Alan Lowenthal

Mr. LOWENTHAL

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

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, I remind my colleagues that these Secretarial actions that I am asking to continue have been going on since September of 2009 with approval and with oversight and reports back to this Congress. These are rational, logical steps that the Secretary has put into place. I ask my colleague, what would you oppose? We should not communicate responses across multiple bureaus? We don't need to understand the science of climate change impacts? We don't need regional hubs to study this, which are ongoing? All we are saying is let's continue this course of action. We need to develop resiliency. We know these impacts. The science is overwhelming. This is an ongoing activity. To deny this now means to stop what is already ongoing, and that would be a shame at this time. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to continue the actions of the Department of the Interior to really coordinate and understand climate change impacts. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, this summer marks the 14th year in which interns working in Congressional offices have benefitted from a program run by the John C. Stennis Center for Public Service Leadership. This six-week program is designed to enhance their internship experience by giving them an inside look at how Congress works and a deeper appreciation for the role that Congress plays in our democracy. Each week, the interns meet with senior congressional staff and other experts to discuss issues such as the legislative process, power of the purse, foreign policy, the media, and more. Interns are selected based on their college record, community service experience, and interest in a career in public service. This year, 30 outstanding interns participated in the program. Most of them are juniors and seniors in college who are working in Republican and Democratic offices in both the House and Senate, including one in my office, Shannon McConnell. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the interns for their involvement in this valuable program. I also thank the Stennis Center and the Senior Stennis Fellows for providing such a meaningful experience for these interns and for encouraging them to consider a future career in public service. I submit a list of the 2016 Stennis Congressional Interns and the offices in which they work. Amanda Bennett, attending Bowdoin College, interning in the office of U.S. Senator Angus King; Max Boyd, attending University of Cincinnati, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Patrick McHenry; Jack Bryan, attending Mississippi State University, interning in the office of U.S. Senator Thad Cochran; Allie Bull, attending Johns Hopkins University, interning in the office of U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders; Anna Caliandro, attending Smith College, interning in the office of U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders; Maggie Callahan, attending Mercer University, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Keith Rothfus; Daniel Russell Cheung, attending University of California, Berkeley, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Mike Honda; Nick Descamps, attending Occidental College, interning in the office of U.S. Senator Steve Daines; Matt Dougherty, attending Suffolk University, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Robert Brady; Maggie Duff, attending Mississippi State University, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Steven Palazzo; Elina Fisher, attending The George Washington University, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Seth Moulton; Emily George, attending University of Idaho, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Dan Newhouse; Easton Gragg, attending Wake Forest University, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Patrick McHenry; Gary Haglund, attending Boston College, interning on the House Committee on the Budget; Katelyn Harris, attending Vanderbilt University, interning on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce; Kate Henjum, attending University of Colorado Boulder, interning in the office of U.S. Senator Michael Bennet; Victoria Hill, attending American University School of International Service, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Joaquin Castro; Conley Hurst, attending Washington and Lee University, interning in the office of U.S. Representative French Hill; Jessica Isler, attending Alma College, interning in the office of U.S. Senator Debbie Stabenow; Jayden Raye Lapin-Tatman, attending University of California, Berkeley, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Janice Hahn; Diane Lee, attending Pomona College, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Ted Lieu; Shannon McConnell, attending University of California, San Diego, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Alan Lowenthal; Anna Perez, attending New York University Shanghai, interning in the office of U.S. Senator Thad Cochran; Tony Rogari, attending University of Notre Dame, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Ted Lieu; Christian Ryan, attending Marymount University, interning on the House Committee on Appropriations; Jared Sutton, attending Drew University, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Mario Diaz-Balart; Marielle Thete, attending Wheaton College, interning in the office of U.S. Senator Angus King; Quin Wetzel, attending Michigan State University, interning on the Senate Committee on the Budget; Stephanie Xiao, attending University of Virginia, interning in the office of U.S. Representative Gregorio Sablan; and, Katelyn Zimmerman, attending Georgetown University, interning on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, the majority has repeatedly brought bills to this same House floor that add requirements for Federal agencies to use more cost-benefit analyses; but now, when we are dealing with climate change, we are told that we should remove requirements to honestly consider the cost of climate change. Which way do you want it? Is cost-benefit analysis only a good thing when it suits the majority's purpose to slow regulation and a bad thing when it may shed some light on the true cost of our carbon-based actions? Ignoring the facts because we don't like them won't make the problem go away. Greenhouse gas emissions from human activities are causing climate change with profound monetary costs for our health, infrastructure, food security, and national security. Let's bring more information and transparency into the Federal rulemaking process by using the social cost of carbon to quantify those costs. That way we can understand the risks and make sound investments in our Nation's future.

