Paul Gosar

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer a commonsense amendment that redirects funds from EPA bureaucracy to the Forest Services' hazardous fuels account in order to prevent dangerous wildfires. In 2015, over 10 million acres burned throughout the country, setting a new record. In that same year, fire season appropriations requests were approximately $4 billion for all wildfire programs. Shamefully, the President requested only $356 million of those funds go toward hazardous fuels reduction activities. Thinning overgrown forests and removing hazardous fuels creates jobs and increases overall forest health. Unfortunately, extremist self- interest groups and Washington bureaucrats have failed to recognize this correlation. As a result, timber harvests are down 80 percent over the last 30 years. Such flawed thinking also negatively impacts education and local communities. Historically, 25 percent of the receipts from timber harvests by the Federal Government go toward schools and important infrastructure projects. The failure to prioritize hazardous fuels reduction activities is also bad for our environment, as sound data from NASA concludes that one catastrophic wildfire can emit more carbon emissions in a few days than total emissions in an entire State over the course of a year. As it currently stands, the Forest Service consistently raids its own treasury when firefighting costs exceed their estimated yearly allotment, taking money from programs that clear brush and remove dead trees. This represents yet another classic example of Washington's misguided prioritization of Federal funds. The Forest Service's own Fuel Treatment Effective Database reports that ``over 90 percent of the fuel treatments were effective in changing fire behavior and/or helping with control of the wildfire.'' Hazardous fuels reduction activities work. In eastern Arizona, areas that were treated in the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest as part of the White Mountain Stewardship Project help prevent further destruction from the catastrophic Wallow Fire. Today there are still healthy trees as firefighters were able to control previously thinned areas. On other lands that were untouched by thinning practices and managed by the Forest Service, all that is left behind is scorched earth and sterilized soil. It is of the utmost urgency that the Federal Government adopt a forward-thinking, active management strategy that combats dangerous wildfires before they get started. My amendment helps accomplish that task by redirecting scarce resources to important hazardous fuels reduction activities. I am honored that this amendment is supported by the Americans for Limited Government, Public Lands Council, National Cattlemen's Beef Association, Agribusiness & Water Council of Arizona, Lake Havasu Area Chamber of Commerce, New Mexico Wool Growers, New Mexico Federal Lands Council, Yavapai County Cattle Growers' Association, Yuma County Chamber of Commerce, and countless other organizations and individuals in my home State of Arizona. I ask my colleagues to support this amendment. I thank the chairman and ranking member for their good work on this bill. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, I rise to offer a simple amendment that will protect private water rights and prohibit the EPA's attempt to expand Clean Water Act regulation beyond what Congress has intended. This amendment prohibits the use of funds to carry out the draft EPA- USGS technical report, entitled, ``Protecting Aquatic Life from Effects of Hydrologic Alteration,'' which is agency guidance that aims to expand the scope of the Clean Water Act and Federal control over waters currently under the jurisdiction of States. A March 1, 2016, Scientific Investigations Report from the Environmental Protection Agency argues that the Clean Water Act gives the EPA the authority to regulate not just the quality of waters of the U.S. but also the quantity, or amount, of water in the Nation's river and water systems. The management of water rights and allocation quantities from all natural streams, lakes, and other collections is an authority that is enshrined in State constitutions and compacts across the West--legal protections that are explicitly designed to exclude interference from the Federal Government. Under the expanded scope of the authority, the EPA suggests in their report that the Federal Government could require an individual private water owner or a local municipality to obtain a Federal permit any time it alters the amount of water available in streams or other water systems. In their comments on the draft report, the Family Farm Alliance stated, ``The report relies heavily on concepts rather than real science'' and that the legal strategies advocated in the report ``could embolden some regulators and special interest groups to seek flow requirements on water projects, even if doing so has no support in Federal or State law.'' Unfortunately, this is par for the course for the Obama administration to push an economically disastrous agenda at the expense of science, the rule of law, and basic common sense. In their statement endorsing my amendment, Americans for Tax Reform explained, ``American citizens cannot afford more economic hurdles and the commandeering of State powers