Charles Taylor

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. My amendment prohibits the use of funds by the Bureau of Land Management to use the recordable disclaimer regulations with regard to any lands within a designated national monument, wilderness study area, National Park Service unit, National Wildlife Refuge System unit, or lands within the national wilderness preservation system. This should resolve once and for all the concerns of the environmental community. In developing these regulations, the Bureau of Land Management considered over 17,000 public comments before finalizing the rule. This rule is very important because it allows landowners to petition the BLM to issue a determination that the Federal Government does not have any property interest in privately owned land where ownership is not clear. The disclaimer process is welcomed by most western States as a means of bringing certainty to the ownership of real property and allowing economic development to take place without having to resort to litigation. I also want to make it absolutely clear that the Department of the Interior's new recordable disclaimers of interest in land regulations were never put in place to build roads in national parks, wildlife refuges, national monuments, wilderness areas, or wilderness study areas. I urge my colleagues to support this perfecting amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo).

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 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

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, today we bring before the House for fiscal year 2004 appropriations a bill for the Department of the Interior and related agencies. This is a good bill that balances many competing needs and stays within the 302(b) allocations for budget authority. Mr. Chairman, this bill is fiscally responsible, providing about $100 million more than the budget request but nearly $200 million less than the fiscal year 2003 level. The bill takes care of our public lands, the national parks, wildlife refuges, forests, and lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management. It has been increased not as much as some would like; and I pledge that in conference, we will try to increase that as much as possible. The bill focuses on conservation initiatives, including operation and maintenance of Federal lands, stateside grants for land preservation and recreation, State wildlife grants, habitat improvements on both public and private lands, eradication of invasive species, and protection of endangered species. We hear arguments that we are not doing enough for the conservation program in this bill. I disagree. There is nearly $1 billion in the bill for programs in the conservation spending category. But more to the point, there are a great number of critically important conservation programs in this bill that have never been included in the conservation spending category but are equally important. We provide increases of $73 million for national parks, $30 million for national wildlife refuges, and $93 million for wildlife restoration and forest health. I would argue that most of the funding in this bill is for conservation activities. Some Members will argue that we need to buy more Federal lands. What we really need is to do a better job of taking care of lands we have and this bill does that. Fire fighting needs are addressed in this bill. In addition to providing the necessary funding for suppressing wildfires, we continue support for the National Fire Plan with the investment of $2.5 billion. We support preparedness activities so that we have the people and equipment in place to handle wildfires. We provide funding increases for hazardous fuels reduction, State fire assistance, and forest health programs. I am proud of the balance we have achieved in these critical programs that are important to all Americans. The bill ensures that energy research programs are adequately funded and that we maintain a proper mix between research on improvements to existing technologies and longer-term higher-risk research on new technologies. We need to keep all of our options open and not fall into the trap of picking winners and losers. When it comes to energy research, ultimately the consumer and not the government will determine what energy technologies will be successful in the marketplace. The bill provides for the continued construction of critically needed schools and hospitals for the American Indians and Alaskan Natives. It is included in a resolution to the contentious litigation between the United States and the American Indians dealing with the individual Indian trust monies. This bill provides prompt, fair, and reasonable resolution of those long-standing claims. This lawsuit has been diverting scarce resources away from critical programs that benefit the Indian people. We need to stop spending hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions, on litigation support and redirect those funds to Indian education, health, wildlife, law enforcement and other important Indian programs. My good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo), chairman of the Committee on Resources, will move to strike this provision on jurisdictional grounds. He has committed to resolving this conflict through the authorizing process. Mr. Chairman, if we do not do this, we will literally be spending perhaps $2.4 billion in continuous accounting measures that will do nothing to solve this problem. It will be taken away from Indian health and education. Finally, the bill takes care of our cultural agencies and provides the funding needed to ensure that the Smithsonian Institution maintains its responsibility for providing quality visitor services and world- renowned research. It provides the administration's request for the National Gallery of Art and for the National Endowment for the Arts. The Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2004 is a bill that I believe strikes an appropriate balance among competing funding needs, and I ask for support for the bill. [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH16JY03.001 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH16JY03.002 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH16JY03.003 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH16JY03.004 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH16JY03.005 Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the amendment.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI. I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill through page 92, line 14, be considered as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I concede the point of order.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman raises a legitimate point. The Indian trust settlement language is an authorizing issue, but before I concede the point of order, let me point out the rationale behind this important provision. Last year, this House debated a provision limiting funding for the historical accounting of the individual Indian money accounts. During debate over this provision, both the majority and the minority members of the authorizing committee assured us that legislation would be developed forthwith to address the Indian trust issues. This did not happen. However, this year, the new chairman of the Committee on Resources, which is the legislative committee of jurisdiction for Native American issues, has held a hearing on this critical issue and has informed me of his intention to develop legislation to resolve the Indian trust issue this year. I am convinced that, without intervention by the Congress, this issue will continue to drag on for years at the expense of other important programs in the Interior bill. The committee proposed what I believe is a prompt, fair and reasonable resolution of these long-standing claims. To date, hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent on lawyers and accountants and not a single dollar has gone to Indian country. Mr. Chairman, if this contentious litigation continues, we will be forced to redirect resources away from Indian education, health, wildlife, law enforcement and other important Indian programs. Let me point out a few facts for Members to keep in mind as legislation is developed to resolve this litigation. Of the approximately 260,000 individual Indian accounts, 68 percent have balances of less than $100. Thousands of accounts have less than $1 and often less than one penny. Since 1909, a total of $13 billion has flowed through these accounts, with the majority of the money deposited after 1970. This is a far cry from the $137 billion claimed by the litigants. Today, there are 4 million different owners of the 10 million acres of individually-owned trust lands, which makes the management of trust assets very difficult. It is important that we finally tackle this issue. I pledge my help in crafting a legislative solution.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, we have no objection to the amendment.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. Mr. Chairman, the bill maintains the largest increases to NEA and NEH since 2002 and provides small increases for fixed costs this year. We also provide a $10 million increase for the NEH American History initiative. Mr. Chairman, this bill must take care of our huge responsibilities for managing Federal lands. Now, this amendment reduces administrative costs, and I would remind my colleagues that over the past 10 years we have reduced the number of personnel in departmental management by 40 percent. I would like to cut overhead further, but this amendment would damage the government's ability to properly manage our lands and programs. This amendment would impair on-the-ground operations for environmental protection and Indian programs. It would reduce the Department's funding, including hearings and appeals in support for Indian trust reform. My committee is watching carefully the use of funding for travel and other excessive administrative costs, and my colleagues can count on our oversight, but this amendment will not help. The bill strikes a fair balance between the needs of the arts and humanities programs and our responsibility to land management, Indian programs, and industry bills. I ask my colleagues to join me in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

