Rick Renzi

Mr. RENZI

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the question. We asked several of the city council members, current city council members, we asked several of the mayors from a local area, we asked the president of the student body of the high school, we asked all the villagers who were at the hearing, over 200 of them, what is the majority opinion, what do they feel. They said that, overwhelmingly, the people of this native American Eskimo village very much want to open it up. The reason is because in the beginning, when the drilling was being done at Prudhoe Bay, there was a fear. They were unsure what kind of neighbors the oil companies would be. Since that time, technology and equipment and the good, hard work of all kinds of Americans, including their own people, who work on this pipeline have proven over the years that this is a worthy investment, and they are worthy of their trust. So these oil companies have been good neighbors, and they know that that will continue with some of the finest new technologies and some of the finest advancements in arctic technology and equipment to pull that oil out of the subsurface terrain. What they know is they have good neighbors in the oil companies. What we do not know is how much oil really is under there, whether it be 6 billion gallons, whether it be 15 billion or even more. What we do know, though, is that our Nation needs it as a bridge to take us from our current dependency on oil to this new generation of alternative fuels. We cannot just go to alternative fuels. That is so expensive right now, to think we are going to jump to the fuel cell or we are going to jump to hydrogen today. We need time to develop that technology, and the bridge from today until that day is that we use our American oil and not be so dependent on foreign oil.

Mr. RENZI. That was for the coastal plane, the entire strip in the north.

Mr. RENZI. That is correct. We flew over the entire area, and the plane ride itself took just a matter of minutes, and we were in a prop.

Mr. RENZI. That is correct. One of the arguments that we are hearing is that the old oil technology, that old dark industry of the past, is going to ruin the environment. And it is a falsehood to think that new technology and lessons learned from the past are not going to be used. The language requires, absolutely requires that the newest and best technology of our oil industry, the American oil industry, be used at ANWR. The gentleman from Utah talked about the ice roads. What we are going to do when we go into ANWR, if we are allowed to drill, if we are allowed to remove those resources and provide for the energy needs of our country, we will build a frozen sheet of ice, many feet thick, in order for the tractors and the vehicles to move in on. So that when in the springtime the ice melts, there will be no impact to the tundra. Absolutely none other than the small areas where the oil is actually extracted. But that small impact has got to be weighed in balance, in a rational balance, with the needs of this Nation and the security of this Nation.

Mr. RENZI. Well said. One of the comments that was made to us was really how there have been a few people that have made it as far north as Anchorage, Alaska, but no one has taken the time to go all the way up to the arctic circle in the northernmost point of Alaska, the northernmost point of the United States of America, and hold a field hearing in a small Eskimo village. These people, the Inupiat Eskimos, they are a very proud and strong people, and they are tired of telling Americans, telling politicians in Washington, telling eastern environmentalists what they want, only to have Congress not do their will. We are dealing with native American lands where they cannot even drill their own oil to sustain themselves. They cannot even go after it. We stop them. We need to open up these lands. My colleague knows the issue well. It is well said.

Mr. RENZI. I thank the gentleman from Utah for his question. Americans invested their tax dollars in building a pipeline that runs almost 800 miles from the coastal plain in Prudhoe Bay all the way down to Valdez, millions and billions of dollars, jobs and the economy back in the 1970s when I graduated from high school. Many of my classmates went and worked on the pipeline. Some stayed because of the magnificent beauty of Alaska. What we learned is that this pipeline at its highest production was producing about 2 million gallons or a little bit more. During the first Gulf War, under President Bush, we increased that to a little bit over 2 million because the production had fallen off to about 1.5 million barrels a day. Right now, even though we are at war with Iraq, at maximum production we are only getting 1 million gallons a day, and that is because the reserves at Prudhoe Bay have fallen off, and yet to answer the gentleman's question, 74 miles is all we need to go with a little step. All we have to do is build off of the existing pipeline in order to reach ANWR, and of that 74 miles, 30-some odd miles has already been completed. So we are talking about 30 or 40 miles of more pipeline that we need in order to use a billion dollar pipeline that is already in existence.

Mr. RENZI. The gentleman is so correct. One of the points that came up during our hearing was that the impact that the good Eskimo people have made on the land is an impact that they desire. There is a philosophy that they have that the earth was given to them as a gift; that the earth was given to them to use and draw out the resources. So the day that the generations long ago showed up on that coastal plain, the first day they killed the first whale, they believed the creator gave that to them to feed them, to clothe them. That first day they made an impact, and to this day they impact the environment. They want to be able to control their own destiny. They want to work with a sound environmental policy with an energy company who has been a proven neighbor to them in order for them to gain the benefits of the earth. It is really a beautiful holistic approach to the land.

Mr. RENZI. It is very similar to our stewardships.

