Bruce Westerman

Mr. WESTERMAN

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

Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, as Republicans, we care about Americans, American companies, American small businesses, and American workers. My colleagues across the aisle were talking about the record profits of U.S. oil and gas companies. Well, they might need to read the news a little bit deeper and look at the profits of Aramco, the Saudi-owned oil company. There was an article in March of this year that said that Aramco's profits were $161 billion, `` . . . the largest annual profit ever recorded by an oil and gas company. . . .'' Aramco, the Saudi-owned company. The Saudis, the ones President Biden went to and begged them to send us more oil because of his attack on energy here in America. Look who now has the largest profits of any oil company in the history of the world. That is what these kinds of policies add up to. It is a thousand cuts. It is death by a thousand cuts. It is using every rule, every opportunity that they have to attack American energy, which makes America less strong, which feeds into the hands of our adversaries. Instead of us dominating energy, we become dependent on others to supply energy--OPEC and OPEC+ countries. How does Putin fund his war in Ukraine? He funds it with high revenues off his oil and gas. We can change that. We can produce more gas and export it to our allies in Europe, but not under this administration, not when they are promoting rules like the lesser prairie-chicken, the northern long-eared bat. They don't do a 5-year plan, they don't do leases on Federal lands or Federal waters. It is an all-out attack on American energy. This is just another spoke in the wheel, another cut against the American people, against the American economy, and against the future of our country. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson), chairman of the Ag Committee, who knows a little bit about the northern long-eared bat.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Newhouse), the chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, we have heard it said, this won't affect the timber industry. This won't affect the construction activities of the country, and I am sure this was said back in the 1990s when the spotted owl was listed. This won't affect the timber companies. Go tell that to the mill towns on the West Coast that were devastated by this weaponized rule. This, again, is just another attempt by the Biden administration to use whatever tool they can to go against the things that they oppose. It is not based on science. It is based on--it is science, it is political science, that they are trying to push an agenda. I don't understand why they are trying to push this agenda. Why do they not want America to succeed? Why do they not want rural America to be able to supply the goods and the services that this country depends on? It is another obstacle that they will use as a weapon that is not going to help the long-eared bat. It is not going to help other species. It is actually going to hurt them when we stop management on our Federal lands and also on private lands where these bats are located. Again, this is something that is important. It shouldn't be downplayed. I think it is an affront to rural America to say this isn't an important issue, and I think it is an affront to all Americans, even those that believe that breakfast comes from the grocery store and heat comes from the furnace, that don't appreciate the hardworking men and women across this country that provide those things. 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, I yield myself the balance of my time. We are having productive talks with our commonsense friends across the aisle on permitting reform. We made some progress in the debt limit bill, and putting some sideboards on NEPA, on pushing back against these out-of-control agencies that are delaying projects. I would just caution my friends on the other side of the aisle that these rules that are based on a political agenda can cut both ways. Those rules can be used to stop projects that my friends would support, as well as stopping ones that they don't like. It almost seems like there is this atmosphere of stopping everything. It is what I call the preservationist approach. I believe the central question facing us today is do we support a preservationist approach to not just recovering the northern long-eared bat, or do we support a conservationist approach? I wholeheartedly believe that a conservationist approach is what will be most successful in maintaining bat habitat, in maintaining lesser prairie-chicken habitat, and helping all of our endangered species if we will actively work for conservation to create habitat that supports these species. A preservationist approach will do nothing. It is basically this idea that we take a hands-off approach. We put an invisible fence around our public lands and these habitat areas and just hope for the best. I often tell people that when you talk about conservation, you are talking about being a good steward. It is like being a gardener. It is like taking care of what you have got, leaving the Earth in a better place than you found it for future generations. A preservationist wants to lock up the natural world and say we are going to keep it here like that piece of art on the wall. I say that conservation is for critters and preservation is for pickles. The only way we preserve the outdoors with nature that is a living dynamic organism--it is like when you pluck a cucumber and you boil it in vinegar and you put it in a jar, you preserve it. That is not going to work for species habitat. It is not going to work for rural America that provides the necessities that our country needs. The preservationist approach benefits no one, least of all the northern long-eared bat. By returning the status of the bat to threatened, Congress will be telling this administration that it believes in conservation, not preservation. Again, I remind this Chamber, this is a bipartisan bill that was sent to the House from a Democratic-controlled Senate. We should pass this CRA, which would put it on President Biden's desk. If he cares about America, especially if he cares about rural America, he should sign this and stop his out-of-control administration. Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of the CRA, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, as a top-ranking State in livestock production, Arkansas is in need of food animal veterinarians like many other places around the country. In 2022, 25 counties within my district applied for designated shortage area status. Of the 25 counties that applied, only 13 were awarded the status. Food animal veterinarians who practice in these areas are eligible to apply for the Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment Program, or VMLRP. Food animal veterinarians are on the decline, and this program is essential to encourage young Americans to consider practicing food animal veterinary. With the 2018 Farm Bill set to expire in September of this year, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to consider the importance of the VMLRP Program in addressing the food animal veterinarian shortage that poses a concern to my constituents and many of my colleagues' constituents, and also it is critical to the food supply for our Nation.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Dr. Lalit Verma on his retirement from the University of Arkansas Biological and Agricultural Engineering Department. As a proud alumnus of this department myself, it is my pleasure today to honor Dr. Verma for his distinguished career at the University of Arkansas and everywhere he has studied and taught. He started in India and continued his academic career at Montana State University and the University of Nebraska. He spent time teaching in Bangkok, in South Dakota, and even made his way down to Louisiana where he spent time at LSU. Thankfully, he made it to Arkansas, where for 23 years, he has left his most significant mark on academia. Dr. Verma has done an incredible job leading the department and has served in various other organizations, such as ASABE. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Dr. Verma for his distinguished career and wish Dr. Verma and his wife Aruna well in their future endeavors and as they spend more time with their two grandchildren. Food Animal Veterinarian Shortage

