Bruce Westerman

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 556, sponsored by my colleague, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wittman). This commonsense bill protects hunters' and anglers' ability to continue using cost-effective lead ammunition and fishing equipment on our Federal lands. At the same time, this legislation gives land management agencies the flexibility to make targeted decisions on lead usage based on sound science and in coordination with State fish and wildlife agencies. In the United States, sportsmen and -women participation is crucial to the success of wildlife conservation. The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation operates on seven interdependent principles. Embedded in these principles are sound science, active management, and access to hunting and fishing. The success of this model is best characterized by the millions of dollars that hunters and anglers pay for wildlife conservation each year, mainly through excise taxes on firearms, ammunition, and fishing tackle. In fiscal year 2026, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service apportioned over $800 million in receipts from excise taxes on firearms manufacturers alone. Of that, nearly $700 million was for wildlife restoration. Similarly, $442 million was generated from excise taxes on fishing equipment for fish conservation. It was with this in mind that the Trump administration changed the paradigm for hunting and fishing on Federal lands earlier this year. Historically, Federal lands were considered closed to hunting and fishing unless specific regulations were issued to allow these activities in certain places. With the signing of Secretarial Order No. 3447 by Secretary Burgum, Federal lands are now considered to be open for hunting and fishing unless existing authorities and unit purposes require an area to be closed. This change charts a path forward toward opening thousands of acres of Federal land through responsible hunting and fishing. This new approach will result in greater economic activity for local communities surrounding our Federal lands and more funding for wildlife and habitat conservation. H.R. 556 will further these goals by ensuring that Federal land management agencies follow specific science and coordinate with State agencies when regulating the use of lead ammunition and fishing tackle. Providing these safeguards is critical, as alternatives to lead ammunition and fishing tackle are often cost prohibitive, with some costing as much as 10 times more than similar lead products. Instead of regulating hunters and anglers out of our Federal lands, the Trump administration is working with State managers, conservation organizations, and sportsmen and -women. When lead is shown to cause harm to wildlife, it will be addressed accordingly, but wide-reaching bans or even refuge-by-refuge bans, where no specific science link can be made, are the wrong approach and ultimately undermine wildlife conservation. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Agriculture, Washington, DC, October 6, 2025. Hon. Bruce Westerman, Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: This letter confirms our mutual understanding regarding H.R. 556, the ``Protecting Access for Hunters and Anglers Act of 2025.'' Thank you for collaborating with the Committee on Agriculture on the matters within our jurisdiction. The Committee on Agriculture will forego any further consideration of this bill. However, by foregoing consideration at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over any subject matter contained in this or similar legislation. The Committee on Agriculture also reserves the right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of conferees, should it become necessary, and ask that you support such a request. We would appreciate a response to this letter confirming this understanding with respect to H.R. 556 and request a copy of our letters on this matter be published in the Congressional Record during Floor consideration. Sincerely, Glenn ``GT'' Thompson, Chairman.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wittman), the vice chairman of the Committee on Natural Resources and the lead sponsor of this legislation. Before he takes his 3 minutes, I will mention that Mr. Wittman is not only an active member of our committee, serving as vice chairman, and the lead sponsor of this bill, but Mr. Wittman also holds degrees in biology and public health and policy. I could actually call him Dr. Wittman, with a Ph.D. He is also an avid outdoorsman. If there ever was an expert in this area, I would consider Representative Wittman an expert.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I will point out that H.R. 556 checks the boxes. It allows State agencies to make the rules on what kind of ammunition is being used. It also allows for the best available science. It has been argued almost like the science totally supports the ban of lead, but I want to read from a quote from the Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies, who is actually the lead advocate for all State fish and wildlife agencies here in Washington: On the Biden administration's proposal to ban lead, I am quoting what they testified: Without definitive science conclusively and fully documenting population-level impacts, we do not believe there is sufficient evidence to support these mandates. What the people closest to this issue said was that there is no conclusive science that we should