Charles Taylor

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, we are talking about roads. The roads are used for many things, recreation, all those sorts of things. Over 90 percent of the Tongass is unroaded, won't be roaded and so forth. It ought to be that forests in America, managed the best in the world, should be providing the resources for all over the world. For instance, if we don't have wood, we will have to rely on steel or plastic. Steel takes lots more energy, about eight times as much to make a steel 2 by 4 versus a wooden 2 by 4, and plastic, we know what that comes from. Mr. Chairman, I urge defeat of this amendment.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce).

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte).

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young). (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. I agree with the gentleman from New York that the Circle Line contract set to expire March 2007 should not be extended. I look forward to working with the gentleman from New York, the chairman of the authorizing committee and the ranking member of this subcommittee to ensure that the new contract is in place as soon as possible and those responsible for the current delay are held accountable.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo).

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, the amendment requires Federal agencies to comply with the requirements of an Executive Order that deals with instituting energy efficiency improvements in Federal buildings and reporting on progress in that regard. We have no objection to the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, we accept this amendment.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, I like a good demagoging just like anybody else, but this is not terribly relevant to everything we have said here to this bill or what has actually happened. Mr. Miller a little while ago made an analogy to a loan that could be changed from time to time. The problem is if you have got a 4 percent rate for 10 years fixed and the bank comes along and says, it has been 5 years and I want to take that up to 8 percent, you are going to say forget you, I have got a contract that keeps me at 4 percent for 10 years, not 5. And then the courts are going to uphold what you are saying. Also if you say, well, I have got a way here where I can blackmail you and you will come across, the court is going to come down on you like a ton of bricks. Now, we could do that that the gentleman suggests, but the problem is we are going to spend lots of money, the courts are going to uphold the law because the Constitution and the law are still in place in this country. Now, a lot of people might not want it to be. I cannot remember and do not know why the Clinton-Gore administration overlooked this and did not put a rate after the rates rose a certain number and royalties were beginning to flow, but they did not. Now, that was caught and after that any drilling in that area is going to pay a royalty. We have got a small period of time. We cannot do anything about it. If I sell my car for $200 and then later find out it is worth $600 and I have signed a contract, we have a law that says I have got to sell that car for $200. And if I try to get around that, I will pay twice because I will pay all my legal fees, I will pay any sort of penalties, any blackmail money, and I will still lose my car for $200. So that is pretty much where we are now, and I would say we need to vote against this. We do not want to waste any more money from the mistake that was made in 1998 and 1999.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt).

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Boren).

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce).

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson).

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson).

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson).