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to congratulate Linda Rushing on her retirement from her leadership role as vice chancellor at the University of Arkansas at Monticello College of Technology- Crossett. Linda has worked tirelessly for almost five decades to serve her community through dedication to teaching, student administration, and academic leadership. Linda began her career at Forest Echoes Vocational Technical School in 1975 where she was hired as a business instructor. She continued to serve this institution through 1987 when she was named director of the school. When Forest Echoes Vocational Technical School merged with UAM to become UAM-CTC, she was named vice chancellor, where she has served for 20 years. Linda's commitment to excellence and the success of her faculty, staff, and students at the UAM College of Technology-Crossett has immensely benefited the greater Arkansas community. Her passion for serving others in leadership has cultivated a campus environment in which students can thrive and one that has served the workforce needs of southeast Arkansas and its communities. I congratulate Linda on a commendable career of leadership and public service and thank her for all she has done for the State of Arkansas. Congratulating Joe Fox on His Retirement

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I also rise today to congratulate my good friend, Mr. Joe Fox, on his retirement. Joe has had a successful career in forestry in my home State of Arkansas as State forester, directing the Forestry Division of the Arkansas Department of Agriculture. In Arkansas, Joe Fox and forestry are synonymous. He brings to the table a depth of experience, having served as president of the Arkansas Forestry Association, chairman of the Arkansas Forestry Commission, and president of the National Association of State Foresters. I express my sincere thanks to Joe for his service and dedication to the State of Arkansas, his knowledge of forestry, and his contributions to the industry. I am proud to say that Arkansas serves as a blueprint for forest management for the rest of the country, and that has been enhanced by the service and leadership of Joe Fox. Without a doubt, through his work in forestry and conservation, Joe has left a legacy for future generations, not only in the example that he set but also a tangible one: Our forests are better off for our kids and grandkids because of Joe Fox. Mr. Speaker, I will leave with you a famous Joe Fox quote: ``Trees are the answer. Now, what is your question?'' I couldn't agree more. Arkansas Is a Wonderful State

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, Arkansas celebrated its statehood last week. Arkansas became the 25th State of the United States on June 15, 1836. Arkansas is a wonderful State with a rich history, breathtaking natural beauty, and vibrant communities. From the gorgeous Ozark Mountains to the mighty Mississippi River, Arkansas is a State of limitless opportunities. Arkansas has changed and flourished since its entry into the Union, leaving its imprint on the history of our country. Arkansas has experienced significant events, overcome barriers, and built a strong and resilient community to be proud of. From the Delta blues to the world-renowned Hot Springs National Park, our State provides a diverse range of activities that reflect our distinct past. Let us continue to honor Arkansas' diverse culture, customs, and people. Protecting Our Territories and Friends Is Paramount