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

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

Mr. LOWENTHAL. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would strike a misguided policy rider that could cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, and it maintains a sweetheart, below-market deal for the fossil fuel industry. My amendment would strike section 440 of the underlying bill, a section that would prevent the Interior Department from updating royalty rates and valuation methodologies for coal, oil, and natural gas resources on public lands. Now, I would think that saving the taxpayer money by charging a fair return for the development of our public resources is something that both sides of the aisle could agree upon. So maybe the sponsors behind this policy rider didn't know the true magnitude of the cost to taxpayers that their rider to this appropriations bill would impose upon Americans. To make sure that we all understand, Mr. Chair, what we would be costing the taxpayer if we were to vote to keep this harmful rider, Mr. Chair, I would like to share some eye-opening research on this matter. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the CBO, just released in April a detailed study that reviewed possible changes to the oil and gas fiscal system. That report explicitly analyzed how much money the American taxpayer is losing from the current below-market onshore oil and gas royalty rates. CBO concluded that the U.S. Treasury would receive $200 million additional and the Western States another $200 million over 10 years if the Interior Department were to simply raise the onshore royalty rates to parity with the current offshore royalty rates. So, to be clear, keeping this misguided policy rider would prevent an additional $200 million from being sent to the Western States and another $200 million to the Federal taxpayer. Mr. Chairman, I have also heard specious arguments that claim raising onshore royalty rates will decrease production, put all oil and gas companies out of business and actually reduce the return to the taxpayer. This is false, and here is why: The CBO analyzed these effects and found that this was not the case. The CBO found that the effects on production would be negligible, and that the increases in Federal and State revenues are net increases that include the decreases in income from bonus bids and production changes. Furthermore, production would not simply move to State or private lands to find lower royalty rates because private mineral owners and Western States, like Wyoming, New Mexico, Louisiana, North Dakota, Montana, even Oklahoma and Texas, all of them charge higher royalty rates. Thus, I hope these facts will disabuse those who used to believe in keeping onshore oil and gas royalty rates below market price, and now will, instead, support the Lowenthal amendment No. 34 that will allow the Interior Department to provide the taxpayer and Western States with hundreds of millions of dollars in additional revenue. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chair, may I ask how much time I have remaining?

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chair, we heard a very passionate plea that this amendment of mine would hurt jobs, would hurt schools, would kill coal. It is just the opposite. As I pointed out, the CBO's report just indicated that production would not go down. In fact, the largest impact upon production, the dominant factor that controls production, is the price of crude oil and natural gas, not the royalty rates. I also would like to remind those on the other side of the aisle that States like Montana already at the State level and also on private property charge much higher than we are asking at the Federal level. I would agree to the same charge that Montana charges residents for its own oil and gas and coal production. Mr. Chairman, I request an ``aye'' vote on this very reasonable amendment that really brings money back to both States and also to the Federal Treasury. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, Dallas, Texas; Falcon Heights, Minnesota; Baton Rouge, Louisiana--these are not individual incidents occurring in a vacuum outside the orbits of each other. These tragedies are tied together by the threads of anger and fear. They filled me with horror, with sadness, and grief. I know that we as a nation cannot allow ourselves to grow numb to this. Each of these deaths, each of these innocent lives lost, should cause each of us great sorrow and pain. They should pain us not just for the simple loss of human life, but also for the realization that their deaths--and the more than 90 people who die from gunfire each day in this Nation--are the painful signs that something is profoundly wrong in our society. Let us begin the healing and let us unite by passing no fly, no buy and universal background checks. As the President has said, ``We are better than this.''

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor the memory of Jean Carlos Nieves Rodriguez, a victim of gun violence who never received a moment of silence on the House floor.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, gun violence permeates every aspect of our lives, from the streets of Chicago to law enforcement officers to Congress. Everybody is affected by what is going on. But we can do something about it by passing two bills that we have been talking about: the no fly, no buy and universal background checks. Neither is a solution to the entire problem, but both are good steps. The reason we haven't done anything is simple: the $15 million a year gun manufacturing industry. And by preventing action here through their campaign donations and Capitol Hill lobbyists, they are controlling the discussion. When I can't act, when you can't act, this House is being controlled by the gun industry. We--all of us, on both sides of the aisle--are looking to blame each other when the real culprits are the gun manufacturers.