Paul Gosar

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 3905.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We have heard some other charges that H.R. 3905 changes five Federal laws for Minnesota's national forests. This bill alters no current environmental laws or protections. The Federal Land Policy and Management Act, NEPA, and all other environmental laws still apply to Minnesota. Let's go through this history. In 1950, Congress took action to make land available for mineral exploration and development within the Superior National Forest. Congress did. Then again, in 1978, Congress passed the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness Act, a compromise that prohibited mining within the 1.1 million acre Boundary Waters; once again, the red area and the yellow. No mining. But again, it specifically authorized mining in the Superior National Forest, the green. Once again, red, no; yellow, no; green, go. But that is fulfilling all current legislative and environmental laws. The General Mining Act of 1872 that we heard about earlier governs most mining on Federal lands. However, in this case, it does not. It is the Weeks Act that controls projects in this area because they are located on acquired National Forest mineral leases on these lands. There are no indefinite agreements. They typically retain a nondiscretionary right--nondiscretionary right, once again--to renew every 20 years. The two leases for the mineral deposit in question began in 1966, were renewed in 1989, and again in 2004, without controversy. The MINER Act halts last-minute political mineral withdrawals by requiring congressional approval. Once again, the magical words are ``congressional approval.'' The return to federalism--amazing--renews those two mining leases that were denied for political reasons under the same terms they were renewed twice previously and ensures any future mining projects will have to satisfy all existing environmental permitting requirements, including NEPA. These people demand that they do it in a righteous way. There is no digging right now. These are proposed. The Minnesotans whom I came up to visit, they happily shared their history and their area with me. They want it done right because they have to live with the consequences; not somebody who comes from Twin Cities once in a blue moon. Once again, let's go back. This is the Boundary Waters. This is what you have heard misrepresented all the way around. There is no mining going on in the Boundary Waters. There is no mining going on in the buffer area. Once again, no other buffer exists around a national monument except this. This is hallowed ground. Green, go. Now, it is also very unfortunate that we hear rumors going around from Members of Congress that the Department of the Interior actually is against this. That rumor is far from the truth. We just received an email from the Secretary of the Interior that they are not opposed to this bill. I include in the Record a list of over 150 groups, individuals, and community leaders who now want to be on record as supporting the lawful aspects of returning this back to the folks in Minnesota for mining. Endorsements of H.R. 3905 53 bipartisan state legislators (including leadership of both parties); AFL-CIO International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental, and Reinforcing Iron Workers Local Union 512; Agribusiness & Water Council of Arizona; ALLETE; American Exploration & Mining Association; Americans for Limited Government; Apache County (Arizona); Apache Sun Golf Club; APEX; Arizona Association of Conservation Districts; Arizona Cattle Feeders Association; Arizona Golf Association; Arizona Pork Council; Arizona Liberty; Arizona State Rep. Bob Thorpe; Associated General Contractors of Minnesota; AZ BASS Nation; AZ Deer Association; The Bass Federation; Better in our Back Yard; Cactus and Pine Golf Superintendents Association supports H.R. 3905; City of Ely. Colorado Mining Association; Competitive Enterprise Institute; Concerned Citizens for America (Arizona); Conservatives for Property Rights; Dena Cordova Jack, Executive Vice President, Mountain States Lumber and Building Material Dealers Association; Global Minerals Engineering LLC; Golden Vertex Corporation; Grand Rapids Area Chamber of Commerce; Hibbing Area Chamber of Commerce; International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union 31; International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 49; The Jamar Company; Jefferson County Commissioner Donald Rosier, P.E.; Jobs for Minnesotans; Laborers District Council of MN & ND; Laborers International Union of North America; Laurentian Chamber of Commerce; Minnesota Building and Construction Trades Council; Minnesota Chamber of Commerce; MiningMinnesota; Minnesota Pipe Trades Association. Minnesota Power; Minnesota State Rep. Josh Heintzeman; Montana Mining Association; National Mining Association; National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association; New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association; New Mexico Federal Lands Council; New Mexico Wool Growers, Inc.; North America's Building Trade Unions; Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 589; Range Association of Municipalities and Schools; Scott W. Yates, President, Denver Lumber Co.; Shake Rattle & Troll Outdoors; Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Cooperative; Twin Metals Minnesota; United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America; Water Resource Institute; Women's Mining Coalition; Yavapai County Cattle Growers; Yavapai County Supervisor Board Chairman Thomas Thurman; Yuma County (AZ) Chamber of Commerce. Other Groups Supportive of Issues Addressed by the Bill 62 bipartisan state legislators (including leadership of both parties); Chair of the MN Permanent School Fund Commission; Dakota County Regional Chamber of Commerce; Dale Lueck, Chair of the Minnesota Legislative Permanent School Fund Commission; Duluth Chamber of Commerce; Fairmont Chamber of Commerce; Fergus Falls Chamber of Commerce; Greater North Dakota Chamber of Commerce; Iron Mining Association of Minnesota; Laborers District Council of MN & ND; Lake County Board of Commissioners; Metro North Chamber of Commerce; Minnesota Association of School Administrators--Region 7; Minnesota Chamber of Commerce; North Central States Regional Council of Carpenters; Owatonna Chamber of Commerce; Rochester Chamber of Commerce; St. Louis County Board of Commissioners; Twin West Chamber of Commerce; Up North Jobs; Western Mesabi Mine Planning Board; Willmar Chamber of Commerce.

