Ed Markey

Mr. MARKEY

Mr. MARKEY. I ask once again how much time is remaining.

Mr. MARKEY. At this point, Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MARKEY. Madam Chair, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MARKEY. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This legislation is fundamentally a solution in search of a problem. According to the analysis of data provided by the BLM for hard rock mines on public lands for which we have complete data, the average time it takes to approve a plan of operation for a mine has actually decreased under the Obama administration. According to the BLM data, plans of operation for hard rock mines are being approved roughly 17 percent more quickly under the Obama administration than under the Bush administration. Thank you again, President Obama, for the great job you're doing in changing the way in which the Bush administration held up those permits. Despite the majority's claims, 82 percent of plans of operation for hard rock mines are approved within 3 years under the Obama administration. According to the BLM, it takes, on average, 4 years to approve a mining plan of operations for a large mine. That's more than 1,000 acres on public lands. My colleagues on the other side have asked repeatedly what the problem is with their legislation that would truncate and eviscerate proper review of all mines on public lands if the majority of plans are approved within 3 years. It is because a little more than 15 percent of hard rock mines take more than 4 years to approve. For these mines, where mining companies may not have submitted a complete application and may not have posted a sufficient bond to ensure the mine is cleaned up where additional environmental review is required because the mine is large or potentially damaging to our environment and public health, this bill would prevent proper review. We're already approving hard rock mines more quickly under the Obama administration than under the Bush administration. We should not be eviscerating proper review of virtually all mining operations on public lands, as this Republican bill would do, and we should certainly not be doing it under the pretense of developing critical and strategic minerals. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MARKEY. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MARKEY. I yield myself 1 minute. Again, this bill is not aimed at ensuring that we can guarantee that we increase the production of the kinds of rare Earth that we need in order to compete against China. By the way, if we're really going to be using China as the guise for the reduction in the environmental laws in the United States because they have rare Earth, and we're ramping up our production of rare Earth, what we should really be talking about is why in the world are the Republicans supporting the sale of our oil and our natural gas to China. If they're using precious minerals as an economic weapon against the United States, then why don't we use natural gas and oil, which we have, against them because that's the most precious of all minerals.

Mr. MARKEY. I yield myself an additional 1 minute. Oil and gas really drive the economy of the world, and every time I bring an amendment out here on the floor that says, well, let's drill for oil and natural gas on the public lands of the United States, but we can't export it after we discover it here, drill for it here, to China, the Republicans, every time, vote not to put a ban on that. At the same time, they are over there with crocodile tears very concerned about China having all of these precious metals that they won't sell to us. Well, you want to know the best way to get China to sell that stuff to us? For us not to sell the stuff we have to them, that they need to manufacture those materials. That's the game. So you can't have it both ways. You just can't have it both ways. Either this is a great threat to our country and we're going to use the precious metals we have, the precious minerals that we have, oil and gas as our weapon against China, or we're doomed. We don't have a real strategy. Again, this is not a coherent strategy to deal with the country of China and their economic strategy to undermine our competitiveness. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MARKEY. I am prepared to close.

Mr. MARKEY. I thank the Chair. China's rare Earth policies do burn America's high-tech manufacturing competitiveness, and the Republicans just want to throw gas on the fire, American natural gas. Our greatest competitive advantage in manufacturing right now is low- priced domestic natural gas, but the Republicans want to export that competitive edge to China and to develop a global natural gas market so that the United States natural gas prices triple here domestically, or quadruple to match the prices the rest of the world pays. China will not send their rare Earth minerals to the United States, but Republicans have continually voted to allow exports of our low-cost natural gas, our manufacturing advantage, to China. This is a one-way ticket to manufacturing oblivion. Natural gas in our country is six to seven times less expensive than natural gas in China. It is four times less expensive than natural gas in Europe. That is our competitive advantage. What the Republicans have consistently done since they have taken over the majority is to put in place policies to export our natural gas that is six times less expensive to China that will then be used in the manufacture of every product that they will then sell back to us, undermining every manufacturing industry in the United States as we supply the very valuable precious natural gas they need in order to harm dramatically the American economy. Where do they show up? They show up here with crocodile tears about the restrictions that the National Environmental Policy Act places upon mining for sand, mining for gold, mining for silver. You really think that's the way we're going to get back into a better competitive stance against the Chinese as you're saying no, let's sell our natural gas that's six times less expensive than the natural gas they have in America fueling their industries? That's just an upside-down policy. It's just dealing with the periphery of the challenge that China presents to us, and not even in an effective way, rather than going right to the core of how they are exploiting this mindless commitment to not the American Petroleum Institute, but we might as well call it the world petroleum institute because they don't represent American interests. That's what we have to do here on the floor of the House of Representatives. That's what our amendments do today to make sure that we do for our country. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MARKEY. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MARKEY. I thank the gentleman for yielding. So what is the majority doing in this bill? They're saying that sand is a ``critical'' material; gravel, clay. There's no crisis in the sand industry. We don't need to wad it down, the environmental protections for drilling for sand or gravel or clay. There is no crisis. That's what this whole bill is. It's a Trojan horse. It's moving in to undermine environmental protections where they're working and where there's no need to reduce them. If they want to talk about scandium or europium or cerium or terbium or some other critical strategic material that we should be discussing out here that we need for cell phones or we need for solar panels or we need for our defense systems, that's one thing. But that's not what this is about. This is about watering down environmental protections for sand and clay and endangering the health and well-being of the Nation for no reason whatsoever because there's no strategic relationship between those very prosaic minerals and our national security.