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, Howard L. Chambers, who has served as the city manager of the City of Lakewood for four decades, is the California city manager with the longest tenure in the same city--this in a profession where the average length of service in California is about seven years. A lifelong member of the Lakewood community, Howard grew up near Mayfair Park, went to neighborhood schools, and worked at the YMCA. After earning his degree at Cal State Long Beach, Howard interned at the City of Lakewood for two years, handling youth services. He then went to work with the City of Rosemead as an assistant city manager. Howard returned to Lakewood in 1972 in the role of an executive assistant to the city manager. In 1976, he was named acting city administrator and shortly thereafter hired to permanently fill the position, which was later re-titled as city manager, by the city council. During his 40-year tenure as a city manager, Howard Chambers has become a respected leader among area city managers, always willing to take the time to share his professional experience with his colleagues on issues affecting Southern California, its residents, and its infrastructure. Howard has also worked tirelessly and effectively on ad hoc committees and coalitions to address federal, state, and local issues, and has never shied away from a principled battle. As a long-term member of the International City/County Management Association (ICMA), Chairman of the Southeast Los Angeles County Municipal Management Group, the California Contract Cities Association, and a member of the League of California Cities' City Managers Division, Howard has worked with elected and appointed city officials, legislators, regulators, the business community, residents, and others to achieve solutions to the critical issues affecting local governments. In addition to his public service, Howard Chambers has made community service a priority. His involvement includes the Lakewood Rotary Club, the Weingart-Lakewood Family YMCA, Lakewood Special Olympics, the American Heart Association, Su Casa Ending Domestic Violence, Lakewood Regional Hospital, Kris Kringle Charity Golf Tournament, and Project Shepherd. For his sustained excellence, he has been recognized throughout his career by a variety of organizations including ICMA, Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government, California Jaycees, YMCA, Lakewood City Council, Lakewood City Employees Association, and Su Casa Ending Domestic Violence. During his tenure, Howard Chambers managed the city's largest public works project in its first 50 years: the $16 million improvement of the Lakewood Civic Center and construction of The Centre at Sycamore Plaza. He later oversaw the $21-million expansion and modernization of the Lakewood Sheriff's Station, the largest single project in the city's history. The sheriff's station expansion project was completed without a new tax, tax increase, or special assessment. Howard Chambers is considered a legend in the city management profession and is known for his ability to build working relationships with city staffers, civic leaders, and state legislators. He also is a role model for his peers. Known for his ``teachable moments,'' he has become a mentor and teacher to new city managers. He has been and will continue to be passionate about local government, and his involvement in community activities and achievements in public service have resulted in significant benefits to Lakewood and surrounding communities. During his four decades of service, Lakewood has deservedly earned many awards for the quality of its services, its commitment to responsive government, and its innovations.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, Howard L. Chambers, who has served as the city manager of the City of Lakewood for four decades, is the California city manager with the longest tenure in the same city--this in a profession where the average length of service in California is about seven years. A lifelong member of the Lakewood community, Howard grew up near Mayfair Park, went to neighborhood schools, and worked at the YMCA. After earning his degree at Cal State Long Beach, Howard interned at the City of Lakewood for two years, handling youth services. He then went to work with the City of Rosemead as an assistant city manager. Howard returned to Lakewood in 1972 in the role of an executive assistant to the city manager. In 1976, he was named acting city administrator and shortly thereafter hired to permanently fill the position, which was later re-titled as city manager, by the city council. During his 40-year tenure as a city manager, Howard Chambers has become a respected leader among area city managers, always willing to take the time to share his professional experience with his colleagues on issues affecting Southern California, its residents, and its infrastructure. Howard has also worked tirelessly and effectively on ad hoc committees and coalitions to address federal, state, and local issues, and has never shied away from a principled battle. As a long-term member of the International City/County Management Association (ICMA), Chairman of the Southeast Los Angeles County Municipal Management Group, the California Contract Cities Association, and a member of the League of California Cities' City Managers Division, Howard has worked with elected and appointed city officials, legislators, regulators, the business community, residents, and others to achieve solutions to the critical issues affecting local governments. In addition to his public service, Howard Chambers has made community service a priority. His involvement includes the Lakewood Rotary Club, the Weingart-Lakewood Family YMCA, Lakewood Special Olympics, the American Heart Association, Su Casa Ending Domestic Violence, Lakewood Regional Hospital, Kris Kringle Charity Golf Tournament, and Project Shepherd. For his sustained excellence, he has been recognized throughout his career by a variety of organizations including ICMA, Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government, California Jaycees, YMCA, Lakewood City Council, Lakewood City Employees Association, and Su Casa Ending Domestic Violence. During his tenure, Howard Chambers managed the city's largest public works project in its first 50 years: the $16 million improvement of the Lakewood Civic Center and construction of The Centre at Sycamore Plaza. He later oversaw the $21-million expansion and modernization of the Lakewood Sheriff's Station, the largest single project in the city's history. The sheriff's station expansion project was completed without a new tax, tax increase, or special assessment. Howard Chambers is considered a legend in the city management profession and is known for his ability to build working relationships with city staffers, civic leaders, and state legislators. He also is a role model for his peers. Known for his ``teachable moments,'' he has become a mentor and teacher to new city managers. He has been and will continue to be passionate about local government, and his involvement in community activities and achievements in public service have resulted in significant benefits to Lakewood and surrounding communities. During his four decades of service, Lakewood has deservedly earned many awards for the quality of its services, its commitment to responsive government, and its innovations.