Eni Faleomavaega

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, this bill was introduced by our former colleague, Congressman Bill Richardson, prior to his nomination as Ambassador to the United Nations. Serving on the Committee on Resources was no doubt good preparation for the many conflicts that he must now deal with around the world. Mr. Speaker, at the hearing held on this bill in September of this year, the Forest Service expressed concerns about the conveyance without consideration of lands within the Carson National Forest and the Santa Fe National Forest in New Mexico. I am pleased to note that as amended by the committee, the bill provides that the Forest Service will receive fair market value in exchange for the properties which comprise a total of 6 acres. It is my understanding that the Forest Service now supports the bill as amended. I know of no objection on this side of the aisle. I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, on today's agenda we have four previously House-passed Colorado bills. Senate bill 588 expands the Eagles Nest Wilderness within the Arapaho National Forest and the White River National Forest to include land known as the Slate Creek Addition. The House passed this bill in the form of H.R. 985 on June 17 of this year. To their credit, the owners of this 160-acre parcel want assurances that their land will be protected as wilderness if acquired by the U.S. Forest Service. Accordingly, the bill provides that if the United States acquires the Slate Creek property prior to the year 2000, it will be included in the Eagles Nest Wilderness. Mr. Speaker, this is good legislation, consistent with the desires of both the private property owners and in the public interest. I urge my colleagues to adopt this measure. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, the House passed H.R. 1019 on June 3, 1997, and the text has returned to us with a Senate bill number. Mr. Speaker, this bill adjusts the boundaries of the Raggeds Wilderness in the White River National Forest in Colorado to accommodate landowners who occupy the property on the basis of erroneous land surveys. It conveys about 1 acre of land on which roads and other improvements were inadvertently constructed. The legislation is noncontroversial, and the administration does not object. I ask my colleagues to support this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, this is yet another noncontroversial Colorado bill which we have already considered in the House. H.R. 1020 passed the House on June 3, 1997. The bill was introduced by the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. McInnis]. The other body in its wisdom has sent it back to us as Senate bill 591. The bill provides for the transfer of the Dillon Ranger District in the Arapaho National Forest to the White River National Forest in Colorado. The administration has no objection to this bill, nor does this side of the aisle. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the gentlewoman from Idaho as chairman of the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health for her diligence, for her leadership and for her attention to issues such as this. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. First of all, Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the gentleman from Utah, the chairman of the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands, for his leadership and especially for his being here managing this piece of legislation. Mr. Speaker, Senate bill 931 is the Senate companion measure to House bill H.R. 136 introduced by my colleague, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Deutsch], who has been a strong advocate for this legislation. H.R. 136 was favorably reported by the Committee on Resources, and we are bringing the Senate-passed bill to the floor to expedite consideration. This is truly a noncontroversial matter, and I am glad to see the House considering this bill so it can be sent to the President for his signature. When the Committee on Resources held a hearing on this legislative initiative, the administration of the National Park Service strongly supported the legislation which would name the Everglades Wilderness and Visitor Center after two individuals who have long and distinguished association with the Everglades National Park. Marjory Stoneman Douglas was a tireless advocate of the Everglades for many years, and it is fitting to recognize her work in protecting this unique ecosystem. Likewise, Ernest F. Coe is considered the father of Everglades National Park, and the bill honors his work by naming the visitor center for him. With that said, Mr. Speaker, I support the legislation, and I urge my colleagues for their approval and adoption by this Chamber.

