Niki Tsongas

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. TSONGAS. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. TSONGAS. Madam Chair, nearly 3 years ago, Superstorm Sandy caught millions of coastal residents by surprise and cost billions of dollars in economic damage. Unfortunately, the weather is not all that has become more extreme over the past several years. I am disappointed that this misguided and misinformed language to block implementation of the National Ocean Policy keeps coming back, just like the recurrent coastal flooding being caused by sea level rise, and my amendment would strike that language. It shows a lack of respect for science and a lack of appreciation for the magnitude and complexity of the governance challenges we face. It seems some Members of Congress do not want to see government succeed even when government's failure to respond to a disaster, to predict a drought, or to properly manage a fishery can devastate the communities they represent. When you disavow words like ``precaution,'' ``preparedness,'' and ``planning,'' you stop being conservative and start being reckless. Conservatives always say they want to run government like a business. Well, would you invest in a business with different departments that don't talk to each other? Would you invest in a business that is not responsive to its shareholders? Would you invest in a business with no business plan? That is essentially what the National Ocean Policy is, a business plan for the oceans that seeks to maximize the benefits for shareholders, all the American people. The policy is a win-win-win for economic growth, public safety, and environmental protection. I urge you to vote ``yes'' on my amendment to protect the National Ocean Policy. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. TSONGAS. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), my colleague.

Ms. TSONGAS. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Beyer), my colleague.

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, my amendment, which I offer with Mr. Beyer of Virginia, would strike three policy riders related to the Endangered Species Act from the underlying bill, those concerning the greater sage-grouse, the northern long-eared bat, and the gray wolf. I want to focus my remarks on the greater sage-grouse. The language in this bill that seeks to block an Endangered Species Act listing of the bird is unnecessary and is completely inappropriate, putting both the species and the historic quintessentially American sagebrush steppe landscape at risk. In 1901, Mark Twain described the sagebrush steppe as a ``forest in exquisite miniature.'' At one point, as many as 16 million greater sage-grouse called the sagebrush sea home. Settlers traveling west said that flocks of sage-grouse ``blackened the sky.'' Today the population has been reduced to as few as 200,000 birds. Right now there are unprecedented and proactive partnerships throughout the West which are working to conserve sagebrush habitat, to encourage predictability for economic development, and to prevent the listing of the greater sage-grouse as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Federal agencies, States, sportsmen, ranchers, farmers, and conservationists have all come together in this effort. In fact, the 10 land management plans released by the Interior Department last month are based on plans developed by the States, not one size fits all, but individual plans to suit each State's individual needs. This is all the result of a concerted collaboration. The Fish and Wildlife Service and the States themselves agree that, as long as these partnerships continue, it is likely that the greater sage-grouse will not be listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Rather than helping communities, the rider in this bill creates uncertainty and only undermines the immense coordinated progress already underway. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, I just want to reiterate that the riders in the underlying bill will do nothing to help our native species but, instead, only serve to cause uncertainty and delay, undermining all the concerted effort by many stakeholders, all seeking to avoid a listing, particularly with the sage-grouse. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to first comment that Massachusetts, at one time, was home to the Heath Hen, which is the greater sage-grouse's cousin. Because at that time we did not have an Endangered Species Act, that Heath Hen is now, unfortunately, extinct. So we have learned an important lesson about the great role the Endangered Species Act does play to protect some of our remarkable species. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Beyer), my colleague.

