Norm Dicks

Mr. DICKS

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the Inslee amendment. The gentleman from Arizona said let the law stand. That is what we are trying to do here. We are trying to let section 3809, which was the law, the regulations properly adopted, we would like to see those sustained. The Bush administration has suspended the 3809 rule and intends to revise the rule. Remember, this is just on BLM lands. The Clinton administration also granted BLM the authority to deny permits to irresponsible mines in places where they would cause substantial, irreparable harm to environmental and cultural resources. The mining industry opposed both of those provisions. Mr. Chairman, I think the Inslee amendment is called for; and I intend to support it.

Mr. DICKS. And all amendments thereto.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that, notwithstanding the unanimous consent agreement that was previously reached, we limit this amendment to 20 minutes, 10 minutes on each side.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman's hard work on this issue. I know this is a major concern. I want to work with the gentlewoman on this, and hopefully we can have a meeting before the conference and go through the details of this and try to work with our friends in the other body who now are chairmen of major committees that might be able to help us find some solutions to this.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, I want to make certain on the Stearns amendment that I would have the 5 minutes in opposition; if we could just have that understanding.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to point that out to my colleagues. Mr. Chairman, I ask that the gentleman from West Virginia be granted an additional minute due to my interruption.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I wanted to ask the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall) a question. I did not want to interrupt the gentleman, and I will be glad to give him some additional time. I say to the gentleman, is it not true that before these became monuments, these were all Federal lands? Mr. Chairman, sometimes people think that Presidents go out and create just out of whole cloth wilderness or whatever area, but the monument has to have been Federal land before it became a monument; is that not correct?

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I have been in that area that the gentleman is talking about, and I think it is something we ought to look at very closely. We appreciate the concern of the gentleman from Idaho for endangered species. That is kind of a new thing from Idaho, and we appreciate it.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I understand the gentleman's concerns, and we will definitely take a look at this during the conference with the House and the Senate.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I accept the Traficant amendment.

Mr. DICKS. I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman. I would point out to the gentleman, however, that in terms of recreational opportunity, that our National Forest lands have more recreational opportunity than do our national parks. We have to keep and maintain those National Forest campgrounds and hiking sites. I look forward to continuing to work with the gentleman from Oregon, but I think we should defeat his amendment here today and keep this bill moving forward to final passage before we have to leave today.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I have tried to help the gentleman with meetings with the Forest Service to try to clear up the problems in the gentleman's area.

Mr. DICKS. I yield to the gentleman from Oregon.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to the amendment of my friend, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio). I frankly believe, based on my own visits to the parks, that the American people are delighted. Not everyone is delighted, obviously, but the vast majority are willing to make a small contribution for the maintenance of the parks, which, as we all know, is something that has been underfunded. Last year, when I offered the conservation amendment with the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), one of the things we had in it was a lot of additional money for maintenance. We recognized that our parks, our national forests, our recreation areas, need additional maintenance. Under this program, 80 percent of the money that is collected stays at that local park, and when people see the signs about the improvements that are being made on the trails, in the housing for the workers, in the facilities, we have all kind of these facilities that are very, very old that need to have their sewers repaired, that need to have their septic tanks repaired, need to have work done on the water systems, many of which are old. People I think are willing to make this contribution. The authorizing committees have had a lot of time here. This has been in place now for several years. They have time to have acted, and they have not acted. I think one of the reasons they have not acted is because they basically believe, as I do, that this program is working. I want to commend the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula). He put this together. I supported him. I think it is working. We are doing better on maintenance, we are keeping these facilities in better condition, and the other 20 percent goes to the lesser parks, the lesser facilities. I think that also makes sense. We are not substituting the money. Where in the past the money was sent back to Washington and then they would get the 80 percent locally but they would cut the amount of money that goes to that park, they are not doing that.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I want to say to the gentleman from New Mexico (Chairman Skeen) that we appreciate his willingness to accept the amendment, and compliment the gentlewoman for her hard work on this issue.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. No one in the House is a bigger supporter of the weatherization program than this Member. Weatherization funds are critical to lower income families who look for long-term savings in the cost of home energy through conservation, in particular insulating their homes. I oppose this amendment, however, for two important reasons. First, the chairman and the committee have been extremely generous, as the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) has pointed out, to the weatherization program in the committee bill. The bill includes $311 million for weatherization and State energy assistance. This is a $120 million, 63 percent increase over last year. Yes, the gentleman is correct, the committee has allocated $24 million of this increase to programs to insulate schools and hospitals. I personally believe that this is a reasonable accommodation given the energy use of these facilities. The bottom line is that I want to support the chairman in his overall generosity to these programs. Second and equally important, I cannot support an amendment which reduces funding for fossil energy research. I believe that the lesson of the current energy crisis is that we need a larger and a balanced research program in all areas of energy research. This includes research on more efficient power plants and distributed generation technologies, which are part of the fossil energy program. The minority supported an amendment by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) in committee to increase fossil energy along with energy conservation research by $200 million. I do not think we should support an amendment today which reduces funding for energy research programs. Therefore, I rise in very strong opposition to this amendment.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I join my colleagues in their assertion that the IHS needs more resources to address the health care disparities within Indian country. The health care needs of many American Indian and Alaskan Natives are not being met. Clearly it is our responsibility to address these health disparities. I appreciate the gentleman's efforts, and look forward to working with him as we complete the fiscal year 2002 budget process. I appreciate his leadership on this issue.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I want to compliment all of our speakers here today. They have done an outstanding job of presenting a strong case for a very modest amendment. Mr. Chairman, what we are talking about is increasing the funding for the National Endowment for the Arts by $10 million, $3 million for the National Endowment for the Humanities, and $2 million for library services. I have served on this subcommittee for 25 years, and I can remember when I was first on this committee we had two significant challenge grants for the State of Washington, and we saw our Pacific Northwest Ballet grow into a major institution. We saw our symphony grow. We saw the theaters in Seattle grow, and people talk about this all being New York and Chicago. I can tell my colleagues that the work of the Endowment has helped spread the arts throughout the country. Sometimes we have to accept a win. The committee has insisted that the Endowments emphasize quality; they do. The grants that are going out today are for the best art, the best humanities in this country. Mr. Chairman, I would just say, I think it helps our country to have this diversity. I bet a lot of people go down to Georgia to attend the performing arts just like they do in the Northwest or for the Shakespeare Festival in Oregon. Each community is proud of its art institutions, and I can tell my colleagues that the young people in my district enjoy being in the symphony, enjoy being members of their theater group; and I think for our children giving them a chance to have something to do after school, to be involved, like the kids are at the Middle School in Tacoma that help develop ``Chihuly's Glass.'' These are the kind of important things that will help our kids throughout their entire lives. Let us vote for this amendment. If there is any difficulty with the offset, we will work that out in the conference. Everybody knows that. This is a chance to support the arts, the humanities, and our museums.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. DICKS. I yield to the gentleman from New Mexico.