Todd Tiahrt

Mr. TIAHRT

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

Mr. TIAHRT. I just wanted to mention to the chairman and to the House that even though this is a sense of Congress, I think that it is opposed enough in the way it is worded that the amendment should be agreed to and the language should be stricken. For example, in the very beginning, where, number one, it says, ``greenhouse gases accumulating in the atmosphere are causing average temperatures to rise at a rate outside the range of natural variability,'' we had a lot of testimony in this Subcommittee of Interior about this very issue. It was very clear that the scientists that study this say that we have large gaps in the scientific data, and it is still inconclusive. One of the great examples of this is the ocean itself. The ocean itself is a carbon bank. It retains carbon sometimes. When it gets warmer, it actually allows carbon to go up into the atmosphere in the form of CO2. That in itself brings the question whether carbon in our atmosphere is a cause of heat or whether heat is a cause of carbon in the air. If you look at the core samples that are found in the Antarctic which have been drilled down to go back and date what our environment was like hundreds of thousands of years ago, we find that there is a high carbon content in our atmosphere when our earth was warmer. And we do know that our earth is getting warmer. In fact, 10,000 years ago, Kansas was covered by a sheet of ice. Just a weekend ago or so, I was back there playing golf, and I can tell you for sure, there is no ice covering the State of Kansas today. Why? Because the earth is getting warmer. But for us to say that the cause is human-induced raises the question. Even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change when they looked at it this year, revised their estimate of the ocean going up because of climate change, from going up to 36 inches. They revised it downward to only going up 17 inches. So that means that they were half off. They said that, as far as climate change, it's human-induced, and they have a 90 percent confidence level. Well, if that's based on their estimate of what the water level is going to be 10 years or 50 years from now, then they are admittedly 50 percent off, so that means they've only got a 45 percent confidence level. That means less than half. My point is that there is no growing scientific consensus on the cause of climate change. In fact, it may be a normal cycle that we're going through. And, in fact, it may be a cycle that is moving us into a cooler climate rather than a warmer climate. So this language, I think, makes assumptions that are based on data that is inconclusive. The scientists tell us there are gaps in the data. It certainly isn't a consensus of Congress from my view. So I would think that we should adopt the gentleman's amendment. I would yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. TIAHRT. I agree that the temperature is going up. It's the cause that is a concern for me. The wording here says that we already know what the cause is and we should move forward and try to do something to stop it, and that includes some very drastic types of actions, including caps and market-based limits on incentives, mandatory market- based limits, I might say. It's my view that those things have not been successful in the past. In fact, when we did mandatory limits, I thought we ended up with gas lines and higher gas prices. That's my view. I would ask that my colleagues here in the House accept this amendment and vote for it. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), the distinguished ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, such time as he may consume.

Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Madam Chairman, I understand the gentleman from Virginia's concern about Northern Virginia being overrun by horses, but there are those of us in Kansas who do enjoy seeing those flowing manes and hearing those pounding hooves across the plains. So in your attempt to move towards horse contraception, I hope you are not going to be horsing around too much with the population so that we can still have those beautiful animals running across the plains of Kansas.

Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I want to thank the gentleman from Connecticut for working with the committee on this very important issue. Truly they have a backlog. Without your looking into this issue, we never would have made the kind of progress that is going to be made because of your efforts. So I want to congratulate the gentleman, and I have no objection to the amendment.

Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I also want to congratulate the gentleman from Illinois for his persistence in pursuing environmental issues in the Illinois area as well as across the United States. It is very important that we have clean air and clean water for our children and grandchildren. The gentleman's leadership has been excellent. Also I want to acknowledge his special recognition of the Great Lakes and taking care of them. He has been worried about the fish life as well as the quality of the water. I congratulate the gentleman in these efforts there.

Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I do not have any objection to this amendment, and I would commend the chairman on his leadership in this area.