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, the United States stands as a beacon of freedom with a mission to protect the inalienable rights for which many have given their lives. This mission rings from the mountains to the prairies, across our oceans, and across the globe. This month, the Indo-Pacific Task Force was assembled to evaluate Chinese attempts to usurp our interests in the Pacific. China is a threat to our democracy, and they are attempting to gain a foothold not only in Cuba but also within our territories across the Pacific and Indo-Pacific regions. To combat this hostility, our bipartisan team was assembled to support our territories and friends in the Freely Associated States to counter the communist influence. Protecting our territories and our friends is paramount. I ask Congress to engage in this effort fully, heed the suggestions of the Indo-Pacific Task Force, and work together to strengthen our territories and deter Chinese influence in the Pacific and here at home.

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Newhouse not only for his leadership here tonight in setting up the Special Order but also his leadership on the Western Caucus, which is a voice for us on not just Western issues but rural issues all across the country. I am honored to be a part of the Western Caucus even though I reside in Arkansas, which I do say at one time was the Western frontier. Over its 50-year life, as has been discussed, ESA has gone from being a law geared toward recovering at-risk species through conservation and has now become a weapon to control land and activities through a misguided concept of preservation. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important that we take a minute here and look at the difference between conservation and preservation. Conservation, which the Endangered Species Act was built around, is the idea of being a good steward of the resources we have, of taking care of and tending to the habitat of these endangered species. It really is like being the gardener of the habitat. Preservation is this idea that you can preserve something in the natural world, and you really can't do that. The way you preserve something that is living, Mr. Speaker, is, for instance, take a cucumber. You boil it in vinegar, and you preserve it as a pickle. Mr. Speaker, what I want to say tonight is that conservation is for critters; preservation is for pickles. The Endangered Species Act, as it was written in 1973, was about conservation and taking care of these at-risk species. I went back to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, and I want to read here what the people who came before us set forth in Congress in the findings of the Endangered Species Act. The very first finding was that ``various species of fish, wildlife, and plants in the United States have been rendered extinct as a consequence of economic growth and development untempered by adequate concern and conservation.'' They pulled that out in the very first of their findings. It goes on to say: ``The United States has pledged itself as a sovereign state in the international community to conserve to the extent practicable the various species of fish or wildlife and plants facing extinction.'' Then look at the purpose of the Endangered Species Act, Mr. Speaker, and I quote directly here: ``The purposes of this chapter are to provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved, to provide a program for the conservation of such endangered species and threatened species, and to take such steps as may be appropriate to achieve the purposes of the treaties and conventions set forth in subsection (a) of this section.'' Our men and women who came before us knew that protecting endangered species was all about conservation. The Endangered Species Act was actually passed as a call to action and conservation, but it has devolved into a weapon for stagnation and leverage for political activism. The irony is that a misused ESA actually does more harm than good to the animals and plants that it was put in place to protect. As chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, I have four guiding principles that form my priorities, and they are access, conservation, innovation, and transparency. In my view, the ESA falls short of all four. The ESA often denies access to our public lands and negatively impacts private property rights. The ESA denies access. The ESA fails at conservation, as has been mentioned many times here, as only a miniscule--less than 5 percent--of listed species have ever been delisted. It has already been brought out that the Endangered Species Act is a modern-day example of the ``Hotel California.'' ``You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.'' In addition, the act disincentivizes innovation and private investment while at the same time lacks transparency. We have cases of private landowners who are doing conservation and trying to take the actions necessary to help the habitat for species, and when those species get listed, it is always: ``Hands off. Don't touch it. We are going to preserve it.'' That just doesn't work, and it is not ever going to work. The example is in the dismal recovery rate the way the ESA is being implemented. We have made reforming the ESA a major part of the committee's business. If we wish to truly help threatened and endangered species, then we must strongly support science-based habitat management, and we cannot tolerate the weaponization of the ESA for political activism. So far this Congress, the Natural Resources Committee has held two legislative hearings on bills that address fundamental flaws with how the ESA is being implemented. These bills include three Congressional Review Act resolutions designed to provide oversight of Biden administration rulemakings that represent the true excesses of the ESA. Each of these CRA resolutions has been passed by the U.S. Senate on a bipartisan base. In addition, three other bills heard by the committee deal with species that have long been recovered, the grizzly bear and the gray wolf, as have been mentioned. These species have been prevented from being delisted due to persistent litigation by activist groups. Even with Republican and Democratic administrations saying these species have been recovered, they are still on the list. Following these hearings, the committee held a markup on April 27 that resulted in all six bills being reported favorably by the committee. I ask all of my colleagues to join in supporting these measures. This is just the beginning. This Congress and the Natural Resources Committee will bring forth policies that promote transparency, science- based decisionmaking, flexibility, and voluntary conservation within the ESA. It is my desire to have a hearing and, hopefully, a bipartisan markup on legislation to allow the restoration of America's wildlife habitat. Focusing on wildlife habitat restoration is definitely the ounce of prevention worth many pounds of cure when it comes to species recovery. I look forward to working in partnership with Chairman Newhouse and the Western Caucus to ensure that we continue to move the ball forward on bringing much-needed reform to the ESA. It has not been reauthorized in 50 years. Maybe we need to rewrite it and put it up for reauthorization. Again, Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman so much for his leadership.