ban lead, yet that is what the previous administration wanted to do and not only on fish and wildlife refuges. They wanted to ban it not only for hunting but also for fishing. Fishing and hunting are sports that people in my district do that maybe can't afford to do a lot of other activities. When you increase the cost of ammunition or the cost of fishing tackle by a factor of 10, you are going to price people out of that sport. Going back to my opening comments, hunters and fishermen are the ones who fund conservation in America through excise taxes, and a lot of that comes from ammunition and fishing tackle. What this would do is force more people out of those sports. It would reduce funding for conservation, and it would create a downward spiral. We need to use common sense. We need to use thorough, science-based research, and we need to be able to make these decisions as they arise. We are not preventing lead from being banned. We are not saying that you can go back and use lead to hunt waterfowl and migratory species. We are just saying to these fish and wildlife agencies, for certain game, you can still use lead shot. We are not going to allow that to be banned just because somebody has a political agenda to ban it. This is a commonsense bill. It is good for hunting and fishing. It is good for hunters and fishermen, and it is ultimately good for our country and conservation. I strongly support it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for closing. Hunters and anglers are the backbone of American wildlife conservation efforts, and they are heavily invested in the long-term health of wildlife. It is important that Congress come to their defense against ideologically driven, unscientific decisions that limit access to our Federal public lands. Mr. Speaker, I have a letter here supporting H.R. 556. I want to read some of the names who signed onto this letter before I ask to include it in the Record. These are organizations like the American Catfishing Association, American Sportfishing Association, Bass Anglers Sportsman Society, Boone and Crockett Club, California Waterfowl Association, Catch-A- Dream Foundation, Coastal Conservation Association, Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation, Council to Advance Hunting and the Shooting Sports, Dallas Safari Club, Delta Waterfowl, Ducks Unlimited, International Game Fish Association, Major League Fishing, Mule Deer Foundation, National Deer Association, National Professional Anglers Association, National Rifle Association, National Shooting Sports Foundation, Pheasants Forever, Public Lands Foundation, Quail Forever, Safari Club International, Sportsmen's Alliance, The Bass Federation, The Walleye Federation, Whitetails Unlimited, and Wildlife Forever. These organizations represent millions of Americans who participate in outdoor recreation through hunting and fishing. I don't think they would be signing a letter encouraging the passage of H.R. 556 if they thought there was something that would endanger our fish and wildlife populations in this bill. Again, to be clear, this bill doesn't prevent the Federal Government from making decisions regarding the use of lead ammunition and fishing tackle, but it does say that any ban must be backed up by site-specific science demonstrating that lead use is harming wildlife in that refuge. It also requires that States be properly consulted when the Federal Government proposes to ban the use of lead. I believe that a true partnership between States and the Federal Government in wildlife conservation is the best path forward, and this bill is a step in the right direction. Mr. Speaker, I include this letter I just mentioned in the Record. March 16, 2026. Hon. Mike Johnson, Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Speaker Johnson: The undersigned organizations, representing millions of hunters, anglers, wildlife professionals, and outdoor enthusiasts, write to express support for the Protecting Access for Hunters and Anglers Act (H.R. 556). Introduced by Congressman Rob Wittman, this legislation would prohibit the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior from restricting the use of lead ammunition or tackle on certain federal lands and waters absent field data demonstrating a science-based link to wildlife population declines. Overly broad or arbitrary bans on traditional ammunition and tackle can create unnecessary economic impacts and hinder fish and wildlife conservation efforts. We respectfully urge prompt House consideration of this legislation. Fish and wildlife are generally managed at the population level, and--with limited exceptions--management authority primarily resides with state fish and wildlife agencies. In the rare cases where credible field data demonstrate impacts to wildlife populations, state agencies already have the authority to regulate ammunition or tackle use to achieve conservation objectives while minimizing impacts on hunters and anglers. Wildlife management decisions should be guided by science and the expertise of professional wildlife managers--not political motivations, litigation, or ballot initiatives. Restrictions on traditional ammunition and tackle on federal lands should occur only with the support of the relevant state fish and wildlife agency. H.R. 556 appropriately reinforces this principle and affirms the central role of states in wildlife management. Broad bans can also discourage participation in hunting and fishing, particularly when comparable alternatives