Alan Lowenthal

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, on this very solemn day, where we commemorate those that gave their lives, I rise on behalf of the Safe Climate Caucus to bring to the House another unfortunate new reality. More frequent flooding is going to be occurring now because of climate change. We are already seeing sea level rise; that is without doubt, and that has resulted in the frequency of nuisance flooding in coastal communities. Cities across America are experiencing nuisance flooding. There is a rise in nuisance flooding between 1960 and the present of up to 900 percent throughout the country. From 300 to 900 percent, it is more often. When rising sea levels combine with natural climate patterns like this year's El Nino, even higher rates of nuisance flooding will occur. For example, in my district, nuisance flooding threatens my entire Long Beach Peninsula and the Alamitos Bay. Flooding roads mean a loss of work or school days, and eroded beaches can have a negative impact on property values. Today's floods are tomorrow's high tides. That is why Congress must act on climate change.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, last month we celebrated Viet Bao Daily News' 15th Anniversary of the Writing on America Essay Contest and its subsequent annual Awards program. Viet Bao Daily News established the Writing on America Essay Contest in 2000 with the simple mission of creating an opportunity for members of the Vietnamese community to share their individual experiences. Since its creation, the competition has become an annual grand award celebration and a uniting chronicle sharing inspirational stories from members of the Vietnamese community. The initial objective of the competition was to preserve the Vietnamese language and cultural values. However, the impact exceeded Viet Bao's initial expectation. The tens of thousands of entries over the years have become more than just an anthology of shared, collective philosophical values--but a historical record helping to preserve the Vietnamese community's history across a broad spectrum ranging from tragedy to triumph. I would like to congratulate all of the participants in the essay competition for sharing their varied stories of life and legacy, as well as congratulate all of the winners past and present. They have all contributed a multitude of inspirational stories that document and share with the whole community their experiences and journey to assimilate in American society. I also want to congratulate and applaud Viet Bao Daily News for the success of their writing competition, not just for the community service the program brings to the Vietnamese community, but for what it contributes to the rich tapestry of our nation.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, the community of Avalon, California was saddened to learn that Paxson ``Packy'' H. Offield passed away on Sunday, June 14, due to complications from leukemia. He recently chose to return to his home in Michigan, and passed away there, with his wife and family by his side. Mr. Offield attended the Latin School of Chicago and the Catalina Island School for Boys, located in Toyon Bay. He graduated from the University of Denver in 1975 with a degree in Economics and then taught here at the Catalina Island School. In 1976, his family asked him to join the Santa Catalina Island Company, formed in 1894 and guided by the Wrigley and Offield families since 1919. Beginning as property manager, Mr. Offield gained experience in several departments, and served at various times as the company's chairman of the board, president, and CEO. He was a member of its Board of Directors from 1980 until his death. Mr. Offield was also chairman of the Benefactor Members of the Santa Catalina Island Conservancy, formed in 1972 by Philip K. Wrigley and Dorothy W. Offield, and was the Conservancy's first chairman of the board. A dedicated conservationist, Mr. Offield was a director and chairman of The Billfish Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to the conservation and enhancement of billfish populations worldwide through scientific research, education and advocacy. He was a Board member and former chairman of The Peregrine Fund, a worldwide organization dedicated to preserving birds of prey. In 2006, Mr. Offield received from the president of Panama the Commendador Award for work through the Peregrine Fund on the reintroduction of the Harpy Eagle, the national bird of Panama. Mr. Offield was also chairman of the Catalina Sea Bass Fund, dedicated to the restoration of sea bass and other fisheries in Southern California waters. He was active with the Conservation and Research for Endangered Species component of the San Diego Zoological Society. He was awarded the 2006 Conservation Medal from the Society for his work with the Peregrine Fund and satellite tagging of marlin. He also spearheaded a DNA sampling study with Rutgers University and The Billfish Foundation. Mr. Offield was very involved in developing satellite tags for tagging billfish in Pacific waters for over 20 years, to track migration and other data on billfish. He was the chairman of the Offield Center for Billfish Studies and funded an archival tagging program for white sea bass in cooperation with the Pfleger Institute for Environmental Research. He