IRIS. IRIS was created in nineteen eighty-five and has been used for decades to develop impartial toxicity information to set national standards and clean up hazardous sites. Its assessments quantify the highest safe level of exposure to a chemical, before it triggers health effects. It is widely respected in the scientific community and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine have affirmed the use of iris values. Efforts to undermine the iris program are not new, and the chemical industry has been systematically working to destroy the program. Project twenty twenty five advocated for ending the iris program, and the Trump administration has been taking steps to do just that. Just last month, a memo from the EPA deputy administrator stated that the EPA would be adding disclaimer language. to the program's web site,

Alright.

stating that its toxicity findings are not necessarily meant to be used in regulation. This amendment is just one more attack to on the IRIS program, and we must oppose that. Before I yield back, I want to point out that the en bloc also includes a substantial piece of authorizing language related to mining claim maintenance fees at the Bureau of Land Management. This seems to run counter to the argument we had heard during earlier debates, that we should

thank you general lady do other members wish to address the amendment seeing none the gentleman is recognized for one minute to close

um

oh i'm sorry Gentleman from Maryland's recognized for remarks on the amendment.

Thank you. The wind inspection fees, what are those? I'm not clear on what that is.

Are you asking me?

Yes, sir.

It costs money for Bessie to go out and do the inspection, safety inspections on both oil and gas uh leases and also on the wind platforms. They're required to do those. Unfortunately, they have to pay a fee for the oil and gas and the wind is free. They do those for free. We're just trying to level them.

Well, but I I guess what I'm trying to figure out is what are they actually inspecting? Cuz inspecting the wind quote unquote, I don't

Well, you have to do an you have to do safety inspections on them.

know what that is.

They're required to do safety inspections on them.

So, is it on the

In fact, they're harder to do on those than they are to do on oil and gas platforms.

So, it's on the the the machines or something that they're what what do they inspec what are they looking at? I

Structural, make sure it doesn't fall down, et cetera, et cetera. i don't know i'm not an inspector

thank you i appreciate that did you ok i yield back disproportionately honest

are there other members uh wishing to address the amendment seeing none the gentleman is recognized for one minute close

i thank the gentleman uh this is a good amendment in fact i disagree with uh the ranking members assessment of the iris We're not trying to diss uh to uh get rid of iris, and in fact I don't think uh the chemical companies as she said want to get rid of iris. But you don't use They're not supposed to use the results of the iris uh analysis for regulatory purposes. They're u- they're they're done to inform the science. But they're not supposed to use those for the regulatory uh aspect of it. So I mean that's the difference. And that's uh that's the concern that a lot of members have and a lot of uh frankly companies and so forth have. So I think it's a good amendment, I think the bill uh uh this improves the bill, and uh I would encourage my uh colleagues to support it.

Uh with that, the question is on the amendment, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye.

all those opposed uh

no

the opinion of the chair of the i's have it and the amendment is accepted a gentleman from california mister levin has recognized the purpose of an amendment

i have an amendment at the desk and i ask for unanimous consent that the reading of this amendment be dispensed with

without objection

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm proud to represent fifty miles of beautiful Southern California coastline and the vibrant coastal economy that relies on its clean and healthy ocean ecosystem. It's well known how much our coastline supports the economy, from tourism to recreation to fisheries to deep water port commerce.

Yes.

But what we don't talk enough about is the fact that our coastline is also home to a broad network of military installations, testing sites, and naval training areas that are essential to our military readiness, including Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton in my district. It's not just California, of course, that relies on a healthy coastline. Every one of us from a coastal state knows just how important it is to have a clean ocean for our constituents and our military, which is why I'm so concerned that the first proposal on the eleventh National Outer Continental Shelf program would open waters off the coast of California and in the Gulf of Florida to offshore drilling. Last year, the Interior Department proposed to expand drilling into the eastern Gulf near Florida, as well as the entire California coast, where no new drilling ban has taken place in more than fifty years. The US Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, Space Force and Coast Guard all use at least one range off California or in the Gulf, and at least two dozen military bases rely on these waters in some capacity. So I raise rise today to offer an amendment to prohibit leasing activities for oil and gas off the coast of California and in the Eastern Gulf, near Florida. Now let me show you for my first, I might ask Mister Morelli to help me here. There we go. Can everyone see this? Maybe not on the dais. Maybe I can go over here.