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I was fortunate this weekend to visit the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, ANWR, with the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo) and several Republican congressmen as well as our Democratic colleague, the gentlewoman from Guam (Mr. Bordallo). We began our visit by visiting the pristine environment in the southern Alaskan town of Valdez. Valdez is located at the southern end of the pipeline where wildlife and sea otters and clean crisp air and the oil shipping business co-exist in harmony. This is not rhetoric from some Congressman who has never set foot on the site. This is firsthand knowledge seen with my own eyes that we can truly balance our energy needs and our desire to protect the environment without disturbing the ecosystem. While in Valdez, we discussed suggested inferences that oil is seeping out of the pipelines and ruining the environment in great volumes. Let me say as a witness on the record that no such claims exist. In fact, if so much as a spoonful of oil or even brake fluid spills, an action report is filed, and there has been no such seepage at this site. We toured the engine rooms and the facilities of the oil transfer stations, and we found the conditions to be spotless and clean. The new technology and equipment used for transporting oil, the professional mindsets of the employees and the operations of the energy development company have become so advanced that together they now serve as a guardian of the magnificent environment of Prince William Sound and the southern Alaskan town of Valdez. We then flew from Valdez in the southern part of Alaska to the ANWR area, what they call the coastal plain, and we flew to the small Eskimo village of Kaktovik. It was almost 20 degrees below zero, and we were met there by over 200 people who turned out at their local community center for our field hearing. Everyone in attendance, except for a handful of non-Eskimos and one resident, was in favor of responsible energy development in their surrounding environment and on their lands. We met with the elders who were represented by an 81-year-old man by the name of George Atookchook. He described for us how life was very harsh growing up. He grew up in an igloo where they would gather driftwood on the beaches before school, and they would make fire out of this driftwood, and they would burn whale oil for heat. This whale oil would fill the room with deadly smoke, and this deadly smoke led to a generation of Eskimos, particularly his father's generation, who lived on average only until their late forties. During our hearing, the community leaders of Kaktovik taunted the extreme environmentalists. Let me quote the mayor of the north slope borough who said, We do not want to go back to our igloos, as some people want to see us. We want to grow by opening up ANWR. The only people who live in or around ANWR want oil development. They believe, and I quote my 81-year-old friend, ``that man was put on this earth to use the land,'' to draw from its resources and to benefit. The Americans out there listening tonight need to know that while the homelands of the people of Kaktovik have been returned, the extreme environmentalists will not allow them to use their natural resources that are beneath their feet. While we fight to liberate Iraq from a brutal dictator, each passing day we become more dependent on foreign Middle East oil, and all the while, we have American oil located on the north slope of Alaska in an area inhabited by a wonderfully strong, native people who want to help us fulfill the energy needs of our Nation by using American oil in their backyard. The people of Kaktovik told us that they need the economic gains that will help their people live longer, healthier lives, economic benefits to build classrooms where they can teach their little ones their native languages, to build museums to display their traditions and cultural heritage. Mr. Chairman, domestic oil production also means more jobs for native American Eskimos and the entire Alaskan economy. New advancements in arctic frontier technology allows us to explore and develop oil with the highest environmental safeguards. Within this energy bill, section 3 of H.R. 39 requires the Secretary to ensure, ``that oil and gas exploration, development, and production activities on the North Slope result in no significant adverse effect on fish and wildlife, their habitat, their sustaining resources and the environment.'' This highest standard of environmental protection is reiterated many times throughout this energy bill in H.R. 39. Let us give the Eskimo village of Kaktovik what they want. Pass the energy bill. Return not just their land but the natural resources that are desperately needed to secure their future and ours.

Mr. RENZI

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 289) to expand the boundaries of the Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge Complex and the Detroit River International Wildlife Refuge, as amended.

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. H.R. 289, introduced by the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), would expand the boundaries of two refuges in Ohio and Michigan. This measure has been thoroughly reviewed; and it has been endorsed by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, the Toledo Chamber of Commerce, the local port authorities, and Ducks Unlimited. Once enacted, this expansion should help to conserve wintering habitat for migratory birds, enhance the natural resources of Lake Erie, and ensure that thousands of sportsmen will have an opportunity to enjoy wildlife-dependent recreation, including fishing, hunting, trapping and wildlife observation. All land acquired by the Federal Government must be obtained in a voluntary manner and absolutely no private property can be added to either refuge as a result of a forced taking. I urge an ``aye'' vote on this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RENZI

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material in the Record on H.R. 622, H.R. 762, and H.R. 289, the three bills just considered.

Mr. RENZI

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Mrs. Cubin).

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 762) to amend the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 and the Mineral Leasing Act to clarify the method by which the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture determine the fair market value of certain rights-of-way granted, issued, or renewed under these Acts.

