Fiscal Year 2021 Prohibition on Mining in the Rainy River Watershed

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, last week the House Appropriations Committee passed the Fiscal Year 2021 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations bill, which I proudly authored as the Chair of the Subcommittee. This bill makes many critical investments in protecting our natural resources and contains several provisions designed to stop the Trump Administration from moving forward on disastrous environmental policies. Unfortunately, one of those provisions is being grossly mischaracterized by some of my colleagues across the aisle, and I claim this time to set the record straight.

I included language within the Interior Appropriations bill that prohibits funds from the bill, for the 2021 fiscal year only, from being spent on reviewing or approving a mine plan within the Rainy River Watershed in Minnesota's Superior National Forest.

First, let me be perfectly clear that this language does not impact the traditional taconite mining that takes place on Minnesota's Iron Range. Mines currently operating under an approved plan would not be affected by this language. Furthermore, there is no iron ore project with a mine plan under review within the entire Superior National Forest.

A search of the Federal Register and the Bureau of Land Management's National NEPA Register show that there is only one mine plan under review within the Rainy River Watershed: the Twin Metals sulfide-ore copper mine. This proposed mine would be on the doorstep of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area (BWCA), putting our nation's most visited wilderness at risk of toxic acid mine drainage.

Anyone suggesting that taconite mining in the iron range is at risk because of this language is either misinformed or misleading their constituents. I crafted this language for one purpose: to stop the Trump Administration from rushing through a deeply flawed plan for a toxic sulfide-ore mine before they are voted out of office this November.

Second, I want to emphasize again that this prohibition is for a single year of funding. Some of my colleagues have suggested that this prohibition would stop all future mine operations. That is simply untrue and suggests a misunderstanding of the way that federal appropriations bills work.

This language protects the BWCA until we are able to work with a more trustworthy administration next year. Multiple Trump Cabinet Members pledged during Congressional hearings to complete the mineral withdrawal study in this watershed. Instead, they abandoned the environmental review after 20 months and have refused to release its results. So clearly, the Trump administration cannot be trusted to review the plans for a mine that could devastate the Boundary Wates wilderness.

Third, some of my colleagues have claimed that stopping this mine plan from moving forward is depriving America of critical mineral resources. I can only assume that those colleagues are unaware of the fact that none of the minerals extracted at the Twin Metals mine will stay in the United States. Twin Metals is wholly owned by the foreign mining conglomerate Antofagasta, who will ship the copper they extract overseas. Earlier this month, in fact, Reuters reported that for the second year in a row Antofagasta has signed contracts to send the copper they mine to China. The Twin Metals mine will not support U.S. national security interests. The copper will be gone, and all Minnesota will be left with is millions of tons of waste rock and acid drainage.

Finally, I want to address the claim that I somehow tried to ``sneak'' this language into my bill. Nothing could be further from the truth. I proudly highlighted this provision in my statements during our subcommittee and full committee markup. I have also repeatedly and publicly informed the Trump Administration during hearings in the Appropriations Committee that their refusal to release the results of the taxpayer-funded study examining the environmental impacts of sulfide-ore copper mining in the Rainy River Watershed was unacceptable, and that any mining plans should not proceed until the study results were released.

If I am trying to be sneaky about this provision, I am doing a very poor job, Madam Speaker.

The people of Minnesota and America deserve a president and representatives that operate with transparency, respect science, and follow our environmental laws. I have done my best to uphold those values in crafting my legislation, and I look forward to working with a new Administration that shares those values and can be trusted with our natural resources.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source