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. Mr. Chairman, no one is a stronger supporter of the National Forests health and wildfire management. But this amendment goes too far. The amendment cuts the NEA funding drastically, and this is much too much of a cut. The President's budget in the committee bill is a fair amount, is level funding with the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. We did raise it slightly and agreed to that. But that remains to be seen. We should support the NEA. The reforms which this committee put in place are working. The new chairman of the NEA is doing an excellent job of ensuring that important works are supported and that funding is well distributed. The bill makes a very strong contribution to the National Fire Plan. It is something that Members can be proud of. The bill increases overall wildfire funding $80 million over last year. That includes a large $70 million increase for Forest Service fuel reduction, and this is $34 million above the 2005 level. I agree with the gentleman that this work is essential, but the agencies can only ramp up so fast. So extra funding is not necessarily needed this year. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is incorrect when he says that the fire funding is down 14 percent from 2005. His calculations may have included the $500 million in emergency funding provided that year. Not counting the emergency fire suppression funds, this bill is $145 million above the 2005 funding level, and this is enough for these fiscally tight times. I also want to point out that this bill has increased funding for forest health management, an important key for preventing forest fires by $31 million above the President's request, and I want to point out that the Forest Service was able to carry over extra wildfire suppression funds from 2005 to this year. So they have or should have plenty of funds for the fire season absent a catastrophic season. Despite the good intentions behind this amendment, we do not need this additional increase for the fund's work at this time. We should not gut the administration's effort in the NEA.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. The amendment would block the EPA from changing the reporting requirements for toxic releases. I appreciate the proponent's concerns that the information on toxic releases should be reported in a timely manner and that this information should be publicly available. These concerns are shared by many State and local officials. On the other hand, I believe that some accommodation should be made by EPA for small businesses that have no toxic releases or have only trace amounts of toxic releases. I am prepared to accept the amendment today with the understanding that we will work with EPA to determine how we can accomplish the amendment's goals without placing unnecessary reporting burdens on businesses that release no toxics or have only trace amounts. I commend the amendment's authors for pursuing this and look forward to working with EPA on that matter.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would increase the EPA State and Tribal Assistance Grants account by $2 million for the National Clean Diesel Initiative. This is an important initiative that was authorized by the Energy Policy Act of 2005. These funds will be used to retrofit school buses and heavy duty trucks and contribute significantly to reducing harmful emissions into the air. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during further consideration of H.R. 5386 in the Committee of the Whole pursuant to House Resolution 818, notwithstanding clause 11 of rule XVIII, no further amendments to the bill may be offered except: Pro forma amendments offered at any point in the reading by the chairman or ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their designees for the purpose of debate; Amendments printed in the Record and numbered 1 and 7; The amendment printed in the Record and numbered 6, which shall be debatable for 20 minutes; An amendment by Mr. Putnam regarding a moratorium on drilling in the OCS, which shall be debatable for 60 minutes; An amendment by Mr. Chabot regarding a limitation on funds for roads in the Tongass National Forest, which shall be debatable for 20 minutes; An amendment by Mr. Oberstar regarding a limitation on funds for activities under the Clean Water Act, which shall be debatable for 30 minutes; An amendment by Mr. Hinchey regarding a limitation on funds for suspension of royalty relief, which shall be debatable for 30 minutes; An amendment by Mr. Obey or Mr. Dicks addressing global climate change by modifying the amount provided for EPA Environmental Programs and Management, which shall be debatable for 30 minutes; An amendment by Mr. Obey regarding funding increases for various accounts with a tax offset; An amendment by Mr. Tiahrt regarding business competitiveness; An amendment by Mr. Gary Miller of California regarding the San Gabriel Watershed; An amendment by Mr. Conaway regarding EPA drinking water regulations for arsenic; An amendment by Mr. Gordon regarding Federal building energy use; An amendment by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas regarding a limitation on funds for urban reforestation; An amendment by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas regarding a limitation on funds on Smithsonian outreach programs; An amendment by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey regarding Federal employee travel to conferences; An amendment by Mr. Dent regarding a limitation on funds to enforce the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act; An amendment by Mr. Andrews regarding Forest Service salaries and expenses; An amendment by Mr. Meehan regarding EPA national emissions standards; An amendment by Mr. Taylor of North Carolina regarding funding for various accounts; An amendment by Mr. Beauprez regarding funding for wildland fire management; An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding any Iowa State University project on mitigating emissions from egg farms; An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding funding for ivory-billed woodpecker research; An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding funding for Neosha National Fish Hatchery; An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding funding for the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge; An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding Santa Ana River Wash program; An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding staffing for the National Zoological Park; An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding NFS recreation sites in North Carolina; An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding citrus studies in Florida; An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail; An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding the Florida National Scenic Trail; An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding the Continental Divide National Trail. Each such amendment may be offered only by the Member named in this request or a designee, or by the Member who caused it to be printed in the Record or a designee, shall be considered as read, shall not be subject to amendment except that the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations and the Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies each may offer one pro forma amendment for the purpose of debate; and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. Except as otherwise specified, each amendment shall be debatable for 10 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent. An amendment shall be considered to fit the description stated in this request if it addresses in whole or in part the object described.