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the service of Pastor Amelio P. Howard of Pine Bluff, Arkansas. Pastor Howard received his calling to the ministry in March 1989 and has served as Pastor of Grace Temple Missionary Baptist Church since being installed as Pastor on May 2, 1993. Answering the spiritual call to service leads so many people to a rewarding and prosperous life, and that can certainly be said for Pastor Howard. He has upheld his Christian duty to his God, to his family, and to his church of believers for 30 years. That long and steady leadership has certainly changed countless lives for the better, and the Pine Bluff community can be proud of Pastor Howard's commitment to them and to his faith. Grace Temple Church's motto is, ``We Are The Friendly Church That Loves People.'' That motto is lived by Pastor Howard daily. He has created a church community that embraces, with love and grace, everyone who is guided by God. We can all learn from the Church's motto and from Pastor Howard's faithfulness. As a cornerstone of the Pine Bluff community, I know that I am joined by many in saying to Pastor Howard, ``well done, good and faithful servant.'' He has earned the respect of his community, and I am proud to share his example with the people of the United States of America today. Mr. Speaker, I thank Pastor Howard for his 30 years of service to his church and his community in Pine Bluff.

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Clerk be authorized to make technical corrections in the engrossment of H.R. 1, to include corrections in spelling, punctuation, section numbering and cross-referencing, and the insertion of appropriate headings.

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the distinguished career of longtime law enforcement Officer L.C. ``Buckshot'' Smith of the Camden Police Department. This week, at 93 years old, Officer Smith will be retiring after over 60 years of invaluable service to the people of Camden, Arkansas. Officer Smith's dedication to protecting and serving the people of his community goes deeper than just his badge; it's in his heart. His true character has been evident through the relationships he's built within the community he's served for so long. Throughout his record- long career, Officer Smith has treated everyone in Camden with the utmost fairness and respect. He's held the nickname ``Buckshot'' for most of his life, and everyone in Camden knows him as such. While he will surely be missed by the Camden Police Department, his 60-plus years of service will be remembered forever. Officer Smith is a beloved member of the community, and his legacy will go down in history as one that was built on the Golden Rule to treat others as you would want to be treated. I'm proud to recognize Officer L.C. ``Buckshot'' Smith for his historic career in law enforcement, and I want to thank him for making such a deep and lasting impact on his community, the 4th District of Arkansas, and our country. I hope his record of service will be an inspiration to all who follow in his footsteps.