are not widely available at similar cost or performance. Reduced participation has economic consequences and directly affects conservation funding. Through excise taxes on firearms, ammunition, and fishing tackle under the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson Acts, hunters and anglers provide the primary source of funding for state wildlife conservation, habitat restoration, research, and public access. At the same time, we support efforts by federal agencies to responsibly expand opportunities for hunting and fishing on public lands. We commend the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for proposing to expand hunting and sport fishing opportunities across units of the National Wildlife Refuge System and National Fish Hatchery System. Increasing access supports the Refuge System's mission to facilitate compatible wildlife-dependent recreation while strengthening participation in the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. For these reasons, we strongly support the Protecting Access for Hunters and Anglers Act (H.R. 556) and encourage the House to advance this legislation. We also appreciate ongoing agency efforts to maintain and expand opportunities for America's hunters and anglers on public lands. Thank you for your leadership and continued service on behalf of America's outdoor heritage. Sincerely, American Catfishing Association, American Sportfishing Association, Bass Anglers Sportsman Society, Boone and Crockett Club, California Waterfowl Association, Catch A Dream Foundation, Coastal Conservation Association, Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation, Council to Advance Hunting and the Shooting Sports, Dallas Safari Club, Delta Waterfowl, Ducks Unlimited, International Game Association, Major League Fishing. Mule Deer Foundation, National Deer Association, National Professional Anglers Association, National Rifle Association, National Shooting Sports Foundation, Pheasants Forever, Public Lands Foundation, Quail Forever, Safari Club International, Sportsmen's Alliance, The Bass Federation, The Walleye Federation, Whitetails Unlimited, Wildflife Forever.

Mr. WESTERMAN. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I, again, thank Congressman Wittman for his leadership in working on this legislation. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2709) to improve the health and resiliency of giant sequoias, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 2709, the bill now under consideration.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2709, the bipartisan Save Our Sequoias Act, led by Representatives Fong and Peters of California. More than 120 years ago, President Teddy Roosevelt camped at the Mariposa Grove of Giant Sequoias in what is today known as Yosemite National Park, and he famously recorded in his diary: ``The majestic trunks, beautiful in color and in symmetry, rose around us like the pillars of a mightier cathedral than was ever conceived even by the fervor of the Middle Ages.'' Mr. Speaker, today, the majestic cathedral that inspired one of the Nation's greatest conservation Presidents is facing an existential threat. In just 2 years, 2020 and 2021, we lost 20 percent of the world's mature giant sequoias, which grow only in a specific area of California in the Sierra Nevadas in a combined size roughly the area of Washington, D.C., in about 70 distinct groves. That is the only place on Earth where they grow naturally. Even though there is one planted out on The Mall here in Washington, it hasn't fared quite as well as those in California. Saying this is unprecedented is an understatement. The last known death by fire of a giant sequoia before this century dates back to 1297 AD. Throughout their ancient lives, known to span over three millennia, giant sequoias standing in California today have lived through the rise and fall of the Roman Empire, the birth of Christ, and the founding of our great Nation. These trees withstood thousands of years of fires, earthquakes, floods, and anything that Mother Nature could throw their way, but in the next 25 years, these iconic trees could be extinct in the wild because, quite simply, we have been loving them to death. For the 1,000-year period from 800 to 1800, giant sequoias experienced an average of 30 fires per century. These low-severity fires cleared out undergrowth and shade-tolerant species, such as white fir, allowing the semi-serotinous sequoia cones to open and begin the regeneration process, but decades of fire suppression and a lack of forest management dropped the number of fires in these groves by a factor of tenfold, down to just three fires per century, with some groves untouched by fire for over a century. In combination with historic drought conditions, this created a perfect storm of hazardous ladder fuels that carry fire up into the crown of the giant sequoias, creating virtually unstoppable infernos. In the words of Dr. Christy Brigham, a scientist at Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks: ``Bureaucracy is slow. Wildfire is fast.'' We are going to need to get a lot faster if we want to save these trees. At its normal pace, it would take the Forest Service 52 years to treat just its 19 highest priority groves. That is time we simply do not have. That is where the bipartisan Save Our Sequoias Act comes in today. This legislation gives Federal, State, Tribal, local, and private land managers the tools they need to expedite the restoration work necessary to