Mr. MARKEY. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, I have an amendment in order today, and the reason I have it in order is that it's a very simple amendment. It would update an antiquated mining law to end the free ride that mining companies extracting minerals like gold and silver and uranium on public lands currently enjoy. It would then send that money to benefit Western States by dedicating the funding to cleaning up the more than 160,000 abandoned mines we have in the West. The underlying bill would extend a host of new giveaways to the mining industry while doing nothing to ensure taxpayers are getting a proper return on these valuable minerals like gold and silver and uranium on public lands. It is well past time to fix this law that was passed during the Presidency of Ulysses S. Grant in 1872. My amendment would require mining companies to pay taxpayers 12.5 percent of the value of these hard rock minerals taken off of the public lands. That is the same royalty rate that coal and oil and natural gas companies pay to the Federal Government to mine and drill on public lands. While mining companies pay no royalty on Federal lands to mine for gold and silver, they do pay a royalty on State lands that would abut those Federal lands. Twelve Western States already require mining companies to pay royalties up to 12 percent on mining on their State lands. Colorado charges up to 12 percent on minerals taken from their State lands. Utah, Wyoming, and California all charge up to 10 percent. Nevada charges up to 5 percent. But when it comes to mining on Federal lands, which could be right next door to the State lands, these multinational mining companies, they still get to play Uncle Sam for Uncle Sucker. They pay Federal taxpayers--all of the rest of us in the country--no royalties while reaping this massive windfall. So what my amendment would do is it would ensure that the States where this mining is occurring reap the benefits. According to the GAO, there are more than 160,000 abandoned gold and silver and copper and uranium and other mines in the West. Some estimates put that number as high as 500,000 abandoned mines. These mines stopped production decades or, in some cases, more than a century ago and have no responsible parties to carry out the proper environmental remediation. The result is that the streams and the rivers, the aquifers, the soils continue to be contaminated by mercury and thorium and arsenic and other toxic pollutants. In fact, the GAO says that more than 33,000 mines are already a danger to the public health and environment. Arizona has some 50,000 abandoned hard rock mines; California has more than 47,000; Utah and Nevada have 17,000 and 16,000, respectively. According to the Congressional Research Service, cleaning up abandoned mine sites can cost tens of millions of dollars per mine. Well, my amendment would generate nearly $400 million over the next 10 years that would be dedicated to cleaning up these sites. This would ensure that mining companies are paying their fair share to aid our Western States in cleaning up these dangerous and toxic sites. At this point, I would like to reserve the balance of my time, Madam Chair.

Mr. MARKEY. Madam Chair, I have an amendment in order under the rule.

Mr. MARKEY. Madam Chair, could you advise us as to how much time is remaining?

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

Mr. MARKEY. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MARKEY. Then I yield myself the balance of my time. So this is a very simple amendment. What it says is this: that these big mining companies--and the ones I'm talking about have a market capitalization of $90 billion--well, they just have to pay to drill on public lands, Federal public lands. Right now they're paying to drill on State public lands, and when they come over to the Federal public lands it's like free parking, free rent. You don't have to pay anything. Well, where are you going? You're going to where it's free. And who's letting them have it for free? Uncle Sam. Uncle Sucker. So what the Markey amendment says is we're going to raise $400 million, charging them to drill for these precious minerals on Federal lands, and we're going to give the $400 million over to the States so that they can clean up their old mines where there are environmental problems. So if you care about the environmental problems in these Western States, here's your ability to send $400 million in, collected where the big companies are now paying nothing to mine on Federal lands, in order to help deal with environmental problems there. Not in Massachusetts, not in the East, but right here, right where this mining goes on, right where the environmental disasters occur. Vote ``aye'' on the Markey amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MARKEY. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Again, I understand the business plan here of these mining interests that don't even pay royalties to drill on the Federal lands of our country. Let's just continue this business plan. That's what they're saying to themselves. Maybe we can get it out of this Republican Congress. So, in addition to not paying, let's also have rules that say we're going to water down the environmental laws, as well, not only for europium and cerium and other rare Earths, but also for sand and for gravel and for clay. I understand. That's a great business plan. It's not for the American people. They get watered-down environmental laws, and they also don't even get paid the royalties on the Federal lands of our country. It's just one big, bad deal for the United States taxpayers, and I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. MARKEY