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chair, this amendment says that the sense of Congress is that the royalty rates should be 12\1/2\ percent, which was the royalty rate before the very misleading and misnamed bill, the Inflation Reduction Act, was passed by my colleagues on the left. We all know that it wasn't an Inflation Reduction Act, and they publicly call it their climate bill. President Biden has called it the climate bill. The increase in the royalty rates was simply another way to attack our energy resources here in America. The Democrats know that. The Biden administration knows that. The officials in the Biden administration know that. In a bill that they call the Inflation Reduction Act, they actually increased inflation by passing a law to say we are going to raise the costs of energy off of Federal lands. It didn't take the market to do it. It was done by the law passed by my colleagues across the aisle. If you don't believe what I am saying, take the word of the Biden administration. Earlier this month, the Biden administration confirmed this fact in a leaked Bureau of Ocean Energy Management memo on Cook Inlet Lease Sale 258. This is in response to BOEM trying to do an 18\3/ 4\ percent rate, trying to put the highest rate they could on this sale. The memo reads: ``A 16-2/3 percent royalty may be more likely to facilitate expeditious and orderly development of OCS resources and potentially offer greater energy security.'' The Biden administration knows this. They know that the lower the royalty rate, the more likely we will have energy security and the more likely we will develop our resources. They choose to use the highest rate possible to do everything they can to attack American energy, to attack American jobs. It is putting Russia and OPEC over the American people because we are still going to use energy. We are not using less energy. We are just using it from different sources. Laws like this that were passed on a partisan basis last Congress, that were signed into law by the Biden administration, simply put these bad actors over the American people. It is time we lower energy costs, pass the Lower Energy Costs Act, and pass it with this great amendment by my friend from Tennessee. I support the amendment.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I thank the ranking member and appreciate bipartisan support on this very important amendment. I think this is a sign that we are making progress. This is a sign that America is coming together to stand up against the Chinese Communist Party. We need to stand up not only against them but we need to continue standing up against Russia, against OPEC. That is what H.R. 1 does. It is a bold step in the right direction, and this is a small part of it. I commend the gentleman from Tennessee for crafting this amendment and for getting it made in order. I support the amendment for a very good reason: We simply cannot let the Chinese Communist Party continue to dominate and take control of not only mineral supply chains but energy supply chains as they are trying to make a move in that area as well, where they are cozying up with the Saudis. They are working with Russia to buy the oil and gas that we have banned from there. Their objective is dominance. They have made great strides in the minerals area, and they are working very hard to do that in energy. The way we push back against China and the CCP is we produce our energy and minerals here, and we, for sure, don't let China come to America and own any kind of lease on Federal lands or private lands. We produce it ourselves. We send it to our allies. There was a delegation recently in Germany, and the message they brought back from Germany was gas equals peace. They want us to send them our gas, and we have ample supplies of it. We just need the pipelines. We need the ports. We need the LNG facilities. We need the vessels to send gas to Europe that is much cleaner than the gas they are getting from Russia. It will help bring peace in Europe if they can get more of our energy here. Mr. Chair, I again commend the gentleman, and I support the amendment.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for bringing this amendment that makes very clear a stark reality that we don't need the China Communist Party. America does not need the CCP. They need us to buy the goods they are producing. They need us to buy the minerals that they are mining out of mines they have developed with child slave labor in Africa. They need us to buy the stuff they are producing with slave labor in China. But we don't need them, and we sure don't need their money here. I appreciate the ranking member realizing that. I appreciate that the people are speaking. The House of Representatives is the voice of the people, and I believe this is how America feels. But we need to go further. We need to put actions to our words. We need to show the CCP that America is strong, that we have our own resources, that we can develop these resources better than they can develop them. We can put these resources out on the world market. Instead of being dependent on others, we can be the ones exporting our goods, growing wealth and jobs here and being a deterrent to the spread of communism, the spread of dictatorships, and all of those things that we as Americans deplore. At the end of the day, this is about freedom and about promoting those values that our country was founded on. Mr. Chairman, again, I support this amendment. I appreciate the gentleman bringing it.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, again, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for yielding. I do rise in support of this amendment. H.R. 1 would allow non-Federal entities to provide money to certain Federal agencies to improve permitting efficiency. This good-governance amendment, offered by my friend from Pennsylvania, would require the Secretaries who accept this money to report on where it came from and how much was provided. I think there is some confusion about the intent of what is in H.R. 1 about speeding up permitting. Mr. Chair, before I came to Congress, I did engineering work for over two decades. I am a professional engineer, so I worked on a lot of projects where permits were required. Fortunately, we were working with State permitting agencies, and we would hear the same argument from the State permitting agencies: We don't have enough resources and enough people to do these permits. It is going to take longer. A lot of States have programs where they allow the entity trying to attain the permit to pay money to the agency so their employees can work overtime. It is really a way to increase the resources and get more out of the resources. It is not degrading the environmental protections at all. It is just moving the process forward at a faster rate. That is what the intent of H.R. 1 is: to move permitting at a faster clip so we can build all kinds of energy; so we can build solar farms and windmills and high-voltage transmission lines; so we can build pipelines; so we can extract minerals and resources here in America. We can process those and we can manufacture things from them. This is important to making our country a leader in the world by overcoming the position we are in with China on minerals and the position we are in with Russia and OPEC. Mr. Chair, I support the underlying principle in the bill, and I support the good-governance amendment by my friend from Pennsylvania.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this amendment. As we know, this bill is about permitting streamlining, including for domestic mineral projects. The underlying bill allows for mining projects that have received funding under the Defense Production Act to be placed on the existing FAST-41 permitting dashboard. My colleague's amendment states that mineral projects that contribute to certain technologies, such as electric vehicles, cannot be placed over and above other mined projects. This amendment also supports responsible deployment of funds under the Defense Production Act. Mineral production is vital to our national security, and H.R. 1 creates multiple opportunities to streamline the process for mineral development. Mr. Chair, I recognize at this time the Natural Resources Committee staff who worked tirelessly to advance H.R. 1, the Lower Energy Costs Act. I thank Ashley Nichols, Rebecca Konolige, Rob MacGregor, Tom Connally, Chris Marklund, Rebekah Hoshiko, Madeline Bryant, Kiel Weaver, Aniela Butler, Murray Miller, Sophia Varnasidis, Will King, Nancy Peele, and Vivian Moeglein. I also thank the Members of the Republican Conference and their staff for all the work that they have put into this legislation. This has really been a team effort to get this bill to the floor in a record amount of time to address an issue that is very prevalent in our country: to lower energy costs, to make America energy independent, to increase our national security, to break supply chains on China, and to make America be the leader of the world in the future. H.R. 1 is the first step to that, and we should be proud to have put it on the floor. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and to support the underlying bill.