Mr. RENZI

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 622 would require the Secretary of Agriculture to perform two land exchanges in the Tonto and Coconino National Forests in Arizona, the Montezuma Castle Land Exchange and the Diamond Point Land Exchange. With the help of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth), I introduced this legislation on February 5, 2003. First, under the Montezuma Castle Land Exchange, the Forest Service would acquire a 157-acre parcel of private land adjacent to Montezuma Castle National Monument, which it may reconvey to the National Park Service, and the 143-acre Double Cabin Park parcel, both in the Coconino National Forest. In the exchange, the Montezuma Castle Land Exchange Joint Venture, an Arizona partnership, will receive approximately 122 acres of National Forest system land adjacent to the Town of Payson municipal airport. The Town of Payson has entered into an agreement to purchase a portion of the property to create a private- sector business development and job opportunities. This exchange will protect riparian areas around Beaver Creek, the view-shed for the National Monument, and it will transfer Double Cabin Park to Federal ownership. Second, under the Diamond Point Land Exchange, the Forest Service will receive a 495-acre parcel known as the ``Q Ranch'' in an area which has completed previous acquisitions and consolidated Federal land. In exchange, the Diamond Point Summer Homes Association will acquire 108 acres of Federal land which have been occupied by the association's 45 residential cabins since the 1950s. The Tonto National Forest Plan specifically recommends conveyance of the Federal land to the cabin owners. The exchange will transfer public land of limited public use to the association in exchange for private lands that will greatly increase the management efficiency and enhance public use, access and the enjoyment of the surrounding National Forest lands. Both exchanges have multiple benefits, enhancing environmental protection and recreation, while also increasing economic opportunities for the community. H.R. 622 is the result of almost a decade of cooperative efforts between local officials and the Forest Service and is based on a balanced solution to responsibly use the land and conserve this area. I urge adoption of this measure. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 622) to provide for the exchange of certain lands in the Coconino and Tonto National Forests in Arizona, and for other purposes.

Mr. RENZI

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing H.R. 1460, the Veterans Entrepreneurship Act of 2003, a bill to help veterans create, manage, and grow their own small businesses. I am joined by Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Evans, Mr. Brown of South Carolina, Mr. Manzullo, Mr. Beauprez, and Mr. Michaud as original cosponsors. We believe Congress should accord veterans a full opportunity to participate in the economic system that their military service has helped sustain. Veterans indeed represent a unique national resource and we need to harness their engaging abilities in our economy. First, this measure would allow veterans to use VA education benefits to enroll in a non-degree, non-credit business course offered by a Small Business Development Center (SBDC) and the National Veterans Small Business Development Corporation. The Small Business Administration helps fund 1,000 SBDCs in the United States; Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa. SBDCs are operated in partnership with colleges and universities or governmental entities. We have drafted this section so that it would improve access to pre- entrepreneurship training and skills building for veterans and certain others, as well. Disabled veterans, dependent spouses and children of certain disabled or deceased veterans, and members of the Guard and Reserve, also would be eligible. Second, the bill would clarify that disabled veterans enrolled in school under a VA vocational rehabilitation program may establish self- employment in a small business enterprise as a vocational goal. The bill recognizes that self-employment is a legitimate rehabilitation goal. It intends to discontinue any current VA practices that could require a disabled veteran to establish that he or she is unable to be employed in another job before being permitted to benefit from the essential entrepreneurship services VA's vocational rehabilitation program currently furnishes. These services include necessary equipment, supplies, and other needs associated with starting a small business. We note VA still could establish certain controls, so that aspiring disabled veterans would have the best chance of succeeding as small business owners. This section of the bill is especially important for disabled veterans who desire to start and grow home-based small businesses. Third, our bill would give federal agency contracting officers the discretionary authority to create sole source contracts for disabled veteran-owned businesses up to $5 million for manufacturing awards and $3 million for non-manufacturing awards. It also would furnish contracting officers discretionary authority to restrict certain contracts to disabled veteran-owned small businesses if at least two such concerns are qualified to bid on the contract. This section of the bill is designed simply to create a ``level playing field'' for those individuals who have been wounded or injured in defending our freedoms. Mr. Speaker, the smaller business sector is our economy's job generator. Our former servicemembers indeed are engaging and resourceful individuals. Our bill simply gives them additional tools to realize the dream of entrepreneurship.

