Bruce Westerman

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman).

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Colorado.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chair, permitting reform in the SPEED Act will help every American by lowering costs and increasing affordability. That is a word that is talked about a lot today, but I think we sometimes forget the question: Why are things not affordable? When we have to import all of our products, when we can't build new energy plants, and when we can't build public infrastructure projects on budget and on time, things become unaffordable. Now is the time for Congress not just to talk about how we need permitting reform but to actually walk the walk when it comes to helping the families in their districts keep the lights on. An analysis by Common Good shows that a 6-year delay in construction on public projects like building roads, something I think we all can agree on, costs the U.S. economy $3.7 trillion. The SPEED Act is supported by over 375 industry leaders ranging from utility companies and energy producers to homebuilders and domestic manufacturers. These are the industries that will lower everyday costs if we simply allow them to build here in America again. A vote for the SPEED Act is a vote for affordability. As I close, I want to return to the core principle at the heart of this debate and this legislation. The Federal permitting process should serve our national interests and not obstruct them. Let me say this again. Permitting should serve our national interests and not obstruct our national interests. NEPA no longer passes the test. It is currently a source of waste, abuse, and predatory litigation. Its unpredictability is fundamentally unfair to the local communities, to working families, and to taxpayers who depend on the infrastructure projects that NEPA obstructs. This has never been more true than today when demand for energy is dramatically spiking. America is blessed with resources we need for a future of energy dominance and critical mineral abundance. God has blessed America with minerals and with energy, we are just refusing to use them. Mr. Chair, we are dependent on China for 90 percent of our rare earth and critical minerals. That is not just economic insecurity. That is a national defense issue. They mine 70 percent of those around the world and process and control 90 percent of them. We have all of them here in America. We refuse to do the permitting, not just to build mines but to build refineries that will create jobs for Americans. When we mine the materials out of the ground and we process them and put them into manufactured goods, there is a multiplier effect by 28. That is what the USGS and Department of Commerce says. We multiply that value by 28. Think of the good-paying jobs Americans could have if we not only mined here in America but if we refined and manufactured products from those things that we mined. The SPEED Act is a targeted, bipartisan solution that will restore balance and accountability to the Federal permitting process. It will streamline administrative review and curtail open-ended and dilatory litigation. These are practical, commonsense reforms that, again, I will say have garnered the support of more than 375 business, labor, and nonprofit groups from across the country, from all 50 States and Puerto Rico. Mr. Chair, we are at a critical point in our country. America has always been a place where we have a can-do attitude. We have always been able to succeed. I like to say we are ``Ameri-cans.'' We are not ``Ameri-can'ts.'' The current permitting laws are telling Americans they can't. We can't be innovative. We can't develop. We can't build here. We have to be dependent on somebody else, somewhere else. We can't have the jobs to earn good wages. We can't grow our rural communities because we can't get through the bureaucratic red tape and permitting. The SPEED Act is the first step in doing that. Mr. Chair, we have to pass this bill. We have to get it to the Senate. We have to work with our Senate colleagues because this is an important time in our country, and this is an important piece of legislation. It is an important issue that affects every American, and today is the day to pass the SPEED Act. I urge my colleagues to support the SPEED Act to get ourselves building again. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, if we want to talk about projects that have been killed by an administration, let's go back to the Biden administration and the Obama administration. Let's look at projects like the Resolution Copper mine in Superior, Arizona, where they got a permit. They spent $2 billion, and they have yet to mine an ounce of copper because of NEPA holdups. Let's look at the Twin Metals project in northern Minnesota, where we have one of the largest deposits of copper, nickel, cobalt, platinum, and palladium, all things we need. That has been going back and forth from one administration to the next. Let's look at the Keystone XL pipeline that was stopped after billions of dollars were spent, and not one drop of oil went through it. My colleagues are making the case for permitting reform. It just happens to be that we are in a Republican administration now, when they turned a blind eye to what was happening during a Democratic administration. This is why we need permitting reform. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter).