protect giant sequoias. The Save Our Sequoias Act expedites environmental reviews, formalizes interagency coordination through the Giant Sequoia Lands Coalition, and declares a congressional emergency to increase the pace and scale of forest management efforts. I will briefly clarify the intent of Congress regarding this legislation as it relates to the Wilderness Act. Over the course of several months of bipartisan negotiations involving the Natural Resources Committee, the Department of the Interior, the U.S. Forest Service, and various stakeholders, several improvements were made to the legislation. During these negotiations, there was clear, universal, and unambiguous agreement that the Wilderness Act did not preclude the National Park Service from fulfilling its mission under the Organic Act of 1916 to replant giant sequoias in groves that had been essentially clear-cut by wildfire. Because there was a clear consensus and prior statutory evidence demonstrating the compatibility of the Wilderness Act with these activities, which are fully outlined in the committee's report, the final legislative text did not include any amendments to the Wilderness Act, which would have been unnecessary. This bill, again, is a culmination of years of bipartisan work, and I thank the many co-leads of this legislation for their dedication and commitment to putting aside partisan politics and doing what is best for this iconic species. I also recognize and thank many of the supporters who are instrumental in the crafting of this legislation, including the Tule River Tribe, Tulare County, Save the Redwoods League, CAL FIRE, Sierra Forest Products, Clay Jordan, Teresa Benson, and Garrett Dickman, as well as Drs. Stephen Sillett, Robert Van Pelt, Kristen Shive, and Christy Brigham. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this important bipartisan piece of legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Agriculture, Washington, DC, March 9, 2026. Hon. Bruce Westerman, Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: This letter confirms our mutual understanding regarding H.R. 2709, the ``Save Our Sequoias Act.'' Thank you for collaborating with the Committee on Agriculture on the matters within our jurisdiction. The Committee on Agriculture will forego any further consideration of this bill. However, by foregoing consideration at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over any subject matter contained in this or similar legislation. The Committee on Agriculture also reserves the right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of conferees, should it become necessary, and ask that you support such a request. We would appreciate a response to this letter confirming this understanding with respect to H.R. 2709 and request a copy of our letters on this matter be published in the Congressional Record during Floor consideration. Sincerely, Glenn ``GT'' Thompson, Chairman.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I echo the remarks from my colleague, Ms. Elfreth, about how this is the way we should do legislation. We took a field trip out to the sequoias, a bipartisan field trip. There is tons of research from academic institutions on what is happening in these sequoia groves. We looked at it. We worked together to create bipartisan legislation. Honestly, we are way past time that we should have passed this bill, but I am so thankful that we have been able to get it on the floor today. I look forward to it passing out of the House and then moving on over to the Senate. This bill sparks something else. We passed a very bipartisan bill in the House called the Fix Our Forests Act based off of the work we did on the Save Our Sequoias Act. That bill is over in the Senate right now waiting for Senate action. As we are moving into spring and will soon be moving into the summer months when wildfires are raging, that is another bill that we can't delay in getting passed. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Valadao), a cosponsor of the bill who was on that field trip that we took when we saw the devastation in the sequoia grove.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, when I was in forestry school, the thing we learned about giant sequoias is they had this really thick layer of bark. At the time we didn't even really think it was possible to kill a giant sequoia with wildfire. That is because, as I mentioned earlier, it was 1297 when the last known death by fire occurred. Trees are like history books because we can count the rings and go back in time. We can see what happened. These trees have withstood fires for millennia. In the blink of an eye, we could lose them all because the fire doesn't just burn down around the trunks anymore. With these other trees growing up into the crowns, it creates a ladder to take the fuel up into the crowns of the trees. Henry Ford once said that failure is the opportunity to begin again more intelligently. The Save Our Sequoias Act is our opportunity to begin managing giant sequoia growth more intelligently. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the Save Our Sequoias Act. I urge the Senate to swiftly take up this bill, and send it to the President's desk. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4467) to modify the boundary of the Vicksburg National Military Park in the State of Mississippi, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 4467, the bill now under consideration.