Donald Beyer

Mr. BEYER

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the Association for Talent Development (ATD) as the largest association dedicated to the training and talent development profession, recognizing them for their annual Employee Learning Week, held December 7th through the 11th, 2015. ATD's members come from more than 120 countries and work in public and private organizations in every industry sector. ATD supports talent development professionals who gather locally in volunteer-led U.S. chapters and international member networks, and with international strategic partners. Established in 1943, ATD is a leader in the talent development field. As businesses seek competitive advantages and growth, talent development professionals make sure an organization's best asset, its employees, have the skills they need to help achieve business growth. ATD serves this important community of professionals with research and resources. To further these goals, ATD has declared December 7th through December 11th, 2015, as ``Employee Learning Week'' and designated time for organizations to recognize the strategic value of employee learning. I applaud ATD and its members for their dedication to developing knowledgeable and skilled employees during Employee Learning Week. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting policies that commit to maintaining a highly skilled workforce.

Mr. BEYER

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, now that the House has approved the conference report I would like to recognize and commend my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for supporting the inclusion of bill language in H.R. 22 (Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act of 2015) that will help protect consumers from the longstanding problem of predatory towing. For some time now, egregious vehicle towing and storage practices performed by some unscrupulous companies have been a serious concern in many parts of the country. While the vast majority of towing and storage firms are honest and well-intentioned, some have been engaged in predatory business tactics designed to delay access to vehicles and increase costs for consumers. Because these companies have possession of vehicles, they are in a position to take advantage of consumers and charge excessive towing and storage fees. For reasons that are not entirely clear, current Federal law allows states to regulate some, but not all aspects of tow truck operations, limiting their ability to protect consumers from predatory towing tactics. The language included in the amendment introduced by myself and Rep. Van Hollen broadens the authority of states and localities to regulate tow truck operations, which is limited by current motor carrier law. This additional authority will now allow states and localities to regulate all aspects of tows conducted without the prior consent or authorization of the owner or operator of a vehicle. The language is also intended to apply to accident scene and breakdown towing, to allow states to protect consumers who are often unable to make an informed choice and give meaningful consent or acknowledgment on towing in those situations. I want to thank the conference chair and vice chair for their support of this important provision. I would also like to thank my predecessor, Jim Moran, who was a champion on this issue for so long and first introduced this language during the 109th Congress.

Mr. BEYER

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chair, my amendment preserves section 433. H.R. 8, the North American Energy Security and Infrastructure Act, deliberately removes the energy usage goals for Federal buildings. In 2007, under the Energy Independence and Security Act, our last energy infrastructure overhaul bill, a provision was included that set a goal for new Federal buildings to have net-zero energy usage by 2030. This naturally also meant the Federal Government would have a corresponding goal of reducing fossil-fuel-generated electricity consumption in its buildings. This provision was forward-thinking. The Federal Government will lead by example in the transition to less-polluting buildings and show what the next generation of infrastructure should look like. Now is not the time to roll back this goal and abandon our leadership. When people mention how H.R. 8 would take us back to a 19th century economy, this is one clear example they can point to. Commercial and residential buildings account for 39 percent of the Nation's carbon emissions. To ignore this source of pollution at a time when we are trying to keep temperatures from rising less than 2 degrees centigrade isn't just negligent, it ignores our responsibility to be a good steward of the Earth and leave it in good condition for generations to come. With the Federal Government as the largest consumer of energy in the U.S., we must be the leader. This effort is under attack because of outdated feasibility concerns--concerns which have already been addressed. Last year, the Department of Energy proposed a rule that charts a path forward to reach the 2030 goal that is both technically possible and plausible. I also want to address some myths about section 433. Some have characterized it as ``a ban on the Federal Government using energy from fossil fuel,'' but the law does no such thing. In fact, at no point does this provision in the current law require zero fossil fuel use for any building designed or renovated before 2030. And despite objections from my friends at the American Gas Association, the Department of Energy actually proposed carve-outs for onsite natural gas usage in highly efficient combined heat and power systems. Natural gas may actually be an important part of the solution of getting to net-zero energy usage. Requiring Federal buildings to meet aggressive energy targets not only reduces taxpayer costs through energy savings, it also reduces our dependence on foreign oil and leverages the government's large purchasing power to bring new technologies and materials to the marketplace. If we eliminate section 433, it could cost American consumers $700 million in savings over the next 25 years. According to the American Institute of Architects, not only are the current targets achievable, but some buildings are already meeting the 2030 goals right now. The EU has adopted a similar goal but with a shorter time horizon. Mr. Chair, during my 4 years in Switzerland, we cut the carbon footprint of the U.S. Embassy in half and reduced the carbon footprint of our home to zero. In 2013, Walgreens opened a net-zero energy retail space in Evanston, Illinois. In 2015, a True Value hardware store was the first net-zero retail store in New York State. Within the Federal Government, our military has also taken a lead on this important effort and used the goal as a means to reduce costs and increase energy security. From 2007 to 2013, the Federal Government reduced its annual energy usage by 7 percent while we continue to grow. We must continue to encourage these energy reduction efforts. We learned a long time ago in business that if we don't have a goal we never get there. We have to have a target that we can all work to meet. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment to reinstate the energy usage goals for Federal buildings. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. BEYER