over precious water supplies from an overzealous, unaccountable Federal Government. States, local governments, and private water rights holders should not be subjected to such costly and burdensome Federal overreach.'' In addition, the Family Farm Alliance, the Americans for Tax Reform, and dozens of national, regional, and local organizations have endorsed my amendment to rein in this Federal overreach and have expressed serious concerns regarding the EPA's dubious report. In their comments on the draft report, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce stated, ``The Chamber is concerned that the agencies will use these arguments to further expand Federal jurisdiction over land and water features without proper constitutional authority.'' The National Association of Conservation Districts echoed that very same sentiment, stating, ``NACD believes that the report attempts to expand the Clean Water Act beyond Congress' original intent.'' The American Petroleum Institute stated, ``The draft report constitutes rulemaking in the guise of guidance. The draft report is vague and ambiguous, and owing to these concerns, EPA and USGS should withdraw the draft report and not finalize it.'' In my home State, the Arizona Farm Bureau Federation stated, ``Not only is this Federal overreach, but it becomes a bureaucratic and logistical nightmare for individuals and businesses.'' I think the Mohave Livestock Association summed up the issue best when they stated, ``The last thing our producers need is another layer of costly and time-consuming permitting. The States understand water use in their respective ecological territories better than any centralized bureaucracy from Washington, D.C.'' I am honored that this amendment is supported by the American Farm Bureau Federation, Americans for Limited Government, the American Public Power Association, Americans for Tax Reform, the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste, the Family Farm Alliance, the National Association of Conservation Districts, the National Water Resources Association, and countless other organizations and individuals throughout the country. My amendment prohibits the EPA from implementing, administering, or enforcing their misguided attempt to usurp States' rights and control the quantity of water used by individual owners and local municipalities. I ask my colleagues to support this amendment. I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their good work on this bill. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, reclaiming my time, I think most hardworking Americans would agree that the senior bureaucrats with the Customer Financial Protection Bureau, the Federal Labor Relations Authority, and the Federal Communications Commission should not be receiving lavish bonuses when we are $19 trillion in the hole. As I mentioned at the outset, the intent of this amendment is to prohibit the use of funds in this act to pay a performance award to any senior executive employee within the IRS. When the staff realized the actual language in the amendment could be more far reaching than intended, we attempted to work with the committee to correct this occurrence. One thing that this House agrees on is that senior executives within IRS should not be collecting bonuses, and this amendment prohibits exactly that occurrence. I urge adoption of this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. GOSAR. Reclaiming my time, if the gentleman from New York can't give an answer--

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, let me now ask the gentleman from New York a question. I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) to respond. If you disagree with my amendment and feel that it will have unintended consequences, name the agencies in the bill that you think should be allowed to dole out lavish bonuses to their senior executives.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, I rise to offer a commonsense amendment with the intent of prohibiting the use of funds in this act to pay a performance award to any senior executive employee within the IRS. Under the direction of Commissioner John Koskinen, IRS officials have led a coordinated effort to hide the truth about this IRS' targeting of innocent Americans based on their political beliefs. Rather than cleaning up this rogue agency, Koskinen has doubled down on the agency's lawlessness and political culture. On Koskinen's watch, the IRS intentionally destroyed nearly 24,000 emails from Lois Lerner and failed to comply with a congressional subpoena. To make matters worse, Commissioner Koskinen made a series of false and misleading statements under oath to Congress at multiple committee hearings on this matter. Koskinen said in March of 2014 that the IRS had turned over all of Lerner's emails and all requested information; yet the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration uncovered more than 1,000 emails that the IRS tried to hide. The recent transgressions perpetrated by this agency are not only disgraceful, they border on corrupt. The trust Americans once had has been utterly destroyed. In July 2013, Danny Werfel, Acting Commissioner of the IRS, sought to eliminate bonuses for union employees and senior executives within the agency, sending an email to employees which stated: ``I do