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

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. Abercrombie] for yielding me time. Madam Speaker, I am delighted to be a cosponsor of this piece of legislation, and commend the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton], the chairman of the Subcommittee on Wildlife and Fisheries. Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. Abercrombie] for introducing H.R. 1787, the Asian Elephant Conservation Act of 1997. Like the similar African Elephant Conservation Act of 1988, and the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994, the fund created by this act should provide valuable financial assistance to programs protecting a keystone species which is greatly threatened throughout its range. This bill will focus projects toward those problems which most threaten Asian elephants: habitat loss and human-elephant conflicts. This bill also supports conservation programs within range states, which is the best way to perpetuate healthy populations of Asian elephants in the wild. Furthermore, this act will help provide the infrastructure necessary to limit Asian elephant poaching activity, which threatens the population that now numbers only one-tenth its previous level. The Asian Elephant Conservation Act of 1997 also contains provisions that encourage efficiency and public participation in wildlife conservation programs. The act works to obtain the greatest leverage for U.S. taxpayer dollars by directing that preference for funding be given to those projects that will generate matching funds in cooperative projects. Additionally, the Asian Elephant Conservation Act of 1997 promotes public involvement in our efforts to protect this species by permitting the Secretary of the Interior, through the Fish and Wildlife Service, to accept and use private donations to the fund. This proposed bill, Madam Speaker, is but one example of the environmental leadership that is needed to protect threatened and endangered species, both at home and overseas. H.R. 1787 deserves our support, and I urge our colleagues' support for its adoption.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Madam Speaker, I wish to thank the chairman of the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands, the gentleman from Utah, [Mr. Hansen], for his management of this legislation, and also the chief sponsor of this legislation, the gentlewoman from Wyoming [Mrs. Barbara Cubin] for her leadership in providing this legislation for our consideration. Madam Speaker, the goals of H.R. 708 are quite laudable. The National Park Service and the Jackson Hole community are concerned that the ranchlands and open space surrounding Grand Teton National Park may be developed, furthering the loss of wildlife habitat, migration routes, and scenic values. Much of the land south of Grand Teton has already been developed or is under pressure of development. H.R. 708 provides for a study to determine if there are viable means to preserving open space and ranching operations for the benefit of both the park and the community. When the Committee on Resources held a markup of H.R. 708, an amendment in the nature of a substitute was adopted that incorporated many of the suggested changes made by the National Park Service. The changes that were made improved the bill. This study has the potential to be a win-win situation for both the park and the local community. I hope that this is the case and look forward to seeing the final study. Madam Speaker, I support H.R. 708, as amended, and urge my colleagues to approve this proposed bill.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Certainly I would commend and thank the gentlewoman from Idaho for her eloquent statement and her thoughts and reasoning, which are well taken. With regard to the Global Climate Treaty to be negotiated in Kyoto, I do not think there is any question that the Administration is very mindful of the concerns of both private industry as well as the many hundreds of thousands of American workers. The impacts upon the U.S. business community and labor force from the Kyoto conference will be significant but positive. Aside from all of that, I think the jury is still out. We will see tomorrow what the Administration's decisions will be as far as greenhouse gas emissions and the United States' role, which I am sure will be very critical, in the upcoming conference this December in Kyoto. Madam Speaker, I have no additional requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As cosponsor of House Concurrent Resolution 151, I am proud to rise today in strong support of this important measure introduced by our distinguished chairman, the gentleman from Alaska [Mr. Young]. The chairman's legislation sends a crucial message. Carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions constitute a serious problem of global dimension. We can begin, in part, to address and control gas emissions and the growing crisis of global warming by proper and prudent management of our national forests and Federal lands. Madam Speaker, coming from the South Pacific, I am particularly sensitive to the related phenomena of global climate warming and rising sea levels. For many low-level Pacific island nations, especially those that rise only 6 feet at their highest point of elevation, increasing sea levels threaten to flood, engulf and destroy the very homelands of many Pacific peoples. Global climate warming presents a real and terrifying danger in the region that cannot be dismissed. I have introduced a companion-related resolution, House Concurrent Resolution 157, to address the need for the United States to work with the Pacific island leaders on these issues. I have attached a copy of House Concurrent Resolution 157 for the Record and urge our colleagues' support. Madam Speaker, just last month, as a member of the House Committee on International Relations, I attended the South Pacific Forum meetings in Rarotonga in the Cook Islands as a representative of the U.S. Congress. As Members know, the South Pacific Forum is the annual meeting of the Heads of State of 16 Pacific island nations, including Australia and New Zealand. The Forum meetings revealed that the most urgent priority of the island leaders concerned global climate warming and the related phenomenon of rising sea levels. House Concurrent Resolution 157 expresses the sense of the Congress regarding the effects of global warming-induced climate disruptions to Pacific nations that are longtime allies of the United States. The measure calls on the United States to work with the island nations to address this extremely serious problem. As I foresee the process