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, I was disappointed to see the Rules Committee decided to add H.R. 2295, the National Energy Security Corridors Act, to H.R. 8. There is no doubt that getting natural gas to where it is needed and to lowering electric and heating bills are worthy accomplishments, but we shouldn't accomplish these by steamrolling the concerns of residents who would see new pipelines built in their backyards. Right now, there are multiple proposals to run natural gas pipelines from West Virginia through the Commonwealth of Virginia to the eastern seaboard. There is the Atlantic coast pipeline, the Mountain Valley pipeline, and more being considered. Understandably, people who live along the proposed route of these pipelines are concerned. Once a pipeline route is approved by FERC, land can be taken by eminent domain. The companies involved, of course, want to draw the straightest, cheapest route they can. The communities in the way of these routes face huge impacts, environmentally and financially. They deserve a say. Unfortunately, the legislation provides absolutely no method for the public to have their voice heard when it comes to the location of these corridors. It completely waives the Natural Environmental Policy Act for the corridor designation, shutting out the community's opportunity for public input. Local governments are only allowed to speak to the extent that they can help identify the most commercially viable, cost-effective acreage. Individual resident concerns or environmental factors don't even come into play. This is not a productive way forward. This doesn't simplify getting natural gas to the people who need it. This is a way that will lead to more opposition, more lawsuits, and an atmosphere of distrust and resentment I have another concern. H.R. 8 now contains a provision which will allow pipelines to be permitted across national parks without congressional approval. This is contrary to longstanding U.S. law. Every time we put a pipeline across a park, Congress has been involved. My many friends in the Appalachian Trail community and the national parks conservation community are deeply worried about Congress abrogating its responsibility to approve such pipeline crossings. We can't ignore the people and the parks that will be impacted by this bill. I encourage my colleagues to oppose H.R. 8.