not believe there should be performance awards this year for IRS employees, managers, or executives.'' Unfortunately, Koskinen chose to ignore Werfel's attempts to restore trust within the agency. In February of 2014, Koskinen announced his decision to pay out bonuses to senior IRS bureaucrats in order to improve ``employee morale.'' In April 2014, the Treasury inspector general reported that more than 1,100 IRS employees with delinquent tax returns received bonuses of more than a million dollars. That same investigation found: ``2,800 IRS employees facing disciplinary actions received more than $2.8 million in monetary bonuses.'' The Office of Personnel Management reported that in fiscal year 2014 alone, 61.5 percent of all senior executives within the Treasury Department received performance awards. Lawlessness within this agency should not be rewarded. This amendment seeks to effectuate a policy of accountability and change the corrupt culture of this agency by prohibiting bonuses and performance awards for Senior Executives Service employees within the IRS. It is unconscionable that Lois Lerner and other dishonest senior officials within the IRS have received more than $100,000 in bonuses in recent years. Committing perjury, purposely disposing of hard drives and more than 2,400 emails in order to stymie an investigation, and providing an extremely poor level of service to taxpayers doesn't warrant a bonus of even a penny, in my mind. Fifty-seven Democrats joined every single Republican in seeking to prevent senior bureaucrats within the IRS from collecting these lavish bonuses in the fiscal year 2015 by voting in favor of my amendment that passed the House with strong bipartisan support. The Council for Citizens Against Government Waste supports this amendment and FreedomWorks is key voting in favor of this amendment. Once the IRS can prove that it will hold rogue employees accountable for their ineptitude, I will cease my efforts to prohibit these awards. Again, I thank the chairman and ranking member for their continued work on the committee. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

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

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today to offer a commonsense amendment. The Gosar-Bridenstine- Duncan-Gohmert-Huelskamp-Jones-Barletta-Brat-Brooks-Black amendment prohibits funds within this act from being used in contravention of Federal immigration law for sanctuary city policies. The concept of sanctuary city policies is in direct opposition to the rule of law and our Constitution. Article I, section 8, clause 4 gives Congress clear jurisdiction on immigration matters. A nation of laws must enforce established law, not seek ways to skirt around it. Sanctuary cities defy Federal immigration statutes by harboring untold numbers of illegal immigrants and providing safe havens for criminals, many of whom are violent offenders. Our amendment prohibits the use of funds which are appropriated by this act from being used in contravention of section 642(a) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. This Federal law prohibits sanctuary policies that prevent or obstruct government and law enforcement officials from sharing information regarding a person's immigration status with the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Despite being the law of the land, more than 200 State and municipal jurisdictions across the country have established policies that directly violate the law and shield criminal illegal aliens from enforcement. The shocking case of Kate Steinle in San Francisco in 2015 revealed the danger sanctuary cities pose to our Republic. Just over a year ago, on July 1, 2015, Steinle was shot and killed by Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, an illegal immigrant who had been deported five times. San Francisco authorities were asked to detain Sanchez until he could be turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials. The city declined and held Sanchez in jail for less than a month on a 20-year-old drug charge before releasing him on April 15, 2015, less that 2 months before he killed Steinle. Sadly, Kate's tragic murder is not alone. Between 2010 and 2014, criminal aliens who were released by DHS went on to commit 124 homicide-related offenses across the country. Let's not forget the many others who have been killed by criminal aliens: Jerry Braswell, Sr., and Jerry Braswell, Jr., of North Carolina; Dani Countryman of Oregon; Chandra Levy of Washington, D.C.; the Gonzalez family of Texas; Kevin Will of Texas; Christopher ``Buddy'' Rowe of California; Jamiel Shaw of California; Alvert John Mike of Utah; and Grant Ronnebeck of Arizona and countless others. These brutal murders have called attention to the dangers sanctuary city policies pose to the safety and security of the American people. The Federation for American Immigration Reform supports this amendment stating: ``Gosar amendment 31 addresses a critical public safety problem and sends a clear message to sanctuary city jurisdictions that their dangerous policies are unacceptable.'' NumbersUSA is key voting in support of this amendment and has stated: ``The Gosar Amendment is a targeted approach to sanctuary policies.'' I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Black).