Well.

Hopefully you can see that. So, in California, the waters off our shore are actively used by the men and women of our armed forces to train, test, and maintain the readiness that keeps this country safe and that keeps our adversaries in check the waters off Southern California are some of the most militarily significant in the world this is where we project power into the Pacific yet as you can see the proposed leasing expansion in California overlaps significantly with areas that the US military uses for training and operations these offshore waters are where the service members rehearse the missions that matter most where next generation systems get tested, where readiness is built so that when the moment comes, our military is prepared. That includes the amphibious assault exercises, ship to shore raids, small unit landings, all of which are essential to how our servicemen and women train and certify for deployment.

Mm.

And folks, these are not opera- uh optional exercises, these are required before deployment. Now let us turn to Florida, Mr. Morelli. There you go.

Well done.

Now we've got our friends in Florida. Everybody can see this, I hope. The same is true on the Florida coast. The proposed drilling expansion in the eastern Gulf would mean real impacts to military readiness. This region, too, acts as a critical training ground, and retired military leaders have been ringing the alarm bell about the risks that new offshore drilling would pose in the Gulf. From weapons and aircraft testing to training exercises, having access to open water in the eastern Gulf, is critical to our military operations. Yet again, as you can see, the proposed leasing expansion significantly overlaps with military training and operations off the Florida coast. So think about what that actually looks like in practice. New drilling creates new physical and logistical conflicts in some of the most sensitive testing ranges in the country. It creates conflicts between commercial activity and military necessity that simply should not exist. Permanent oil platforms cannot be moved for military exercises. there's also an environmental dimension of course to this that can't be ignored the risk of oil spills is indeed very real and one that our southern california community experienced all too recently a pipeline leak just off my home county orange county releasing tens of thousands of gallons of crude oil into the ocean making the shoreline unsafe for fishing and tourism per month now ask yourself what happens when that kind of catastrophe occurs not off a tourist's beach but in the middle of an offshore range complex or an active training corridor For all these reasons, new drilling off the coasts of California and Florida faces bipartisan opposition from communities and local elected officials. I hope that everyone can stand by our colleagues from California and Florida to support my amendment to prevent new drilling in these sensitive areas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.

Thank the gentleman, the uh gentleman from Idaho, Mister Simpkins, for recognizing to respond to the amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I'm kind of confused. But it's like six o'clock at night and I'm old, so that's not unusual. But, I have to admit, I, it seemed like it was just about an hour ago and I was listening to somebody in this room talk about all of the above and we need an all of the above energy stra- strategy and so forth but all of a sudden we seem to have changed our mind a little bit.

I don't know, it's pretty much human.

Uh, let me tell you, this is a cute amendment. And the attempt is to bring Florida into California. I find this kind of interesting because there is already a memorandum on drilling off the coast of Florida and in the Gulf of America. Already, till twenty thirty two. Already exist. Executive order. Not true in California. But if there's some way we can drag Cali drag Florida into this debate in California, that would help your cause. But that's not what's happening. I'll tell you what the challenge is. If I was from Florida, I would be a little bit leery about listening to someone from a state whose energy prices are the highest in the country. The highest in the country. That's because of state policies that have done that. No other reason. There is no refining in California. They have the highest gas prices by two dollars a gallon over Florida. kilowatt hours, it is thirty point nine nine cents per kilowatt hour

Well, the church.

for energy in California. You know what it is in Florida? Fifteen point three six cents per kilowatt hour, half what it is in the state of California. So quite frankly, in fact, if you wanna know the truth, Idaho has the lowest at eleven point eight one cents per kilowatt hour. So, I would be a little bit leery about taking direction from the state of california and dragging have them drag florida into this issue when there's already a moratorium in florida so i would oppose this amendment i hope my colleagues would oppose this amendment and i hope the floridians would see through this scam and i'm opposed to this amendment and i hope my colleagues would vote against it

thank you gentlemen i just wanna make it clear that he's only speaking for himself when he talks about six o'clock and not being able to handle anything there are those of us older than you who can so uh to make that point gentlelady from maine miss pingree is is recognized to address the amendment