was a founding member of the Marine Conservation Science Institute. Mr. Offield was also a director of USC's Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies and endowed the Paxson H. Offield Professor of Population Ecology now held by Dennis Hedgecock at USC. Mr. Offield was president of the Offield Family Foundation, which works predominantly on environmental issues around the world. He has worked with the Little Traverse Conservancy to protect the arboreal forests of Northern Michigan. He was a past president and board member of the Silver Creek Fishing Club in Northern Michigan. Mr. Offield was named to the International Game Fish Association Board of Trustees in 2007 and currently served as its chairman. He shared its belief in the conservation of game fish and the promotion of responsible, ethical angling practices through science, education, rule making and record keeping. He was inducted into the IGFA Hall of Fame in 2011. In Avalon, Mr. Offield was a past president and member of the Avalon Tuna Club, the world's oldest sportfishing club and was the current president of the Tuna Club Foundation. He had in the past served as Chairman of the Avalon Planning Commission and as president of the Catalina Island Chamber of Commerce. The Tuna Club had twice recognized him as Angler of the Year, and he had three Tuna Club record fish using three-thread linen and 8-pound Dacron. Mr. Offield also participated in the International Masters Angling Invitational Tournament in Cancun. Mr. Offield is survived by his wife, Susan, his children, Chase (Lena), Calen (Amber) and Kelsey, his stepson, Rex, three grandchildren (Christian, Owen and Capri) and his brother, James Offield. A celebration of life will be held in Avalon later in the summer.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Natural Gas Environmental and Economic Security Act with a number of my colleagues, including the Ranking Member of the House Natural Resources Committee Raul Grijalva, to reduce the frivolous and unnecessary waste of natural gas from public lands. Large volumes of natural gas are regularly flared, vented, or simply leak from Federal oil and gas leases--in 2013 alone, the amount of lost gas could meet the heating and cooking needs of 1.6 million American homes according to the Environmental Defense Fund. To make matters worse, the Center for American Progress and The Wilderness Society showed that the amount of gas lost to venting and flaring doubled between 2008 and 2013, with no sign of the trend slowing. In addition, this wasted gas is not subject to royalties, costing the American taxpayers as much as $58 million annually in lost revenue according to the Government Accountability Office. Beyond being economically wasteful, these processes are bad for human health and the environment. Gas released to the atmosphere from venting and leaks contributes dramatically to climate change, since methane, the major component of natural gas, has 25 times the warming impact of carbon dioxide over 100 years. In 2013 alone, the Environmental Defense Fund estimated that the volume of methane released to the atmosphere was equivalent to the emissions from 5.6 million cars. Venting, flaring, and leaks all affect local air quality as well by releasing volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter into the atmosphere. These environmental costs undercut the potential benefits of natural gas as a lower-carbon, cleaner burning fuel alternative to coal. Local regulations have already demonstrated that the best way to curb venting, flaring, and fugitive releases is to both enact strong regulations and incentivize gas capture by collecting royalties on lost gas, and our bill, the Natural Gas Environmental and Economic Security Act takes this two-pronged approach. To address royalties, the bill amends the Mineral Leasing Act and the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to require royalties on all gas produced from new leases, including gas used on the lease to power equipment. Gas lost in acute emergency situations would remain exempt from royalties to ensure that safety is not compromised. The bill would also require that 99 percent of all gas produced each year from Federal leases be captured within 5 years. It also prohibits venting and limits routine flaring. To reach the 99 percent goal, the bill establishes equipment and operation standards, mandatory leak detection and repair procedures, and recordkeeping requirements; it also institutes new reporting requirements for all gas produced, disposed, or leaked on a lease and requires public disclosure of the data. Market-appropriate enforcement mechanisms for non-compliance, as well as guidelines for applying such measures, are also established. This bill is a win-win for the American taxpayer, providing both environmental and economic benefits, while also promoting the growth of the domestic methane mitigation industry, which is creating high-paying jobs through small businesses across the nation. Further, many of these gains come at minimal or no cost to producers, since many mitigation technologies pay for themselves once the captured gas is marketed. The Natural Gas Environmental and Economic Security Act stops the waste of valuable taxpayer resources, protects the environment and public heath, and boosts the economy. I ask that my colleagues support this commonsense legislation and rein in the waste of natural gas from our public lands.