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 2 p.m. on Monday next.

Mr. WESTERMAN

Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Chair, I rise in support of this amendment. The provisions of this bill, such as Representative Graves' BUILDER Act, would streamline the inefficient and costly NEPA process. It is costly in more than just dollars. It is costly to our environment. It is costly in human lives. As the gentleman explained, we can do better managing our forests. When we keep these forests healthy, we are protecting human life. We are protecting property. We are also protecting the very, very thing that does more to support and help the environment than anything else, and it is our forest. It is a tragedy that we send up so much of our forest in smoke. This NEPA process, although it is streamlining, will help to produce more domestic energy. It will also help to build infrastructure. It will help to take care of our national forest and Federal lands. Madam Chair, this is a good amendment. I support it, and I encourage others to support it.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman not only for yielding me time but for bringing another commonsense and good amendment that makes H.R. 1 even a better bill. As he mentioned, similar provisions were enacted in 2018 to allow electric transmission or distribution facility operators to remove hazard trees that can threaten infrastructure and start a catastrophic wildfire. That is what this amendment was built on. Madam Chair, I have been to California. I have been to South Lake Tahoe. I have seen the efforts and the fruits of the labor in the field from the work of my colleague from California (Mr. LaMalfa) and our colleague Mr. McClintock, who worked so hard to be able to get this provision in previous legislation. This has been used to thin the timber on power lines. Actually, these provisions have helped stop wildfires from spreading. This works. This should be added to, and we should be doing it everywhere we can to prevent these catastrophic wildfires like the folks in California and other parts of the West see all too often. Madam Chair, I support this amendment, and I encourage everyone else to support it.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Chair, this amendment requires local units of the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, and Forest Service to open job positions related to permitting or natural resources, including at local high schools, community colleges, universities, and other institutions. Madam Chair, I just have to commend the gentlewoman's district. I was recently in the town of Hobbs, New Mexico, and I got to visit an amazing facility called CTECH that is used to educate future workers in that area. I have seen a lot of career and technical education facilities, and this one is second to none. It was funded by the industry in the oil and gas business. They gave back to the community and built this remarkable facility. I believe they said over 1,000 high school students per year are using this facility. These are the places that are educating these future workers, and these jobs should be advertised there. We have heard from multiple sectors, including in the energy, mining, and renewable energy spaces, about the permitting challenges they face, and those challenges are magnified by a lack of sufficient qualified personnel in State and local land management offices. This amendment tasks the administration with performing outreach to local schools and other institutions to help fill open positions in their local offices. While it is far from a total solution to the permitting challenges in our country, this amendment could help improve permitting backlogs and provide employment opportunities at the local level, including in rural areas. Madam Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for her amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.