i thank my colleague from california for submitting this amendment and urge uh everyone to support it the public does not support this administration's expansion of offshore drilling and while this amendment specifies california and florida Coming from the coast of Maine where we have debated this many time, I can guarantee you that our fishermen hate the idea of offshore oil drilling, and it could wreck huge havoc to our tourism industry as well as our fishing industry, if there was ever an oil spill. It is universally opposed there. Offshore drilling in all these areas is a bad idea in general, but drilling in these waters right now is even more of a recipe for environmental catastrophe. And you ask why? I'll tell you. This administration is weakening environmental protections related to offshore drilling because of things as the such things as the well control rule. This administration is also seeking to undo another key reform instituted after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, by re-merging the bureaus responsible for leasing an environmental oversight of offshore development, generally considered a very bad idea. And at the same time, in this idea of all of the above, The states who are counting on projects offsh- for offshore winds, such as the Carolinas and New York, are facing the administration paying billions of dollars for companies to abandon those projects. This administration's energy policies are not promoting American energy independence or lower grass gas and utility bills. These policies are only benefiting polluters in big industries above all else. The Eleven Amendment would protect the environment and the wishes of the public, over the desires of big oil companies and I urge everyone to support it and yield back my time.

Thank you, General Lady, for your comments. General Lady from Florida, Miss Wasserman-Schultz is recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in strong support of my colleague, Mister Levin's amendment. For decades, decades there's been bipartisan support for an off-shore offshore drilling moratorium in the United States federal waters. Presidents George H. W. Bush, Clinton, Obama, Trump, and even Congress have all agreed at various points that drilling for oil in our coastal waters is simply not worth the risk that it poses to marine ecosystems, and the livelihoods they support. It is not an overstatement to say that back home in Florida, the ocean is the lifeblood of our economy. We employ over half a million people, the most in the nation, in our marine economy, generating twenty billion dollars in wages for hardworking Floridians. our commercial fisheries yield over a hundred million pounds of america's finest seafood annually while our rich waters attract more recreational anglers than any other state for top-tier sport fishing florida's eight thousand plus mile long coastline is comprised of pristine beaches wetlands coral reefs and mangroves that attract millions of visitors each year mr. chairman all of this natural splendor is at risk with the prospect of new outer continental shelf leases in the gulf of mexico in twenty ten The Deepwater Horizon disaster dumped over three million gallons of crude oil into the Gulf over eighty seven days, making it the worst oil spill in United States history. Up and down Florida's west coast, our beaches were awash with toxic oil, swamping wildlife habitat and polluting our ecosystems for months. But the large scale damage of this disaster is not the only threat offshore drilling poses. Smaller leaks fly under the radar each year, and they do irreparable harm to the environment. There is simply no need to reverse decades of consensus. Consensus on the dangers of offshore drilling to squeeze more fossil fuels out of the seabed when we should be investing in our abundant clean renewable energy sources. I'm sure my friend, Mister Levin, would agree that California's marine marine economy and wildlife are equally valuable and cannot be jeopardized because Republicans want to ensure lease sales for their oil and gas industry friends. I thank my colleague for introducing such an important amendment to protect our oceans, i urge my colleagues to vote yes on the amendment and i yield back the balance of my time

thank the general lady the other general lady from florida miss frankl is recognized to address the amendment

here we go thank you so much mister levin for your amendment i rise in strong support which protect uh some of our nation's most vulnerable and treasured coastal areas california the you got that map up there and of course i'm gonna talk about florida and uh i know you spoke about uh military readiness i'm gonna talk more about the environment and i i do wanna say this uh with all due respect that the trump administration uh is proposing opening waters off california and florida to all oil drilling backing off from this memorandum uh that we had bipartisan support for