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned, I offer this amendment to require companies to follow the law if they want to export crude oil from the United States. I want to make it clear. This amendment is not about whether we should lift the crude oil export ban altogether. That is a debate for a different time and a different bill. This is about those narrow cases where companies are currently able to export crude oil in limited quantities but are also choosing not to follow the rules. Last summer, the Commerce Department ruled that two companies could export very light crude oil, called condensate, after it had been lightly processed. That decision meant that those companies would not need to obtain a license to export crude oil even though licenses are required for all other crude oil exports. Because of that ruling, which I believe was inappropriate, another company decided that they, too, would begin exporting their own light crude oil without even asking the Commerce Department for a decision first, let alone try to get a license. Since then, exports have skyrocketed. From January 2010 until June 2014, when the Commerce Department made that ruling, we exported about 97,000 barrels of crude oil a day, mostly to Canada. Since that day in June of 2014, our oil exports have quadrupled to an average of over 400,000 barrels a day, hitting all-time record levels, with more and more of that crude oil going to Europe and to Asia. I don't think we should be exporting so much of our domestic oil when we are still importing roughly 7 million barrels every day. We may be the world's number one oil producer, but we are still the world's number one oil importer. If we want to change that, we shouldn't be letting oil companies simply ship American crude oil anywhere in the world that they want to. We should certainly also not let them ignore existing laws and regulations in order to do so. First and foremost, oil produced in America, particularly oil from America's public lands that belong to the American people, should remain in this country for the benefit of the American people. If we are going to allow these companies to export oil, they must follow the law. They simply can't take matters into their own hands and decide whether they need or do not need a license before shipping this oil all over the world. My amendment is a simple, commonsense solution to this problem. It simply states, if you are going to drill on public land, you must follow the legal process for getting an export license if you want to ship that oil elsewhere. This is not an onerous restriction. It only applies to public land, only requires companies to commit to following the existing process for getting a license with the Department of Commerce. That way, the Commerce Department can evaluate these options on a case-by-case basis to determine if they are in the national interest. The concept of exporting American crude oil is too important to let the companies make that call on their own. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw this amendment.

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment. The Bureau of Land Management has only just begun the process of examining whether royalty rates and rentals for oil and gas leases on public lands should be increased. That process should be allowed to continue. GAO recently found that, based upon the results of a number of studies, the U.S. Government receives one of the lowest government takes, commonly understood to be the total revenue, as a percentage of the value of oil and natural gas produced in the entire world. For example, royalty rates on public land are at 12.5 percent, considerably less than the royalty rates even on State lands, which range from a low of 16.67 percent to 25 percent-plus. These low royalty rates cheat the American taxpayers and keep them from receiving a fair return for the extraction of their oil and gas resources. However, rental rates are even worse. To secure very valuable mineral rights, sometimes worth hundreds of millions of dollars, companies only have to bid a minimum, and I repeat, a minimum of $2 an acre upfront to win the lease and then $1.50 per acre each year to keep the lease. That is right, a rental of $1.50 per acre per year. This low price was last set by Congress in the 1980s and has not been adjusted since. This can and should change. Oil companies, some of which generate billions of dollars per quarter in profits, should pay their fair share to the American people for the development of the Nation's public resources. Imagine if your rent had not increased since Ronald Reagan was President or if the local grocery store had not raised their prices since 1987.

Mr. LOWENTHAL. This scenario may sound too good to be true, but in fact, that is exactly the sweetheart deal that we are currently giving oil and gas industries, a sweetheart deal that should end. All Americans must deal with the unavoidable reality of inflation; so why shouldn't oil and gas companies? It is long past time for the BLM to assess better ways for the public to receive their fair share. Blocking the BLM from doing that is fiscally irresponsible, a giveaway to the oil and gas companies.

