Doug Lamborn

Mr. LAMBORN

Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the conference report for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020. The NDAA continues rebuilding readiness and provides vital capabilities required to implement the National Defense Strategy. Highlights include significant investments in operations and maintenance, facilities, sustainment, and military construction; also, nuclear triad modernization and authority to deploy low-yield weapons; the historic establishment of Space Force as a separate military service with a seat on the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and $5.3 billion in emergency funding to rebuild Tyndall and Offutt Air Force Bases, Camp Lejeune, and China Lake Naval Air Station, all of which were struck by natural disasters. The stress that military families endure from frequent deployments makes the systemic failures of privatized military family housing truly deplorable. Critical reforms in this bill include a Tenants Bill of Rights, formal dispute resolution, and improved quality control for repairs and mold remediation. The bill also provides critical oversight of the Defense household goods program that will ensure that military families are put first in DOD reforms. The bill also addresses PFAS contamination by prohibiting nonemergency use of firefighting foams containing PFOS and PFOA and requires DOD to accelerate fielding a PFAS-free replacement. I want to thank Readiness Subcommittee Chairman John Garamendi for his leadership. Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Thornberry also deserve great recognition for preserving the committee's 59-year bipartisan tradition of passing the NDAA to support our warfighters and their families. I want to thank the professional staff who worked tirelessly to complete this important legislation. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the conference report.

Mr. LAMBORN

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

Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, it is a great honor for me to come to the House floor tonight to commemorate National Bible Week. This is an opportunity to celebrate the tremendous influence of the Bible on the freedoms we enjoy today in America. We are truly blessed to live in a nation where we are free to worship and read the Holy Scriptures without fear of persecution. There are many places throughout the world where such freedoms do not exist. Americans have the right under our wonderful system of government to respect and study the Bible or any other system of belief that they so choose or even none at all. That is the beauty of the American way, and I believe it goes all the way back to the Bible. In 1941, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt declared the week of Thanksgiving to be National Bible Week. The National Bible Association and the U.S. Conference of Bishops have designated the specific days of November 18 to 24 as National Bible Week this year. This is the week set aside to recognize the Bible as a foundational building block of Western civilization, the Judeo-Christian heritage, and the legacy that motivated and shaped the founding of the United States. In this hour, we will hear from Members of Congress from all throughout the United States from various faith traditions and denominations speak about what the Bible means to them. We are here, in keeping with tradition, to recognize National Bible Week. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Washington (Mrs. Rodgers), who is a good friend and colleague.

Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her words of wisdom, her personal experience, and for being here tonight. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Babin).

Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for sharing his heart with us tonight. Throughout American history, many of our great leaders have turned to the Bible for guidance, faith, and hope. President Abraham Lincoln once said of the Bible: ``I have but to say, it is the best gift God has given to man. All the good the Savior gave to the world was communicated through this book. But for it we could not know right from wrong. All things most desirable for man's welfare, here and hereafter, are to be found portrayed in it.'' Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson), as we go across the country and hear from folks all over this great country of ours.

Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for his words, and I thank him for reminding us about the Pilgrim tradition, especially as we enter this week of Thanksgiving. It is interesting, in American history, we have two different strains of life going on in this country: We had people starting in Jamestown looking for gold, looking to make money, putting up with slavery; but we had people in Massachusetts who wanted to just have religious freedom, and they had a whole different view of the world and of God and the Bible. They were the start of the abolitionist movement. So I am glad that Mr. Thompson brought us the Pilgrim tradition tonight. Ronald Reagan, when he designated National Bible Week, said, when he was in office: ``When I took the oath of office, I requested the Bible be opened to II Chronicles 7:14.'' Cathy McMorris Rodgers mentioned this earlier. It reads: ``If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from Heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.'' This passage expresses my personal hopes for the future of this Nation and the world. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Estes).

Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Kansas, in the Nation's heartland, for sharing his thoughts with us tonight. I am going to share my own story. When I was a freshman at the University of Kansas--also there in America's heartland--in the 1970s, someone approached me and asked me if I knew what the Bible was about. I said: Yeah, sure I know what is in it.'' But do you know what? I said that without ever having read any of it for myself. Kind of presumptuous on my part. Mr. Speaker, I wonder if there are any people listening in here to us today who are in the same position. Maybe they think they know what it is about, but they have never looked at it for themselves. The only honest thing I could do at that point was to read for myself. So I read the Gospel of John, and as I read it, I discovered that I didn't know what was in there at all. It was totally different than what I had expected. And I found a man in there who said: ``I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me.'' So I ended up discovering for myself a relationship with Jesus Christ, who became my Lord and Savior. Mr. Speaker, that is what I know from personal experience. It is better to read the Bible for oneself and not just take someone else's word for it. For me, it made all the difference in the world. My life has been totally different as a result. As David said in Psalms: ``The unfolding of your words gives light; it gives understanding to the simple''--Psalm 119:130. So, as we celebrate National Bible Week, we remember the importance of faith in both our private and our public lives. We recognize the Bible's powerful message of hope. We cherish the wisdom of the Bible, and we thank God for providing this holy book that has truly been, in the words of Scripture, a lamp unto our feet and a light unto our path. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King), another person from the heartland of America.

Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. Many of the early American settlers, we reference them many times. They came to the New World with the express purpose of following the Bible according to the convictions of their own consciences. One of the first acts of Congress during the tumultuous beginning of our Nation was the authorization of an American published Bible. The war with the British had cut off any supply of Bibles from England. Our Founding Fathers understood how important it was for the American people to have Bibles. Robert Aitken, a private citizen, brought this need to the attention of Congress. In his letter, he wrote: ``This work is an object worthy the attention of the Congress of the United States of America, who will not neglect spiritual security, while they are virtuously contending for temporal blessings.'' So in 1782, Congress reviewed, approved, and authorized the first known English language Bible to be printed in America. They passed a congressional resolution. I am not sure how many votes this would get if we brought this today. I know I would support it. ``Resolved: That the United States in Congress assembled, highly approve the pious and laudable undertaking of Mr. Aitken, as subservient to the interest of religion, as well as an instance of the progress of the arts in this country, and being satisfied from the above report of his care and accuracy in the execution of the work, they recommend this edition of the Bible to the inhabitants of the United States, and hereby authorize him to publish this recommendation in the manner he shall think proper.'' Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington).

Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Arrington for his heartfelt comments and for being here tonight and sharing with us. One reason many people respect the Bible is that so many prophecies for telling future events have come true exactly as foretold. It is one of the reasons I look at whenever I ask myself: Is the Bible really true? Is it just a collection of stories and legends, or is it rooted in history and fact? So when I look at the prophesies of the Bible, that gives me the answer. In the Old Testament, there are many predictions that were given to prove that the speaker who claimed to be divinely inspired really was or not. If, and when, those predictions or prophesies came true, it validated the words of that speaker. In the Book of Daniel, for instance, there are scores of detailed prophesies that were literally fulfilled. So skeptics who want to criticize the Bible have fallen back on the position that Daniel must have been written of after the facts about which they talk about. But, the Book of Daniel is found in its entirety in the Greek Septuagint and partially in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which were discovered in later years and now we know predated the events that were talked about in the Book of Daniel. So Daniel gave prophesies that came true in history. So the critics of the dating of the Book of Daniel are the ones who are not being honest. The rise and fall of empires, the capture and destruction of cities, the destiny of kings, all of these are prophesied about in minute detail, and history has literally confirmed hundreds of such prophesies as having come true. So that is one of the reasons I believe in the Bible and know it to be true, and not just a nice collection of stories. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Allen).

Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for his words and for being here tonight. We have been on the Pacific Coast. Now we are with Georgia on the Atlantic Coast. We have been hearing from Texas, people from Texas down at our Mexican border, and we are about to hear from someone from Wisconsin, our border with Canada in the north of our country. And as Mr. Grothman comes forward, I want to just say a word about archaeology. It is a historical fact that there are archaeological discoveries that have validated accounts in the Bible, which gives trustworthiness to the Bible that we acknowledge during this National Bible Week. Time and time again, archaeology has shown that Biblical personalities, locations, and events actually existed in time and space. They weren't just made-up stories. Claims by critics that a Bible statement was simply made up have been debunked by later archaeological discoveries more times than we can say. The Jewish archaeologist Nelson Glueck has said: ``It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted or controverted a Biblical reference.'' Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman).

Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Grothman for his words tonight, and I appreciate him being here. Listen to what President Harry Truman said during his address at the Attorney General's Conference on Law Enforcement Problems: ``The fundamental basis of this Nation's law was given to Moses on the Mount. The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings which we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul. I don't think we emphasize that enough these days.'' He continued: ``If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.'' Now, we have been hearing from people from the Atlantic to the Pacific, from the Canadian to the Mexican border. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Hartzler), my friend and colleague from the Nation's heartland.

Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Missouri for her passionate and powerful words. Our last speaker now before we conclude our hour is from the great State of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).

Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for his words, and I thank him and all the others who have spoken here tonight from all over this great country of ours for their heartfelt comments. It has been an honor and a pleasure for me to commemorate National Bible Week this evening. I am grateful to my colleagues who joined me to honor, respect, and commemorate the Word of God. Mr. Speaker, the prophet Isaiah, thousands of years ago in this book right here, the Bible, in Isaiah 40:8 says: ``The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God stands forever.'' Those are powerful and true words. Civilizations have risen and fallen, generations have come and gone, yet here today, on November 20, 2019, we are still celebrating the enduring Word of God given to us starting thousands of years ago. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LAMBORN

Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Mr. Wilfred George Perkins, a cherished family man, business owner, and faith leader. Mr. Perkins, a lifelong Colorado resident and pillar of the Pikes Peak region passed away on October 19, 2019, at the age of ninety-one. Will was born in Montrose, Colorado. After graduating from Colorado College in 1949, he married the love of his life, Bessie Lea Hastings, in 1950. Their remarkable sixty-nine years of marriage produced children, Pamela (Ted) Walker, Tom (Cheryl) Perkins, Karen (Jeff) Sheets, and Sandra (Bentley) Tate, along with fourteen grandchildren and eighteen great-grandchildren. Mr. Perkins was a second-generation automobile enthusiast and salesman. Will owned and operated Perkins Motors from 1958 to 1985. He also served two terms as the president of the Chrysler National Dealer Council. Will was highly regarded in the business world. He was a role model for his peers and community leaders around the state and the nation. Even competitors admired Will's humble attitude and spiritual consistency. Upon retiring, Mr. Perkins passed the family business on to his son, Tom, and later his grandson, David. Will's public testimony to the power of the Gospel was bold, clear, and compelling. If there was one thing that Will hung his hat on, it was that he was a faithful follower of Jesus Christ. He wanted people to know about the life they could have if they would open up their hearts to the Lord. He generously supported numerous ministries, including: The Navigators, Young Life, Springs Rescue Mission, International Students, Inc., and Focus on the Family. Will and Bessie attended Village Seven Presbyterian Church for forty-seven years. Will faithfully sang in the church choir and encouraged fellow believers to become engaged in their communities, whether it be politically or spiritually. Mr. Perkins truly made the culture of the 5th Congressional District as beautiful as our natural surroundings. The Colorado Front Range has lost a Christian statesman, but we will benefit from Will's legacy for generations to come.

Mr. LAMBORN

Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 823, a bill that creates land restrictions for approximately 400,000 acres of land in Colorado in the form of new wilderness, permanent mineral withdrawals, as well as recreation and conservation areas. While the goals of the public lands legislation in this bill are certainly admirable and well-intended, and I have great respect for the bill's sponsor, my friend and fellow Coloradan, Congressman Neguse, it is clear that this proposal lacks the type of local consensus required for a bill of this scale. I am proud to call Colorado home, and I am honored to represent the Fifth District of Colorado. I truly believe our State is the most beautiful in the Union, and myself and the bill's sponsor and other Representatives from Colorado that you will hear from during our debate would agree with me on that. We love our State, and we are very proud of it. As is the case for most Western States, Colorado has a large amount of public lands, with roughly one-third of the State under Federal management. These rich and diverse public lands provide countless outdoor recreation opportunities, habitat for wildlife, and significant economic benefits for our rural communities and our State as a whole. Because of these diverse uses of our public lands, it is vital that the land management decisions we make find balance and common ground. I regret to say today that this bill before us falls short on both counts. To put the enormity of this bill into perspective, Madam Chairman, this bill affects a total acreage that is nine times the size of Washington, D.C. A bill of this magnitude should not be forced through along partisan party lines, yet that is what we are facing today. Public lands decisions should be made with local collaboration and input. They have real consequences for communities on the ground who live near these public lands. It is troubling to note that 65 percent of the lands affected by the bill before us are located in Congressman Tipton's district. Not only was Mr. Tipton not meaningfully consulted on this legislation, but he was not even made aware of it until the day that it was publicly announced. It is not against the law to write bills affecting other people's districts, but I think that consensus and collaboration require that they should be brought into the loop and be part of the process. Subsequent efforts to engage on this legislation and find compromise have been largely ignored. That lack of engagement sadly continues today. Mr. Tipton, for instance, offered 10 good faith amendments that raised specific concerns that his constituents have brought to him concerning this bill. Only three of these were made in order by the Democrat-controlled Rules Committee. Substantial stakeholder concerns about this bill have been raised by impacted counties, recreation groups, forestry health advocates, as well as the relevant Federal agencies. One particularly worrying concern has been raised by the National Guard Bureau--not the State, but the national National Guard Bureau-- about this bill's impact on the Colorado Army National Guard's High Altitude Aviation Training Site, or HAATS, that has yet to be resolved. Proposed wilderness expansions in Colorado around the Colorado Army National Guard's HAATS, or High Altitude Aviation Training Site, are creating concerns about the future of the site's ability to ensure military readiness for the men and women who may be deployed to combat zones in the Middle East. This HAATS site is a treasure. It is the only place in the country where high-altitude rotary-wing aircraft can get the training in real- life conditions that they will encounter overseas in places like Afghanistan or training for search and rescue in mountainous areas around the country or around the world. So this is a treasure. It is a unique site that must be protected. And it is a collection of sites. It is not just one landing zone. It is a multitude of landing zones. While the sponsors of the CORE Act have indicated that their goal is to protect HAATS, the only way to provide certainty for HAATS is to codify the existing Department of Defense guidance for aircraft flying over Colorado wilderness areas. As with any compromise, balance is key. There is no room for winner- take-all mentalities if you want to achieve lasting public land management agreements. This bill, unfortunately, has chosen a winner- take-all path that may deliver some great press releases momentarily but will ultimately fall short of becoming law. I believe this bill will not be supported in the other body and is certainly not supported by the administration. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, I do agree with my colleague from Denver that the outdoor recreation industry in Colorado is a thriving and vital part of our State's economy. We have such good material, such a good environment to work with that it is no wonder. I would have to point out that, fortunately, the lands that are under consideration in this bill already have one form of protection or another due to being wilderness study areas or other types of Federal lands. The development that was being mentioned--one football field every 30 seconds--doesn't apply to these lands. These lands are not in that category.