Mr. BEYER

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I wish to pay tribute to an outstanding civil servant and constituent of mine, Thomas P. Holian, Deputy Chief Counsel of the Federal Highway Administration, FHWA, who is retiring after 37 years of Federal service. Tom is a graduate of Fordham University and received his juris doctor from New York Law School. Tom joined the FHWA as an Attorney Advisor in the Office of the Chief Counsel in 1978. From 1978 to 1982, he worked in the Chief Counsel's Office of Legislation and Regulations on such matters as the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978, the Motor Carrier Act of 1980, and the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982. Tom also served as a Trial Attorney in the Chief Counsel's Motor Carrier and Highway Safety Law Division where he handled motor carrier safety enforcement cases and regulatory and litigation work associated with driver qualification requirements, the Americans With Disabilities Act, and controlled substance and alcohol testing of commercial motor vehicle drivers. Tom also served as the first Executive Director of the FHWA's National Motor Carrier Advisory Committee. Tom joined the Senior Executive Service in December 1999 when he was selected to serve as the Deputy Chief Counsel for Legislation and Regulations in the Office of the Chief Counsel. In this position through February 2008, Tom was responsible for directing a staff in providing legal advice and services on all aspects of the FHWA's legislative and regulatory programs. In this role, he greatly contributed to the implementation of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) and the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act--A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). Tom also led the team responsible for drafting much of the TEA-21 reauthorization bill that became SAFETEA-LU. Prior to this appointment, Tom was an Associate Chief Counsel and served as the FHWA's Regulations Officer responsible for leading the comprehensive review of FHWA's regulations in response to Presidential directives in 1992 and 1995, as well as FHWA's ISTEA and TEA-21 regulatory implementation. Tom became the Deputy Chief Counsel, the senior career attorney in the FHWA, in March 2008. As Deputy Chief Counsel, Tom supervises and coordinates the activities of a staff comprised of 60 employees, of whom 50 are attorneys responsible for providing legal services regarding all aspects of the FHWA's programs. The Office of Chief Counsel consists of three headquarters divisions and five field divisions, four of which provide services to Federal-aid Division Offices and the Resource Center, and one that provides services to the Federal Lands Highway. Tom directly advises the most senior officials in the FHWA and the U.S. Department of Transportation. Tom and his staff work with State and local government transportation attorneys and other customers to enhance their understanding of Federal laws and procedures relating to transportation. Tom will be retiring this month after 39 years of Federal service. After his long career and especially his seven and a half years as Deputy Chief Counsel, Tom leaves FHWA a well-respected, dedicated public servant, who has used his knowledge and skills throughout his 37-year FHWA career to make significant contributions to the advancement of transportation law. I am proud to represent Tom and so many other Federal workers. We are fortunate to have dedicated, talented, creative, hard-working, and patriotic public servants like Tom. I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Tom for serving the American public with such distinction and devotion and wishing him much success as he leaves Federal service. We also need to thank his wife Ginny and their three children for supporting him in his public career.

Mr. BEYER

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Mr. Carlos Leon-Campos of Arlington, Virginia, on the occasion of his retirement on November 13, 2015 after more than 31 years of service to the United States House of Representatives. Carlos Leon began his career with the House in September 1984 as a File Clerk for Congressman Bill Nichols (D-AL). Simultaneously, he held a patronage job operating the Member's elevator in the U.S. Capitol. It was while working this distinguished position that he had the occasion to meet several high-profile individuals. He greeted Tip O'Neill on arrival every day with his customary cigar. He was lucky enough to meet other notables such as Margaret Thatcher, Mikhail Gorbachev, Actor Telly Savalas, and former U.S. President, George H.W. Bush. Carlos transitioned to work for the Clerk of the House, the esteemed Donnald K. Anderson, in 1991. He truly enjoyed working for Mr. Anderson, but when the Republicans won the House in 1995, a Chief Administrative Office (CAO) was established. Carlos went on to work for Scott Faulkner, Acting CAO, and Jeff Trandahl, Clerk of the House, and in 1997, settled into the job as Inventory Account Counselor under CAO Jay Eagen. He received the Distinguished Service Award, the highest honor given by the CAO, for his exemplary service to the Office of the CAO. He was promoted to Supervisor, Inventory under the Asset Management department, and quickly rose to Manager, Inventory for Logistics & Support under CAO Dan Strodel. Most of his career has been spent working for the Logistics & Support Department under various CAOs. After 25 years with one organization, he recently received the Employee Length of Service Award given by the House Officers. Carlos reported to the Assistant CAO, Cam Arthur, for many years. However, most recently he has reported to Rhonda Shaffer, Director, and Tom Coyne, Chief Logistics Officer, of the newly formed Asset Management group. Carlos has always had an encyclopedic mind and knows massive amounts of historical knowledge of the House and its workings. He is beloved by his employees and they respect his leadership. His talents were recognized at a reception hosted by Ed Cassidy, CAO, on October 14, 2015, with a certificate and engraved pen, which acknowledged his contributions to supporting the new organization. Some of his most memorable experiences in his time of working for the CAO include attending Ronald Reagan's Inauguration in the bitter cold and the Capitol Dome Tour, personally given by Congressman Harper of Mississippi. He remembers that the view of Washington, D.C. from the Capitol Dome is breathtaking and unmatched. In retirement, Carlos plans to move to Atlanta, Georgia, where he will pursue art and painting. He also plans to expand his hobby of attending estate sales, and to visit his family more often in Lima, Peru. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Carlos Leon-Campos for his service and contributions to the U.S. House of Representatives. I want to thank Carlos Leon for his commitment to public service, and I wish him and his family all the best.