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment to require companies to follow the law if they want to export crude oil from the United States.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

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

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chair, according to the American Lung Association's 2015 State of the Air Report, the Los Angeles metropolitan area, which includes both my district and also the Appropriations Subcommittee chair's district, that metropolitan area is the number one in the country for ozone pollution. But ozone pollution is not just a southern California problem. The report shows that more than 40 percent of the United States' population lives in areas with unhealthy levels of ozone. Large cities like Houston and less populated areas like northwest Ohio also make the list. Power plants, motor vehicles, and chemical solvents contribute to the majority of nitrous oxides and volatile organic compounds, NOX and VOCs, which react with each other on hot, sunny days to produce ground level ozone. The American Lung Association has pointed out that because hot, sunny days produce the most ozone, climate change is increasing the number of unhealthy ozone level days. We are all familiar with those ``high ozone level'' warnings that happen on really hot, sunny days, and unfortunately, they are becoming more and more common due to global warming. Ground level ozone interacts with lung tissue, can cause major problems for children, the elderly, and anyone with lung disease. Ozone is known to aggravate health problems such as asthma, and it is also linked to low birth rates, cardiovascular problems, and premature death. Given the grave consequences and the widespread problem of ozone pollution, I am glad that EPA is moving forward with updates to its national standards for ozone pollution. Members of the medical and health communities have been calling for a long time for updates of this standard in order to protect the public health. The current standard of 75 parts per billion is outdated and does not adequately protect public health, which is what the EPA is required to do under the Clean Air Act. Thousands of hospital visits and premature deaths and up to a million missed schooldays can be prevented just by strengthening this standard. But instead of trusting health professionals, some in Congress have decided to protect the financial interests of the polluters. The reckless legislative rider in section 438 of this appropriations bill blocks the EPA from updating or even proposing scientifically-based standards for ozone to the detriment of the health of at least 40 percent of the U.S. population. I urge my colleagues to vote to remove this polluter protecting section from the bill, to support the Edwards amendment, and allow the EPA to move forward with doing what they are required to do by law, and that is protect the public health. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, let's just talk about why we need to change the standard. I understand and appreciate that reaching that standard is going to take some work, but remember, the air, by saying that we don't need to do this because the air is cleaner than it was 30 years ago, for example, does nothing to put current air quality in context. Just because the air is cleaner than it used to be doesn't mean that it is completely healthy. My district is a great example of this. L.A. County has reduced its ground ozone by 5 days since 2009, and I am proud of that, but it doesn't mean our air is healthy. We still experienced 217 days of unhealthy ozone level days last year. We need to take into account current pollution levels. We need to use the best science available to determine what standards are needed to get our ozone pollution below those unhealthy levels. That is why we are doing this, to get the ozone below unhealthy levels. That is what EPA is doing, and we shouldn't block their efforts because we think that the air is cleaner or it is difficult to reach. The savings in public health will far outweigh the costs to polluting industries. If the EPA would implement a standard of just 70 parts per billion, the cost of implementation is estimated to be about $3.9 billion, but the savings in public health costs are estimated to be anywhere from $6.4 to $13 billion. That is a net savings of $2.5 to $9 billion. If you reduce the standard even lower, to 65 parts per billion, the savings are even greater, from $4 to $23 billion in public health costs. Ground ozone pollution costs billions of dollars in healthcare expenses around the country. We have a chance to save taxpayers a lot of money. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to recognize Mr. Ken Farfsing, upon his retirement as the city manager of the city of Signal Hill, California, which will be this coming week, on June 30. I have had the pleasure of working with Ken on local and statewide issues for almost 20 years, while I served on the Long Beach City Council, as a member of the California State Legislature, and now, as a Member of the United States Congress. I consider Ken to be a dear friend. Ken has served for over 33 years, in community development, redevelopment, economic development, and city management in five southern California communities. He has spent the last 19 years, however, serving the city of Signal Hill, and I am honored to recognize his outstanding career. Ken began his career with the city of Santa Fe Springs in California in 1981 as an intern. In 1985, he was promoted to community development director. In 1988, he continued his career as the community development director for the city of Downey. He later became Downey's assistant city manager and director of economic