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4467, the Vicksburg National Military Park Boundary Modification Act, which was introduced by Representative Thompson and is cosponsored by the entire Mississippi congressional delegation. Mr. Speaker, this legislation conveys two small parcels of National Park Service land to the State of Mississippi to build a new state-of- the-art welcome center for Vicksburg National Military Park. Vicksburg National Military Park marks the site of the Battle of Vicksburg, one of the true watershed moments of the Civil War. Over the course of 6 weeks in 1863, Union forces under General Ulysses S. Grant encircled the Confederate stronghold of Vicksburg National Military Park, ultimately forcing its surrender on July 4, 1863. The victory gave the Union full control of the Mississippi River and split the Confederacy in half. It is widely recognized by historians as a turning point in the war. Today, Vicksburg National Military Park contains more than 1,300 monuments and markers; 20 miles of reconstructed trenches; the USS Cairo gunboat; and the Vicksburg National Cemetery. The park serves as a major destination in Mississippi for education, reflection, and historical tourism. In fact, in 2022, more than 400,000 visitors came to Vicksburg, generating approximately $36 million in economic activity and supporting hundreds of local jobs. While that economic and educational impact is substantial, it is currently constrained by aging visitor facilities that limit public engagement. To address this, the State of Mississippi is leading an effort to build a new state-of-the-art welcome center, which would be financed with non-Federal dollars. H.R. 4467 helps support this effort by transferring two small parcels of National Park Service land, totaling approximately 7 acres, to the State so they can build this new facility for visitors. This legislation is an important and practical step that will enhance the visitor experience without unnecessary expense to the Federal taxpayer. This is a model for future public-private partnerships and a win-win for both the Federal Government and the State of Mississippi. By improving visitor experiences and enhancing a site integral to American history, this bill also directly advances the goals of President Trump's executive order on celebrating America's 250th birthday. I thank the entire Mississippi congressional delegation for their work advancing this practical bill that will improve public access and education during America's 250th anniversary year at this hallowed site. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I am prepared to close. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, this is a commonsense bill that helps a local community improve a pivotal Civil War-era military park while reducing the Federal estate. As we celebrate our Nation's 250th anniversary, this bill will allow Mississippians to take the lead in telling the story of Vicksburg for generations to come. Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4284) to amend the Small Tract Act of 1983 to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to convey, without consideration, certain cemeteries, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 4284, the bill under consideration.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of Representative Leger Fernandez' bill, H.R. 4284, the Small Cemetery Conveyance Act. Mr. Speaker, all across the West, there are small, historic cemeteries in rural communities that sit on or adjacent to Federal land. These are places where families and communities have laid their loved ones to rest for generations long before jurisdictional boundaries were drawn on a map. Due to the Federal Government's large footprint all around these large cemeteries, basic access for upkeep, ceremonies, or simply paying respects to loved ones can turn into a bureaucratic mess. H.R. 4284 is a commonsense fix. It gives the U.S. Forest Service, which administers a significant portion of the lands near or under these cemeteries, clear authority under the Small Tract Act to transfer small cemetery parcels to the people who are best positioned to care for them, the local and Tribal Governments with close connections to those laid to rest. Rather than going through the lengthy process of requiring an act of Congress to convey each individual parcel on a one-off basis, this bill establishes a legal framework for communities to gain possession of historic cemeteries. The legislation respects local stewardship and reduces the Federal footprint, all while ensuring safeguards are in place to make sure that these hallowed sites are used as cemeteries in perpetuity. This bill puts locals in charge of the cemeteries they have maintained for centuries, allowing the Forest Service to focus on their core mission: restoring health and resiliency to our Nation's overgrown, fire-prone Federal lands. This bill removes red tape from the burdensome process of transferring land in these special cases so that local communities can more easily honor their loved ones and be stewards of the places where their ancestors are at peace. I support this bipartisan piece of legislation. I thank Representative Leger Fernandez and Representative Hurd for their work together on this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Agriculture, Washington, DC, January 13, 2025. Hon. Bruce Westerman, Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: This letter confirms our mutual understanding regarding H.R. 4284, the ``Small Cemetery Conveyance Act.'' Thank you for collaborating with the Committee on Agriculture on the matters within our jurisdiction. The Committee on Agriculture will forego any further consideration of this bill. However, by foregoing consideration at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over any subject matter contained in this or similar legislation. The Committee on Agriculture also reserves the right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of conferees, should it become necessary, and ask that you support such a request. We would appreciate a response to this letter confirming this understanding with respect to H.R. 4284 and request a copy of our letters on this matter be published in the Congressional Record during Floor consideration. Sincerely, Glenn ``GT'' Thompson, Chairman.