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a town from my district, Jerome, Arizona. The Town of Jerome recently celebrated its 50th anniversary as a National Historic Landmark. Jerome was founded in the late 1800's on a hill near rich supplies of minerals. The town was named after one of the founders of the United Verde Copper Company that mined those very hills, and it eventually hosted the largest copper producing mine in the Arizona Territory. When it was designated a National Historic Landmark, it was proclaimed that ``this site possesses national significance in commemorating the history of the United States of America.'' The Town of Jerome has been beneficial to the growth of our nation in so many ways. It has provided the copper in the wiring that spread electricity across the country as well as the materials that aided our troops in both World Wars. The Town of Jerome should be recognized not only for its historical contributions, but also for its ability to adapt and survive. During the Great Depression, many mining jobs were cut. In response, the town invested in tourism and retail sales. To increase tourism, Jerome hosts music festivals, historic-home tours, and a variety of businesses, such as craft stores, art galleries, coffee houses, wineries, and restaurants. The Town of Jerome is the type of community that perseveres in difficult times and flourishes in prosperity. This is a model community that should inspire the rest of society to work hard in order to succeed. I would like to congratulate the citizens of Jerome on 50 years of preserving such a unique National Historical Landmark, and wish them years of richness and success in the future.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the faculty and students of the University of Arizona for the work they do at Biosphere 2. Biosphere 2 was built in 1991. Its original purpose was to simulate different climates and biomes from around Earth and to see if it was possible to recreate the natural cycles of the earth inside a contained space. Their goal was to see if this type of habitat was sustainable and to ultimately use this technology for space colonization. Although the original experiments were unsuccessful, the investment in infrastructure continues to provide scientific value to this day. The University of Arizona has turned this science experiment of the 1990s into a first-class research facility with a myriad of uses. The fact that Biosphere 2 is completely separated from the rest of the environment has made it the perfect area to study some of the great challenges society faces today as they relate to the environment, water, and energy management. The work completed there has advanced mankind's understanding of environments, both natural and manmade, allowing the next generation of scientists to be better educated and trained in this field of study. The advancements in horticulture, water usage and environmental science as a result of their work are commendable. I urge them to continue pursuing their commitment to scientific excellence.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, in September of 2014, on the same day Attorney General Eric Holder resigned, the Obama administration took executive action and issued a memo that allowed DACA aliens to begin enlisting in the military. Specifically, President Obama's administration unilaterally expanded eligibility in the Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest, or MAVNI, program to include DACA aliens through a September 25, 2014 memo. Prior to this memo, the executive branch never attempted to enlist DACA aliens through MAVNI. Further, military enlistment rules explicitly prohibit illegal aliens from enlisting in the Armed Forces. MAVNI is a military program intended for lawful immigrants and lawful nonimmigrants. The Department of Homeland Security's Web site states that DACA aliens lack lawful status and are subject to all legal restrictions and prohibitions on individuals in unlawful status. The Gosar amendment would not end the MAVNI program, as open border advocates have falsely claimed. I support the intent of MAVNI. As NumbersUSA accurately states, the Gosar amendment would return the MAVNI program to its original intent by defunding any extension of the memorandum responsible for expanding MAVNI to include DACA beneficiaries. When I offered a similar amendment less than a month ago, DOD reported that only five DACA aliens had enlisted in the Armed Forces. Yesterday, DOD confirmed to my office that 141 total DACA aliens had enlisted in the military through April 30, 2016, as a result of Obama's backdoor amnesty program. As noted by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, CRS, the MAVNI program allows citizenship to be granted to any enlistee who serves at least 1 day of wartime service. MAVNI was never intended to be utilized for the benefit of illegal aliens. Testimony from DOD states that MAVNI was created to recruit legal noncitizens with critical foreign language and cultural skills. Retired Lieutenant Colonel Margaret Stock, who created and implemented the MAVNI program, previously stated, as quoted in a Politico story: ``It's a major bureaucratic screw-up by the Obama administration . . . The MAVNI program is not designed for DACA at all . . . It was rather alarming to see DACAs being put into MAVNI. Someone didn't know what they were doing.'' An Army Times story also quoted Stock as stating: ``It was set up for people who are legally in the country, and had been legal their whole history . . . They have to go back and redo all the security screenings, train recruiters all over again . . . it's one of these things where people want magic to happen, and bureaucracy doesn't work that way.'' These comments are even more noteworthy, as Stock is a huge amnesty supporter and testified in support of provisions in an earlier version of the DREAM Act. Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress clear jurisdiction on immigration matters. Congress has consistently rejected and failed to act on policies that aim to allow illegal aliens to serve in the military. In fact, the House has rejected DACA three times. Furthermore, MAVNI, a pilot program, created by executive order, has never been authorized by Congress. The amendment is supported by Americans for Limited Government; Eagle Forum; the Federation for American Immigration Reform, FAIR; Heritage Action; and NumbersUSA. In fact, it is being key scored by NumbersUSA and Heritage Action. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), the chairman of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I didn't serve in the military, but I understand my constitutional obligation, Article I, section 8 power as well as the application of the rule of law. That is exactly what made America great was equal application of the law. If you don't like the law, don't go around it and bypass it with an executive order. Understand that the full jurisdiction of this House is to uphold Article I, section 8 powers. We never gave jurisdiction to this, and it shouldn't go forward. I ask all of those voting on behalf of this amendment to go forward, as well as the King amendment as well. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. ``The probation officer factored in that the defendant is youthful and has no prior convictions. In my opinion, he is old enough to know what he did was wrong. When you are eighteen in this country you can go to war. When you are nineteen, you are old enough to pay the consequences for attempting to rape someone. He is young, but he is old enough to know better. ``As this is a first offense I can see where leniency would beckon. On the other hand, as a society, we cannot forgive everyone's first sexual assault or digital rape. It doesn't make sense. The seriousness of rape has to be communicated clearly, we should not create a culture that suggests we learn that rape is wrong through trial and error. ``The consequences of sexual assault needs to be severe enough that people feel enough fear to exercise good judgment even if they are drunk, severe enough to be preventative. The probation officer weighed the fact that he has surrendered a hard earned swimming scholarship. How fast Brock swims does not lessen the severity of what happened to me, and should not lessen the severity of his punishment. If a first time offender from an underprivileged background was accused of three felonies and displayed no accountability for his actions other than drinking, what would his sentence be? The fact that Brock was an athlete at a private university should not be seen as an entitlement to leniency, but as an opportunity to send a message that sexual assault is against the law regardless of social class.''

