Providing for Consideration of H.R. Sportsmen's Heritage and Recreational Enhancement Act of 2015
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 619 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 619
Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2406) to protect and enhance opportunities for recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Natural Resources now printed in the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. All points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. No amendment to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such amendments are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 619, providing for consideration of H.R. 2406, the SHARE Act, also commonly known as the sportsmen's bill.
The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2406 under a structured rule, with 17 amendments made in order that are roughly evenly split between Democratic and Republican members of this legislative body.
Mr. Speaker, the SHARE Act is an important bipartisan package of proposals that will promote greater opportunities for hunting, fishing, and outdoor recreation, as well as safeguard the rights of hunters, anglers, and recreational shooters.
While similar bills have passed the House in the past two Congresses, the Senate has failed to adopt them, making this legislation long overdue. This is especially true when considering the current administration's ongoing assault on the Second Amendment, as well as their restrictions on access to Federal land. This includes restricting hunting and shooting on Federal lands, where many people go to participate in these time-honored American activities.
The Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation recently stated that roughly 37 million American sportsmen and -women spend over $90 billion annually on outdoor sport activities, highlighting the important economic impact this legislation will have on small businesses across the country that comprise our recreational industries.
Mr. Speaker, these outdoor activities are deeply ingrained in America's heritage and culture, with the values they instill passed down from generation to generation. In fact, according to a 2013 Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation report, hunting, fishing, and shooting are growing in popularity throughout the country, with almost 40 million people over the age of 16 hunting or fishing in the United States. However, over the past 7 years, we have seen the Federal Government continually find ways to block law-abiding Americans from exercising this most fundamental right. People all across my State of central Washington are avid hunters, anglers, and outdoorsmen. Many Americans, especially in the West, look to our vast Federal lands to hunt, fish, and shoot.
Unfortunately, over the past few years, we have seen Federal agencies such as the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management prevent or impede access to Federal lands which should otherwise be available for these purposes. Lack of access to acceptable areas to participate in these activities is often one of the main reasons why sportsmen and -women stop participating in these traditional American pastimes. Ensuring the public has reliable access to our Nation's Federal lands must remain a priority of this Congress.
Mr. Speaker, we should be fostering and growing participation in outdoor sporting activities--rather than trying to create regulatory barriers that drive Americans away from them--which instill important lifelong values and principles.
These include responsibility, firearm safety and conservation, as well as patience, discipline, respect for wildlife, and most of all, appreciation of our country's rich natural heritage and beautiful national parks, forests, and vast wilderness areas.
H.R. 2406 is critical to protecting our way of life and ensuring all Americans have the ability to enjoy outdoor recreation and develop a profound appreciation for our country's marvelous natural landscapes.
This legislation is comprised of a number of provisions that will help provide future generations of Americans with access to our country's Federal lands for outdoor recreation, sport shooting, hunting, and fishing.
The measure will also reaffirm the Second Amendment rights of Americans to lawfully carry firearms on Federal lands.
Additionally, it will help prevent Federal overreach, eliminate regulatory impediments, and protect against the promulgation of new, onerous regulations that impede access or restrict lawful activities on Federal lands.
Sportsmen are natural stewards of public lands and greatly contribute to habitat and wildlife conservation, so I find it difficult to understand the rationale behind many of these Federal decisions.
Mr. Speaker, the SHARE Act also includes legislation that I introduced, the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act, or FLTFA, which authorizes the BLM to sell surplus lands to States, localities, or private entities that can be put then to economically beneficial use.
Since its initial enactment, FLTFA reduced Federal land ownership by more than 9,000 acres over the course of a decade, while also enhancing access for hunting, fishing, and shooting on these Federal lands.
This critical program brings a commonsense approach to land transactions and helps streamline land ownership patterns, all without spending taxpayer funds or adding to the surplus of federally owned property.
Additionally, the bill includes the Recreational Land Self-Defense Act, legislation that protects the ability of gun owners to exercise their Second Amendment rights when they are legally camping, hunting, and/or fishing on property owned by the Army Corps of Engineers.
Like many in Central Washington, I grew up responsibly exercising the right to bear arms, and I am a longstanding advocate for the protection of those rights, which is why I am proud to cosponsor this bill.
In my district, access to Federal lands is of paramount importance, and the SHARE Act will ensure that sportsmen, outdoorsmen, and all Americans wishing to enjoy our treasured Federal parks and forests have the ability to do so.
For this reason, I have also introduced an amendment to the SHARE Act that would require the U.S. Forest Service to publish a notice in the Federal Register, along with a justification for the closure of any public road in our forests.
In Central Washington and across our country, the Forest Service has closed public roads with no prior notification, preventing access to public areas in our region's national forests. Often, these blocked roadways have been in use for decades, and many local residents rely on them for both everyday activities as well as for recreational purposes.
The first indication of a closure should not come when an individual is faced with an impassable roadway, but, rather, through an adequate public notice from the Forest Service, which my amendment would provide.
Our country has a deep and longstanding tradition of using Federal land for outdoor and recreational activities, and protecting the ability of Americans to use our abundant Federal lands for these purposes must remain one of our top priorities in Congress, which is why I am committed to working with my colleagues in the House and in the Senate to advance this much-needed legislation.
Mr. Speaker, for generations Americans have passed down these values to their children and to their grandchildren, which have deeply ingrained hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting in America's heritage and our cultural fabric.