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

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 631, I call up the bill (H.R. 3905) to require congressional approval of any mineral withdrawal or monument designation involving the National Forest System lands in the State of Minnesota, to provide for the renewal of certain mineral leases in such lands, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to remind everybody I am wearing a copper tie, and that is because I come from Arizona. We are known as the 5 Cs: for the cotton, for the climate, for the cattle, for the citrus, and for copper. It is a critical mineral. We have seen these displays here in the well this morning, diverting the public's attention about what truly is actually here. This is actually a cite to explain to people exactly the clear definition. Let's look at this. What you see in red and yellow, just like a light that you see red, stop; yellow, caution; green, go, the red is the Boundary Waters. The red is the Boundary Waters: no mining, no mining whatsoever. The yellow is a buffer. By the way, the only place in the United States in which a monument is surrounded by a buffer: no, don't proceed. They confused you with that map. This is where we are talking about, down in here, in the green area. It is not the Boundary Waters. The pictures you saw that were in the well so eloquently shown to us were of the Boundary Waters, not where the mining is going to take place. Let's dispel the rumors. Let's get back down to facts. Red, no mining; yellow, no mining; green, okay. But that is following rules. That is following all rules. Once again, just to remind folks back home that are watching, the red is the Boundary Waters. There is no mining in the Boundary Waters. The pictures you saw in the well are of the Boundary Waters. No mining occurs in the Boundary Waters. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and H.R. 3905, the Minnesota Economic Rights in the Superior National Forest Act. 17,000 jobs, $3 billion for education, $1.5 billion in annual wages, and $2.5 billion annually for our economy are at risk if we don't pass H.R. 3905. Further, there are more than 4 billion tons of ore containing copper, nickel, and other metal resources within the area the previous administration tried to shut down, which represents the largest known undeveloped deposit of strategic and critical minerals in the world. If left unchallenged, these political anti-mining and anti-education actions set precedent for a sweeping executive power grab that threatens communities throughout the country. Education will be significantly harmed, as Minnesota is projected to lose up to $3 billion in royalty revenues for the State's permanent school trust fund that would support nearly 900,000 K-12 students statewide if the withdrawal application and canceled leases are not rejected. As the President, on January 19, was leaving office, he actually proposed a massive land withdrawal in northern Minnesota, immediately placing 245,000 acres off limits to development potentially for 20 more years in the future. In conjunction with this massive mineral withdrawal, the Obama administration's Bureau of Land Management inappropriately rejected Twin Metals Minnesota's application to renew two hard rock mineral leases in Minnesota's Superior National Monument. Finally, I want to put to rest the false claim raised by the extremist groups that this bill would affect the 1.1-million-acre Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness that already has a significant buffer between it and the forest. No one is advocating to mine in the wilderness or the surrounding buffer zones. In fact, the bill clearly states on page 4: ``Nothing in this section may be construed as permitting the prospecting for development and utilization of mineral resources within the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness or Mine Protection Area.'' Congress has authorized mining in the forest by law two different times, and the 1986 Forest Service and 2004 Forest Plans both concluded mining is a desired condition in the Superior National Forest. Mr. Speaker, I ask Members to support this commonsense, job-creating bill and to support the rule to bring this bill to the floor for proper adjudication.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3043 from Representative McMorris Rodgers, the Hydropower Policy Modernization Act of 2017. For centuries, Western States have fought over scarce water supplies. We even have an expression in the West that says: Whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting over. Water scarcity in the West led our visionary forefathers to build Federal water storage projects throughout the West to provide water, hydropower, recreation, flood control, and environmental benefits while adhering to States' water rights. These were nonpartisan endeavors, as evidenced by President John F. Kennedy dedicating the San Luis Dam in California. While the Central Arizona Project came after President Kennedy, it continues to bring prosperity to Arizona's cities, Tribal communities, ranches, and farms almost 50 years after its inception. The Glen Canyon Dam and other projects affiliated with the Colorado River Storage Project provided the backbone of a regional economy that has produced year-round and emissions-free hydropower. H.R. 3043 streamlines the permitting process and encourages the expansion of hydropower generation by establishing a single lead coordinating agency, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC, in order to facilitate in a timelier manner all hydropower authorizations, approvals, and requirements mandated by Federal law. This bill will also dramatically decrease costs to relicense non- Federal dams, a huge win for the West. Presently, FERC exercises jurisdiction over 1,600 non-Federal hydropower projects at more than 2,500 dams under the Federal Power Act. According to FERC, the relicensing workload is increasing dramatically. Between FY 2017 and FY 2030, roughly 480 projects amounting to 45 percent of FERC-licensed projects will begin the relicensing process. Rural co-ops, power companies, and other stakeholders in the West need a clear process without the bureaucracy. Let's get bureaucracy out of the way and pass H.R. 3043 so we have a clear process moving forward for pursuing worthwhile hydropower projects. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from Washington for the sponsorship of this much-needed legislation, and I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this commonsense bill.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Colorado (Mr. Buck) for taking the opportunity to highlight some of the good work the House has accomplished this year. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to build on these accomplishments so that Congress as a whole can keep their promises to the American people. As Congress continues to face the preeminent task of repairing our Nation's healthcare system, first and foremost, we must establish the proper foundation for a competitive and consumer-driven health insurance marketplace. The Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act of 2017 will restore the application of Federal antitrust and competition laws to the health insurance industry. Ending the special interest exemption is the first step to broader healthcare reform. Popular cost-reducing reform priorities, such as selling insurance across State lines and developing diverse consumer- driven plans, are predicated on the robust competitive markets this bill will ensure. The McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945 exempted the insurance industry from the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act, acts that have the purpose of ensuring fair competition. This broad exemption was intended to assist the newly developing business of insurance so that those companies could set sustainable premiums by permitting data sharing between insurance companies. However, after 70 years, it is apparent that the broad-stroked exemption created by Congress in the 1940s was not wise. Over the decades, and expeditiously since the passage of ObamaCare in 2009, the health insurance market has devolved into one of the least transparent and most anticompetitive industries in the United States. It is clear that the continued exemption of the health insurance industry from the full application of the Federal antitrust laws has had an unfair impact on consumers. It shows up as artificially higher premiums, unfair insurance restrictions, harmful policy exclusions, and simply no diversity of choice. These antiquated exemptions are no longer necessary. There is no reason in law, policy, or logic for the health insurance industry to have special exemptions that are different from all other businesses in the United States. Repeal of the specific section of the McCarran-Ferguson Act, which applies only to health insurance, has strong bipartisan support. A form of this legislation passed the Democratic-controlled House during the 111th Congress by a vote of 406-19 and passed the Republican-led House in the 112th Congress by a voice vote. Similar legislation has been introduced by multiple Democratic Members of the House, and the text of my bill has been included in the Republican Study Committee's healthcare reform bill for the last four Congresses in a row. In March of this year, this pro-market reform received its biggest show of support yet, passing by an overwhelming majority of 416-7. Now, when 416 Members of the House agree, it sends a strong call to action in the Senate. As a dentist, I know how important robust competition is to dynamic and effective health insurance. It should protect the patient as well as the healthcare provider. It should uniformly apply associated checks and balances that incentivize competition and prevent monopolies. Today, in the healthcare market, those equally applied antitrust protections just simply don't exist. I don't have a crystal ball that will tell you what the future holds for healthcare or what it will look like. I don't think anybody knows. But I can tell you that history is an important guide. The 70-year antitrust exemption for health insurance has strangled competition and resulted in a consolidated, anticompetitive, and nontransparent scheme controlled by seven megacorporations. That is not what we want for our future. Instead, let's liberate the market by removing this antitrust exemption. Imagine what could exist when we put the patient first and demand that health insurance companies compete for their business. This market should be patient-centric, patient-focused, and provide a variety of affordable, quality options that empower patient involvement and accountability. The passage of the Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act into law is an important first step toward increasing competition in the health insurance market and will assist in setting the foundation for real competitive and patient-centered healthcare reform. I thank my friends in the House for their strong support, and at the same time, promises were made in the Senate to get a vote on the Senate floor. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to build upon the good work of this Chamber and do their part to restore competition in the health insurance industry. There is an old saying: Trust is a series of promises kept. Keep the promise. We are watching.