wow

uh in florida uh our coastline is not a postcard um it's a part of our economy our way of life and part of who we are our beaches fisheries tourism industry and coastal communities all depend on clean water and healthy ocean and millions of families uh from across the country around the world will all join floridians uh to experience what we fortunate to call home our beaches our wildlife, our fishing, and natural beauty. And our natural treasure are part of who we are. We have, and we believe strongly, we have on a bipartisan basis, that we have a responsibility to protect them for future generations. And we don't have to imagine what can happen when offshore drilling goes wrong, cuz we lived it, as uh my colleague uh Wassim Vitschelz has said. In twenty ten, the b p deep water horizon disaster disaster of florida devastated gulf communities and caused billions of dollars in damage to tourism recreation fishing and coastal industries small businesses struggled jobs were threatened and families who depended uh on a water for the live livelihoods they're the ones who paid the price one spill one mistake one disaster can change a community for generations and that's why protecting our coasts have been by parts a priority in florida leaders from both parties have recognized that some places are just simply too precious and too important to our economy and our environment uh to to put at risk and so uh this this amendment thank you mr. levin again stopping all all oil drilling off of florida's uh west shore is just common sense listen we can support we can support energy future but also protect our natural resources that define our states in the case of florida our economies and i just uh again uh thank you uh represent i joined you with saying that florida's coasts are not worth the gamble our beaches our waters and our communities are too valuable to risk florida say protect our coasts don't drill it and i yield back

thanks general lady the gentleman from new york mr. morelli is recognized to address the amendment

right

thank you uh mr. chairman my sixth sense tells me that uh a distinguished gentleman from california would like to respond to the chairman's comment so if i might i'd like to yield in my time

are we into this game

i thank my good friend from new york

mr. chairman i have tremendous respect for for you for your many decades of service i think the major argument that i heard against what i had to say was that i'm a californian

pretty much

guilty as charged everyone i am in fact a californian i don't always agree with sacramento on how they make policy i'm a reasonable and pragmatic person i'm my own person i can tell you what my district and our constituents and coastal districts up and down our california coast uh, what they are saying, I can tell you what our military leadership tells me, cuz I'm in touch with them all the time. And they're saying they don't wanna see drill rigs off the California coast, full stop. So in my district, we've got ten cities up and down the coast. Many of them are run by Republicans. We've got two counties. I've got a Republican county supervisor. I've got Democratic county supervisors. To a person, they do not wanna see drill rigs off their coast in cities that are run by republicans they don't wanna see the drill rigs in cities run by democrats they don't wanna see the drill rigs you talk to our generals and others that run operations on camp Pendleton or other military installations and i have they don't wanna see drill rigs either i do support it all the above but i think in this particular instance you have to evaluate just as you would with any of these resources a cost benefit assessment what would it actually yield us if we were to open this entire land up and we've run the numbers uh don't don't take it from me go and look at the government's own data on this doesn't matter who's been in charge they run the numbers they've reached pretty much the same conclusions which is that if you opened all of this up it would amount to about one third of one day worth of what you would actually need to use in california what would that yield in terms of an actual price reduction for the people of california somewhere between two and three cents a gallon But, what are the risks? Well, ask anybody who's been there, done that, and seen the spills, seen the spills in Huntington Beach, made their their way all the way down into the San Diego coast, seen the tarballs, tarballs wash on shore. Ask anybody from Santa Barbara who saw the spills going back into the sixties what they think of this. And again, ask the Republicans too. Ask our military leaders too. You don't have to take it from me. And if you don't wanna like California, that's fine. And I wouldn't expect anybody who lives in florida wanna be more like california but maybe just this once on this one thing we can all agree that the costs aren't worth whatever perceived benefit there may be now if we actually wanna reduce the price of gasoline let's have that discussion last i checked our jurisdiction is here over the the federal government at least i hope it is and we have an eighteen point four cent gas tax and we ought to have a thoughtful and reasonable discussion about a gas tax holiday that actually doesn't eviscerate the highway trust fund, we ought to have that conversation, and I'd be more than open to that. I think many of us would. So let's not go down this road, jeopardize our military readiness, jeopardize training, have huge potential for environmental hazard, for one third of one days of production for two to three cents a gallon. It just isn't worth it, worth the worth the cost. And look, all I can tell you is on this one, if it the other thing you should know is is if it were actually advantageous for this drilling to occur it would have occurred many decades ago and it didn't because your production just isn't there so what i asked um the all the administrators that i worked with will you respect california will you respect elected officials of both parties will you respect eighty percent plus of the voters in my district cause we've polled eighty plus percent including huge uh republican majorities they don't wanna see this so that's all i'm asking is for those who are open-minded about this to recognize that we can have all the above but in some places the costs truly do outweigh the benefits and with that i'll go back to my gentleman the the good man from new york mr. morelli