development. He served as the city manager in the city of South Pasadena for 4 years before coming to the city of Signal Hill. Under his guidance, the city of Signal Hill established three commercial centers, the Town Center North, the Town Center West, and the Signal Hill Gateway Center. He facilitated the relocation of a Mercedes Benz dealership to Signal Hill and the expansion of the Glenn E. Thomas Dodge dealership, growing sales and tax revenues from $6 million to more than $12 million. Additionally, he completed the development of six community parks and a new police station. Ken has been active in regional issues, also, and he has been a leader with expertise on water issues, working with 27 of the area's Gateway Cities Council of Governments on water, storm water, and urban runoff regulations and practices. He has served as the chair of the city manager's steering committee for the Gateway Cities manager's group, and he was a member of the water quality task force for the League of California Cities. As you can tell, I respect and admire Ken Farfsing's leadership and service to the community of Signal Hill, and he will be greatly missed. I want to wish him the very best as he retires. His impact on the city of Signal Hill will always be remembered. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to ask all my distinguished colleagues to join me in thanking Ken Farfsing for his 19 years of public service within the city of Signal Hill.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, first, I thank the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey for yielding. I also rise in strong opposition to H.R. 2042. No one wants to see new rules and regulations just for the fun of it, and we should not take this EPA rule lightly. But here is why we must let this rule move forward: one, climate change is real; two, it is caused by greenhouse gases that are released from human activities; and three, it has already been changing the world as we know it. Pope Francis, in his encyclical, ``Laudato Si,'' or, ``Praise Be to You,'' points out that ``reducing greenhouse gases requires honesty, courage, and responsibility, above all on the part of those countries which are more powerful and pollute the most.'' The Pope is right. We need to be honest about climate change, we need to be courageous and face the future, and we need to take responsibility for our carbon pollution. That is exactly why we need to work with the EPA, with States, with our great research centers, and with our energy sector to increase efficiency and to transition to cleaner fuels and renewable energy sources. The clean power plan and the authority granted by the Clean Air Act is the vehicle we have right now to cut greenhouse gas emissions and to clean up polluted air. But my colleagues are telling States they should just say no and completely opt out of doing their part and subject this rule, which, by the way, we have not even seen it in its final place, to years and years of delay. This is not honest. It is not courageous. It is not a responsible way to deal with greenhouse gas pollution. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the irresponsible and shortsighted Ratepayer Protection Act.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mr. Ken Farfsing, upon his retirement as the City Manager of the City of Signal Hill, California on June 30, 2015. I've had the pleasure of working with Ken on local and state-wide issues for almost 20 years while serving on the Long Beach City Council, in the California State Legislature, and now in the U.S. Congress, and I consider him to be a dear friend. Ken has over 33 years of experience in community development, redevelopment, economic development and city management in five Southern California communities. Ken has spent the last 19 years serving the City of Signal Hill, and I am honored to recognize his outstanding career. Ken began his career with the City of Santa Fe Springs, California in 1981 as an intern. In 1985 he was promoted to Community Development Director. In 1988 he continued his career as the Community Development Director for the City of Downey. He later became Downey's Assistant City Manager and Director of Economic Development. He served as the City Manager of the City of South Pasadena for four years before coming to Signal Hill. Under his guidance, the city established three commercial centers, Town Center North, Town Center West and the Signal Hill Gateway Center. He facilitated the relocation of a Mercedes Benz dealership to Signal Hill and the expansion of Glenn E. Thomas Dodge Auto Dealership, growing sales tax revenues from 6 million dollars to more than 12 million dollars. Additionally, he completed the development of six community parks and a new police station. Ken has been active in regional issues and a leader with expertise on water issues, working with the 27 area Gateway Cities Council of Government on water, storm water and urban runoff regulation and practices. He served as chair of the City Manager's Steering Committee for the Gateway Cities Manager's Group and was a member of the ``Water Quality Task Force'' of the League of California. Ken Farfsing's leadership and service to the community of Signal Hill will be greatly missed. I want to wish him the very best as he retires. His impact on the city will always be remembered. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to ask all of my distinguished colleagues to join me in thanking Ken Farfsing for his 19 years of public service with the City of Signal Hill.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, the goal of the ongoing P5+1 negotiations is to guarantee that Iran never develops a nuclear weapon. As Congress assesses the final deal, I am going to draw upon a recent publication which is entitled, ``Negotiations with Iran: Five Requirements for a Good Deal,'' which details the following five components: one, mechanisms supporting strong verification, including anytime, anywhere inspections of all Iranian nuclear and military facilities; two, Iranian compliance with all U.N. resolutions and full disclosure of its previous work toward nuclear weapons; three, a schedule which lifts sanctions only as Iran meets the agreement's obligations; four, must include measures to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear threshold state; and, lastly, requirements that Iran dismantle its nuclear weapon infrastructure and relinquish its fissionable weapons material stockpile.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