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, what about the $12 billion we put in the reconciliation bill to upgrade our air traffic control system? We are not talking about just permitting energy. We are talking about permitting safety. Look at how long it takes to build interstate highways and bridges, and the safety effects that happen because those projects are dragged out for so long. It costs so much more money, and it creates congestion. It creates all kinds of problems. If we could just move the permitting process more quickly, we could benefit not only from the cost of energy, the cost of transmission, and the cost of raw materials that we can be mining, but we could also improve the safety of our country. Mr. Chair, we allocated $12 billion to upgrade the air traffic control system. The Department of Transportation tells me the problem is they can't get a NEPA permit to put fiber-optic cables in air traffic control towers. That is insane when something like an outdated air traffic control system that has funding can't be implemented because we can't get through the NEPA process to run a fiber-optic cable. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WESTERMAN

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. 4776.

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert), the lead sponsor of this legislation.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Crank).

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Bentz).

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 951, I call up the bill (H.R. 845) to require the Secretary of the Interior to reissue regulations removing the gray wolf from the list of endangered and threatened wildlife under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The whole State of Virginia was at one time gray wolf habitat. Washington, D.C. had gray wolves. When are we going to turn them loose here on the Mall or Old Town or whatever part of Virginia? This is a problem that seems to get exported to rural areas, and people turn a blind eye to what happens in the rural areas. Also, there is a difference between desiring fewer wolves and desiring no wolves. States where wolves have already been delisted have a proven track record of success which has been confirmed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This bill does not prohibit the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from listing the wolf in the future if it determines a listing is warranted. However, as the service has confirmed multiple times, the gray wolf currently does not meet that criteria. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Stauber).

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have a question: Which will it be? What is the good science? As I have mentioned before, the Obama administration, the Bush administration, the first Trump administration, the Biden administration all said the wolf has been recovered. The experts, the scientists at U.S. Fish and Wildlife have said it has been recovered. Yet my friends argue it has not been recovered because there are some places where its native range is that the wolf is not there. I remind everyone, we are in gray wolf territory, historical gray wolf territory. Mr. Speaker, like many, like you probably and myself, I have walked around D.C. at night, and this is a rat-infested city. I think there would be at least a little bit of food for the wolves if we were to turn a pack loose on The Mall. However, what happens when they eat all the rats? What do they go after next? Now, this is a preposterous situation because I don't think anybody really wants a pack of wolves on The Mall. However, if you go down the logic trail that my colleagues are making, the wolf is not recovered until it is back in its historic range. Why do we want to sit in a big city where wolves once were and say: We want wolves, just not in our backyard. We want them out in the Midwest or West where it is somebody else's problem, but we don't want those problems here because it makes no sense to put wolves back here in the big cities and across the Northeast. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa), where they have a lot of wolves.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

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. 845.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as we are getting close to breaking for the Christmas holiday, I am glad that this last bill that the Natural Resources Committee will offer is one that we will have a debate on that will resolve an issue that has united the Bush, Obama, Biden, and Trump administrations alike. I am not sure there is another issue like that out there, but this is one of them because each of those administrations has agreed that the gray wolf is a recovered species and should be removed from the Endangered Species Act, or ESA, protection. H.R. 845, the Pet and Livestock Protection Act, sponsored by Representatives Boebert and Tiffany, instructs the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to re-issue its 2020 final rule that delisted the gray wolf from the list of threatened and endangered species in the entire lower 48 States. Recovery of the gray wolf is a true ESA success story, and there aren't a lot of them. In the 1970s, the species was at risk in the lower 48 States. Today, the gray wolf numbers in the thousands across the Great Lakes and Rocky Mountains, with each of these populations being connected to tens of thousands of wolves in Canada. The first Trump administration recognized this successful recovery and issued a delisting rule for gray wolves in the lower 48 States. Unfortunately, this rule was vacated by a Federal judge in California in a blatant instance of judicial activism. Mr. Speaker, don't just take my word for it. The Biden administration appealed the California judge's vacatur of the 2020 Trump rule, arguing: ``The district court misunderstood the ESA's clear mandate and compounded that error by imposing its own review of the science.'' By every sensible definition, the gray wolf is a recovered species, and that recovery should be celebrated as a success of the ESA. Gray wolf populations are healthy and thriving in every region in which they are found. The Great Lakes region has the largest concentration of gray wolves in the lower 48 States, with approximately 4,200 wolves inhabiting Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. Moreover, this population is connected to at least 12,000 to 14,000 wolves in central Canada. The Western United States is also home to roughly 2,500 wolves, including already delisted populations in Montana, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, and Wyoming. This population is connected to over 15,000 wolves in western Canada. The Biden administration's own science determined that wolves in the Western United States had a healthy abundance, retained genetic diversity, could respond to high-mortality events, and maintained adaptive capacity. Most of these wolves reside in States where they have already been delisted. The science is clear. Gray wolves have recovered in the lower 48 States, and it is time to return their management to the States, which have managed and will continue to manage wolf populations responsibly. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hurd).

