Russ Fulcher

Mr. FULCHER

Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Westerman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, as has been mentioned, this bill would add 1.5 million new acres of wilderness area, monument expansion, and scenic rivers. That sounds pretty good. Now, here is the rest of the story, and it is coming from someone whose home State is two-thirds federally owned. This bill also comes with a critical mineral ban on things like uranium. China and Russia will thank us for that. This bill also comes with a ban on any active land management, which is a welcome mat for wildfires. It is simple. If we don't manage, a lightning strike will. Now, that is too bad for wildlife, the environment, and productive use, but at least we get the privilege of spending taxpayer dollars for fire suppression. Mr. Speaker, we can't rationalize the contents in this bill to the objective American taxpayer, but that is what happens when legislation gets rammed through without one markup or adequate bipartisan review.

Mr. FULCHER

Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 447, the National Apprenticeship Act. This bill invites continued Federal rules that hinder Idaho's ability to use industry-based standards. There is a lot of success with apprenticeships in Idaho. From companies like Idaho Power, Micron Technology, and St. Luke's Hospital to small businesses of all types, apprenticeships are crucial to job growth in the Gem State. These businesses partner with colleges and universities across my State, connecting skill development to college degrees from regionally accredited schools. Whether it is Idaho Power partnering with the College of Southern Idaho or the many small entrepreneurs working with schools like College of Western Idaho, North Idaho College, Lewis-Clark State College, and others, businesses need the flexibility to use approved third parties to certify apprenticeship programs. Make no mistake, Idahoans are used to dealing with heavy-handed Federal bureaucracy. Despite long wait times for approval by the Federal Department of Labor, our State officials continue to succeed in setting up apprenticeship programs. But often, Idaho's labor officials must use existing occupations because the Federal Department of Labor doesn't have standards for new ones. Why make it harder by removing qualified third parties that can approve industry-recognized apprenticeship programs needed for our economy? Why eliminate the opportunity for employees to participate in industry-based programs where they can go to school, get paid work experience, and earn an industry credential? Idaho's economy has been resilient, despite government intervention due to COVID. Last year, I said if the government shut down the economy, it had an obligation to help open it back up. We should not hamper companies trying to create apprenticeship programs for the types of jobs they need. We should help industry by freeing them to develop high-quality, high-paying jobs for the future. We should give jobseekers more opportunities to grow and succeed, not with Federal boundaries, but only by the limits of their imaginations. It is for these reasons I vote ``no'' on H.R. 447.

Mr. FULCHER

Mr. FULCHER. Madam Speaker, election law and regulations must be developed and administered at the state and local level. To that end, I believe criteria and engagement from all Idahoans must be included in this debate and want to enter the Committee's recommendations into Congress' current debate on free and fair elections. The Citizen's Committee for Election Integrity's findings and recommendations: All political power rests with the people. Our Constitutionally guaranteed Republican form of government relies on free, fair, and honest elections to select our representatives and leaders. To ensure equal protection and equal representation of the people, laws governing our elections must meet certain minimum standards. It is the purpose of this Citizens Committee to concisely articulate the minimum standards for free, fair, and honest elections. These standards shall then be used by our local, state and federal legislators as a metric for reviewing and revising election law to ensure free, fair, and honest elections where the outcome is accepted by all citizens of good will. Minimum Standards for Fair and Honest Elections Our Constitutionally guaranteed republican form of government relies on free, fair, and honest elections to select our representatives and leaders. The standards listed here shall be used by our local, state, and federal legislators as a metric for reviewing and revising election law to ensure free, fair, and honest elections where the outcome is accepted by all citizens of good will. All voting processes, other than those needed to preserve the privacy of a citizen's vote, must be open and available for direct observation, with no minimum distance requirements, and audit by agents of the candidates or parties. All election materials must have a secure chain of custody at all times. Election officials must be accompanied by observers when accessing any election materials. Records of the chain of custody shall be complete and available for audit. All votes, regardless of voting method, shall be held to equal standards. Voters shall only be qualified electors that are able to verifiably provide their government issued photo identity before being issued a ballot. Voters who provide false information, including information of voter qualification, should face severe penalties. As a condition of being issued a ballot, the voter's identity and signature must be recorded in a permanent record (Poll Book). Original Ballots must have a physical form that allows voting choices to be examined and properly interpreted by the naked eye. Ballots must have features designed to prevent counterfeiting. An auditable system for tracking the status of all ballots must be implemented and maintained in the State of origin. The total number of printed ballots must equal the sum of the number of cast ballots, spoiled ballots, and unvoted ballots. Ballot tabulation must be conducted by two independent and unrelated systems. The difference in totals between the two systems must be less than one half the margin of victory or 0.1% of the vote total, whichever is less. Tabulating machines must only tabulate and not modify ballots in any way, or be connected to the internet. Before the results of an election can be certified, the ballot counts must be reconciled with the voter records. The margin of uncertainty must be less than one half the margin of victory or 0.1% of the vote total, whichever is less. Lists of qualified electors must be purged of unqualified persons 180 days before an election. Voter Rolls should be vetted and compared with available government records to identify duplicate or Ineligible registrations. Laws and regulations governing an election may not be changed for 180 days prior to that election. All election records should be retained and preserved for not less than 22 months. Voter identification for provisional ballots must be verified, with information provided by the voter, prior to that ballot being counted.

