Colorado Outdoor Recreation and Economy Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CURTIS. Madam Chair, before I begin, I would like to list the number of areas where I likely agree with my good friend from Colorado (Mr. Neguse).

We share a State, a boundary, and our States are beautiful and full of public lands and recreational opportunities and areas that are majestic and are great treasures in our wonderful country.

I believe personally that strong, pragmatic legislation to solve these local land managements is very important and far superior to efforts like the Antiquities Act. I thank my colleague for the years that have gone into this bill and his personal time to build consensus in the area.

I found myself in his position just several months ago, offering a bill in my State. I believe the Congressman supported that bill, and I thank him for that support. It was a million acres of public land designation in my State. While not everybody got what they wanted, we were able to approach it from a prospect where I was able to get ranchers, environmentalists, outdoor enthusiasts to support that bill.

The major difference between our two bills and why I stand today is that, on my bill, I was able to claim support from my local county commissioners. Every elected official in the State, my Governor, the State legislature, and the entire delegation of Utah were able to support that.

While I want my friend from Colorado to succeed in his endeavor, I feel moving this bill without the support of the entire delegation and its members who represent the impacted land is a mistake.

I am told that half of the Colorado delegation opposes this bill, including a Member who represents 65 percent of the land covered by the bill. While I applaud the consensus that has been put into this, I don't believe there is enough consensus to get this bill across the finish line and into law.

With that said, in anticipation of the gentleman from Colorado's question, if this amendment passes, yes, I will support his bill. However, that is my second choice, and I think a poor, distant second choice to my first choice, which is that we would be able to find consensus with the other members of the delegation and move forward.

I can't support a bill that lacks the consensus needed to continue through the Senate process, and I truly hope that Mr. Neguse and Mr. Tipton can work together to work out their remaining concerns.

I have had other Members of Congress make proposals in my district, especially in San Juan and Emery Counties. I know firsthand that proposals made in another Member's district sometimes can cause problems. In fact, in my case, it has made it more difficult to resolve those public land issues.

Similarly, on a practical level, any proposal that is not supported by all Members of Congress who represent that area doesn't have the consensus to get signed into the law. We all have a duty to represent these local communities in Congress, and that consensus is vital for success in any public lands bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Chair, I would like to reemphasize my praise for the Congressman from Colorado. The consensus that he mentioned is not a simple thing and should be applauded.

I simply make a plea and request that the gentleman will continue to seek for that consensus, and particularly that of my colleagues and particularly his colleagues from Colorado, to see if he can get that final consensus needed to push this across the finish line.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source