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. H.R. 3844 is a bipartisan bill that I am proud to have worked cooperatively on with Mr. Hice and the Natural Resources Committee. H.R. 3844 would establish a charitable foundation to support the mission and activities of the Bureau of Land Management. Congress has chartered a number of similar foundations to serve as partners to our land management agencies, including the National Park Foundation, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, and the National Forest Foundation. By establishing a Bureau of Land Management Foundation, H.R. 3844 will provide the BLM with an important partner and allow private individuals and corporations to support the Bureau's diverse mission, which includes activities such as managing wild horses, protecting cultural resources, and cleaning up abandoned mines. Again, I join with my colleague, and I would like to commend my colleague, Mr. Hice, and the committee for working with me so that we, together, could put together this final bipartisan language that was adopted in the Natural Resources Committee and that we are voting on today. The establishment of a Bureau of Land Management Foundation is long overdue, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, 49 dead Americans: sons, daughters, husbands, wives, friends. Whatever his ideology, whatever gun he used, this killer was driven by hate toward the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community. Just as hate struck the LGBT community at the UpStairs Lounge in New Orleans or at Uncle Charlie's in New York City or the BeBar nightclub here in Washington or the hundreds and hundreds other attacks that occur each year, it is because of the inaction of bodies like this, the Congress of the United States, to address discrimination, to ignore cries for equality, that this hate continues to fester. The LGBT community deals with this fear and hate every single day, all for wanting to live and love and be who they are. And who they are, just like every member of the LGBT community, are sons, daughters, husbands, wives, and friends.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, as Tony Budrovich readies to take the reins as president and CEO of the Catalina Island Conservancy, it is important to step back and look over the successful tenure of Ann M. Muscat, who announced her June 25 retirement last year. She has served as president and CEO for more than 13 years--the second longest tenure of any previous Conservancy president. Ann will continue to serve the Conservancy as its president emeritus until October 7, 2016. She will focus on serving as a resource to Tony, transitioning donor relationships, continuing fundraising for the Conservancy's first every capital campaign, IMAGINE CATALINA, and completing design of the new visitors' center, The Trailhead. ``Ann and the Conservancy have achieved a lot,'' Los Angeles County Supervisor Don Knabe said. ``I've had the great pleasure of working with Ann and her team, all of them consummate professionals who are dedicated to getting things done.'' ``Under Ann's leadership, the Conservancy has become a living laboratory of innovation in conservation, education and financial sustainability for nonprofit organizations,'' Catalina Island Conservancy Board of Directors Chair Stephen Chazen said. ``The Conservancy has significantly improved the Island's ecological health, greatly increased access to Catalina's wildlands and expanded and enhanced its educational programs to better serve students living in Avalon and visitors from the mainland.'' Here is a look back at how the Conservancy and its stewardship of Catalina Island have flourished since Muscat joined the organization in 2003. During Ann's 13-year tenure, and through its Catalina Habitat Improvement and Restoration Program (CHIRP), the Conservancy staff has completed vegetation mapping of the entire Island, including non-native and invasive plant species. It has controlled and eradicated numerous invasive plant species that were eliminating native and rare biodiversity. It also expanded the native plant nursery's scope to include landscaping initiatives on the Island, along with restoration, and significantly expanded the native seed collection. The Conservancy has been a leader in removing non-native and highly destructive animal species from the Island, leading to the rediscovery of native plants previously believed to be extinct. It also brought the Catalina Island fox back from the brink of extinction and supported the successful recovery of the bald eagle. Its wildlife biologists have implemented innovative social (repatriation) and scientific methodologies (contraception) for managing the bison herd. They also have conducted bird and small mammal surveys, discovering nesting sea birds on cliffs and nearby rocks, and implementing protective measures for bat populations. In addition, the Conservancy has pursued research partnerships with universities and museums from across the country, including a multi- institution collaboration that resulted in a comprehensive look at the Island's oak woodlands. Working with the Long Beach Unified School District, the community and philanthropic organizations, the Conservancy has greatly increased access to natural and intellectual resources over the past 13 years. It implemented extensive educational enrichment and internship programs for the local school population through the establishment of the K-12 NatureWorks workforce development and STEM education initiative. In its continuing service to the local community, the Conservancy provided free access to the wildlands of Catalina for Island families without vehicles. It implemented a free of charge Naturalist Training Program for tour operators and local businesses, as well as Conservancy front line staff. To ensure visitors to the Island could access the wildlands and learn about Catalina's ecosystem, the Conservancy created the 37.5 mile Trans-Catalina Trail. It also has secured funding and developed plans for further trail improvements and expansions. It significantly expanded and improved the Jeep Eco-Tour program and developed a signage and way finding system across the Island. It added new running and biking events, an Island Ecology Travel Program and Wild Side Art Program to increase access and awareness. In addition, it increased volunteer program initiatives to include AmeriCorps, American Conservation Experience and numerous university-level spring break programs. So that visitors and others had more information about Catalina Island and the Conservancy, it added a Nature Center in Avalon and a Mobile Nature Station that has served Avalon and Two Harbors, along with interpretive panels in the Garden and at campgrounds and trailheads. The Conservancy also expanded and revamped its outreach and marketing materials, including maps, field guides, monthly e- newsletters, videos, an extensive photo library and expanded web site. To serve a greater good