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. My amendment is intended to recognize the National Park Service's Centennial Challenge and the importance of funding the program at the level requested by President Obama and the National Park Service. Next year is the 100th anniversary of the National Park Service, a milestone in this country's history that we as a nation should be proud of and celebrate. For a century now, the national parks have preserved and protected our Nation's natural, cultural, and historic resources for the use and enjoyment of future generations. I am proud to represent two national parks. In my hometown, the Lowell National Historic Park was the first urban national park of its kind, commemorating, preserving, and protecting the catalytic role the city played in spawning America's Industrial Revolution. Minute Man National Historic Park is just down the road in Concord, where visitors can see firsthand where the shot heard 'round the world was fired and where the American Revolution began. The many visitors to both sites are grateful that our country has made the commitment to protecting our history and our landscapes for future generations, coming away awed and inspired by the sites that have shaped who we are as a people. The upcoming centennial is a tremendous opportunity to increase public engagement with our parks so that we may not only celebrate the places we love to visit with family and friends, but also make the necessary investments that will prepare our parks for the next 100 years. Despite its significant and multifaceted obligations, the Park Service budget has been shrinking, compromising its ability to ensure adequate protection to our treasured national history. Since 2010, there has been more than a 7 percent, or $178 million in today's dollars, reduction in the account to operate national parks. Over the last decade, there has been a 62 percent, or $227 million in today's dollars, decline in the National Park Service construction account. This has led to an enormous deferred maintenance backlog, totaling $11.5 billion of dilapidated visitor centers, unmaintained trail centers, and failing water treatment facilities. Historically, our parks have had bipartisan support. To mark the 50th anniversary of the National Park Service in 1966, President Eisenhower initiated Mission 66, which invested more than $1 billion in improvements to visitor facilities throughout the park system. Ten years ahead of the 100th anniversary, President George W. Bush launched the Centennial Initiative, a 10-year, $3 billion plan to restore the parks through a combination of public and private funding. That effort was never fully realized, but President Obama revived the initiative ahead of the 2016 centennial celebration. In the FY15 omnibus spending bill, Congress provided $10 million to reinvigorate the Centennial Challenge. The initial $10 million Federal investment was matched by an additional $16 million in private donations for signature centennial projects. In total, 106 projects were selected throughout the country to improve visitor services, chip away at the deferred maintenance backlog, and support youth programs. Over 200 projects were submitted, demonstrating the high demand for additional money to be matched by private contributions. Given the overwhelming success from the $10 million investment this year, Congress should strongly consider increasing funding levels for the Centennial Challenge in 2017. I understand that this is a difficult task, given the inadequate funding allocation provided for the Interior Department under the Budget Control Act and sequestration. I regret that we were unable to do so through this amendment. The funding allocation for the National Park Service represents yet another example of why Congress must work together on a bipartisan basis to end sequestration. I hope that we can find a way to support the Centennial Challenge and the President's budget request for the National Park Service so that we not only celebrate the places we love to visit with family and friends, but to make the necessary investments that will prepare our parks for the next 100 years. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Beyer.)

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of increased funding for the National Park Service in order to address the deferred maintenance backlog. Despite its significant and multifaceted contributions to our country, the National Park Service budget has been shrinking, compromising its ability to adequately protect our treasured national history. Shrinking appropriations and increasing wear and tear on aging infrastructure has led to a maintenance backlog of approximately $11.5 billion dollars, including dilapidated visitor centers, unmaintained trails, and failing water treatment facilities. More than half of the maintenance backlog, approximately $6 billion, is comprised of transportation projects that require funding through the Highway Trust Fund, not the Park Service. The Arlington Memorial Bridge, which is so important to our nation, connecting the Lincoln Memorial to Arlington National Cemetery, is so badly corroded that it must be partially shut down for six to nine months. In fact, the estimated total cost of repairs for the bridge is more than the entire annual allocation to the Park Service from the Highway Trust Fund. This trend is completely unsustainable if we want our children and grandchildren to have the same opportunity to visit and enjoy some of our nation's most iconic sites. At recent hearings on the Natural Resources Committee, I have heard many of my colleagues express their frustrations with the maintenance backlog. This is our opportunity to address the problem, but we are once again kicking the can down the pothole riddled, crumbling road. Next year is the 100th anniversary of the National Park Service, which will bring even more visitors to our parks. I urge my colleagues to not only address the maintenance backlog at the National Park Service, but to come together and pass a long-term fix for the Highway Trust Fund so that we can address the maintenance backlog. Point of Order

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of increased funding for the National Park Service in order to address the deferred maintenance backlog. Despite its significant and multifaceted contributions to our country, the National Park Service budget has been shrinking, compromising its ability to adequately protect our treasured national history. Shrinking appropriations and increasing wear and tear on aging infrastructure has led----