Mr. FULCHER

Mr. FULCHER. Madam Speaker, I stand in opposition to H.R. 4447. A clean energy future is not possible without advanced nuclear energy. We are in a global competition. Russia is building seven reactors in Asia, has 22 more under contract in Asia and Europe, and proposals to put more in Africa. China is on pace to double nuclear capacity by 2030 and has stated it wants to build 6 to 8 reactors a year. In the U.S. we are currently building two. If we fall behind, so does our national security and geopolitical standing. That is why I introduced the Next Generation Nuclear Advancement Act, which was ruled out of order as an amendment. All sections of this act, the Nuclear Energy Strategic Plan, and Integrated Energy and Light Water Reactor Programs, have Senate counterparts with bipartisan support. These provisions need to be inserted for legislation to have a chance at becoming law; anything less is only useful as a social media post.

Mr. FULCHER

Mr. FULCHER. Madam Speaker, the sun is waning on a generation of warriors that were the embodiment of a full and meaningful life. I am thankful to have lived in a time where these men and women were pillars of our community and the foundation of their families. Almost 75 years ago today--a price was paid for the life we live today, owed to the men and women that fought in World War II to preserve the foundations of our Republic. One such warrior is Perry Arthur Justice. As part of the Second Engineer Special Brigade operating in the Pacific Theater, Perry saw first-hand the price that must be paid to preserve the peace of this world. Through six campaigns and 22 landings on beachheads throughout the Pacific, the Second Engineer Special Brigade provided mission-critical services to win the battle. Even in the midst of the chaos of combat, surely aware of his impending doom, Perry said ``I just wanted Dad to know I died like a man. When I knew I was going to die, I stopped being scared and have never been afraid since.'' Amazingly, Perry's fearless life continued years after his time in the Pacific with his marriage to Norma Ploss, his career at Dow Chemical Company, his time as a teacher, and his legacy carried through his children and grandchildren. Even in retirement, Perry enjoyed his time as editor of the ``Farm and Ranch Reporter.'' I am always amazed that such individuals in the heat of battle, continuously facing death, came home and lived their lives to the fullest. Truly, Perry Arthur Justice is an example of a life well-lived. He is also a sign of the debt we owe to those who came before us to ensure our freedoms and way of life. The oppression of distant terrors was hurled back at a time when hope was bleak but the Greatest Generation responded as true heroes and prevailed. I am honored to highlight the life of Perry Arthur Justice. May God bless him, his family, and our great country.

