Conrad Burns

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. I concur with Chairman Byrd and can assure the Senator from Virginia that the restoration of the Arlington House will receive our attention during the conference with the House of Representatives. We will make every effort to address the needs of this historic home.

Mr. BURNS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BURNS. I, too, support such an allocation by the Secretary. don edwards national wildlife refuge

Mr. BURNS. Madam President, I wish to take this opportunity to offer a few observations as we are closing up this Interior appropriations bill. I must thank the senior Senator from West Virginia for his work as chairman of this committee. His staff has been remarkable. They are easy to work with, and they have accommodated, I think, as many people in this body as they possibly could. Peter Kiefhaber has done a commendable job in his first year as the clerk for the majority. His willingness to work with my staff has ensured that this bill has reached its bipartisan form. He has been assisted by a number of very capable staff members, including Ginny James, Leif Fonnesbeck, Brooke Livingston, and a detailee from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Scott Dalzell. On my side of the ring, I thank my staff members who work with me on the minority side. Bruce Evans lent his expertise after spending numerous years as the majority clerk under the very able chairmanship of Senator Slade Gorton of Washington. I have a lot more respect for the former Senator from Washington and the work he did because this is my first year on Interior appropriations. I personally thank Bruce for continuing his service in the Senate and helping me through my first year as chairman and then ranking member on this bill. I also thank Christine Drager for her assistance on a number of extremely difficult accounts, as well as Ryan Thomas, who moved from my personal office to the Appropriations Committee to lend a helping hand in crafting this legislation. While I am thanking those who have helped in the formation of this legislation, I want to single out Mark Davis. Mark has joined my office as a congressional fellow from the U.S. Forest Service. I want my colleagues to know that it was Mark's efforts that ensured we received all of your requests, and all the requests were considered. He sifted through the request letters, organized your request lists, and tracked your staff down to make sure we had the information necessary to help us meet the desires of each Member and make some very tough decisions. I thank him for his service. Madam President, this has been somewhat of a difficult process. We were not able to fully meet the desires of every Member who offered an amendment to this bill. However, the chairman and I have attempted to remain fair while avoiding adding legislative riders that would slow the progress of this bill. It is imperative that this bill be moved through Congress and be sent to the President as soon as possible. It is now mid-July and we have a lot of work ahead of us. Again, I thank my chairman, Senator Byrd of West Virginia. I could not have asked for a better chairman as I enter the first year working on Interior appropriations. I thank him very much for his patience because he helped me through some of the rough spots. I thank him for that. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BURNS. I agree with the distinguished chairman that this funding should be continued in fiscal year 2002. North American Wetlands Conservation Act and Caddo Lake Institute Wetlands Project

Mr. BURNS. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BURNS. As the Senator from California knows, funding for the Fish and Wildlife Land acquisition account has already reached its cap and any new funding would have to be offset from within the account.

Mr. BURNS. The Senator from Maine is correct. The subcommittee recommended an increase of $7,380,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management above the administration's request for this account. Of the $7,380,000, $600,000 has been reallocated as part of the manager's amendment to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's General Administration Account for the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation's Atlantic salmon grant program, bringing the total provided by the bill for this program to $1.1 million.

Mr. BURNS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BURNS. As this program also affects my State, I too would be pleased to engage in a colloquy.

Mr. BURNS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. BURNS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I am glad we are finally considering the nomination of Steve Griles. It has been a long time. I can remember going through the hearings on the Energy Committee and him being reported out of that committee on the 23rd. It has been a long 40-some- odd days. It has been too long. It seems that we are asking our Cabinet Secretaries to do their jobs by themselves. We are having a hard time getting them any help downtown. I just think that is a wrong thing to do to any administration. I remember when President Clinton first came to town back in 1992, 1993; whenever we went through the process, I always took the position that each President got his Cabinet members and the people he wanted in his administration because he had been duly elected by the people of this country. So he could move his agenda as he saw fit. We have been holding up folks going downtown far too long. Twenty-eight percent of Montana is public land. With the BLM and the Forest Service and, of course, with the BIA and the Indian lands and Indian country, this position is very important. Of course, with Mr. Griles coming from a standpoint of multiple use, single use does not work. I think that we can balance the use of our lands. We have had a tendency in the last 10 or 15 years to redefine conservation. Conservation is the wise use of any resource. That has been the driving force on any of our resources found on our public lands and on our private lands. I have an agricultural background. This position in the Department of the Interior requires a man of not only high integrity and high purpose but also to have guts enough to make a decision. We have gone through these situations where nobody wants to make a decision. We had a situation on the Flathead Lake in just finding its level. We had too many cooks in the kitchen and nobody knew who was in charge when trying to make a decision on what level we wanted to maintain at Flathead Lake in northwestern Montana. I know there are some of my colleagues in this body who have some real heartburn with Mr. Griles. In fact, I know there are many colleagues in this body who have heartburn with the words ``multiple use.'' But, nonetheless, we who come from the land and the resources--and especially from a resource-based economy--think we understand just how important renewable resources are. We realize that in oil and gas, it is sort of finite--there may not be any more of it made. But on renewables, we should be using conservation practices that consider wise use. Tough decisions will have to be made by the Department. We need someone who is confident in making them and also basing the decisions on science and common sense. So the reason I support Steve Griles is because he brings outstanding credentials to the job. He served at many levels, both inside and outside of Government. I think everybody will find he will be an able listener, and he will also show the cooperation in being a good Deputy Secretary.