Mr. BEYER

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin by thanking Chairman Shuster and Ranking Member DeFazio for their hard work on the underlying bill and for considering Congressman Van Hollen's and my amendment. Our amendment is simple. It would merely restore the ability of State and local governments to regulate the tow truck industry. Through a provision slipped into the Federal Aviation Administration Act of 1994 that defined the tow truck industry as an interstate carrier, State and local regulation of tow truck operations has been preempted. But the very next year, passage of the Interstate Commerce Termination Act struck down the Federal regulatory body that was overseeing the towing industry. So it essentially left it without any oversight despite widely reported consumer abuses. In the years since, a number of conflicting court rulings have been made on cases between tow operators and localities. Some decisions have upheld some aspects of local regulations and others have stayed silent. With no Federal regulator and a confusing patchwork of Federal preemption and judicial rulings, no level of government has been able to adequately regulate the towing industry. This lack of regulatory authority has led to more than two decades of major misconduct by some unscrupulous towing companies, and these bad operators continue to taint an otherwise much-needed and respectable profession. State and localities are the logical towing regulators. They have an established body of law in place to do so. Mr. Chairman, in my family automobile business, we have long run our own tow trucks. We have contracted with independent tow truck companies for decades. Most of them are hardworking, honest, small businesses. They work long days and nights, weekends, in all kinds of weather, but they are given a bad name by the few, but real, irresponsible operators in the industry. I would just like to note our amendment is supported by the largest trade association representing small business trucking professionals and professional truck drivers, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association. In their letter of support, they talk about nonconsensual tows and say: These are situations where there is no opportunity for motorists to negotiate services or compare prices among multiple towing operators. So it is critical that States have the ability to enact important consumer protections. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and end unnecessary and impractical Federal overreach. Return this important authority to the States and help end our constituents' frustrations with abusive towing practices. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise as the designee of the gentleman from Maryland. I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chair. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BEYER

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BEYER. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Brownley).