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2936, the Resilient Federal Forests Act of 2017, introduced by my friend and colleague Bruce Westerman. Our forests and the communities that live, work, and rely on them desperately need improved management practice to reduce these forest fire disasters and to increase resiliency. I was very pleased with the quick work by my friend and former colleague OMB Director Mick Mulvaney for addressing the wildfire funding crisis at the United States Forest Service, requesting $576.5 million for wildfire suppression and recommending active management reforms. Now, while the Trump administration came through in a big way for Western communities that have been ravaged by catastrophic wildfires, Congress must pass H.R. 2936 and get serious about combating catastrophic wildfires before they get started. The Resilient Federal Forests Act is a bipartisan, comprehensive piece of legislation that simplifies the cumbersome planning process and reduces the cost of implementing proactive forest management strategies. H.R. 2936 empowers local communities by getting them involved in the decisionmaking process. It empowers Tribal communities to be part of the solution and help reduce the risk of wildfire. The bill removes incentives for extreme special interest groups to file frivolous lawsuits. In fact, it requires litigants opposing active management projects to propose an alternative plan as opposed to just saying ``no.'' Imagine that, solutions over lawsuits. Mismanagement has left our forests vulnerable to insects and disease and ripe for catastrophic wildfires. It is clear the system is broken. Western communities are tired of being victims, and this bill allows us to be proactive and to prevent disasters before they become a risk. Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record two letters, one from the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and the second from the National Association of Home Builders, in support of H.R. 2936. Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies, Washington, DC, June 26, 2017. Hon. Rob Bishop, Chairman, House Natural Resources Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Raul Grijalva, Ranking Democrat, House Natural Resources Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Bishop and Ranking Democrat Grijalva: The Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (Association) is pleased to support H.R. 2936, the ``Resilient Federal Forest Act of 2017'' (RFFA). All 50 state agencies are members of the Association. Founded in 1902, the Association's mission is to protect the interests and authorities of the states to manage fish and wildlife within their borders, including on federal land. The Association works closely with the federal land management agencies to deliver on the ground conservation of fish, wildlife and their habitats for our citizens. The Association is particularly appreciative of changes made by the Committee staff at the request of the Association. These changes make more prominent in federal statute the states' authority to manage fish and wildlife on U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands. Nothing in the amended language is intended to change any existing federal, state or tribal authority. It simply makes more evident the state-federal jurisdictional relationship which Congress has affirmed. Federal-state cooperation in this arena is compelled because the USFS and BLM own the land and thus the habitat, and the state fish and wildlife agencies manage the fish and wildlife. Robust cooperation will provide that both land/habitat objectives and fish and wildlife population objectives are met. The RFFA is vitally needed to restore the health of our Nation's federal forests on USFS and BLM lands. Unfortunately, the USFS and BLM have fallen significantly behind in meeting objectives for early successional stage forest habitat, for a number of reasons. Significantly, federal court decisions and increasing uninformed litigation has created ``paralysis by analysis'' to quote a former USFS Chief. Congress mandated that the federal forests were to be managed for water quality, wildlife habitat, recreation, and timber harvest. Active forest management by the federal professional managers in cooperation with the state fish and wildlife agency professional managers has been replaced by natural resource management decisions being made by the federal courts. A return to active forest management will facilitate realization of all of the public values of federal forests. The Association much appreciates that the fire-borrowing problem is addressed in HR 2936. While most catastrophic fires occur in the western United States, this is a national problem because the funds for every national forest and public land unit are affected. This remedy will prevent the USFS and BLM from having to borrow from other appropriated line-items (for example, wildfire prevention, wildlife, recreation and water quality) to pay for the cost of catastrophic fire suppression, which cost consumes over 50% of the USFS budget. We respectfully urge the Committee to further protect the USFS budget by capping the 10-year average cost of catastrophic fire costs at its current level. The 10-year average is used by the USFS in building their budget request. The 10-year average continues to rise and unless it is capped it will continue to erode other important budget line items such as wildlife, water quality, fire prevention and recreation in the President's budget. The Association further appreciates the process relief provided to National Forest Plans (NFP) and (potentially) Resource Management Plans (RMP) developed by collaborative deliberation. It is appropriate that a collaborative- developed plan, which often takes years to deliberate and conclude, be subject to only two options under NEPA, proceed or not proceed. It is very reasonable to assume that the collaboratively deliberated process has examined and rejected the other options, and only the action or no action need be analyzed. The bill's establishment of a pilot binding arbitration process as an alternative to litigation in each FS Region is certainly welcomed by the Association. Not only is the cost of defending the land management plan a burden on the agencies, but the planned for management