unfolding, the United States will play a leadership role to ensure that all nations and major economies in the world--including China, India and Mexico--fairly share the burden of reducing global greenhouse emissions. All members of the international community must bear the sacrifice for the greater good of the world. No nation should be exempt from doing its part. As to the measure before us, House Concurrent Resolution 151, Madam Speaker, the ranking member of the committee, the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller], has contributed immensely to the amended legislation. Unfortunately, the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller], is at the White House and is unable to be here with us to urge adoption of this measure. House Concurrent Resolution 151, as amended in committee with the leadership of the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller], recognizes that our forests have an important role to play in removing carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas, from the atmosphere. In our view, however, the amended resolution clearly does not endorse the original premise that it is desirable to increase old growth harvests of U.S. national forests in order to reduce global warming. That would be a horribly misguided message to send to the rest of the world, especially as we seek to encourage conservation of forest resources in other countries. Instead, we believe that the old growth forest reserves of the United States should be protected. The temperate rain forests in the Pacific Northwest are among the most effective carbon sinks in the world. If the old growth is harvested it takes many decades to recover the vast amount of carbon released in the process. We do recognize that carbon dioxide reduction can and should be improved by planting and growing more forest cover in the United States, especially on marginal crop and pasture lands. That is why the amended resolution applies not only to national forests, but to all U.S. forests including private lands. Finally, Madam Speaker, we want to be very clear that forest-based carbon sequestration, while important, does not replace the need to reduce fossil fuel emissions. Just yesterday, the Department of Energy reported U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases, which contribute to global warming, significantly increased in 1996. Contrary to our 1992 treaty obligations, such emissions have increased by 7.4 percent since 1990. This should give the administration a sense of urgency as they prepare to engage in global warming talks with the rest of the world in Kyoto, Japan, this December. Madam Speaker, I would urge our colleagues to adopt House Concurrent Resolution 151, a worthy measure that symbolizes America's commitment to address the growing crisis of global climate warming. H. Con. Res. 157 Whereas the world's leading climate experts who comprise the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (hereafter in this preamble referred to as the ``IPCC'') have reported that ``the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate''; Whereas the IPCC has concluded that the effects of global climatic disruption due to increased greenhouse gas emissions could result in (1) a global temperature increase of 1.8 to 6.3 degrees Fahrenheit by the year 2100; (2) a rise in sea level of 6 inches to 3 feet by the year 2100; (3) extreme weather events due to a more vigorous hydrological cycle, such as increased flooding in some areas and more severe droughts in others; (4) saltwater intrusion into freshwater supplies; and (5) the spread of infectious diseases, including malaria and dengue fever; Whereas the IPCC estimates that today's carbon emissions will remain in our atmosphere for a century or more; Whereas more than 2,600 scientists recently signed the Scientists' Statement on Global Climatic Disruption calling on the United States, and the world leader in greenhouse gas emissions, to provide leadership this December in Kyoto, Japan, where an international protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, to which the United States is party, is scheduled to be signed; Whereas relations between the United States and Pacific island nations historically have been marked by a spirit of mutual understanding and cooperation on a wide range of issues; Whereas Pacific island nations and the United States share a commitment to world peace, and the Pacific islands have traditionally been supportive of major United States initiatives, including United States positions at the United Nations; Whereas at the Seventh Economic Summit of Smaller Island States (SIS), held September 17, 1997, in the Cook Islands, a statement was issued to reaffirm, recognize, and endorse the Second Assessment Report of the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of 1996; Whereas the United States is a Forum Dialogue Partner in the South Pacific Forum and is a participant or contributor to other regional organizations, including the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, the South Pacific Commission, the Forum Fisheries Agency, the El Nino research in conjunction with the United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the South Pacific Geoscience Commission (SOPAC), the Joint Commercial Commission (JCC), the U.S. Studies Country Program (USSCP), in connection with the Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) Program, the International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI), the South Pacific Nuclear-Free Zone (SPNFZ) Treaty, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the World Bank, and the Asian Development Bank; Whereas the bonds of cooperation are established between the United States and Pacific island nations either through independent territorial, commonwealth, or free association relationships; Whereas certain Pacific island nations, in alliance with the United States, have historically provided for an important U.S. regional strategic presence and have continued to provide such vital assistance in recent years; Whereas the world is becoming more politically and socially volatile, with growing security threats in proximity to the Pacific region and in other potentially hostile global theaters; Whereas Pacific island nations, with many inhabited atolls, lie only a few feet above sea level and are faced with the constant threat of flooding and the possible loss of their nations due to a rise in sea level induced by global warming; Whereas Pacific island nations such as Nauru, Tuvalu, Kiribati, Niue, Tonga, the Cooks Islands, the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia are already experiencing the effects of an accelerated