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

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chair, providing science, technology, engineering, and math education to America's youth is critical to the global competitiveness of our Nation. The STARBASE program engages local fifth-grade elementary students by exposing them to STEM subjects through an inquiry-based curriculum and is currently active in 56 congressional districts throughout the Nation. Today I want to thank Chairman Frelinghuysen and Ranking Member Visclosky for their strong leadership in reestablishing funding for the program over the past 2 years. I am respectfully requesting an additional $5 million to help expand the program nationwide. Today I am offering STARBASE amendment No. 18 to H.R. 2685, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act. My amendment increases funding to the STARBASE Youth Program by $5 million, and while providing support for the program, it also reduces spending by $1 million. The STARBASE program is carried out by the military services because the lack of STEM-educated youth in America has been identified as a future national security issue by the Department of Defense. Two years ago, both the House and Senate rejected the Office of Management and Budget's, the OMB, proposal to terminate this critical program. As a Member of Congress, I appreciate OMB's desire to consolidate STEM's programs across the spectrum into one funding line. However, this is a national defense item and has been identified by the Joint Chiefs of Staff as such. STARBASE was created under the auspices of the Department of Defense to meet its critical needs in STEM-related fields. Regrettably, the funding uncertainty caused by OMB's action during that time resulted in the elimination of all programs operated by the Navy and reduced in fiscal year 2014 the number of DOD STARBASE programs from 79 to 56. DOD currently has 25 sites on the waiting list for a program, and that is why we need a small increase in funding for a number of STARBASE programs. It is one of the most cost-effective programs across the Federal Government, costing an average of $343 per student. Last year, 3,062 classes were conducted in 1,267 schools in 413 school districts across the country. More than 70,000 students attended the programs, bringing the total to 825,000 students since its inception in 1993. It is one of the most effective STEM programs as well. The students demonstrate undisputed improvement in STEM. I will conclude by reading Warrant Officer Stacey Hendrickson of the California State Military Reserve and director of the STARBASE program at the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base in my district, who said: ``Congressman Lowenthal, I wanted to let you know that one of our schools, 96th Street Elementary in Watts, earned their highest science standardized test scores ever last year. This is significant because the class is second-year remediation and has English language learners and special needs students. Every student's score went up, so this is a class that was very special to us. We were all very excited to hear that, as those students had all shown a big increase in our own pre and post test scores. We were happy to see that the improvement was seen on their Academic Performance Index scores as well.'' Mr. Chair, STARBASE inspires America's youth to discover technical career fields that are imperative. During this time of economic recovery we cannot lose this battle and concede our technical edge to the rest of the world. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, congratulations. Los Cerritos Elementary School in Long Beach, CA was recently selected as a 2015 U.S. Department of Education Green Ribbon School, an honor shared by several other schools in the Long Beach Unified School District. The dedicated faculty and staff, students, and families who share the same ideals of conservation and sustainability in their community are commended for integrating these ideals while meeting state education standards. Through hands-on application of activities such as farming and recycling, students become good stewards of their communities and environment and expand the margins of their K-5 education. Additionally, the campus has adopted new technologies to bring their existing infrastructure up to efficient standards. In sum, Long Beach Unified School District has saved approximately $4.9 million in energy costs across multiple school campuses. Los Cerritos Elementary School is the fifth school in the school district to receive this distinction. I am proud that Long Beach continues to be a leader in green education and I encourage other schools, at all levels, to follow suit in adopting and implementing the leadership necessary to reduce environmental impacts. The environmental instruction being developed by Los Cerritos Elementary as well as previously recognized Green Ribbon Schools should be a model for adoption by all schools nationwide. The value of a quality education to our community cannot be overstated, and investing in green education will offer great returns to our future.