Mr. LAMBORN. I yield to the gentlewoman from Colorado.

Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Chair, reclaiming my time, I understand where the gentlewoman is coming from. Without getting into the philosophical area for time constraints over restricting lands that very few people can enter into as opposed to having lands as open as possible for as many people and many uses as possible, which I think is a balance we have to strike--there has got to be a place for both--I think we need to keep our discussion for the next part of our debate on the local collaboration, or lack thereof. Madam Chair, for that reason, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tipton).

Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Chairwoman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, I would point out that Mr. Tipton offered 10 amendments in the Rules Committee, only three of which were adopted. There were seven amendments right there that were not even brought to the floor for debate. I think that that is unfortunate. Madam Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock) who is the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Water, Oceans, and Wildlife on the Natural Resources Committee.

Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Chair, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman), who has a master's degree in forestry from Yale University.

Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Chair, I yield the gentleman from Arkansas an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Chair, I am ready to close, if that is where the gentleman from Colorado stands, also.

Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, let me say that I am informed that Garfield and Montrose Counties, although they are comfortable with certain portions of the bill, are not willing to endorse the bill as a whole. Also, I want to say that Colorado Springs Utilities in my district, representing about half a million people, and the Aurora Water District have raised concerns that the Camp Hale National Historic Landscape designation will negatively impact their existing and future water rights. These concerns have gone unaddressed. I finish by stating what the administration, the Office of Management and Budget, says about this bill, which means, basically, that they have concerns that, if not addressed, will result in a veto of this bill, and it will not become law. ``The administration opposes H.R. 823, the Colorado Outdoor Recreation and Economy Act. This bill would impose land restrictions on nearly 400,000 acres of land in Colorado and would reduce areas open for motorized recreation. The administration has pledged to expand access to America's public lands; increase hunting, fishing, and recreational opportunities nationwide; and enhance conservation stewardship. H.R. 823, however, would not achieve these goals in a balanced way, and the administration opposes it as it is currently drafted.'' It goes on to say, among other things, ``Rural communities have raised concerns that the land-use restrictions included in H.R. 823 would have negative effects on local economies, and, as evidenced by the committee process, it appears that local sentiment has not been adequately taken into account when developing this bill. The administration, therefore, opposes H.R. 823 in its current form, but it is willing to work with the Congress to improve it if the bill is considered further.'' So if it were presented to the President in its current form, his advisers would recommend he veto it. I also have the understanding that the Senate will not take up this bill either. Maybe it is an interesting exercise that we are doing here, but it is not anything that is going to result in a law. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill, and let's move on from here. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chair, I will agree there is a good amendment here that we can all support. The underlying bill designated 28,000-some-odd acres surrounding Camp Hale as the first-ever National Historic Landscape. Now, Camp Hale was a U.S. Army training facility for what became the 10th Mountain Division, and it was established in 1942 in Colorado to provide winter and mountain warfare training during World War II. It was also used during the Cold War as well. This amendment would add veteran outreach and engagement activities to the proposed management plan. It is a good amendment. It would rightfully prioritize outreach and involvement of our Nation's veterans, so I would agree with the amendment and ask that my colleagues vote ``yes'' on this amendment. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.