sea level rise, such as salinization of soil and water, erosion, and rising tides; Whereas the National Academy of Sciences has determined that the efficiency of nearly every United States energy use can be improved and that the United States could reduce its greenhouse gas emissions significantly at low cost or potential savings; and Whereas research and development into advanced energy saving technologies would position the United States as the leading exporter of these technologies, reduce the dependency of the United States on foreign oil, and help balance the trade deficit: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that-- (1) the United States, with its advanced technologies and comprehensive studies on global climate conditions, should be committed to the proposition that global warming is a very serious international issue, and the United States take appropriate measures to consult closely with the nations of the world to address this serious problem; and (2) the leaders and peoples of Pacific island nations should be commended for their efforts to enhance the consciousness and sensitivity of the world community by raising the issue of global warming and greenhouse gas emissions. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Chairman, with due respect to the distinguished gentleman from Alaska [Mr. Young], as the chairman of the Committee on Resources, and also to the gentleman from Utah [Mr. Hansen], for whom I have the highest respect not only in his capacity as chairman of the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands, but the privilege I have serving as ranking member of that subcommittee, I thank the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller], the ranking member, for allowing me this opportunity to share my thoughts with our colleagues here in the Chamber. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this bill in its current form. H.R. 1127 amends the Antiquities Act, a law that has been in effect for 91 years. Pursuant to this act, 105 national monuments have been designated, and 29 of these national monuments were later designated as national parks. Among the national monuments that have been later designated national parks are Grand Canyon National Park, Olympic National Park, Glacier Bay National Park, and Bryce and Zion National Parks. The Antiquities Act has been used by all but three Presidents in the past 90 years and has been the vehicle to protect some of our most cherished public areas. Given this successful history, I do believe the executive should, with modification, retain its current authority to proclaim national monuments. Not all of the Presidential proclamations have been received favorably by the officials from the States in which the national monuments were made. As a result of this dissatisfaction, the States of Alaska and Wyoming are now treated differently than the other States under the Antiquities Act. Some would say that these two States are now protected from having further monuments proclaimed within their boundaries. I want to bring this point to my colleagues' attention. This concept of inconsistent treatment among the 50 States should be addressed so that we are all returned to an equal footing. Mr. Chairman, I believe the driving force behind this legislation is the President's designation of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in 1996, shortly before the 1996 elections. It is my understanding that the President declared this area in southern Utah as a national monument without proper consultation with the elected leaders of the State of Utah. To make matters look even worse, the President issued this proclamation while he was physically, physically, Mr. Chairman, in the State of Arizona, as though he was afraid to set foot into Utah to issue the proclamation. Mr. Chairman, I sympathize with the Utah congressional delegation on this point and feel it was improper for the President to act in this manner. I think any of us would have been offended if such an action were taken in our State or territory, and I do not believe the Antiquities Act should give the President license to proclaim monuments without consulting with the Governor and congressional delegation from that State. Nevertheless, the State of Utah provides a perfect example of congressional inability to reach final agreement on issues affecting the use of public land and the need for action from the executive branch of the Government. I believe there is general agreement that it would be beneficial to the Nation if parts of the public lands in southern Utah were preserved for future generations. And, in fact, there has been legislation introduced in each of the past five Congresses to preserve the scenic, environmentally-sensitive lands. The problem has been in getting the two sides to agree on a compromise. In fact, even the Utah congressional delegation has not been able to agree. The two competing bills have proposed designating 1.8 million acres and 5.7 million acres of land as wilderness. Because of differences of how much land to designate and how this land might be used, and despite the efforts of legislators on both sides, Congress has not passed a bill. Furthermore, as best I can tell, Mr. Chairman, there is little prospect of legislation on this issue being enacted into law in the foreseeable future. Mr. Chairman, as other speakers have noted, Congress retains the power to negate Presidential proclamations. In the case of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, I am not aware of any effort to prohibit funding for the national monument or to terminate the designation as a national monument. In fact, contrary to many arguments I have heard that designations of this nature hurt the economic development of the region, I believe the designation of this most recent national monument will provide an economic stimulus to the region. The future designation of part or all of this area as a national park could be even a greater economic stimulus. Mr. Chairman, at the Committee on Resources markup of H.R. 1127, I offered an amendment to require that at least 60 days before the issuance of a proclamation establishing a national monument, the President must consult with the Governor of that State in which the monument would be located. The rule for this bill provides the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller] the opportunity to offer this amendment later on today, and I hope to address the amendment in more detail at that time. I believe this change will address the real problem while still giving the President the authority to take definitive, unilateral action.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.