Mr. FULCHER

Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this legislation. While I understand the merits of the bill and while some of my colleagues support it, I still have concerns. I spent a lot of time in the rural counties of Idaho. Residents and local governments, understandably, have serious concerns regarding additional Federal land acquisition, especially at a time when Federal resources are stretched so thin. The Federal Government doesn't have the resources to manage the land and are often prevented from allowing local involvement. Translation: More Federal land equals less land being intelligently managed and, often, more wildlife. Currently, about two-thirds of Idaho's land mass is controlled by the Federal Government. That means less property tax, more D.C. bureaucracy, reliance on grant programs like Secure Rural Schools, Payments in Lieu of Taxes, and the ramifications of associated strings inevitably attached. I am also concerned about our growing national debt, now over $24 trillion. And while I appreciate that this bill utilizes revenue streams from future oil and gas receipts, it is still ultimately taxpayer money. That authorizes permanent funding, and any time there is permanent funding, that also raises a red flag. Mr. Speaker, to be a wise steward of the people's money, Congress should regularly reevaluate programs that it funds, not automatically renew appropriations.

Mr. FULCHER

Mr. FULCHER. Madam Speaker, prior to serving in Congress, I served in the Idaho Legislature with a beloved individual. This special person, who passed recently, was an aircraft commander, an instructor, a Captain, a teacher, a linguist, and a mother to five children and twelve grandchildren in her life of 75 years. Joyfully, Thyra Stevenson of Lewiston, Idaho, lived to the fullest in her life of adventure but sadly, she died suddenly last month. As a precursor to her success, Thyra was the Valedictorian of Lewiston High School, a doctorate of Latin American Literature, having studied in Madrid, Spain, and at the University of Washington in Seattle. Additionally, she was a musician playing the oboe, cello, piano, and the bagpipes. Amid her career, Thyra served our country as an amazing pilot and worked as an officer in the United States Coast Guard. Thrya flew large transport jet airplanes including the McDonnel-Douglas DC-9, the Boeing 727, the Boeing 737, and the Boeing 757. After her time as a pilot, Thyra went on to serve in the Idaho House of Representatives for three terms. While in the State Legislature, Thrya's passion for education shined through, and she took a keen interest in ensuring the success of our local dairymen, farmers, and ranchers. In 2018, Thyra, in the self- described ultimate show of her life, purchased a 2019 F-350 Platinum. It is said that parking for such a large truck was limited around the Idaho State Capitol, but, today, our hearts are joined by family, friends, and colleagues in celebrating the ``full-throttle'' life she led. Thyra, a woman of her time, and a woman beyond her time will be sorely missed. I believe lhe embodiment of this message is a small tribute to the large life she lived. I pray for her family and those impacted by the sudden loss of loved ones during this difficult time. The Congressional Record is the permanent archive of the American people, and I am thankful to include the life of Thyra Stevenson of Lewiston, Idaho. May God bless our great country and wonderful people like Thyra that grace this world with their lives

Mr. FULCHER

Mr. FULCHER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the honorable life and work of a beloved fellow Idaho native. A graduate of Idaho schools, a successful small business co-owner, and a leader in public service--also a long-time personal friend and legislative colleague of mine, Shirley McKague will be dearly missed. First, as a State Representative, then an Idaho State Senator, Shirley worked her way into the hearts of her colleagues in the Idaho Statehouse through her wit, charming personality, and talent. For her family, Shirley leaves behind her husband Paul of 50 years, and six children to carry on her wonderful legacy. I am honored to highlight a life of success and positive influence. As a genuine conservative, Shirley was instrumental in the Idaho State Legislature and in the public service careers of countless fellow Idahoans who refer to her as their inspiration. In everything she did, Shirley was always more interested in the welfare of fellow Idahoans than that of her own. Shirley was a beacon in our local communities and known as someone who was thoughtful and soft- spoken, but always on target. God bless Shirley and her family. We will also miss her, and her passion for life.