beyond Catalina's shores, the Conservancy launched a successful radio show and web site, Isla Earth, on environmental issues that aired for 10 years on over 320 radio stations across the country. To provide the needed programs and ensure the organization's long- term financial health, the Conservancy has focused on raising revenues and creating a sustainable business model that will ensure the Island will continue to be restored and protected for future generations. In the past 13 years, the Conservancy has increased its operating budget nearly three times through an increase in philanthropic giving and mission-based earned income. It has significantly expanded its donor base and created a reserve fund to address deferred maintenance projects across its 42,000 acres. Projects have included improvements at Airport in the Sky, across its road and bridge system, a new pier, replacement and expansion of its vehicle fleet and upgrades to its numerous buildings. The Conservancy also revamped its organizational structure, adding new departments and expanding existing functions while providing professional development and training for all staff. The Conservancy's staff has doubled in size and moved to a more customer service/ community orientation. The Conservancy also expanded and updated employee housing, adding 14 new units, to support recruitment and retention of staff. The Board of Directors and the Conservancy's staff have worked together to develop a strategic vision for the organization's future, called IMAGINE CATALINA. They worked with nationally recognized sustainability architect William McDonough and landscape architect Thomas Woltz to develop a long-term strategic vision. It imagines an Island that represents California as it can be, demonstrating how nature and humans can thrive together. It envisions Catalina and the Conservancy serving as models for science-based conservation, for training tomorrow's stewards of the natural world, for connecting people to nature and for creating sustainable finances and operations. To implement IMAGINE CATALINA, the Board and staff launched the Conservancy's first-ever capital campaign, and they are more than three-fourths of the way to fully funding the first phase. They plan to celebrate the groundbreaking for the campaign's flagship project, The Trailhead Visitor Center, on June 24. Another groundbreaking is scheduled on October 14 for the next major project, improvement and expansion of Catalina's trail system, and planning is well underway for a major ecological restoration effort on the Island's West End. ``Ann and her team's excellent stewardship work at the Catalina Island Conservancy is leading edge and has served as a model for many other land trusts,'' said California Council of Land Trusts Executive Director Darla Guenzler. Ann has also been a leader beyond Catalina. She was a founding Board member of the California Council of Land Trusts and served as its Chair of the Board. She is also a member of the Steering Committee for the Southern California Open Space Council and an Advisory Board member of USC's Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

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

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chair, I, along with Representatives Cicilline, Farr, Langevin, Keating, Beyer, and Peters have introduced an amendment to clarify that the National Ocean Policy is a critical multiagency action that should be implemented. Mr. Chair, my district is a poster child for the need for ocean coordination and information sharing between local, State, and Federal Governments, and the military, ports, shippers, energy developers, recreational users, and other stakeholders. I know firsthand that we can have a thriving ocean economy and at the same time protect and conserve our precious ocean resources. For example, the Port of Long Beach is the second busiest port in the United States in my district, moving $140 billion in goods, supporting 1.4 million jobs in the United States. Offshore oil platforms extract crude oil in San Pedro Bay less than a mile from my front door. San Clemente Island in my district has a Navy training ground and a ship-to-shore firing range. Nearby waters are home to seabirds, fisheries, and migrating whales. Sea level rise and extreme weather threaten neighborhoods and businesses all along my district and the entire coast of California. With so much activity happening, it simply makes sense to have the Navy at the table when NOAA is working on siting of a new aquaculture installation. It makes sense to have the fishery management council weigh in when oil rigs are being decommissioned, and it is a no-brainer that NOAA, the Coast Guard, and the ports all work together to get these massive ships in and out of port safely. We want these collaborations to happen because we want to have a sustainable ocean economy, and by developing regional plans and having a framework for multi-stakeholder involvement, we can streamline this process and promote a robust ocean economy that also conserves our precious ocean resources. The country and my district need a comprehensive approach to our ocean resources, which the National Ocean Policy provides. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on my amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, there is an agreement among all of us that there needs to be more coordination among all of the stakeholders to make smart decisions about our ocean resources. However, many on the other side of the aisle oppose the National Ocean Policy on the grounds that, as we have just heard, it is overreach, which is authorized by an executive order of a President that they don't like. To me, this seems petty. National Ocean Policy is not a failed policy like some suggest, nor is it an instance of executive overreach. It is merely a commonsense way to facilitate multistakeholder collaboration on complex ocean issues, and it promotes economic opportunity, national security, and environmental protection. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, like everyone who knew him, I was shocked and am still very saddened by the sudden passing of Eric Bradley. Eric was so many things to so many people. He was a colleague, a friend, a mentor, a son, a husband, a father. For me, Eric was a dear friend who helped me in so many ways over the years, just as he helped so many others, but that was Eric. He gave of himself to everyone whom he met whether that be insight, advice, knowledge, or simple kindness. Behind all of his hard work, behind all of his efforts, there was a genuine passion for making life better for others. Just like anyone who crossed his all too brief time with us, I am better for having known him. I will miss my friend.