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce America's Red Rock Wilderness Act, a bill to designate as wilderness southern Utah's incredible public lands, such as Desolation Canyon, the Dirty Devil, and the Greater Cedar Mesa. These wild and precious lands are our birthright as Americans, and they are essential to who we are as a Nation. My bill safeguards these special lands and the waters, the flora, and the fauna within them. It furthers the great American conservation ethic of John Muir, of Theodore Roosevelt, and of the many others who helped to preserve the great wild places we cannot imagine today living without. As we advance toward a cleaner economy, we must protect the $646 billion outdoor recreation economy, which employs more than 6 million people nationwide. None of that is possible without protecting our public lands. America's Red Rock Wilderness Act would do just that.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, if gutting the successful conservation provisions of Magnuson were not enough, the problem also is that this bill will also weaken other bedrock environmental laws. First, it makes Magnuson then in this reauthorization the controlling statute in the case of any kind of conflict with the Antiquities Act or the National Marine Sanctuaries Act. If we think about this, there is no rationale for giving the councils that are authorized in Magnuson the authority to regulate fishing in marine sanctuaries or in monuments. Those areas represent just a tiny fraction of U.S. waters, and now, they are managed by scientists and other staff who consider more than just fishing interests. We are really here to understand how do we balance fishing with the other purposes in order to protect vulnerable species and habitats. For the same reason that we don't allow State fish and game departments to make decisions about hunting in national parks or monuments on land, which we don't allow, these councils should not make decisions about fishing in our parks, our national marine sanctuaries, or in our national monuments at sea, but that is not enough. The bill also takes a swipe at the Endangered Species Act by requiring these councils, not Federal agencies which are now responsible for the recovery of species, to implement the fishery restrictions necessary for Endangered Species compliance. These councils lack expertise, and they lack the resources to implement the Endangered Species Act. What are we going to end up with? We are going to end up with recoveries that are going to be delayed, and the negative impacts to fishing communities are going to be prolonged, just the very thing that we wish not to happen.

Mr. LOWENTHAL. As I said before, these assaults on key conservation laws are far outside the scope of a fisheries bill. We are really talking about a fisheries bill. We should not be talking about gutting key conservation laws. It is unfortunate that an historically bipartisan effort like the Magnuson reauthorization has now become the subject of an antienvironmental crusade.

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

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, unfortunately, the bill before us, H.R. 1335, undermines nearly two decades of progress making U.S. fisheries profitable and sustainable. A few weeks ago, NOAA reported that overfishing has hit an all-time low, and the number of rebuilt stocks has hit an all-time high, largely because of the success of the Magnuson-Stevens Act reforms of both 1996 and 2007--the same reforms that this bill today before us would undercut. In an attempt to add some good policy to an otherwise unproductive bill, I am offering an amendment to improve the management of one important fish stock: the Gulf of Mexico red snapper. Last year, during a series of Natural Resources Committee hearings on fisheries policies, we heard from members and witnesses who were irate over the fact that the Interior Department was allowing offshore oil platforms and drilling rigs in the Gulf of Mexico to be decommissioned in a way that was killing red snapper and destroying important snapper habitat. After intense questioning, it became clear that in the current process for decommission rigs, NOAA, which is part of the Department of Commerce, is not regularly consulted by Interior agencies. As a result, NOAA does not even conduct surveys to determine if the Department of the Interior is about to dismantle a productive artificial reef teeming with red snapper and other fish. Mr. Chair, I agree with my colleagues from the Gulf States who feel this is ridiculous and needs to stop; but how do we do it? Then I remembered that we already have a mechanism in place for resolving exactly this kind of multistakeholder conflict at sea. It is called the National Ocean Policy. Through the National Ocean Policy, the National Ocean Council facilitates commonsense governance of public resources. Like air traffic control for the seas, the council coordinates all of the users of our oceans and helps them determine safer, less contentious, and more efficient utilization of ocean resources. My amendment would direct the agencies responsible for implementing the National Ocean Policy to work with the Gulf States and other stakeholders to develop a transparent process that would preserve red snapper habitat during rig decommissioning. A vote for this amendment is a vote for more recreational fishing opportunities in the Gulf of Mexico and a vote for a bipartisan solution to promoting red snapper habitat. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Lowenthal amendment. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?