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

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his interest in the Chesapeake Bay and his leadership in addressing the threat posed by invasive species to our public. The committee intends that the funds appropriated for the Nutria Eradication and Control Project in Maryland be applied to the eradication strategy, as authorized, and not to be limited to activities within the boundaries of the refuge.

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

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I was a member of the Subcommittee on the Interior, was not a member of this agreement that Members are talking about being made. No Congress can bind another Congress to an agreement because each Congress changes. I would point out that given our funds, we have done a great deal in the area of conservation spending. We are putting in more than $1 billion in this program. In addition, we have spending categories that were not even established in 2001, and there are many billions of dollars in this bill that address conservation. Neither this administration nor this committee has failed in our effort to address the question of conservation. We have, however, tried to balance the bill given the fact that we have a deficit this year. I am sure the gentleman will soon be addressing us and criticizing us in a few months about the deficit. This is the only time we can address it in our appropriations area. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest) for a colloquy.

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

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I would say to the gentlewoman from Kentucky that I know she has worked long and hard on this project, and it will be my intent to see that it is funded, working with her and the Senate.

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

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I wish to assure the gentleman that I agree with his assessment of the situation. I am not sure that the interior bill is the appropriate place to provide this funding, but I will work with the gentleman to address these needs in future appropriations bills.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Kentucky (Mrs. Northup).

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for his leadership on this program. The Hackensack Meadowlands are indeed an important resource and a reasonable priority for the service. I am advised that the unanticipated budgetary delays have hindered the prompt hiring of the personnel the gentleman mentioned. I will look forward to working with the gentleman as we move forward towards conference to ensure that the service has the resources it needs to continue its consultative role on the Army Corps' meadowlands ecosystem restoration study.

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

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute to enter into a colloquy with the gentleman from Pennsylvania.