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

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which is set to expire in less than 100 days, unless Congress takes action. We have a generational responsibility to protect our Nation's remaining natural wilderness areas for our children and grandchildren. For over 50 years, the Land and Water Conservation Fund has been an instrumental tool in this effort, and it has been used in almost every single county in the United States. LWCF protects and expands access to recreational areas and preserves our treasured natural and historic landscapes. It does not cost taxpayer money or contribute to the Federal deficit. In fact, according to a recent economic analysis, every dollar invested in the conservation of public lands through the LWCF leads to $4 in economic activity to local communities. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the permanent reauthorization of the LWCF, ensuring that it remains one of our Nation's most successful conservation tools.

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. Thank you, Ranking Member Visclosky. Mr. Chair, I rise for the purpose of engaging in a colloquy. As you are aware, our Nation's Federally Funded Research and Development Centers, or FFRDCs, play a critical role in advancing national security goals and ensuring that our Nation stays at the cutting edge of technological innovation. Mr. Chair, I wanted to engage in this colloquy to clarify Congress' intent in section 802(3)(c), which states: ``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the funds available to the Department from any source during fiscal year 2016 may be used by a defense FFRDC through a fee or other payment mechanism for construction of new buildings.'' Mr. Chair, I am concerned that some could take an expansive interpretation of this provision and view it as preventing the execution of critical facilities modernization projects, even when authorized by Congress through military construction projects. I am also concerned about the provision's medium-and long-term implications for building maintenance and facility modernization projects that are necessary to continue important innovation programs for decades to come. Chairman Frelinghuysen, is it the committee's understanding that this provision is not intended to apply to military construction projects or to advanced planning and design funds that are authorized by Congress?

Ms. TSONGAS. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Ms. TSONGAS. Thank you, Mr. Frelinghuysen. I look forward to working with you, and I appreciate that construction. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), the ranking member of the Defense Subcommittee. Is that your understanding?

Ms. TSONGAS. Thank you both, and I look forward to working with you.

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to cast votes from May 18-May 21st due to a family commitment. Had I been present, I would have voted against H.R. 2250, the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act. Republicans have chosen to fund the Department of Defense at higher funding levels at the expense of funding for other agencies already squeezed by strict sequestration rules. Although I support some of the provisions in this legislation, I oppose the manner with which Republicans have decided to prioritize spending for the country. I would have voted in favor of H.R. 2353, the Highway and Transportation Funding Act of 2015. The strength and vitality of our nation's infrastructure is critical to our economic competitiveness. The Highway Trust Fund provides federal support for transportation projects on the state level in order to maintain a modern, efficient, and reliable transportation infrastructure. These projects also support local job creation and economic development. However, I am extremely dismayed that H.R. 2353 only extends authorization for the Highway Trust Fund for two months and does not address long term funding challenges. Congress must pass a bipartisan, long-term funding solution for the Highway Trust Fund. I would have voted against H.R. 1806, the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act. Since its enactment, the America COMPETES Act has bolstered our nation's science and energy competitiveness through increased investment in research and development and STEM education. Unfortunately, instead of simply reauthorizing this bipartisan program, this bill undermines critical investments in science, technology, and research. I would have voted against H.R. 880, the American Research and Competitiveness Act. While I am a strong supporter of making the Research and Development tax credit permanent, I do not support this legislation because this unpaid-for tax measure would add an estimated $181.6 billion to the deficit over 10 years. I would have voted against H.R. 2262, the SPACE Act of 2015. While I support the development of the commercial space industry, this legislation does not strike the appropriate balance between the needs of the industry and overall safety of the programs for the general public and future customers.

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I will be absent from the House May 18th through May 21st to attend my daughter's wedding.