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3033, the Research Excellence and Advancements for Dyslexia Act, or the READ Act. Passing this bill is the perfect way to honor October, National Dyslexia Awareness Month. As my friend, the chairman, has said, dyslexia is a learning disorder characterized by difficulty reading due to problems identifying speech sounds and learning how they relate to letters and words. Unfortunately, many children are not diagnosed or are diagnosed later in life, leaving them with little access to helpful interventions and technologies. Too often our educators do not have the proper training to identify students with learning disabilities, including dyslexia. This bill would fund research on the early identification of individuals with dyslexia and professional development for teachers and school administrators. There is a lack of research on curricula development and educational tools for students with dyslexia, and I am happy to report that this bill would fund that research into that as well. Finally, as we heard from our expert witnesses during the committee hearings on this topic, there is a significant gap in getting the research from the laboratories into the hands of teachers and administrators. To address this gap, we need more research on understanding which experimental innovations will be successful in the classrooms and research on how best to scale those successful interventions. Having an intervention work in the laboratory is not enough. The intervention needs to work in classroom settings, which are very heterogeneous environments. Mr. Speaker, I have a first cousin who was raised just across the river in Fairfax County. He was a most clever child because he managed to make it all the way to eighth grade before they realized that he didn't know how to read. He has had a good career, but I wonder what kind of professor or Supreme Court Justice or even rocket scientist he would have made with early intervention. Mr. Speaker, my oldest child had a passel of learning disabilities but also had and has a very high IQ. At the school he attended to address these disabilities, the walls were adorned with photos of Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, and Thomas Edison. These remarkable men remind us of the promise of every child, that a learning disability like dyslexia need not hold a child back from an extraordinary life and an extraordinary education. This is why we need the READ Act: to help realize the promise of every child with dyslexia. On this remarkable bipartisan night, I want to thank my Texas friends, Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson, for working across the aisle together to make improvements to this bill during the committee process. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bill, and I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support it. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BEYER

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge and congratulate Sasha DiGiulian, a constituent and world-renowned rock climber. She is the first woman in the world and the first American to free-climb one of the most difficult routes up the north wall of the Eiger in the Swiss Alps. I have known Sasha for a long time. She is a family friend and a schoolmate of my daughter. She began climbing at just 6 years old at Sportrock in Alexandria, Virginia, and has since become the top female climber in the world. She is small, slender, lithe, and incredibly strong. Sasha has the uncanny ability to defy gravity. Sasha was the overall female world champion in 2011, is the reigning Pan-American champion since 2004, and is a three-time U.S. national champion. She is the only North American woman and the third woman in the world to climb the grade 9a, 5.14d, the hardest sport climbing grade ever achieved by a woman, doing so in Kentucky's Red River Gorge. In August, at age 22, Sasha climbed the north wall of the Eiger, a massive 1-mile vertical rock face in the Swiss Alps. This is one of the most difficult and deadliest mountains in the world. Sixty-four people have died attempting the Eiger since 1935, earning it the German nickname ``Mordwand'' or ``Murder Wall.'' It took Sasha and her climbing partner, Carlo Traversi, nearly a month to make the climb, facing constant rockfall, rain, ice, and snowstorms throughout their ascent. Sasha became the first woman and the first American to climb the face via the Magic Mushroom route, one of the most difficult paths to the summit. As if her accomplishments were not impressive enough already, Sasha is also a third-year student at Columbia University, where she is studying nonfiction writing and business. She has been published in National Geographic and several other outdoor publications, and is an athlete representative on the board of the International Federation of Sport Climbing. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Sasha on her outstanding achievements. She is a shining example of how hard work, determination, and dedication can lead anyone to unprecedented heights. I wish Sasha all the best in her future ascents as she continues to make us proud. To paraphrase Maurice Herzog: There are other Eigers in the lives of women and men.

Mr. BEYER

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, September is National Voter Registration Month, and in honor of this occasion I am introducing legislation to allow young Americans to preregister to vote in federal elections. Nothing is more important to representative government than choosing our leaders through free and fair election. But right now too many young people are not participating in the electoral process. In the 2014 election cycle only 39 percent of 18-24 year-olds were registered to vote. And of those, only 16 percent actually cast a ballot on Election Day. That is why today I am introducing the Pre-Registration of Voters Everywhere Act, or the PROVE Act, to allow young Americans to preregister to vote in federal elections and increase access to voter registration. Once these future voters are registered and in the system, they can be automatically added to the voting roles so they can vote once they turn 18. Already in 20 states and the District of Columbia young people are able to preregister to vote prior to the age of 18. In those states young people are more engaged and more likely to vote. Mr. Speaker, voting is habit forming; when people vote, they are likely to vote again. The PROVE Act is an effective way to engage young people early on and encourage lasting participation in elections.