work on the ground is lost, perhaps never to be resurrected on that site. We commend Congressman Westerman and the Committee for settling on this significant improvement to litigation reform that was in HR 2647 from the last Congress. We also appreciate the increase in acreage ceilings for the statutorily endorsed Categorical Exclusions (CEs) under NEPA. CEs must avoid sensitive areas and must be consistent with standards and guidelines in Forest Plans. Early forest successional stage habitat, for instance, cannot be just incidental to be effective in providing habitat for deer, elk, wild turkey, neo-tropical migratory songbirds and other species which are dependent on this habitat type. While an acreage ceiling is an easy metric to measure success, the desired forest future condition should really determine the size of the timber harvest. Additionally, the Association supports the proposed common- sense amendments to the Endangered Species Act. First, H.R. 2936 overturns the Cottonwood decision, which directs that if additional critical habitat is designated under an approved FP or RMP, a section 7 programmatic re-consultation of the entire FP needs to be done. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Obama Administration argued that the section 7 consultation needs only to be done on the project covering the additionally designated acreage of critical habitat. This remedy will greatly reduce the debilitating process that the federal court decision directs. Second, the bill affirms that no ESA section 7 consultation is required if the USFS or BLM determine during informal consultation that the proposed action is ``not likely to adversely affect a species or designated critical habitat'', which is already USFWS policy. And third, if any consultation on a categorical exclusion established by the bill is not concluded after 90 days, the action shall be considered to have not violated section 7(a)(2) of the ESA. The Association is committed to working with our partners in the USFS and BLM to manage our federal forests to fulfill their public values as Congress mandated. HR 2936 makes significant improvements to and would expedite the process that governs approval of the USFS and BLM management plans. We urge that your Committee expeditiously report HR 2936 from the Committee to the House floor. We look forward to continuing to work with you to move this bill quickly through the legislative process. If you have any questions, please contact AFWA Government affairs Director Jen Mock Schaeffer. Sincerely, Nick Wiley, President, Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies; Executive Director, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, we need forest management reforms, we need them now. I thank Mr. Westerman and the committee for their work on this bill, and I strongly urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Arizona for yielding. What a great issue. As a conservative, I am an outspoken defender of one's right to life. But being pro-life doesn't mean that I am just antiabortion. It also means that I support the right to try, because life at all stages is worth fighting for. Every year, over 1 million Americans die from terminal illnesses, many of whom pass away while waiting for the FDA to approve a drug that could dramatically change their prognosis, while others die in the hopeless cycle of trying and trying again to gain acceptance into a medical trial. Think about that: we are losing millions of Americans at the hands of government red tape. Now, as a healthcare provider for 25 years, I know firsthand how important innovation is to the medical community. The Right to Try Act, if made into law, will give hope to the child with leukemia whose doctors have exhausted all other treatment options. It opens previously locked doors by allowing healthcare providers to try experimental drugs as a last-ditch effort for survival. The experiments that the Right to Try Act will allow for have the potential to lead to many more birthdays, more piano recitals, and more camping trips, and offer hope for our future, hope for years to come. But don't take my word for it. Emily Whitehead was merely 5 years old when she was diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and her doctors quickly realized that she was among a small percentage of patients whose disease was seemingly untouchable by chemotherapy. The Whiteheads were at the end of their rope. The little girl's body was resisting chemotherapy, and the window for many more birthdays, more piano recitals, and more camping trips was wearing thin. Their only option was to join a clinical trial that experimented with T-cell therapy, where Emily could be the first pediatric patient to undergo this treatment. And do you know what? It worked. Three years later, a groundbreaking study was conducted where 63 patients received T-cell therapy for 1 year, and 52 of them became cancer free, an absolutely unheard-of statistic with this deadly strain of leukemia. Think about that: 52 lives were saved; 52 families were given another birthday, another piano recital, and another camping trip. What a waste it would have been had they not had the right to try.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Montana, who I am sorry to see have such a hard time this year in forest management, for his remarks. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock), my friend and colleague.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Utah, who has seen the challenging aspects and destruction from the fires, for his remarks. I also now want to acknowledge my friend from Montana, who is actually still seeing the ravaging of the fires. In fact, Seeley Lake, Montana, set a record for the worst air quality ever recorded there, 18 times greater than the EPA safe particulate limit. Wow, that is a record that we have got to stop. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Gianforte).