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. This amendment attempts to add yet another completely unrelated Endangered Species Act rider to the underlying bill. Specifically, this amendment would prohibit the lesser prairie chicken and the American burying beetle from being listed as endangered species under the Endangered Species Act. The lesser prairie chicken was listed as threatened under the ESA in March 2014, and the American burying beetle was listed as endangered in 1989. Given the very broad language of this amendment, it is clear that DOD lands are not the primary driver of this attack on the Endangered Species Act. If the sponsors really wanted to protect DOD activities and military readiness, they would have written the language as such. In fact, the amendment does not make a single reference to military readiness. The Department of Defense does not believe this amendment is necessary. DOD has given no indication that the listings of these species has negatively impacted military readiness, for good reason. Since being listed, neither the lesser prairie chicken nor the burying beetle have had critical habitat designated on DOD lands. Just look at this map. There is virtually no overlap between our military installations, which are in red, and the lesser prairie chicken's range. In fact, if you look, they are separated in most instances by hundreds of miles, with the green areas representing the current range of the species and the red areas our military installations. For the record, DOD also does not believe that the language already included in the bill regarding the greater sage grouse is necessary to protect military readiness, either. The Endangered Species Act has been successful in preventing the extinction of species since its enactment 40 years ago. Congress should allow the Fish and Wildlife Service to make species-listing decisions in accordance with the law and the best available science. Congress should not further delay these scientific decisions by micromanaging the process on a species-by-species basis, especially in the context of the NDAA. The administration has already indicated they would strongly consider vetoing this bill, in part because of the nongermane provisions that would delay listing of the greater sage grouse for 10 years. Adoption of this amendment would add another provision to their list of objections. The Senate has already agreed that harmful Endangered Species Act riders do not belong in the NDAA, instead referring the matter to the Environment and Public Works Committee.

Ms. TSONGAS. I urge my colleagues to reject this misguided amendment and vote to protect the scientific integrity of the Endangered Species Act, as well as the integrity of the NDAA.

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, in January 2012, when Keith Goldberg went missing, finding him was all his family wanted. Investigators presumed that he had been murdered and that his remains were somewhere in the Lake Mead National Recreation Area, a unit administered by the National Park Service. After several months passed, local law enforcement was unable to recover Mr. Goldberg's remains, and they gave up the search. His family, wanting what any family would want, reached out to a private, nonprofit search and rescue outfit for assistance. Unfortunately, it took 15 months for the professional search and rescue company to acquire the permits and insurance required to conduct this search. Within 2 hours of receiving the necessary credentials, Mr. Goldberg's body was recovered. H.R. 373 will help speed up the process for granting private search and rescue companies access to Federal lands. The bill strikes a fair balance between guaranteeing safety, ensuring sufficient liability insurance for the American taxpayer, and improving the process. Under H.R. 373, private search and rescue operations, when appropriate, can have timely access to public lands. The Natural Resources Committee held a hearing on this bill in the 113th Congress, and the National Park Service recommended some technical changes to the legislation. I would like to thank the majority for working with us to incorporate those suggestions into the legislation that we are considering today. I also want to thank Mr. Heck for his leadership on this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 373 and urge its adoption. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 984 directs the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study on the feasibility of designating the Chief Standing Bear National Historic Trail in Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Kansas. The trail extends 550 miles, following the same route taken by Chief Standing Bear and the Ponca people during Federal Indian removal in 1877 and their subsequent return to Nebraska. Chief Standing Bear played an important role in American history as the first Native American recognized by the United States Government as a person under law, following his arrest and ensuing trial for leaving his reservation in Oklahoma without permission. Chief Standing Bear was honoring his son's dying wish to be buried in the land of his birth and traveled with his son's remains, along with other members of his tribe, through harsh conditions from Oklahoma back to their ancestral lands in Nebraska. Unfortunately, at that time, leaving the reservation was a violation of the law. At the very least, 135 years later, it is only right that we look into the feasibility of including this trail as part of the national historic trails system, to reflect on a not-so-proud period of history in our country when Native Americans were treated as second-class citizens and to honor the courage of Chief Standing Bear and the Ponca people. This bill passed the House last Congress. I thank my colleagues on the other side of the aisle for advancing this legislation again, and Representative Fortenberry for his leadership on this bill. I support passage of this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.