Mike Simpson

Mr. SIMPSON

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Speaker, when someone thinks of Idaho, they usually think of the things the state is most well known for, like potatoes, Boise State football, world-class hunting and fishing, or any other of the numerous outdoor attractions popular in the State. One thing Idaho is not yet well known for is its contributions to deep space exploration, yet that is the reason I come to the floor today. I rise today to pay tribute to the dedicated men and women of the Idaho National Laboratory, INL, who have made significant contributions to NASA's Mars Science Laboratory mission. This mission has sent a large mobile laboratory--a planetary rover named Curiosity--into space, and is now headed to the surface of Mars. One of the greatest challenges for deep space exploration has always been providing a reliable source of electricity to power scientific instruments and provide heat to keep them from freezing in the harsh conditions of space. NASA used solar power for its earlier voyages to Mars, but because of its limitations, NASA decided to utilize nuclear powered batteries to provide the needed heat and power for the mission. The best place to assemble and test these batteries was Idaho. Why Idaho? Well, Idaho has a long history of leadership and innovation in the nuclear power arena. After World War II, Idaho was chosen as the new home of the Nuclear Reactor Testing Station, where for the first time it was demonstrated that nuclear power could be used to generate usable forms of electricity. In the 60 years since, over 50 nuclear reactors have been designed and tested in Idaho, leading to the development of extensive capabilities and expertise. This expertise handling nuclear materials made Idaho an ideal location when NASA needed to develop the next space battery that would power its new planetary rover. The Mars Science Laboratory mission has the potential to be the most productive Mars surface mission in history. That is due, in part to its nuclear heat and power source. The rover Curiosity, which is the size of a small car, is carrying the most advanced payload of scientific gear ever used on Mars' surface. The nuclear powered rover can go farther, travel to more places and power and heat a larger and more capable scientific payload than a solar powered vehicle would in the same environment. Curiosity will travel to locations on Mars that have been off-limits before and collect samples and perform analysis on a far larger scale than previously imagined. This is all possible because of Curiosity's unique nuclear-powered batteries. A dedicated team of INL scientists and engineers began assembling and testing these batteries in the summer of 2008. After extensive testing to ensure the batteries would perform as expected during the launch and subsequent travel through space, and then again when the rover began its mission on Mars, the team of INL employees felt confident the batteries would do what they needed to do. Many of these people sacrificed significant time away from families to ensure every aspect of the batteries would work as planned, a service that this country should be grateful for. But in the end, I'm sure the individuals who put thousands of hours into this project have considered it a privilege and an honor to be involved. Last Saturday, when Curiosity lifted off from its launch pad at the Kennedy Space Center to begin its nearly nine month voyage to Mars, it may have seemed odd to see a large group of people in Idaho celebrating while they watched the event unfold on a big screen. But for this dedicated team of INL employees, it was a moment they had been anxiously awaiting for years. They can be proud of the fact that whatever new discoveries are made as a result of this new state-of-the- art rover would not be possible without their contributions. And for that, I extend heart-felt congratulations.

Mr. SIMPSON

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize seven employees of the Idaho National Lab who recently received awards from Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu, for their assistance to the people of Japan in dealing with the disaster caused by the recent earthquake and tsunami and for their efforts to secure enough special nuclear material to produce almost 800 nuclear weapons. Eight months ago a devastating disaster struck Japan when a massive earthquake and unprecedented tsunami struck the island nation, killing over 16,000 people and causing a serious reactor accident. Recovery was complicated by a near total destruction of the surrounding transportation infrastructure. At the greatest time of need the Idaho National Laboratory offered its assistance, which was gratefully accepted by the people of Japan. INL employees Doug Burns, Cal Christensen, Betsy Connell, Harold McFarlane, Joy Rempe and Derek Wadsworth assisted by assessing the damage in near real time, providing technical assistance and coordinating the delivery of specialized equipment to assist in controlling the radiological effects. Eric Howden led a 14 year program to secure ten tons of highly enriched uranium and three tons of plutonium from Kazakhstan. These efforts have resulted in relocating enough fissile material to produce almost 800 nuclear weapons at a time when there was great turmoil in the region and an emerging international terrorist threat. I am proud to represent the Idaho National Lab, which has through its history been the worldwide leader in advancing the safe and peaceful use of nuclear energy. As the worldwide demand for energy and environmental concerns increase, the responsible use of nuclear power will continue to grow. As it does, the dedicated employees of the Idaho National Lab will continue their efforts to improve the impressive safety record of nuclear power and promote technologies that prevent future accidents and reduce the threat of nuclear weapons from falling into the wrong hands.

