Introduction of the McIntire-Stennis Act District of Columbia Equality Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, today, I rise to introduce the McIntire- Stennis Act District of Columbia Equality Act, which would amend the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act (Act) to make the District of Columbia eligible for funding. The District is treated as a state under federal programs, with a few exceptions, most of them simply oversights or failures to update. This legislation would rectify the exception in this Act, ensuring equitable treatment for the District and allowing the District to benefit from the funding opportunities available under the Act.

The Act provides U.S. states and territories with formula funds to support state-designated institutions' cooperative forestry research programs. The Act defines ``State'' to include Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands and Guam. The District's notable, but faulty, absence from this definition makes it ineligible for grant funds that would support research at the District's state-supported university, the University of the District of Columbia's (UDC) College of Agriculture, Urban Stability, and Environmental Science, a program that complements the city's ongoing forestry efforts. UDC is the nation's only urban land- grant university.

We appreciate that Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands and Guam are included under the definition of ``State,'' even though, unlike the District of Columbia, their residents do not pay federal income taxes. It would be particularly troubling if the District, whose residents pay the highest amount per capita in federal taxes, which support farm and other federal programs, were to continue to be excluded.

It has been argued that the District should be excluded because of its lack of local timber production. However, the Act says, ``[i]n making such apportionments, consideration shall be given to pertinent factors including'' local timber production. Proximity to timber is, therefore, only one in a non-exclusive list of factors that are part of the larger analysis regarding the apportionments. Excluding the District from the definition of ``State'' merely because it is not located in an area with a timber industry runs counter to the intent of the Act. While timber production can be a factor in determining the amount of state allocations, there is no reason that the District should be excluded from the Act.

We believe, therefore, that the omission of the District must have been the result of an oversight during the original drafting of the Act. However, as you can imagine, this omission has serious consequences for the District, rendering UDC ineligible for these formula grant funds. Passage of this bill would allow students and researchers in the nation's capital to take part in this important forestry program.

I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source