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, it is with considerable sadness and a profound sense of loss that I report that the Long Beach community lost a dear friend and a dedicated public servant on the passing of Marilyn Green on October 29, 2015. Marilyn--with long-time professional partner Dick Cantrell--founded the law firm of Cantrell Green--now Cantrell Green Pekich Cruz & McCort--in 1971. Marilyn was also the heart and soul of the progressive movement in Long Beach. She was an advocate, mentor, and friend to several generations of progressive leaders in Long Beach. I count myself lucky to have had her friendship and counsel over the years. A native of Newark, New Jersey, Marilyn eventually made her way to Stanford Law School. While attending as one of only two female students in her class, she met and married journalist Terence Green. Determined to finish what she started, she sat for the California Bar exam in 1951 and was admitted to practice law in January, 1952, just one month before her first son, Alan, was born. She used to recall how odd it felt walking to take her oath while almost 9 months pregnant. Terry's job brought them to Playa del Rey and, eventually, to the Long Beach area that would become their home for well over 50 years. Like many women of her generation, Marilyn found herself unwelcome in many law firms due to her gender and was limited to family law practice. Knowing it was a matter of time before she found the right job, she settled into family law. She used to joke that, as a young lawyer, she had no idea how to create a safe exit strategy while interviewing a less-than-savory character. During one such interview, she decided ``the case was much too complicated'' and referred the person to the FBI. She later told us ``From then on, I decided to keep the FBI's number in my top drawer, but think I certainly wore out my welcome!'' Marilyn joined the prestigious Levy & Van Bourg firm as an applicant's attorney in Workers' Compensation in the late 1960s early 1970s. When she and Richard Cantrell first opened Cantrell and Green in 1971, their first office was a public phone booth on the corner of Broadway and Pine Avenue in downtown Long Beach. Later, good friend and union official Tony Rodriguez from the United Rubber Workers Union, would offer them a small office at his Local. Marilyn and Richard would go on to build Cantrell and Green into one of the most well-known and respected workers' compensation firms in Southern California. Their practice also included social security, labor law, and personal injury claims. Not only did Marilyn Green talk the talk, she walked the walk. When asked why she would settle in a practice not as lucrative as other areas of practice, Marilyn said ``If I wanted to make money, I would never have chosen a workers' compensation practice. However, I love and believe in what I do and that is why I became a lawyer.'' Over the years, Marilyn was honored by many organizations, including being named as Long Beach Bar Association Lawyer of the Year. She was a true professional in her work, a good friend to many, and a powerful force for good in our community who will be sorely missed.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, this Saturday, April 30, marks 41 years since the fall of Saigon, commemorated as Black April in Vietnamese American communities across this Nation. I introduced a resolution in remembrance of this event, and to honor the contributions and the sacrifices of Vietnamese Americans. In addition, this week, in front of my congressional office, I am flying the Vietnamese Heritage and Freedom Flag, as recognized by States and localities across this country. As we remember the fall of Saigon, I also believe it is critically important to continue to shine a light on human rights abuses in Vietnam. When President Obama visits Vietnam next week, I hope he will make human rights a priority. Now is exactly the right time for Vietnam to begin respecting the rights of its own citizens.

Mr. LOWENTHAL

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, I submit the July 28, 2015 testimony of John Englander to the House Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources. Chairman Lamborn, Ranking Member Lowenthal, and members of the Committee: I am John Englander, an oceanographer, independent consultant, and author of the book, High Tide On Main Street: Rising Sea Level and the Coming Coastal Crisis. (2nd Ed, 2013, The Science Bookshelf) Thank you for inviting me to comment on the implementation of the Coastal Zone Management Act. Your oversight of that important legislation is a good opportunity to consider the profound changes in the coastline that are just beginning to occur and will almost certainly accelerate in the decades ahead. I believe that looking forward to new perspectives about our coastal zone management is a truly important role for your subcommittee and the Natural Resources Committee and deserves a high priority. Throughout human civilization we have recognized the highly dynamic aspects of the broad coastal zone, particularly the varying tides and storms, and shoreline erosion or accretion. Yet, it was generally assumed that the base sea level was rather stable. That was a commonsense belief as the fundamental height of the ocean had changed little in all of recorded human history, going back some five or six thousand years. Understanding of the ice age cycles, however, gives a critical perspective that is key to recognizing the new era we are now entering. Thus I would like to briefly explain the ice ages and the implications for future sea level change, as that will directly impact how we define and manage the coastal zone. Over long periods of time, centuries and millennia, the amount of ice and sea level vary inversely, in response to climate shifts, that is, long-term average temperature change. With the natural cycles of glacial advance and retreat, sea level moves up and down roughly 300 to 400 feet, moving typical coastlines many miles inland or seaward. This phenomenon has been occurring in a regular pattern roughly every hundred thousand years (more precisely varying between 95 and 125 thousand years). The most recent ice age extreme (Last Glacial Maximum) was some twenty thousand years ago. At that time ice sheets miles thick covered much of the northern hemisphere. Sea level was 390 feet lower than at present. As the ice melted, the sea rose for some fifteen thousand years when it stabilized at roughly the current height. That sea level change is shown in attached Exhibit A, illustrating how sea level rose since the last glacial maximum. In Exhibit B, a chart of the last four hundred thousand years, that last glacial warming period is put in a larger perspective, looking at several full ice age cycles with the accompanying up