Mr. FULCHER

Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Speaker, the United States of America has generated more prosperity than every other nation in history combined. That is because our divinely inspired system of government prioritizes individual rights through a republic that has representation, employs market principles and property rights, and backs it up with rule of law. The sponsors of today's legislation are using a pandemic as an excuse to propose spending $3 trillion on policies that reverse or undermine all three. Now, we all know it is not going to become law. Instead, it is part of a strategy to set the initial negotiation bar so outrageously to the left that the end negotiated result would transform our Republic to a socialist remotely governed Republic. When I disagree with legislation content, I often consider compromise.

Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Speaker, when I disagree with the legislative content, I often consider compromise. But in this case, there is only one reasonable response, and that is a ``no'' vote.

Mr. FULCHER

Mr. FULCHER. Madam Speaker, as a man of faith, I have seen the spiritual strength of our nation tested during these challenging times. As a ray of hope, I run proud to showcase the work of Mission Aviation Fellowship, headquartered in Nampa Idaho, on their 75th anniversary. Founded shortly after World War II, a few veteran pilots who served our country found a way to extend the gospel of Christ to those in desperate need of aid, supplies, and medicine. On May 20, 1945, a non- profit organization was formed, and on February 23, 1946, Mission Aviation Fellowship chartered their first flight from La Habra, California to Tuxpan, Mexico. A founding board member, Betty Greene, served as MAF's first pilot, and after that first flight into Mexico she became the first woman to fly over the Andes mountain in South America, and the first female pilot in Sudan, as she traveled the world on behalf of MAF. She is a recipient of a Congressional Gold Medal as a Women Airforce Service Pilot (WASP) for her wartime service. Over the years, and through earthquakes, war, and genocides, Mission Aviation Fellowship sent brave men and women into uncharted areas to help those so desperately needing aid. Today, Mission Aviation Fellowship operates a fleet of 47 light aircraft, with 13 of those planes being Kodiaks, which are manufactured in Sandpoint, Idaho. In the 13 countries it serves, Mission Aviation Fellowship is that light at the end of the tunnel for many seeking aid when all else seems dark. Last year, I had the pleasure of meeting the staff of Mission Aviation Fellowship at their headquarters in Nampa, and the faith, courage, and dedication to their divinely inspired ``mission'' gives me great hope for our future. But as we learned on May 12, it comes at a cost. MAF pilot Joyce Lin took off from the Sentani, Papua, Indonesia airport, on her way to a village in the Papua highlands, delivering supplies for a school and COVID-19 rapid test kits for the local clinic. A few minutes later, over Sentani Lake, she declared an emergency. Joyce did not survive the ensuing accident. She loved her Lord and she loved serving other people who were in need. The MAF family is grieving the loss of this dedicated pilot. As Jesus Christ, our savior once said, ``Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.'' May Mission Aviation Fellowship's leadership be an example for all of us during these difficult times.

Mr. FULCHER

Mr. FULCHER. Madam Speaker, a month ago we stood on the floor and we authorized a $2.2 trillion stimulus package. Today, we will authorize another $480 billion to keep it going. By law, the U.S. economy is mostly shut down. As long as that is the case, we have an obligation to facilitate relief. So with anxiety, I will support an extension of the Paycheck Protection Program. Madam Speaker, most of the Members have not been here the last month. We have been working, but we have been working from home due to health concerns. And by most of Congress not being here, that means only a few negotiate the deals, and these are very big deals. Madam Speaker, our job is here. No more bypassing of regular order. This virus may threaten our health, but when all of us aren't involved in the work of Congress, our Republic is threatened.

Mr. FULCHER

Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Speaker, the United States of America is at war. Its invisible foe is called coronavirus. Having a virus is not a new precedent for America. It is happened twice in the 20th century: the Spanish flu and polio. But in an attempt to slow this outbreak, we did set a new precedent. For the first time in history, we mandated the economy shut down by law. Now, we don't yet know the benefits of that, but we do know the cost. It is about $2 trillion dollars. And one must ask: What is the cost of not acting? It is agonizing to take on this debt, but here is a game-changer for me: When the government shut down the economy, it assumed the responsibility for bringing it back. This virus may threaten our health, but 98 percent or more will survive that. We will not allow the virus to take away our livelihoods. Mr. Speaker, I will be supporting the bill.