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, let's talk about some of the issues that were just brought up. First, the foreign entity of concern restrictions, I agree, and I think everybody would agree, that we should scrutinize foreign direct investment to ensure that it does not pose a threat to the United States. We have programs to do that, programs that possibly should be strengthened. However, imposing arbitrary standards could prevent publicly traded, non-Chinese companies from mining domestically. Doing what? Forcing a continued reliance on China. We all know that China is already doing whatever it can to prevent us from building out secure domestic supplies of critical minerals. The CCP has repeatedly used its dominant market position to strategically flood markets and make U.S. projects uneconomic. Mr. Speaker, when they see a project announced in the United States, they dump product on the global market, lowering the prices and making our mining operations uneconomical to investors. If we create an arbitrary standard, they will continue to play even more dirty. The CCP will simply buy shares of publicly traded companies to disqualify the companies from mining on Federal lands. We are being naive if we think that China won't use any tool and loophole at their disposal to stop mining in the U.S. In any event, this bill is about regulatory certainty so that we can start mining again in America. I have already mentioned this, but we are blessed with resources here in America. A lot of those resources are on Federal lands. This issue has come up about royalties. It continually comes up. People say this bill would allow mining companies to extract valuable public assets without paying any royalties to Americans. I want to remind everybody of something. U.S. mining companies already pay between 40 and 50 percent of earnings in Federal, State, and local taxes, as well as other fees. These taxes are vital to funding school systems, roads, and other infrastructure projects, especially in rural communities. Now, thanks to the Rosemont decision, on top of paying those taxes, companies must pay millions more in litigation. The developers would be required to pay fees for any mill sites established under this bill. These fees would go toward remediating abandoned hardrock mine lands, something my Democrat colleagues have repeatedly pushed for. If we want to encourage investment in safe, responsible, and cutting- edge mining practices that provide billions to the public's coffers and essential materials to the American people, we need to support H.R. 1366. Mr. Speaker, I also want to call attention to a letter we received, signed by 28 organizations from A to Z. It is literally from A to Z. Starting with A, the Alaska Miners Association, American Exploration and Mining Association, Bipartisan Policy Center Action, Battery Materials and Technology Coalition, Colorado Mining Association, National Mining Association, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Women's Mining Coalition, Wyoming Mining Association, and I will round it out with Z, the Zero Emission Transportation Association. These organizations stress the importance of Congress enacting this bipartisan legislation. They stated: This legislation will ensure the U.S. can utilize its vast domestic resources to build essential mineral supply chains. Your efforts to enhance mineral supply chain security, while upholding our leading safety and environmental standards, are crucial. The passage of H.R. 1366 will support the trajectory of innovation in the U.S. and maintain the Nation's economic leadership. Mr. Speaker, this bill is common sense, supporting American industries that are working to bolster our domestic mineral supplies. I also want to draw attention to a letter we received from Nevada democratic Governor Joe Lombardo in support of the Mining Regulatory Clarity Act. His letter states: Advancement of this bipartisan, bicameral legislation is indispensable to the long-term economic resilience of our rural communities and Nevada's ability to help achieve domestic mineral security. Again, this bill is common sense. It is bipartisan, and it bicameral. It supports a key industry for States like Nevada. It should be strongly bipartisan. Mr. Speaker, when we look at the abundant minerals that we are blessed with across the United States, I think of the claim that our colleague from Alaska (Mr. Begich) also says. He talked about the Ambler Road district. Of 50 things listed on the U.S. List of Critical Minerals, he says in the Ambler Mining District, 49 of those exist in abundant capacity to develop, process, and mine. Yet, we are yet to be able to get a road into this area to process these materials. When I look at my home State of Arkansas, we have the largest deposit of lithium possibly in the world. At least 15 percent of the world's lithium is in brine water on public land in the great State of Arkansas. We have all these minerals available all across the country. According to the ``2025 Mineral Commodity Summary'' from the U.S. Geological Survey, the U.S. is 100 percent dependent on imports for 14 critical minerals, many from China and Russia. Mr. Speaker, I have met with the Navaho Nation. They have abundant deposits