Mr. BEYER

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge and congratulate the Humane Society of Fairfax County for reaching the grand old age of 50, and, perhaps more impressively, for spending those years caring for the animals of Virginia's 8th District. The Humane Society of Fairfax County was established by concerned citizens in 1965 in order to pursue the three-fold mission of promoting humane education, preventing all forms of cruelty to animals--both domestic and wild--by every legitimate means available, and assisting the community with all matters pertaining to the welfare of animals. In furtherance of this mission, the HSFC provides numerous different services for both the animals and people within its community. The HSFC accepts and cares for all animals in need--dogs and cats of course, but also birds, rabbits, gerbils, and more. They care for animals that have been given up by their families and for animals from overwhelmed and kill shelters. They help military families that have special needs in regard to caring for their animals and they provide emergency medical treatment for animals from families that wouldn't otherwise be able to afford such care. They provide spay and neuter services for community cats and run a pet food pantry to assist families during financial difficulties. They do all of this, which would be impressive enough on its own, and yet the HSFC goes even further--they have made a conscious decision not to simply fix the problems that come their way, but to also seek out unaddressed problems and resolve them. They have been involved with legislative issues such as ensuring adequate shelter and veterinary care for animals and stopping the operation of rodeos and circuses. They employ investigators that, for over 40 years, have investigated thousands of cruelty and neglect cases. Finally, they have assisted with the Deer Spay Project for the past 2 years. I hope I have made it as clear to you as it is to me that the Humane Society of Fairfax County is an outstanding, upstanding organization that has done more than can here be described for the animals and families in their community. I thank them for their valuable work and wish them many more happy anniversaries to come.

Mr. BEYER

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the Goodlatte amendment. The Goodlatte amendment removes the federal backstops which ensure that states meet their responsibilities under the Clean Water Act to restore the Chesapeake Bay. The Chesapeake Bay is a critical part of Virginia and we are already starting to see the results of successful Bay cleanup efforts. Virginia oysters are booming--last year the harvest was up 25% and passed the 500,000 bushel-mark. That is why Virginia is committed to working with EPA and other Bay states to clean up the Chesapeake. There have been hundreds of millions of dollars invested in this effort and federal backstops play an important role to ensure that all states do their share. But this amendment puts our investments and progress at serious risk. This amendment suggests that it would preserve the rights of the states to write their own water quality plans. But the Commonwealth of Virginia already wrote its own water quality plan and the Total Maximum Daily Load submission was accepted by EPA. So in Virginia, this is simply not a problem. So to me, this amendment looks like an answer in search of a problem. A problem we do not have in Virginia. But what this amendment does do is this. It creates a BIG problem for Virginia because it would allow upstream states off the hook. It would allow upstream states to stop their cleanup with no consequences. In Virginia, we would feel--and see--real consequences. We could see increases in dirty water flowing downstream, reversing all of our hard work. If upstream states stop their cleanups, Virginia would need to double the work and more--and we would still not have a clean Bay. The fact is that this amendment would absolutely undermine the cleanup efforts already underway. It puts at risk future environmental and economic benefits that Virginia would accrue with a cleaner, healthier bay such as more abundant seafood, tourism, recreation, and improved quality of life. As the state at the bottom of the bay watershed, Virginia's success in restoring our part of the Bay is dependent upon what the other states do, or don't do. This amendment would ensure that other states would write the future of Virginia's waters and the future of our Bay. That is why I am working with my colleagues Chris Van Hollen and Bobby Scott to raise awareness of the dangers of this amendment. I urge my colleagues to vote NO. It takes away our clean water future and our clean water investments. This amendment is bad for Virginia and bad for the future health of the Chesapeake Bay.