Mr. FULCHER

Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in opposition to H.R. 2546. Regardless of what the House does, this bill is not going to be signed into law, and I find it only fair to explain why. This package of bills is based on an ideological thought process that has always failed and is going to continue to fail. It will fail because this will add collectively about 1.5 million new wilderness acres. Yes, that is 1.5 million. Although we already have about 111 million, this is going to add another 1.5 million. This bill will fail because the sponsors think they are protecting this land. In truth, the opposite is true. This bill will fail because unmanaged land equals fuel load. Fuel load equals wildfire. Mr. Chairman, according to the Insurance Information Institute, over the last 5 years, an average of 7.86 million acres per year has burned in the United States. According to the Congressional Research Service, about 78 percent of that is on public land. The wilderness designation is the most vulnerable public land there is. More wilderness equals more fire. More fire equals more carbon, somewhere in the region of about 40 tons per acre when a wildfire burns. And it gets worse. If a forest burns, that is God's best tool for absorbing greenhouse gases, and that is destroyed. That is like taking out your lungs. Mr. Chairman, I can't count the number of times that I have heard the term ``climate change'' since I have taken office. The same people sponsoring these bills, the climate change fighters, are fighting to increase one of the most major causes of just that. So, yes, this bill will get stalled. It may pass the House, but it will fail. And all this land happens to be in the west, Colorado, Washington, California. It is easy if you are from Connecticut or New York or some other eastern State to vote for a 1.5-million-acre wilderness designation somewhere in the western U.S. and then not have to explain to constituents the real impact. You can go home and say I expanded wilderness, saved all this land. Well, guess what, it does impact your constituents and here is why: Creation of wilderness, scenic rivers, and monuments is a creation of another Federal dependent. Disease and fire are inevitable on these lands. Those of us who live in those States or surrounding States, we are trying to govern in those States, and under these designations, you just can't touch it until there is a fire, and then you have to fight it. Those States that are helping make this decision, your constituents are subsidizing us. Now, the Senate and the President know that this is not right. The Senate and the President know that having 47 States in this case decide what happens in three is not right, so they will stall this bill. I am simply hoping to raise the truth in this situation in a way that will at least make people think. I am not naive about what is going to happen with this bill. This package designates about 100,000 acres of national monument expansion, so I will use the same argument there. Ditto. It also has 843 miles of wild scenic rivers. Just to drive home a point, please know this, sometimes our fish need some human help, and this designation will prevent that. Sometimes our fires create devastating silt flow into our waterways, and that would need some human help, but we won't be able to do it under these circumstances. Massive new management burdens on a Federal Government already $2.3 trillion in debt. Mr. Chairman, our Federal Government is in over its head already. We can't afford to manage what we have already got, so we don't. This is the wrong bill for the West. It is the wrong bill for Idaho. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FULCHER. Madam Chair, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa).

Mr. FULCHER. Madam Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).

Mr. FULCHER. Madam Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).

Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).

Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Stauber).

Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop).

Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, it was alluded to once, but I want to underscore that passage of this would add massive new burdens on Federal agencies. We need to be using those resources to better manage what we have already got as public land and public resources. As a reminder, we are $2.3 billion in debt. What that means is the Federal Government is way over its head. We can't afford to manage land, and we can't afford to take care of it. So guess what? It doesn't do it. Then we all pay, typically, when things go on fire. Mr. Chairman, in my State of Idaho, because of all that massive amount of Federal land, we are really more like tenants than we are landlords. But to make an analogy, our landlord can't afford to fix a broken roof. That is what we have got with responsibility on these government agencies unable to take care of these resources. Mr. Chairman, you have heard testimony from my colleagues that many of the local communities impacted have raised significant concerns ranging from loss of access, recreation, elimination of constructive and wise management, and threats to rural economies. In addition to the concerns and opposition raised by local stakeholders and counties, some of the provisions in the package are opposed by the actual Members who represent the areas affected. It is troubling. This effort is also funded in part by some special interest groups, and they sometimes will call themselves environmentalists. To those people, I just want to communicate: I live in this area. All too often you don't. We are the real environmentalists because we take care of a fabulous resource. Public lands decisions should be made with local collaboration and input. This set of bills does not do it. They have real consequences on real people. Sound, proven, and scientific management are critical. Mr. Chairman, God gave us a fabulous resource here, but he also gave us a brain. We need to use our brain. Now, I am not naive. I know my colleagues across the aisle have got to vote for this thing. Part of that is that some people's DNA says that wilderness is good and human involvement is bad. I would just close by saying this: Facts are stubborn things. The first fact is this set of bills is going nowhere. The second fact is wise management--that is using our mind--is much better than stagnating this resource. Fact number three is when this stalls--and it will--those of us on this side of the aisle and those of us who live in the West will still be here asking for your cooperation in working with us. Mr. Chairman, please don't let pride blind you. Work with us on putting some intelligence and some wisdom into managing this resource. Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record a Statement of Administration Policy recommending a veto of this bill package. Statement of Administration Policy H.R. 2546--Protecting America's Wilderness Act--Rep. DeGette, D-CO, and Rep. Neguse, D-CO The Administration opposes H.R. 2546. This bill would impose unnecessary and harmful restrictions on more than 2.5 million acres of land in Colorado, California, and Washington State, including nearly 1.5 million acres in the form of wilderness designations. These restrictions will greatly reduce opportunities for multiple uses on these public lands, limit access to them, and significantly reduce the available productive acreage in working forests, rendering them more prone to catastrophic wildfires. The Administration has expanded access to America's public lands; increased hunting, fishing, and recreational opportunities nationwide; and enhanced conservation stewardship of our vast natural resources. With regard to the designation of wilderness on public lands, the Administration generally supports congressional action to resolve wilderness designation and Wilderness Study Areas (WSA) release issues, particularly for WSAs that were established more than 30 years ago. Many WSAs were recommended for designation, while others were recommended as not suitable, with suggestions that they be returned to agency management to integrate their other intrinsic values into surrounding land management plans. The Administration recommends addressing these long overdue WSA decisions before undertaking potential designations of new areas that did not meet the criteria established in the 1964 Wilderness Act when inventories were completed many years ago. The Administration strongly believes that before new or potential wilderness areas or wild and scenic rivers are designated, it is important to first ensure that such designation is the most appropriate land management tool for a given parcel. For this and other reasons, successful conservation proposals that have incorporated this tool over the last decade have been more limited in geographic scope than this bill. It is important to ensure that designating new wilderness areas on public lands does not unnecessarily impede public access, limit outdoor recreational opportunities, or conflict with pre-existing uses. Unfortunately, a number of the proposals for wilderness designations in H.R. 2546 fail to follow this successful model. While many recreational activities, such as hunting, fishing, and hiking, are compatible with wilderness designation, other activities, such as mountain biking and off-highway vehicle use, are not. Some of the areas proposed for wilderness designation in H.R. 2546 contain popular motorized or mechanized recreation areas. In addition, existing energy development poses inherent challenges for wilderness designations, creating complex management issues pertaining to active mining claims and oil and gas leases within a designated wilderness area. The designations under this bill could impede future energy and mineral development, including development that is important to the economic and national security of the United States. The Administration is committed to managing public lands as a good neighbor to the local communities and to the Americans who live and work in close proximity to them. Engaging local stakeholders and considering their on-the-ground expertise are critical steps in making decisions about public lands management, and local communities have concerns that many aspects of H.R. 2546 would produce negative effects for their citizens and their economies. The Administration is willing to work with Congress to make the necessary improvements to this bill if it is considered further. If H.R. 2546 were presented to the President in its current form, however, his advisors would recommend that he veto it.

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

Mr. FULCHER. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Chairman, I just want to make a comment. We haven't been shy so far today over here on criticizing where we see issues. I just wanted to communicate with the gentleman that, in this case, I also want to point out the positive things. I support the gentleman's amendment, and I commend him for bringing that forward.

Mr. FULCHER. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.