thank you mr. chair i'll yield back my time

thank you gentleman gentleman lady from pennsylvania is recognized to address the amendment gentlelady is uh no longer requesting to do that

ok

are there others wishing to address the amendment seeing none the gentleman is recognized for one minute too close

thank you so the other thing obviously we need to do in order to reduce the price of gasoline is to end the war in iran of course we just conducted a vote on that but i think we all know that the geopolitical factors any drilling in any of these sensitive areas in california or florida would address miss frankel did an excellent job of explaining why the supposed moratorium on drilling in florida really is not true that is actually uh very much uh being debated and disputed right now uh and you should also know that more than nine million acres offshore are leased currently but oil is not being produced on those offshore areas representing seventy nine percent of all least acres so the availability of waters to drill for oil is simply not a problem so we're not seeing companies even wanna drill more here they're instead uh looking to other areas and at the end of the day i just hope we can reject new drilling in areas where it faces overwhelming bipartisan opposition from communities from elected officials and specifically from our military leaders and with that happy to go back

thank the gentlemen the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california all those in favor say aye

aye aye

aye

all those opposed say no

no no no

being the chair of the no's have it roll call is requested please more hands sufficient support is demonstrated and we'll call the roll

mister adderholt mister adderholt no mister aguilar mister aguilar aye mister alford mister alford no mister amity mrs. bice mister bishop

aye

mister bishop aye mister calvert mister carter

no

mister carter no mister case mister siskamani

no

mister siskamani no mister klein mister cloud mister kleiburn

aye

mister kleiburn aye mister kleid

motion

negative

mister clyde no mister cole mister cole no mister cuillard

no

miss dean

aye

miss dean aye mister loro mister loro aye mister diaz-ballart

aye

mister edwards mister edwards no mister lz

no

no no uh no no

mister lz no miss escobar miss escobar aye mister espiat

aye

mr. espayat aye mr. fleischman

no

mr. fleischman no miss frankl

aye

miss frankl aye mr. franklin mr. guest

no

mr. guest no mr. harder

yes

aye

mr. harder aye dr. harris dr. harris no mrs. hinson

no

mrs. hinson no mr. hoyer

aye

mr. hoyer aye mr. ivy mr. ivy aye mr. joyce

no

mr. joyce no miss captor

aye

miss captor aye mr. lolota

no

mr. lolota no miss lee miss letlow mister levin

aye

mister levin aye miss molloi

no no

miss molloi no miss mccullum

no

miss mccullum aye miss ming

aye

miss ming aye mister molinar mr. molinar no mr. moore

no

mr. moore no mr. morelli

yes yes

mr. morelli aye mr. mervan

yes

mr. mervan aye mr. newhouse

no

mr. newhouse no miss perez

mmm

miss perez aye miss pingree miss pingree aye mr. pokan

aye

mr. pokan aye mr. quigley mr. quigley aye mr. russenthaler

no

mr. russenthaler no mr. rogers

no

mr. rogers no mr. rutherford

no

mr. rutherford no mr. shreve

no

mr. shreve no mr. simpson

no

mr. simpson no mr. strong

no

mr. strong no mrs. torres

aye

mrs. torres aye miss underwood

aye

mr. valadao

no

mr. valadao no miss wassam and schultz miss wassam and schultz aye mrs. watson coleman

aye

mrs. watson coleman aye mr. womack

no

mr. womack no mr. zinke

no

mister zinke no

are there any members wishing to vote or change their vote gentlemen from virginia

mr. chairman no

mister klein no

gentlemen from nevada

one four three four diaz-ballart

mister amity no

gentlemen from california

no

mister calvert no

gentlemen from florida

no

mister diaz-ballart no

gentlemen from texas

no

mister cloud no

gentlelady from oklahoma

mrs. bias no

gentlelady from illinois

aye

mrs. miss underwood aye

are there uh gentlelady from nevada