Mr. BURNS. Are we ready to vote?

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. The figures the Senator cited are from a USGS survey taken in 1995. Those figures have changed and moved up. No. 2, if he doesn't want people to drill there, where can they drill? How many people in this body or in this town drove an automobile or rode something here that required energy? How many? Do we close off the whole Nation because somebody is making a profit? Do we take the same mindset into agriculture, into production agriculture, as they have in Klamath Falls where 1,500 farmers cannot irrigate because of a suckerfish? It is a mindset. I move to table this amendment for the simple reason that it will impact the country. You say only 5 percent or 2 percent or 1 percent. I say to the Senator: $5 is not very much to some of us. But it is when you don't have it. We have that possibility with this kind of a mindset. I yield the floor.

Mr. BURNS. I will be very short.

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may summarize my argument.

Mr. BURNS. The meeting with the President and the group downtown was not in until 4:15. We are going to begin the vote at 4:10 and they will have time to vote; 4:15 had nothing to do with it. We agreed at 4:10 to table the Durbin amendment.

Mr. BURNS. I tell my good friend, it is that kind of mind-set that said we are going to save the suckerfish in Klamath Falls, OR, and it takes precedence over 1,500 families and their future and our ability to provide food and fiber for this country. It is a trash fish. That is going on right now in that basin. That is what I am saying. When we take a look at what our attitude is about a certain thing and hide behind the screen of green and throw out all logic on the management of those lands, then we may have to reassess how we look at all lands, even those that exist in the State of Illinois. That is what I am saying. It is something that creeps into the mind-set, that it is all right to disrupt our lives and our families--even though we do it right and in an environmentally sensitive manner--because of a mind-set. I think that is where we have a basic philosophical difference on how we manage land. I look at it much differently. I know you come from down there not too far from where I was raised. I was raised in Missouri. I never thought about water rights until I went west, where there wasn't any. There wasn't any water. Those things become very important. But they never entered our life when I lived in the lower Midwest. I just think it is a mistake whenever we close up an area because of a mind-set that we cannot do it right and we here in Washington, DC, are basically in a better position to make the decision, more than having the decision made locally. Even the Senator from Washington says we had local input. We did the boundaries originally. We looked at the land that was sensitive, and we set it aside. I agree with that. There are areas in the Missouri Breaks that I think should be set aside and even made wilderness. The river is already a protected river. I agree with that. But whenever you take one broad swipe across a huge amount of land, especially when you have 77,000 acres of in-holdings and you have to cross public lands just to get to them, then we make a decision here that impacts people's lives in a real way. Those people have faces. That is why I oppose this amendment. I am not calling for the repeal of the Antiquities Act. What I am saying is we are impacting our own Nation's ability to produce food and fiber and energy because of a mind-set that sounds warm, green, and fuzzy. I yield the floor.

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I move to table the Durbin amendment, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. BURNS. Yes.

Mr. BURNS. We had the Secretary of the Interior up in Montana. In the upper Missouri, which was designated as a national monument, I tell my good friend from Illinois, we asked the Secretary, No. 1, to find the gas well and then find the pipeline that carried the gas from the wellhead into the main pipeline. He could not find it. He could not find either one of them--he tried by air and by land--until we showed him where they were. What I am saying is we should consider the new technologies and how we regard our lands, especially the big open lands. I am not talking about a monument such as The Mall; I am talking about land that is in bigger country that is very seldom ever walked upon by the people who probably own the grazing lease. We still allow grazing in national monuments. Very seldom are those lands ever walked on by anybody else. We have an area in Montana that is going to demand some more attention in the next 2 or 3 years because it is along the Missouri River and that was the route of Louis and Clark. Of course, this will be the 200th anniversary of the Louisiana Purchase, and the trek of Louis and Clark will draw a little more attention to that area. But tell me why we would completely close out the possibility, even under emergency conditions, in areas where we could develop that energy--and especially natural gas, which is the cleanest of all energy that is coming from the fossil fuels we take from the Earth--why we would close out that possibility.