and down of sea level. The red graph in the middle, shows global average temperature, and easily identifies four ice age cycles. The blue graph at the bottom shows the respective sea level. The green graph at the top, represents the carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration. At the last warm point in the cycle, 120,000 years ago, average global temperature was approximately the same as present and base sea level reached a height approximately twenty-five feet above the present. It is almost inevitable that our future sea level will eventually exceed that height. The key question of course is how long it will take to occur. The consensus thinking among scientists is that it will take centuries, though the evidence of increased melting in key locations continues to accumulate in recent years. Over the last twenty-five years, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has published projections for SLR, though even they have rather consistently been on the low side. In Exhibit C, the 1990 projections are shown in blue with various spreads of possibility. The 2002 projections are shown in green, a little higher than the previous projection. Actual sea level is shown in gold, with a smoothed out trend line in red. While there is considerable variation, it is clear that even for the last decade or two, that official projections for sea level, underestimate the rise, more often than not. The fact is that there is large uncertainty as to just how quickly the glaciers and ice sheets on land will melt. That depends on how warm the planet becomes, which in turn largely depends on the levels of the `greenhouse gases' (GHG) and the unknown tipping points and feedback loops for the collapse of the ice. Again referring to the three-part chart in Exhibit B, there is a long-term close correlation of sea level, average global temperature and carbon dioxide levels, with CO2 being the GHG of greatest concern. In that regard, I was very pleased to see the statement by your subcommittee featuring the support of alternative energy sources such as wind, solar, hydropower, biomass, and nuclear. They are most likely the key to reducing the growth of GHG and slowing the warming. However, it needs to be noted that even if all GHG emissions were stopped today there is enough heat already stored in the ocean to guarantee sea level will rise for centuries. The rate of rise can be slowed but it can no longer be stopped in the foreseeable future. We need to recognize that rise sea level rise is quite different than the temporary flooding from storms along the coast. The damaging wave action of storms is typically confined to the shoreline with storm surge affecting adjacent coastal waterways, all of which recedes in a very short time. With rising sea level saltwater percolates through porous rock, getting into the fresh water table, flooding highly productive and ecologically sensitive marshlands, and extending up tidal rivers. Though not as dramatic as a severe storm, the affected area is far broader. As a result for each foot of vertical sea level rise the average shoreline is estimated to move inland roughly three hundred feet. Given the importance of higher sea level to coastal facilities such as refineries, transfer terminals, wind farms, hydropower, ocean energy, and the infrastructure associated with traditional energy sources, I submit that this is a very important topic for consideration by your Committee. There will be tremendous losses of assets, ``write offs'', as vast areas of land go underwater with increasing frequency during flood events, and eventually permanently. What is often overlooked is that there will also be tremendous opportunities for economic growth as we adapt to this new reality. Now is the right time to see the future that is just over the horizon and will soon be at our shores--just like a tsunami racing invisibly across the sea at four hundred miles an hour, only becoming visible moments before impact. In this case I am using the tsunami as a metaphor for the relatively slow sea level rise. But make no mistake the speed of the ice that is now melting on Greenland and Antarctica is happening at ``warp speed' in geologic time. The pace of warming is tens or even a hundred times faster than at any known period in the last five hundred million years of geologic history. Since this is without precedent in recorded human history and is often misunderstood, it may be worth reviewing the factors that contribute to sea level rise. Primarily it is the melting of ice on land, the glaciers and ice sheets, which can enter the ocean as icebergs (glacier fragments) or melt water. Another factor is the slight expansion of seawater as it warms. Such thermal expansion has been a major factor in the last century causing nearly four inches of global sea level increase, but that will almost certainly be overwhelmed by the ice melt in the coming century. (There are also other nuanced factors that can affect sea level, such as changing ocean currents and global mass redistribution, though I suspect those are beyond the scope of the subcommittee's inquiry.) Certain locations vary considerably from the global average sea level change and warrant special attention even sooner. Over the last century, global average sea level has been approximately eight inches as shown in Exhibit D. However during the same period of time the New Orleans region has had approximately forty six inches of SLR, Norfolk thirty inches, Miami twelve, but Los Angles only four. Most of Alaska has had lower SLR in the same period. The differences are mostly due to land subsidence or uplift, which increases or reduces the global average sea level change. The point is that historical and future sea level change will not be the same everywhere and in fact will vary greatly. The effects of sea level rise are often confused with storm surge, coastal erosion and the regular extreme high tide events, (`king tides'). Except for erosion, those other types of flooding are temporary, making it possible to rebuild and recover. Sea level rise is different in that it is essentially permanent, and will not recede for at least a thousand years. I trust you will see that this insight has strong relevance for critical assets and infrastructure including ports, power plants, and military bases that have long durability and are difficult to elevate or relocate. Of course there will be an even broader effect on homeowners, businesses, communities, local and regional economies in the vulnerable low elevation coastal areas, where a majority of the US population resides. I encourage this Subcommittee, the Committee on Natural Resources, and the Congress to revise and reauthorize the CZMA taking this seminal change in the land ocean boundary-- the coastline--into full