Mr. RENZI

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. RENZI

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, in days when wars were fought with bows and arrows, the international doctrine of self-defense said that a nation should not go to war unless attacked. But in these days of weapons of mass destruction and in these days following September 11, we no longer enjoy such a privilege. Americans cannot gamble on the false hope that Saddam Hussein, who has already killed one million of his own people, will not team up with the al Qaeda terrorists who have the intention and the determination to kill a million Americans. This lethal combination of Iraqi stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction and the al Qaeda network of international terrorists is too much to be left in the hands of the U.N. Security Council. For those who think we have no reason to fight, no reason to ever go to war, I ask you to envision a Saddam Hussein who is the new hidden financier behind the al Qaeda network, a Saddam Hussein as a secret arms broker for the al Qaeda network, and a Saddam Hussein who has become the new leader of the al Qaeda network. This is why Americans must choose to put their future in the hands of the American administration, in our own military. Our future and your children is dependent upon us and our Nation protecting itself. This wounded beast, the Iraqis, this wounded beast, the al Qaeda network, will team up and come after us like a wounded beast, like a wounded bear. In addition, America lives by a moral obligation to lift up the weak, defend the oppressed, and free those too enslaved to free themselves. We come as liberators not conquerors. We have proven our just and true intentions in liberating other Islamic nations like Kuwait, like Bosnia, like Afghanistan. We have shown the Muslim world that we can help you be free and respect your faith. So rise up, people of Iraq, overthrow the Butcher of Baghdad. Begin to dream now of how you can rebuild your nation, how you can choose to institute a representative form of government of your own choosing. You need not be content with the mediocrity imposed upon you. Your Iraqi brothers and sisters will return to your homeland from exile. They will help rebuild your nation. This is your chance, a second chance to breathe free. Rise up now and help the American liberators.

Mr. RENZI

Mr. RENZI. Madam Speaker, on March 10, our children who attend public schools in the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit Court, including my home State of Arizona, were told not to start their day with the real Pledge of Allegiance. An absurd ruling made by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals last June held that the 1954 Federal act that added the words ``under God'' to the Pledge of Allegiance violated the Establishment Clause of the first amendment. Madam Speaker, our great Nation rests upon the wisdom of our Founding Fathers. Our Founding Fathers created a Nation based upon spiritual beliefs, and yet judges continually misinterpret this founding principle by citing the Establishment Clause. So what really is the Establishment Clause? Within our Constitution, the Establishment Clause was created to protect American citizens against religious persecution, so that the government would not impose one religion, the government religion, so that a government or king would not impose his own spiritual or personal beliefs. The Establishment Clause was not created by our Founding Fathers to sterilize this Nation, to not allow this Nation to utter the name of God. Just the opposite. The Constitution of the United States of America, written by our Founding Fathers, states this clearly in Article VII, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven. So how ridiculous is it that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals can prohibit our teachers and children from reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in the public schools of nine western states, when the Constitution itself speaks of God? Using this perverted logic, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals must now find our Constitution unconstitutional. This holding is a new low for our Nation, a low that will harm our children. A good teacher, Mr. Byron Bolen, who teaches American government in Round Valley, Arizona, is concerned that we are undermining our national traditions and taking focus away from our Founding Fathers by not allowing the real Pledge in our classrooms. He believes this issue has become more an issue not of separation of church and state, but an issue that directly negates the patriotism that our children need to learn towards their country. As a teacher in the First District of Arizona, Mr. Bolen asked me how far our courts will go to sterilize and remove God from our classroom and public places. Our Founding Fathers created a Nation based on truth and morality and a love for democracy based upon a person's desire to conform to laws which they revere. Our good natural tendencies as human beings is to repel from evil and to be drawn towards goodness. When hippie generation judges impose their own sterile secular beliefs on the American people, they are establishing their agnostic beliefs on Americans. To go one step further, on February 28 the Court of Appeals in the Ninth Circuit refused numerous requests by our President, the Congress and local school districts to overturn their prior decision. Twice now this court has ruled that reciting the real Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional. Yet in the House of Representatives we start our day with the real Pledge of Allegiance. Our institution writes and debates our laws only after we recite the real Pledge of Allegiance. We must act to allow our children to start their day the way we start our day here in the House. Therefore, I call upon the Supreme Court to review this case, to review it expeditiously, and allow our children to honor our Nation by reciting the real Pledge, and let them start their school day the way we start our day.

Mr. RENZI

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003, H.R. 534, reintroduced by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak). The issue here is human cloning. The issue has to do with us playing God and allowing human embryos to be produced. Make no mistake about it, we are compassionate Americans. We care about pain and suffering, we care about curing diseases; but at the cost of creating human life, human embryos? There is a claim that cancer, diabetes, and other diseases will be cured. I would go as far as to say in the medical community, with safeguards against terrorists, we can identify biological weapons. In my district sits one of the finest anthrax labs in the world that can already identify these types of dangerous pathogens. We do not need human cloning to identify those signatures that exist within those pathogens. As researchers develop artificial wombs, if you are voting for the Greenwood substitute, after 10 years it would allow scientists the legal protection to harvest embryos and to grow human fetuses. It is essential that, whether for research or reproduction, we not allow people to create human life. Join me in voting in favor of final passage of the Weldon-Stupak bill.