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, this is a simple, bipartisan measure that serves the spiritual needs of rural, Tribal, and local communities across the West. It lightens the administrative burden on the Forest Service and reduces the Federal footprint. Above all, it returns the protection and care of local cemeteries to those with the closest connections to them. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1665) to require the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture to establish online portals to accept, process, and dispose of certain Form 299s, and for other purposes.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1665, the bill now under consideration.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the DIGITAL Applications Act, a bipartisan bill introduced by Representative Cammack. This important legislation directs the Department of the Interior and Department of Agriculture to establish online portals to accept, process, and track applications to deploy broadband infrastructure on Federal lands. The United States faces a persistent digital divide, with tens of millions of Americans still lacking access to basic broadband services. Many of these Americans live in rural areas or on Tribal lands near federally managed land. For these communities, broadband isn't a luxury. It is essential infrastructure. It means students can do their homework at home; small businesses can reach customers and compete in the modern economy; farmers and ranchers can use precision tools; and families can access telehealth, emergency services, and basic information. Without reliable internet, entire communities are left at a disadvantage. In too many cases, the problem isn't a lack of interest from providers but, rather, the Federal permitting process. Today, broadband providers face a system that is slow, opaque, and unpredictable. Applications can sit for months with little to no communication. Providers have no idea where their applications stand, whether more information is needed, or when a decision might come. That uncertainty makes it harder to plan projects and invest resources, ultimately delaying the delivery of internet access to the communities that need it most. This permitting morass is exactly how the Biden-Harris administration wasted $42 billion in taxpayer funds to deploy broadband infrastructure across the country and failed to connect a single household. Throwing money at this problem is not the answer. We need commonsense permitting reform. Representative Cammack's legislation offers a real, straightforward solution to a discrete problem. By creating online portals for broadband application, agencies can bring transparency and accountability to the permitting process. Applicants will be able to track their submissions, see where they are in the review process, and understand exactly what is needed to move forward. This kind of transparency is a simple fix that can bring more predictability to developers and help speed deployment. H.R. 1665 will help build essential infrastructure faster, smarter, and with more transparency. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bipartisan legislation, and I commend Representative Cammack for her leadership on this effort. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Washington, DC, January 30, 2026. Hon. Bruce Westerman, Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Westerman: I write concerning H.R. 2294, To reauthorize the Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation System Act of 2009, which the Committee on Natural Resources ordered reported on July 23, 2025. H.R. 2294 contains provisions within the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology's Rule X jurisdiction. As a result of your having consulted with the Committee and to expedite this bill for floor consideration, the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will forego action on the bill. This is being done based on our mutual understanding that doing so will not diminish or alter the jurisdiction of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology with respect to the appointment of conferees, or to any future jurisdictional claim of the subject matters contained in the bill or similar legislation. I would appreciate your response to this letter confirming this understanding and would request that you include a copy of this letter and your response in the Committee Report and in the Congressional Record during floor consideration of this bill. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. Sincerely, Brian Babin, D.D.S., Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Cammack), the lead sponsor of the bill.