Mr. MARKEY. And while this bill provides new giveaways to large multinational mining companies, it does nothing to change the Mining Law of 1872--1872, ladies and gentlemen--which allows mining companies to pull taxpayer-owned hard rock minerals out of our public lands without giving Americans a fair payment. In fact, under the 140-year- old law, mining companies can extract gold, silver, uranium, copper, and other hard rock minerals without paying taxpayers one cent in royalties for the minerals on the public lands of the United States of America. This law isn't just outdated, it's outrageous. These are the same people here who are saying we can't afford to pass the law which protects against preexisting conditions in health care of ordinary Americans. These are the people here saying we can't pass a bill to protect against discrimination against women in our society.

Mr. MARKEY. I thank the gentleman from Colorado. We are just hours removed from House Republicans' voting to take away health care for 30 million Americans and put the insurance companies back in charge of our health care system. And it's back to business as usual for the GOP-controlled House. Yes, it's time to get back to more giveaways to the Nation's wealthiest companies. Because when House Republicans aren't voting to take away health care from ordinary Americans, from poor Americans, they're voting for ``wealth care'' for the most profitable industries in the history of the United States of America. In fact, the majority continues to bring largely the same legislation to the floor over and over again, only the name of the industry reaping the windfall changes. Two weeks ago, the Republican majority voted to give away nearly all of our onshore public lands to the oil and gas industry. The majority has passed bills to put rigs off our beaches in California, off our beaches in Florida, and off our beaches in New Jersey without passing any new safety requirements after the BP oil spill just 2 years ago. They have passed legislation to allow old-growth forests to be clear- cut and to hand over land to a multinational mining company without protecting Native American sacred sites or local water quality. In fact, this Republican majority has cast so many votes to give away our public lands to the oil, the gas, the mining, and the timber industries, it's almost hard to remember which industry is getting a special giveaway each week. So I have a suggestion that I think could help everyone out there keep track. Each week, we can consult this handy-dandy chart, the ``GOP Wheel of Giveaways,'' to figure out which industries are going to get their turn benefiting from handouts from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle on the same day they're going to take away health benefits from the poor, the sick, the elderly, and ordinary families in America. Let's see who the big winners are on the House floor today as they take away the health care benefits for ordinary people. Let's give it a spin here. Let's see what happens as we look at what is happening out there in this great land of ours this week. This week, it's the mining industry, ladies and gentlemen. Come on down. You are this week's big winner in the GOP giveaway game. The mining industry is the big winner on this giveaway show here today on the House floor. That's because the bill that the majority is bringing to the floor tomorrow, despite being entitled the National Strategic and Critical Minerals Act, has absolutely nothing to do with developing these minerals. In fact, this bill is all about gutting the environmental safeguards and the proper review of large mining projects on public lands for virtually all minerals, including coal. Under this legislation, sand apparently could be considered as rare. Gravel could be a critical mineral. Crushed stone or clay could be a strategic resource. Even abundant minerals like gold, silver, or copper could potentially qualify as a rare Earth product under this bill and have lower environmental standards as a result in drilling for them that would endanger ordinary families again and their health. But of course they would never provide any health care benefits for them because that's the other bill we're going to be having out here on the House floor and gutting here today. Indeed, the only rarities created under the Republican bill would be environmental protections or public input.

Mr. MARKEY. This law isn't jut outdated, it is outrageous. On the game show ``The Price is Right,'' a $1 bid is strategic. But under the Republican giveaway game show, it is an actual price that these huge industries can continue paying for the rights to our public lands. The Republicans want to continue giving away grazing rights for a little more than $1 per acre and allow oil companies to warehouse public lands for $1.50 an acre. And after more than 250 votes against the environment and more than 110 votes to benefit the oil and gas industries, the American people are going to look at the record of this Republican majority and say, ``No deal.'' I urge a ``no'' vote on the Republican proposal.

Mr. MARKEY. I thank the gentleman. And if it were possible to retard the aging process, that would be something that I think all of us could agree upon. But in the absence of that breakthrough medically, I thank the gentleman for his bipartisan wishes of a happy birthday.