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chairman, I rise today to offer a commonsense amendment that will prevent wasteful spending in this bill and the unsolicited delivery of printed copies of the House telephone directory to 435 House congressional offices. I hold here the United States House of Representatives Telephone Directory for 2016. This book, printed by the Government Publishing Office, contains 378 pages of names, addresses, and the contact information for Members of Congress and their staffs. While the Clerk of the House does get a deal from the GPO on these printing costs, this directory is sold to the public online at a cost of $52 per book. GPO stated that 14,080 copies of this directory were sent this year to the House Postal Operations for delivery. This year, all 435 House Member offices received this stack--this whole stack right here--unsolicited from the Office of the Clerk, 20 copies, total, for each office. Each year we get this directory and, to be frank, it is not needed. All the information contained within these pages is readily available online, both publicly and through House Web sites. To make matters worse, often, the information contained is out of date by the time we receive these bound copies. For example, by the time I received my 20 copies of this directory, the information listed for my staff was no longer current. According to a CRS report from 2011, approximately 97 percent of all government documents originate in digital form and are distributed electronically but are not printed. This same CRS report estimated that it costs Congress about $134 per page for prepress costs for miscellaneous publications, of which this directory is one. Madam Chairman, I don't think I need to remind anyone here that we are currently $19 trillion-plus in debt as a result of excessive and unnecessary spending. I will be the first to admit that this amendment will not be saving millions of dollars this year alone, but in a time of such financial crisis, we should remain vigilant and save every penny we can. This book is unnecessary, and its unsolicited distribution en masse is excessive. Why does each D.C. office get 20 unsolicited copies? My D.C. office only has eight employees, none of which utilize these wasteful directories. I ask my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment that will save precious taxpayer money and prevent future unsolicited deliveries of this directory in every single House office on the Hill. I thank the distinguished chair and ranking member for their work on this bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chairman, I rise today to offer another commonsense amendment that will prevent wasteful spending in this bill by preventing the delivery of this packet of nearly 2,000 pages containing the President's budget request to 435 House congressional offices. In its 2017 budget justification, the Government Publishing Office states: ``Since 2012, GPO has made the annual Budget of the U.S. Government available as a mobile app. The FY 2016 Budget app, released in January of 2015, provided users with access to the text and images of the Budget, including the Budget Message of the President, information on the President's priorities, and budget overviews organized by agency. This app provides links to GPO's FDsys where summary tables and additional books of the Budget, including the Analytical Perspectives, Appendix, and Historical Tables, are available.'' This package, which contains the President's budget, analytical perspectives of the budget, and the appendix of the budget are all available on an app for your phone for free. Furthermore, all three are available in their entirety online at www.whitehouse.gov/omb/, where they are more easily searchable. While the Office of Management and Budget does get a great deal from GPO on printing costs, each individual copy sells online for $38, $56, and $79, respectively. These documents comprise 170 pages, 409 pages, and 1,413 pages, respectively. OMB orders one copy of the budget for all 435 Members of the House, and this publication is then printed by the Government Publishing Office and delivered by House Postal Operations. In a time when our Nation is facing a fiscal crisis and has a $19 trillion-plus debt as a result of excessive and unnecessary spending, we should not be squandering more money printing nearly 2,000 pages of the President's budget that most Members throw in the trash, recycle, or don't even open. Furthermore, this massive document is not even a serious proposal and has been routinely rejected with strong bipartisan support. The Senate defeated President Obama's budget by a vote of 97-0 for fiscal year 2011, 99-0 in fiscal year 2012, and 98-1 last year. Again, I will be the first one to admit that this amendment will not save millions of dollars this year alone, but, in a time of such fiscal crisis, we should remember the old adage that a penny saved is a penny earned. The printing and distribution of the President's budget to 435 House offices is excessive. I ask my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment, and we will save precious taxpayer money and prevent future mass deliveries. Again, all these publications are online in their entirely, where they are more easily searchable, and they are also on a free mobile app. I thank the distinguished chair and ranking member for their work on this bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of a business from my district, Payson Concrete and Materials, Incorporated. Payson Concrete and Materials recently celebrated their 51st anniversary in business. George Randall opened the business in 1965. His brothers, Robert and Fred, joined him soon after and the family has been serving the communities of Payson, Pine and Tonto Basin ever since. Providers of concrete, asphalt and road paving services to eastern Arizona, the Randalls now employ 35 people, many of whom have been with the company for over 20 years. Their loyalty shows a commitment to excellence in every aspect of their company, from customer to employee. The Randall Brothers are also very active and generous in their community. Every year, they make major contributions to the local community. Robert Randall has also invested in the future of Pine. Mr. Randall, along with other local businessmen, has invested his own time and money into drilling a well with the capability of providing the citizens of Pine with a fresh source of water. Payson Concrete and Materials is the type of family-owned and operated business that is all too rare in this day and age. It models the kind of community involvement that should be commonplace in our country. On behalf of the people of Arizona and the United States, we thank them for all that they do.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer a commonsense amendment that will ensure that the study on ozone formation in the underlying bill analyzes the relative contribution from wildfires. The National Interagency Coordination Center reported this year that we set a new record in terms of total acreage burned from wildfires with more than 10.1 million acres going up in smoke. This significant increase is not the result of more wildfires, as the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service reported last month that ``the number of wildfires has stayed about the same over the last 30 years, but the number of acres burned annually has increased by nearly double the acreage burned in the 1990s.'' Timber removal is down 80 percent over the last 30 years and acreage has burned up. There is a direct correlation between thinning our forest and overall forest health. As a medical professional for over 25 years, I know firsthand that preventive care is a much cheaper and effective treatment as opposed to dealing with an illness or disease after it has already been diagnosed. Let's not forget the old adage that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Unfortunately, the Federal Government has failed to employ such a strategy when it comes to our Nation's forests and continues to spend billions of dollars on the back end of suppression activities. The CRS reports that the top 5 years with the largest wildfire acreage burned since 1960 all occurred between 2006 and 2015. In Arizona, we have seen the tragic results of this agency's misprioritization firsthand, as the five largest fires in Arizona's history occurred between 2002 and 2011. Data released from NASA a few years ago 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 a year. My commonsense amendment simply seeks to determine the overall contribution to ozone formation from wildfires. We should all want to have this information and know the extent to which ozone formation from wildfire emissions occurs. I am proud to be a cosponsor of the underlying bill and applaud Representative Olson, Chairman Upton, and my other colleagues who are actively involved with moving this much-needed legislation forward. Most States are just beginning to adopt the 2008 ozone standards as the EPA didn't announce the implementation guidance and a final rule until March 6, 2015. Rather than allowing time for those standards to be implemented, the EPA moved the goalposts and is seeking to unilaterally implement a regulation that has been projected to be the most expensive mandate in our Nation's history. The Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry recently reported that ``the EPA's new ozone standard of 70 parts per billion will be virtually impossible for Arizona to meet due to Arizona's high levels of background, limited local sources, and unique geography'' and that ``implementation of the current rule in Arizona is not reasonable, based in sound science, or achievable.'' Again, my amendment simply ensures that the study on ozone formation in the underlying bill analyzes the relative contribution from wildfires. Chairman Upton supports my amendment, and I wholeheartedly support the underlying bill. I ask my colleagues to do the same and support my amendment and H.R. 4775. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, once again, this three-word amendment simply ensures that the study on ozone formation in the underlying bill analyzes the relative contribution from wildfires. Just simply that. This is something that I would hope would be analyzed anyway under the language in the underlying bill, but I felt the need to clarify so as to ensure such analysis occurs. Data released from NASA a few years ago 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 a year. We should all want to have this information and know the extent to which ozone formation from wildfire emissions occurs. The science is science, the whole science, nothing less, nothing more. I ask everybody to vote for this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.