Mr. BURNS. I move that the Durbin amendment be tabled, and I ask for the yeas and nays, which vote will occur at the agreed time.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I watched the debate with a great deal of interest. I can only think of the amendment a little while ago that was offered by the Senator from Illinois. The Minerals Management Service has been working on this lease sale for quite a while, and includes the current 5-year Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Program. This was put on the table under the Clinton administration. The service prepared the draft EIS. They have ensured that the proper public hearings have taken place, including the hearings in Pensacola, Tallahassee, and Mobile. But despite the fact that service has jumped through all of the required administrative hoops, some opponents are now trying to foul the whole thing up in the end game right before the lease, of course, is finalized. When we take a look at the Land and Water Conservation Fund, it is interesting that Members who have been leaning towards voting for this amendment are the same Members who have submitted healthy requests for money out of that Land and Water Conservation Fund for some of their projects. It is also interesting to note that in this very bill, Florida has approximately $42 million in items that are funded under the Land and Water Conservation Fund. It is likely that State has been the single largest draw on the Land and Water Conservation Fund in the last 5 years. That money is derived from royalties from offshore drilling and production. It is ironic to note that the State of Florida is actually the third largest consumer of petroleum products. However, it only produces about 2 percent of the petroleum that it consumes. Basically, this amendment on the surface appears to be one of those ``not in my backyard'' kinds of situations or games. To top it off, this amendment totally ignores the fact that last week the administration announced that it decided to reduce the size of the lease sale and in particular decided to make sure that the lease sale is much further away from Florida's shores. A while ago, we had the amendment of the Senator from Illinois. Now we have the proponents of this amendment pleading with us to heed the local concerns for the protection of Florida's beaches, of which I would concur. I will say right now that I think the offshore drilling probably does less damage than the tankers that go up and down and unload in the Gulf of Mexico every day. They want those decisions to be made locally. But when it comes to voting on an issue that affected the West, they disregarded that. When voting, I ask my fellow Members to think about the fact that this is a legislative rider that could ultimately reduce the amount of funds contributed to the Land and Water Conservation Fund, and it might interfere with our country's ability to produce its own oil and gas during a time when the country is facing a very serious energy crunch. If local concerns are in play in Florida, why aren't they in Montana? I call that the lack of fairness. I think that is all we ever want in this body--fairness. I yield the floor.

Mr. BURNS

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise today to express my support of the Agriculture Job Opportunity, Benefits, and Security Act of 2001. I am proud to join my colleague Senator Craig as a cosponsor of this important legislation. I am a strong believer that American workers should have the first chance to have American farm and ranch jobs. However, when there are not enough American workers, our agricultural producers should be able to find farmworkers elsewhere. Under the current H-2A agricultural guest worker program, producers are required to go through a lengthy, uncertain, and undoubtedly costly process to demonstrate to the Federal Government that American workers are not available in order to gain authorization for guest workers. During this long process, Montana crops are not being harvested and cattle and sheep herds are not being tended to the degree they require. A General Accounting Office study recently found that the Government's inefficiency in processing such claims discourages use of the program. As a result, the Federal Government estimates that only half of this country's 1.6 million agricultural workers are authorized to work in the U.S., and the figure may be higher since the estimate is based on self-disclosure by illegal workers. Let me give you an example of how H-2A reform will benefit real producers. We have a number of large sheep operations in Montana. All of these sheep need to be sheared in the spring of the year, and as any sheep rancher will tell you, this is a job that needs to be done quickly, safely, and accurately. Shearers need to pay close attention to detail, lest sheep could be severely injured. With the number of sheep ranches in this country dwindling, there are few Americans who shear professionally, so guest workers from countries such as Argentina must be brought in to do the job. Reform of the H-2A program would make this process easier for our sheep producers. It is high time we reformed the H-2A program. This legislation will replace the current system with a more efficient process for certification of H-2A employers looking to hire agricultural guest workers. It will also replace the current, unrealistic premium wage mandated for H-2A employers with the standard, minimum wage. Employers will continue to furnish housing and transportation to H-2A workers. This bill makes sense for producers in Montana, Senator Craig's home State of Idaho, and other agricultural States across the country. It also provides a better environment for our guest workers. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this important legislation.