of uranium they could recover from former mining operations. We are so dependent on uranium imports. The last number I saw, we produced only one-half of 1 percent of the uranium we use for fuel in U.S. reactors. Do my colleagues know where most of that comes from? It comes from Russia and Kazakhstan. These are the kinds of minerals we are dependent on foreign actors for. If my colleagues support growing our domestic supplies of critical minerals, this bill provides the regulatory certainty necessary to strengthen domestic mineral supply chains. If my colleagues support weakening China's global control over minerals, join us in voting for the Mining Regulatory Clarity Act. Let's talk a little bit more about China. We need not only more mining here in America, but we need to do more processing and refining in the U.S. to meet our energy infrastructure and national security and defense needs. The Mining Regulatory Clarity Act will help strengthen domestic mineral supply chains. I have a chart here that shows where we are at with China on rare earth and their monopoly. They control 70 percent of the mining in the world. It is not in China. It is all over the world. My colleague mentioned child slave labor being used to extract cobalt in Africa. It is atrocious where they go and mine these materials and the lack of standards that they have. The environmental, human health, human safety, and human rights that are violated in the mining is also appalling. They take that back to China, and they process 90 percent of it in China. This is all of the world's critical minerals. Then they manufacture 93 percent of the things that are manufactured with critical minerals. If my colleagues want to help China maintain their stranglehold over our critical mineral supply chains, we should oppose this bill. Look no further than the chart behind me. We will see we can't continue to allow China to have the monopoly and the stranglehold on our economy and on our defense that they currently have through the critical mineral supply chain. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this bill. I appreciate my colleague from Nevada (Mr. Amodei) for bringing it to the floor. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 951, I call up the bill (H.R. 1366) to provide for the location of multiple hardrock mining mill sites, to establish the Abandoned Hardrock Mine Fund, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 1366.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1366, to restore clarity and stability to mining operations and support reclamation of abandoned hardrock mine land. First, I thank my colleague from Nevada, Representative Amodei, for his work on this bipartisan legislation. In 2022, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals revoked an approved mine plan of operations for the Rosemont Copper Mine in Arizona. The ruling, known as the Rosemont decision, limited the Forest Service's ability to approve support activities necessary for conducting mining operations on Federal land. This decision upended over 40 years of regulatory and legal precedent. Before developing a mine on Federal lands, an operator must obtain a mine plan of operations from the Forest Service or the Bureau of Land Management. This plan must detail the intended uses of the surface of the mining claim, including waste rock placement, mills, offices, and roads. Under the Rosemont decision, however, operators must prove the existence of a commercially developable deposit on a claim before a plan of operations can be approved. This obvious problem is that the economic viability of a site cannot be determined until after the mine plan of operations is approved by the Federal Government. The ramifications of the Ninth Circuit's decision are substantial. Although the Rosemont decision involved Forest Service lands, it has prompted multiple lawsuits targeting projects on BLM lands based on similar regulations. If allowed to stand, the Rosemont decision will thwart hardrock mining projects across Federal lands, further jeopardizing domestic mineral supply chains, energy security, and national security. Mr. Amodei's bill provides needed regulatory clarity by creating a new category of mill sites for activities ancillary to mining that operators can include within the boundaries of an approved plan of operations. The legislation also creates an abandoned hardrock mine fund to support the reclamation program by using claim maintenance fees to inventory, assess, and remediate abandoned hardrock mines. Simply put, our reliance on foreign critical minerals is one of the greatest strategic vulnerabilities facing our Nation today. America has been truly blessed with vast natural resources. This bill would create the regulatory clarity and stability that companies need to attract investment and responsibly develop these resources. With mineral demand expected to grow exponentially in the coming decades, Congress must safeguard and defend the country's ability to access its own resources. Again, I applaud my colleague Mr. Amodei for this commonsense but urgently needed bill. Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Stauber) the subcommittee chair on Energy and Mineral Resources of the Natural Resources Committee.