consideration. I would expect that your subcommittee is also interested in the changing Arctic given its potential role for energy exploration and shipping. Regardless of the associated concerns with those activities, it is worth noting that the melting of the polar ice cap has no effect on sea level, as it is floating sea ice. The disappearance of that perennial ice across the Arctic Ocean does however illustrate some key points. The fact that it will be essentially ice-free for increasing periods of time starting in some late September, almost certainly within the next decade or two, points to the profoundness of this new era. The sea around the North Pole has been frozen for roughly three million years. I recall my first expedition in 1985 diving under the polar ice cap, when we had to drill through ten feet of ice. That multi-year ice is almost gone. Now we just have thin ice that builds up and then melts each year. That thin ice, or lack of ice, has very different energy characteristics, which has a huge impact on the planet's weather. The changes to the Arctic are truly profound and raise new issues. As I am sure you have considered there is the opening of sea routes, the challenge of treacherous waters for our Navy and Coast Guard to operate, and new areas of shoreline rapidly eroding as the coastline is exposed by the disappearing ice and melting permafrost. Your subcommittee has the opportunity to mark a place in our nation's history by recognizing and planning ahead for the dynamic changes in store for our coastal zone. Sea level will almost certainly reach the upper limit cited in the 2014 National Climate Assessment regardless of exactly when it occurs. That report explicitly said they had a 90 percent confidence that SLR this century would be between upper and lower bounds of 8 inches and 6.6 feet. It is difficult to quantify the collapse rate of the West Antarctic marine glaciers, due to the phenomenon of ``tipping points'', which defy accurate modeling until they can be observed in detail. That challenge leads to an inadvertent conservative or low figure, not because of a lack of risk, but rather due to the inability to put a precise number on it. With other phenomena where we have had prior experience such as earthquakes, tornedos, and hurricanes we plan for low probability high- risk events. In the case of sea level rise, the worst-case scenarios for this century now exceed ten feet, yet hardly anyone is putting that scenario in their range of planning. A key point in that National Climate Assessment that is often overlooked is that they acknowledge a one-in-ten chance that it will not be within those bounds. In risk terms, a ten percent chance is huge. In fact a risk assessment is exactly how we should be considering the effect of rising sea level on the coastline and our management thereof. We are already seeing the destructive effects of sea level rise today. Just to cite a few examples: In Miami Beach, they recently installed $15 million of pumps to keep salt water off the streets that now occurs every 28 days with the full- moon high tide. It is just the first phase of a $400 million plan that they admit has limitations as sea level continues to rise. In Hampton Roads, both military and private locations are seeing steadily worsening flooding, a combination of higher global sea level, a slowing of the Gulf Stream, and subsidence. From the Carolina banks to Cape Cod, coastal changes are noticeable from year-to-year. Along San Francisco's seven- mile Embarcadero well inside the Bay, saltwater now comes over the seawall onto the street with increasing frequency. I could cite examples from Annapolis, Boston, Seattle, and the Gulf Coast or dozens of others. These are manifestations of rising sea level already increasing the problem of storm impacts and abnormal high tides. It will continue to get worse. In the longer term, mid-century and beyond, rising sea level will dramatically change the coastal zone, probably beyond what most of us can imagine, within the lifetimes of our children and grandchildren. We can ignore reality and leave future Americans to suffer the consequences. Or we can see the future in front of us and plan for intelligent adaptation. Recent evidence from Antarctica makes clear that the melting forces are well ahead of nearly all the models and projections, similar to the way that the melting of the polar ice cap is far ahead of the models. Those who understand the dynamics of glacial collapse and the uncertainty of specific projections, appreciate that the models will almost certainly continue to underestimate the rate of their collapse, and the sea level rise that will directly result. To close my remarks, the sea does not care what we think or want, or what laws we pass. Throughout history the ocean has taught man humility. We ignore its power at our peril. Along with crisis, there is opportunity. There can be tremendous innovation and adaptation in the coming decades as we anticipate and change our coastal oriented society and economies. But getting a good return on investment requires that we see where things are headed. I often cite the Dutch as an example of how it is possible to do bold engineering, but also to illustrate the potential trap of inadequate design. Many have seen pictures of the amazing gates at Rotterdam harbor, the Maeslantkering. Designed in the 1980's with construction finished in the early 90's, it is a key part of their innovative coastal defense system. The cost was almost a billion dollars. It was designed for a one-in-ten thousand-year storm, and the worst historical downstream flooding from the three rivers that merge there. Plus they added an allowance for one foot of sea level rise, as that was the worst they considered possible when it was designed. Now they recognize that will soon be inadequate. If they had been able to foresee the possibility of five to ten feet of SLR back in the 1980's they admit they would have designed the barrier with greater height for longer effectiveness and a better ROI--return on investment. Our coastline is largely unchanged since the founding of the United States, a nation founded in recognition of truth and science. Our founders specifically recognized that the world of man and nature was dynamic and would need to adapt accordingly. Our changing coastline, a significant feature of the United States, is an appropriate place to implement that attitude, respecting the collaborative relationship between the Federal government and the States. From my perspective the CZMA seems like the right forum to have that discussion about public policy. The sea is rising and the shoreline is shifting. We have time to adapt, but no time to waste. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. I would be pleased to answer questions.