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 4 minutes to the cochairman of the Parks Caucus, who has a great passion for our national park system, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder). (Mr. SOUDER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I want to thank the gentleman from Utah and also the gentleman from Washington, Mr. Dicks, the chairman of this subcommittee, for understanding the depth of this problem. We do need to put additional funds into PILT, because the Payment in Lieu of Taxes has created shortfalls for school systems, for local municipalities and for counties. I want to commend the gentleman from Utah for his effort. We have no objections to his amendment.

Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Speaker, I move to strike the last word. I think that the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) has made a good point and reinforced what I was saying in my opening statement that we can get overextended in the Park Service and acquire more than we can take care of. The beautiful building that he used in his example provides a wonderful purpose is now closed because we have not been able to maintain it. My concern, in getting overextended, is that we build new buildings and acquire new land that we are unable to maintain and we get into the same problem that we're trying to correct today. So I thank the gentleman for offering his amendment, and I think it makes a valid point.

Mr. TIAHRT

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

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, there are really two ways to proliferate wolves, one is in the wild, where they respect their distance from humans, and the other is in captivity, where they have no respect for humans. The Mexican wolves have been propagated and proliferated in captivity, and as a result, they encroach into areas that put humans at risk. I think the gentleman from New Mexico has brought up a valid concern because these isolated problems are now coming home to people who live in this area and having to carry firearms with them everywhere they go. I would like to yield to the gentleman from New Mexico to let him complete his point.

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. TIAHRT. Will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. TIAHRT. I wanted to congratulate the gentlewoman on a fine amendment. We have no problems with it.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. I want to congratulate the gentlewoman from California and the gentleman from Michigan for bringing this amendment here. The Energy Star Program has been a very successful program, and it has saved the American taxpayers many, many dollars already. I think this program, again, will get into the billions. It's something that we need to have as part of an overall comprehensive energy plan. So I commend them on their amendment and encourage the passage of it by voice.

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

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment. I am also a fiscal conservative, but I think this amendment is misdirected. We should not limit the funds to do proper forest management on the Tongass. Some limited road building is needed to take care of the land. The Tongass National Forest is, indeed, a wonderful place. But under the existing forest management, approximately 90 percent of the 16.8 million acre forest, over 15 million acres is roadless and undeveloped. Only 4 percent of the forest is suitable for commercial timber harvest, and only half of that area is within the inventoried roadless areas. The amendment would prevent the Forest Service from doing road maintenance on a large area of southeast Alaska. Most of these communities have no road access to the outside world, but they need the Forest Service roads to get around during their daily activities. This amendment would also harm a variety of forestry, recreation and wildlife conservation activities by preventing the proper road maintenance. The existing forest plan allows timber harvest on only 300,000 acres, only about 2 percent of the more than 15 million total acres of roadless area on the forest. I have a letter here from the United States Department of Agriculture, and it's from a person called the forest supervisor up in Tongass. He said we have heard the figure today that there was $40 million lost each year. He says from fiscal year 2005 to 2006, the Tongass spent $2.4 million less on roads, reducing the level from $10 million to $7.8 million; from 2006 to 2007, the program reduced further to $6.1 million. All told, over the past 3 years, the forest has cut spending by $4.1 million to less than 50 percent. So I don't know where the $40 million per year figure came from when they are only spending $6.1 million this year on the roads. In addition, when you add up all the jobs, according to the Forest Service, it's about 1,000 jobs that are at risk with this legislation. This, by also prohibiting roads, also makes the forest more vulnerable to forest fires. So if you love the forest, if you love the bounty, if you love the beauty, then oppose this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Alaska.

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I also would request my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment.

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida.

Mr. TIAHRT. Will the gentlelady yield?

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. TIAHRT. I want to thank the gentleman from Georgia. I think it's a very important issue that we test our Nation's water and make sure that we do have a secure water system. This is very timely. We're a little behind schedule now, so I think it's a very appropriate amendment. We have no problems with it, either.