Mr. SIMPSON

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to congratulate Bonneville County on its 100th anniversary as an organized county in the great state of Idaho. Significant events over the past century have made for a colorful history, and this commemoration is a noteworthy event for both past and present residents of Bonneville County. Bonneville County acquired its name from United States Army Captain B. L. E. Bonneville. He established a settlement in southeastern Idaho in the mid 1800s while exploring the Snake River area. On February 7, 1911, one hundred years ago, Bonneville County was born and that small establishment, known as Taylor's Crossing, then Eagle Rock, and now as Idaho Falls, became the heart of beautiful Bonneville County. Ammon, Iona, Irwin, Swan Valley, and Ucon are a few of the other towns located in this distinguished county. A vast and naturally diverse landscape offering mountain ranges, the world-renowned South Fork of the Snake River, and national forests expanding to Idaho's border with Wyoming is home now to more than 104,000 people, making Bonneville County the fourth largest county in the state of Idaho. The county is also home to the Idaho National Laboratory and Grays Lake National Wildlife Refuge and is a regional cultural destination where you may enjoy the Idaho Falls Symphony, the Museum of Idaho, the Colonial Theatre, and several art galleries. The citizens of Bonneville County demonstrate unity and a sense of pride through their deeply sown roots. Traditions, a variety of dynamic organizations, both large and small farms, unique entrepreneurship opportunities, and a willingness to extend a helping hand within the community appropriately characterize this community and our Idaho lifestyle. It is a privilege to represent Bonneville County and the people who structure its prominence.

Mr. SIMPSON

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Speaker, October 10th of this year marks the 100th anniversary of Taiwan, the Republic of China. Taiwan has been an important contributor towards economic and political security in Asia for decades, and continues to be a major trading partner with the United States. Indeed, Taiwan is the ninth largest trading partner of the United States and the sixth largest agricultural market for products grown and produced here in the United States. Taiwan continues to benefit from self-governance and free-elections, and its open society and democracy allows for innovation and growth that puts it on a competitive footing with the most powerful and largest countries in the world. Taiwan and the United States uphold a peaceful affiliation through trade agreements and meaningful personal relationships. I enjoyed a trip to Taiwan when I was a state legislator, and it is a beautiful country with a vibrant culture. Congratulations to the people of Taiwan and President Ma Ying-jeou on its 100th anniversary.

Mr. SIMPSON

Mr. SIMPSON. I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. SIMPSON. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I loved listening to the gentleman from Washington's debate. Now, if the gentleman wants to really create some jobs in this country, we can create hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of jobs if we'll start getting oil going back in the gulf and permitted. The gentleman talked about not being so reliant on foreign oil. We've got rigs right now that were in the gulf that are off the coast of Africa because they can't get permitted in the gulf. Now, do you want to create millions of jobs? Join us on that, and let's create millions of jobs. The gentleman talked about, geez, he just doesn't understand how people could change their votes. People actually sometimes learn more information and decide that they were wrong the time before and that now they'll change their votes, just like some people on that side of the aisle who actually issue press releases saying that they were going to support this CR and then change their minds. That's okay.

Mr. SIMPSON. I reclaim my time. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight in support of this continuing resolution. This CR is vital to keeping our government operating over the next 7 weeks while Congress completes its work on next year's budget. It's worth reminding Members that tonight this CR actually reduces spending from last year's enacted levels and saves taxpayers billions of dollars. The irony is that voting against this CR is actually a vote for more spending. If you want to reduce government spending, then you should vote for this CR. It's pretty simple, really. FEMA's coffers for disaster assistance are about to run dry. There is no such thing as a Republican natural disaster or a Democrat natural disaster. The last thing Congress should do is hold up disaster assistance because of partisan politics. We need to approve this CR tonight and get the relief to those in need as quickly as humanly possible. Now, I've got to tell you, in all honestly, I'm not one of those people who believes that we have to offset every emergency. We have done some in the past--some we have not--but in the past, we have not had a $14 trillion deficit. That's the danger to this country is the $14 trillion deficit and the $1.6 trillion we add to it every damned year. I've got to admit, this is only $1 billion. But do you know what? Some people say, Oh, that's only $1 billion. I heard one Member say yesterday it was nickels and dimes. In Idaho, $1 billion is not nickels and dimes. We did not get into this situation a trillion dollars at a time. We got here a million and a billion dollars at a time, and that's how we're going to get out of this situation. So let's do our job and do what's right for the country and get this deficit under control; and if we can offset it, let's offset it. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. SIMPSON