Mr. BEYER

Mr. BEYER. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. BEYER. Madam Chair, I rise in support of this amendment, which would allow for the implementation of the National Ocean Policy. Plain and simple, coordinated ocean planning makes common sense and is a good economic policy for our coastal communities. It allows for a comprehensive mapping of existing ocean uses that helps to identify and resolve conflicts between stakeholders before they play out in specific permitting processes. In Virginia, this process has been crucial to preserving public access to the ocean, to sustain economic growth, to address marine debris, to create migration corridors for marine mammals, and to support promising new ocean industries, such as wind power and marine aquaculture. In fact, I am proud to note that Virginia was recently selected by BOEM to be the first State in the Nation to receive a wind energy research lease in Federal waters. This rider would eliminate language that would undermine regional collaborative efforts to manage existing and future ocean policy challenges. Let's not roll back the valuable work and resources that many States, industries, and communities have already devoted to implementing this policy. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. BEYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I also thank the chairman for his comments. Mr. Chairman, I am proud to speak in support of Mr. Grijalva's amendment. The U.S. is the world's second largest market for ivory. Only China has a greater demand. In February of last year, President Obama announced a ban on the commercial trade of elephant ivory. This ban is the best way to ensure that U.S. markets do not contribute to the further decline of African elephants in the wild. The African elephant population has declined by an estimated 50 percent over the last 40 years, with approximately 35,000 elephants poached every year. That amounts to one elephant poached every 15 minutes. The Fish and Wildlife Service has been undertaking a series of administrative actions, including a proposed rule in order to implement the ban. Section 120 would prevent the Fish and Wildlife Service from implementing this rule and other policies necessary to crack down on the domestic illegal ivory market. I cannot understand why we would not do everything possible to stop the illegal slaughter of African elephants. I urge my colleagues to support Mr. Grijalva's amendment, which would prevent section 120 from being enacted. We must allow the FWS to continue its efforts to prevent the extinction of the African elephant.

Mr. BEYER. I thank the gentlewoman. Mr. Chairman, despite what you may hear from some Members of Congress, gray wolves have not recovered. In a test by the Fish and Wildlife Service to remove them from the Endangered Species Act, protections for wolves have failed time and again. Why? It is because scientific experts have shown and the courts have confirmed that the best available science does not justify the removal of all ESA protections for gray wolves at this time. In fact, the only instance in which wolves have been delisted has been through the unprecedented and unfortunate congressional action in 2011 to remove protections from wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains. These wolves are now endlessly persecuted by hunters and ranchers despite the positive effects they have on the ecosystem and the minimal toll they take on livestock. Wolf-related tourism around Yellowstone generates more than $35 million annually for local economies, and recovery in the Pacific Northwest is only beginning. This amendment would prevent Congress from directing the Fish and Wildlife Service to reissue the delisting of wolves in the western Great Lakes and Wyoming. Now is not the time for Congress to declare open season on one of America's most iconic wild animals. Science, not politics, should guide these delisting decisions. By the way, wolves are not in Massachusetts, they are not in Virginia, and they never will be as long as we do not continue our efforts to protect wolves and allow them to occupy the old territories they did a few hundred years ago. This amendment would also allow the Fish and Wildlife Service to move forward with steps to protect the northern long-eared bat. Over the past decade, populations of the bat have declined 98 percent, mostly because of the deadly effects of white-nose syndrome. As a result, Fish and Wildlife Service recently listed the bat as a threatened species. While scientists and wildlife managers work to fight the spread of white-nose syndrome, it is important to ensure that the remaining bat populations are safe from other threats. The interim rule currently in effect governing taking of the bat is incredibly flexible and was developed in close coordination with industry stakeholders, particularly the timber industry, to ensure that economic activity is not negatively impacted. The final rule is expected to be similarly flexible. The language in this bill will only serve as a delay tactic, causing additional uncertainty for businesses and property owners, and this amendment would effectively strike these unnecessary sections from the bill.