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the vice chairman for his comments. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Stewart).

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for his thoughts. He brought up some specific facts that need reiteration just because they are so plentiful. The Forest Service only harvested 2.5 billion board feet in 2016, compared to over 10 billion board feet in 1990. To make matters worse, litigation and other challenges have caused a significant reduction in active sawmills nationwide from over 1,300 in 1995, to just over 220 today. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden).

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the topic of my Special Order.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise to bring this Chamber's attention to the devastating wildfires that have ravaged the Nation this year. The National Interagency Fire Center reports that there have been 49,563 fires that have burned 8,422,251 acres so far in 2017. Wow. Another 80 million throughout the country are at high-risk status, including one-quarter of the 193 million-acre National Forest System. Though the Forest Service has spent a record $2.3 billion to fight fires in 2017, these resources are being spent on the back end. Mr. Speaker, the country has literally been on fire, particularly Western communities. It is far past time that this Chamber pass H.R. 2936 and get serious about combating catastrophic wildfires before they get started. Mr. Westerman's bipartisan bill adopts a forward-thinking, active management strategy and also provides allocation reforms that would cease the practice of fire borrowing. I will likely have more comments later, but we have a few folks pressed for time, so I am going to end my comments there. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tipton), my friend.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Arkansas for his excellent leadership. He is very modest. Listen, folks, I made a comment. Around here in Washington, D.C., we talk about the Democrats being the opposition and the Senate being the problem. Well, as you know, this is a very bipartisan bill. He is very modest. Let's go back through what H.R. 2936, the Resilient Federal Forests Act, actually does. It allows for the streamlined review of projects up to 30,000 acres if the management strategy is put forward by collaborative stakeholders. Imagine that, something so simple. It also requires litigants opposing active management projects to propose an alternative proposal as opposed to just saying ``no.'' ``No'' isn't a solution. It is what you are for. It removes incentives for extreme special interest groups to file frivolous lawsuits--boy, once again, coming to the table with a solution. It empowers local stakeholders and decisionmakers. So often we overlook the people on the ground, on Main Street, who have to live with the consequences for bad policy decisions. It also empowers Tribal communities to be part of the solution and to help reduce the risk of wildfire. We see this time and again, that the Native Tribes that are in charge of their forests have pristine management practices. H.R. 2936 also maintains current protections for our environmentally sensitive areas, including wilderness and roadless areas. What a concession. We need to be clear about larger risk areas and get to these in a more timely manner that we really want to handle. This bill is good for forest-dependent species as it allows for improvements to their habitat. This bill adopts a forward-thinking, active management strategy that combats dangerous wildfires before they get started, which includes reforms that would end the practice of fire borrowing. I want to thank the gentleman for his excellent piece of legislation. It is time that it moves forward. Once again, it is not the House that is the problem, but our colleagues across the street. Once again, talk is cheap; actions speak. Americans need help. The fact that these disasters are quite natural might lead one to think they are inevitable, but according to forestry officials and experts, it is our stunted Federal forestry management and underfunded and misallocated Forest Service accounts that are to blame. Our system is broken. These fires start naturally and decimate our natural ecosystems, but the ultimate cause at the level of their severity and recurrence is manmade. The facts about the relationship between management and wildfires speak for themselves. Forest Service data indicates that active forest management reduces wildfire intensity, while improving forest health. In spite of this, only 1 to 2 percent of high risk areas are actively treated and subject to forest management. The United States Forest Service expends too many resources fighting fires after they break out to work to prevent them in any significant way before they start. By performing routine thinning, culling hazardous fuels on the forest floors, and conducting controlled burns, they could accomplish exactly that, but such a course of action would require ample resources and wise allocation. As you could guess, my professional diagnosis is that both of those are in short supply. I hope my friends on the other side of the aisle are able to hear what I say next. If you care about carbon emissions, you