Mr. SIMPSON. I thank the chairman for yielding. Madam Speaker, many Members of Congress, myself included, recognize that if we want to get our economy going again we need to take steps to get our fiscal house back in order and provide certainty to the marketplace so small business and job creators can begin hiring again. Until we finish the regular appropriations process for the coming year, we won't be able to implement the necessary spending reductions and policy reforms needed to get our economy moving again. While the House has come close to passing all of the appropriation bills out of committee and many of the bills on the floor, the Senate has passed only one bill so far. This CR gives us time to complete that work, while cutting current spending. To me, that seems like a much more reasonable solution than threatening another government shutdown, which will only hurt the economy. Congress has one responsibility each year, and that is to pass the 12 appropriations bills by the beginning of the year. That job has been made harder this year by the fact that the previous majority did not complete their work by the end of 2010. But I've got to tell you, in all honesty, this debate has almost been bizarre to me today. People have asked me whether we need to offset emergency spending, and I said emergency spending does not have to be offset. But if you can find the offsets to do so, why not do so? And that's what we've tried to do in this bill. This debate seems to me almost devoid of the fact that we are $1.5 trillion in debt this year. The gentlelady from Texas, in the debate on the rule, said, we're nickel and diming those that are suffering from disaster, and that we shouldn't be nickel and diming. I don't know, but in Idaho, $1.5 trillion, or the $1 billion that we're offsetting here, is not nickels and dimes. The gentleman from New Jersey said people need relief now in New Jersey. They are going to get relief when we pass this bill. The gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price) said, we are cannibalizing the program that we are taking the money out of. In full committee, this amendment was offered on the Homeland Security bill. This amendment was offered. There was no objection to it. It passed on a voice vote. And now we are cannibalizing the program? We need to pass this so that we can get on and finish our appropriations bills.

Mr. SIMPSON

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Speaker, as a representative of Idaho's Second Congressional District and member of the House Energy and Water Development Subcommittee, it gives me great pleasure to recognize Bechtel BWXT Idaho's exemplary eight year legacy at the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project, AMWTP. Under BBWI's supervision, AMWTP is the United States Department of Energy's most advanced waste treatment facility, safely and compliantly sending more radioactive waste to the DOE Waste Isolation Pilot Plant for permanent disposal than any other site in the DOE Complex. The excellence of BBWI and its employees shows through numerous awards ranging from the 2005 Department of Energy Electrical Safety Challenge to the multiple National Safety Awards received in 2010. Employees have worked more than 12.4 million hours and 2,839 days without a lost-time injury and have shipped more than 43,718 cubic meters of transuranic, mixed low level, and low level waste. BBWI is also an active and involved corporate partner to Idaho. Supporting its community through contributions such as civic, cultural arts, and educational organizations, BBWI helps strengthen the fabric of communities and improve the -quality of life for Idahoans. I am proud to represent AMWTP, a leading corporation in Idaho and for other waste treatment sites across the country.

Mr. SIMPSON

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. SIMPSON

Mr. SIMPSON. I would be happy to yield.

Mr. SIMPSON. I move to strike the last word.

Mr. SIMPSON. Referring my remarks to the Chairman, I've got to get the gentleman from Virginia on a horse out with some cattle. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. ``Trailing'' is the process of moving a livestock herd from one grazing area to another. It generally doesn't take weeks. It certainly doesn't take weeks in the same location. You're moving from one location to another. Trailing has no significant impact on the environment, so while in the past it has been generally considered part of the process of grazing on public lands, the BLM has rarely conducted environmental assessments on or issued permits for trailing itself, focusing instead on the impacts of grazing. Recently--and this is the problem and this is why this amendment is before us--environmental activists that want to get cattle off of public lands, and they have a right to try to do this--I disagree with them--have focused their attention on trailing as a way to shut down grazing on public lands. Congress, not the courts, has the authority to determine public land policies, and today responsible grazing is an important and legitimate use of public lands. Unfortunately, because activists have tied local BLM offices up in knots with litigation, judges are now determining how public lands can be used in the West. This provision--and this is the important part--attempts to get ahead of this issue by exempting trailing from NEPA requirements for 2011 through 2014. The Forest Service on their grazing permits require permits on trailing. The Forest Service does. The BLM has not in the past. But, instead, these litigations are tying this up in knots. The BLM is going through a process to include trailing when they issue their grazing permits, so that the NEPA process on trailing will be included. The problem is between now and when they get that completed, we're going to be in court spending all our money in court rather than getting this process moving forward. We're not opposed to requiring NEPA process on trailing permits just like the Forest Service does, but what this does is exempt this through 2014 while BLM, for lack of a better term, gets their act together. That's all this does. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SIMPSON. I trust him.