As I said, growing up in Central Washington, I experienced the importance of these values firsthand, and they continue to play an important role in my life to this very day.
The rule we consider here today provides for consideration of legislation that will protect these values, increase opportunities for hunters, anglers, and shooters, and ensure that future generations of Americans have equal opportunity to access and enjoy our Nation's vast public lands.
This is a good, straightforward rule, allowing for the consideration of a critically important measure. I support the rule's adoption, and I urge my colleagues to support the rule as well as the underlying bill.
I would just respond that certainly there are many issues facing Congress today, many important things that we have to consider in many issue areas, but that should not preclude us from addressing a very important issue, and that is access to our national, our Federal lands by sportsmen, by hunters, by fishers.
Protecting the ability of Americans to enjoy our natural abundance of Federal lands, I think, is something that our President Roosevelt, who the distinguished gentlewoman from New York quoted, would be very much in favor of. Certainly he was a proponent of enjoying those same Federal lands.
Any efforts that we can put forth to make sure that we can continue those strong traditions of Americans being exposed to the great outdoors in this country is something that we should do all we can to preserve.
I might note, too, that this is a bipartisan-led effort in the House of Representatives. Passed in the last two Congresses, many of the provisions of this bill have enjoyed overwhelming bipartisan support, and this year we do have a clear path forward, as the committees in the other body across the rotunda are already marking up very similar legislation in their work on this important issue.
So I feel very positive about the direction we are taking, about the bipartisan nature of the effort that we have here before us today, and I think it is an important thing that we need to address, as well as many of the other things that the gentlewoman from New York discussed. But certainly this is something that we can and should move forward.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, just out of courtesy to the gentlewoman from New York, I do have one Member who would like to speak on this bill, if that is okay with you.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEWHOUSE. So, with that, I would be very happy to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Benishek).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Slaughter) for an opportunity to respond, since she already yielded back her time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I do have one more speaker who would like to say a few words on this issue.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wittman), the sponsor of the bill.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, let me first say I very much appreciate the distinguished gentlewoman's indulgence on allowing folks to speak on this issue. As you can tell, it is very important to a lot of people. So I thank her very much for her polite indulgence.
Mr. Speaker, the debate that we have had here today underscores the importance of the legislation that is considered under this rule.
I believe we must take a firm stand against executive overreach on the infringement of Americans' constitutional rights to keep and bear arms by protecting the Second Amendment as well as protecting the public's access to Federal lands for the purposes of hunting, fishing, and sports shooting.
People all across the country are avid hunters, anglers, and outdoorsmen, often utilizing public lands for those purposes, and the SHARE Act will ensure that the Federal Government does not restrict their ability to participate in these activities.
Federal lands represent an important and precious national resource for many mixed-use purposes. We must not tolerate efforts by Federal agencies such as the Forest Service or the BLM to restrict, impede, or prevent access to Federal lands that should otherwise be available for use by our country's outdoor enthusiasts as well as sportsmen and - women.
By adopting this rule, providing for consideration of the underlying bill, the House will be taking an important step toward resolving many of the long overdue issues facing our country's outdoor recreational community.
The SHARE Act will allow the values instilled by hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting to be passed down to future generations of Americans, just as our parents passed them to many of us.
This is particularly important to me because, as a farmer, I consider myself a conservationist, a steward of our resources, and believe we have a responsibility to use our natural resources wisely and with care, preserving them for those who come after.
Mr. Speaker, this is a good, straightforward rule allowing for consideration of a long overdue piece of legislation that ensures future generations have access to our country's Federal lands for outdoor recreation and sporting activities.
I have certainly appreciated the discussion here today, which underscores the importance of this issue to so many people. I believe this rule and the underlying bill are strong measures that are important to preserving our Nation's cultural heritage.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 619 and the underlying bill.
The material previously referred to by Ms. Slaughter is as follows: An Amendment to H. Res. 619 Offered by Ms. Slaughter
At the end of the resolution, add the following new sections:
Sec. 2. Immediately upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order without intervention of any point of order to consider in the House the resolution (H. Res. 624) Directing the Committee on the Budget to hold a public hearing on the President's fiscal year 2017 budget request with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget as a witness. The resolution shall be considered as read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the resolution and preamble to adoption without intervening motion or demand for division of the question except one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget.
Sec. 3. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of the resolution specified in section 2 of this resolution. ____ The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means
This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote against the Republican majority agenda and a vote to allow the Democratic minority to offer an alternative plan. It is a vote about what the House should be debating.
Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of Representatives (VI, 308-311), describes the vote on the previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or control the consideration of the subject before the House being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the majority party offered a rule resolution. The House defeated the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said: ``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first recognition.''
The Republican majority may say ``the vote on the previous question is simply a vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on adopting the resolution . . . [and] has no substantive legislative or policy implications whatsoever.'' But that is not what they have always said. Listen to the Republican Leadership Manual on the Legislative Process in the United States House of Representatives, (6th edition, page 135). Here's how the Republicans describe the previous question vote in their own manual: ``Although it is generally not possible to amend the rule because the majority Member controlling the time will not yield for the purpose of offering an amendment, the same result may be achieved by voting down the previous question on the rule. . . . When the motion for the previous question is defeated, control of the time passes to the Member who led the opposition to ordering the previous question. That Member, because he then controls the time, may offer an amendment to the rule, or yield for the purpose of amendment.''
In Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. It is one of the only available tools for those who oppose the Republican majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the opportunity to offer an alternative plan.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source