should care deeply about this issue, no matter where you live in the country, no matter where you live. NASA data shows that one wildfire can emit more carbon in a few days than total vehicle emissions in a State for the whole year. To put it in perspective, controlled burning releases roughly 10 percent as much, and is only one part of an overall active management strategy. So the correct choice in this situation is obvious: we spend a little more on the front end so that we can save ourselves much of the economic, environmental, and familial displacement costs on the back end. These costs are year after year, and they are catastrophic when they are left untreated. Treatment is the right course of action, but it requires a little bit of planning, due diligence, and yes, action on our part. I know Congress is a big fan of the word, but when you look at the track record, Congress isn't a big fan of actually acting. In response to this dire situation, Members of Congress from across the country will be sharing their thoughts and experiences within their home States. They will be discussing this during the year, and this past year of terrible wildfires. These are stories that need to be recounted. They will also be speaking about the solutions that we have come together with, for forestry officials and stakeholders across the country. Tackling this problem has become a collaborative and holistic national policy effort, and the policy proposals we have produced are reflective of this fact. They are also bipartisan. But, Mr. Speaker, we can't let this just be a rhetorical exercise. We are united in demanding Congress do something. This Chamber has the knowledge and aptitude to deliver policy solutions. Now we need the political will to turn that knowledge into congressional action. Only then will huge portions of the country finally see some relief from these disasters. When your home is on fire, it is straightforward, it is a nonpartisan issue. You call the fire department, and after the problem is dealt with, you make sure that you eliminate what caused the fire so that you don't see it again. Mr. Speaker, our Nation was on fire this year, and I demand that we, as this Chamber, unite in the same spirit of decisive problem solving as we do for our natural disasters. Let's put these fires out, and then let's stop the brunt for next year's fires before they start. In my four terms as a Congressman from Arizona, I have had to witness the largest catastrophic fire in Arizona history, and also the most catastrophic life-taking, the Yarnell fire. The first was the Wild Well fire in northeast Arizona, and the second was the Yarnell fire that is now in the movie theaters that took the lives of 19 firefighters. That is a travesty. This is something that gives when it is managed right. The people back home know the right answer. Let's give them the tools, the working power, and the policy that allows them, instead of being victims, to be stalwart solutions for a policy that gives back. As the gentleman from Arkansas said, as Teddy Roosevelt said: Leave our natural resources better than we found them. Mr. Speaker, the speakers tonight shared their stories. We want America to hear those loud and clear. These are natural disasters no different than hurricanes, but these, in one case, are different. They are manmade. Let's bring this commonsense policy that Mr. Westerman has put forward. He is a true advocate and smart in regards to those reforms; that is why we want to make sure that H.R. 2936 gets moved through this Chamber, and then put the onus back on the Senate, so that we actually reward the people for good policy and making sure that the victims are turned upside down and made stalwart solution makers. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington. Mr. Speaker, the two speakers have now brought up the issue that the House has repeatedly passed resolutions and ideas in regards to funding and taking care and mitigating our forest tragedy. There is an old adage around here that the Democrats may be the opposition, but the Senate is always the enemy. What we are here to do is light a fire under the Senate. Their talk is cheap; their actions speak. So let's light a fire. To do that, I now yield to the gentleman whose Resilient Federal Forests Act is the topic for this evening, H.R. 2936. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman.)

Mr. GOSAR. I want to highlight one thing that the gentleman actually brought to attention. Catastrophic fires also cause significant damage to the environment. Robust data from NASA has concluded that one catastrophic wildfire can emit more carbon emissions in a few days than total vehicle emissions in an entire State over the course of the year. Phenomenal. We just have to make sure people understand. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his comments.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Newhouse), my dear friend.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman so greatly for his indulgence in coming down and expressing the problems that have been faced in Oregon and thank him for the timely hearing tomorrow in Energy and Commerce. We certainly appreciate it. We need to enlighten all Americans as to the tragedy that is going on in our public Western lands.

Mr. GOSAR. I yield to the gentleman.