Mr. SIMPSON. You're welcome.

Mr. SIMPSON. Reclaiming my time, western Washington. I just want you to know that there have been several wolves that have come to my house, and they presented me with a petition that they would like to visit the Cascades.

Mr. SIMPSON. I thank the gentleman for his comments. I would just say to the gentleman from Washington that was supportive of the reintroduction of wolves in Idaho and Montana and Wyoming that put us in this situation, several wolves----

Mr. SIMPSON. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. SIMPSON. I'll be brief, Mr. Chairman, or as brief as I can. I appreciate this discussion on wolves because it is something that is near and dear to the people of Idaho. I was the speaker of the house in Idaho when the gentleman from Washington supported wolf reintroduction in Yellowstone and Idaho and Montana and Wyoming--something that Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana frankly didn't want but, nevertheless, the Fish and Wildlife Service said that's what we're going to do and that's what they did. Since that time, Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming have been doing the right thing in restoring these wolf populations. In Idaho and Montana, they came up with a wolf management plan that was approved by the Fish and Wildlife Service--it was approved--but then it was taken to court because it didn't include Wyoming. And a judge said--not based on science. We're trying to get back to science. But a judge said, You can't just delist in Idaho and Montana; you have to include Wyoming, and Wyoming didn't have a State management plan approved then. Since that time, I understand that the Fish and Wildlife Service and Wyoming have come up with a plan in principle--and they're still working out the details, but I believe that they will have a plan by the end of this year--to delist in Wyoming. All we're saying is that when they're delisted by Fish and Wildlife Service, they have an approved plan, then it is not subject to judicial review. Because, frankly, there are people who don't think we ought to have any wolf management plan that would include, guess what? Hunting wolves. I know the gentleman from Washington is astounded by that. Our Governor has indicated that he likes to hunt wolves. The problem is wolves have no natural predator out there except hunger. When they've done away with the food supply, some wolves die; otherwise, they just continue to grow in population. Anybody that thought we were going to reintroduce wolves into the Rocky Mountains and there wasn't going to be some type of control--a hunt or whatever--were living on a different planet. But those same people now that wanted the wolves reintroduced, that oppose any type of wolf management, go to court to try to stop the delisting. The gentleman from Washington has explained the problem that exists when you have mixed management of wolves that get confused. They don't know which side of the line they live on, whether they're protected or whether they're not protected, whether they can go out and eat your puppy dog or not. So they're confused wolves. We're trying to clear that up for them. And in the Great Lakes, the Great Lakes have had a population that is greater than in the Rocky Mountains and have been deserving of delisting for a number of years but have just not gotten it done. And contrary to what the gentleman from Virginia said, I actually think the Secretary of the Interior is doing a good job. There are many things I agree with him on. Many of my westerners would disagree with that. I happen to think he's doing a good job as Secretary of the Interior. I don't agree with everything he does, but you know what? When I call him up and say we've got some real problems with this, he listens--he might not agree after he listens, but he listens to us. That's all I ask from a gentleman in that position. So don't believe that we are critical of the Secretary. We do have some differences of opinion, and I realize that he works in an administration that makes it difficult for him sometimes. He's from Colorado. He knows western issues. But I have enjoyed working with him. And I trust the Fish and Wildlife Service and the science that they provide to delist wolves better than I do adjudge. That's why this language is here. Wolves will still be protected in Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Washington, Oregon, Utah, where they have expanded to, and in the Great Lakes.

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. SIMPSON. Reclaiming my time, the gentleman is right. If wolf populations get below acceptable levels, then they go back on the endangered list. Guess what. Wyoming and Montana and Idaho are not going to let that happen. I think this is a good way to go for proceeding with the Endangered Species Act and making sure it does what it's intended to do.

Mr. SIMPSON. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. SIMPSON. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. SIMPSON. Reclaiming my time, that's the standard that exists now, as I understand it. We're not changing that.

Mr. SIMPSON. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.