Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2025

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, unfortunately, my colleague from Minnesota has offered an amendment which doesn't make sense. I will explain why, Mr. Chairman. The amendment is directed at the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, but there is a fundamental misunderstanding of what is wilderness and how it is designated, what happens in the Superior National Forest, and the way this amendment is drafted.

First, the amendment would prohibit the administration from designating the BWCA as a national monument. When the Antiquities Act was passed by Congress to give the President the ability to protect vulnerable lands that contain valuable scientific, cultural, and historic resources, the BWCA was already protected.

Wilderness, Mr. Chair, is the most protected and restricted designation we have for public lands. The level of wilderness that it affords far exceeds what the national monument designation offer is. What I think the Member is attempting to do, and I might disagree with him but he has the right to do it, would be to leave out the Boundary Waters Canoe Wilderness Area and just talk about the Superior National Forest which is not part of that wilderness area, and then his amendment would make sense. I wouldn't support it, but his amendment would make sense.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, as I said, the gentleman from Minnesota from the Eighth Congressional District and I might disagree on some of those things. I can't, in good conscience, support this amendment because it is not drafted in a way that would even do what the gentleman would like to do. It is just written wrong.

The Boundary Waters Wilderness Canoe Area is protected. It is wilderness. Any portion thereafter that is in the amendment would be parts that are not part of the Boundary Waters Wilderness Canoe Area. So by having that in the amendment, the amendment is not drafted properly.

For that and other reasons, I just close with this: I would urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment. We look forward to, in the future, having this discussion maybe next year with an amendment which the gentleman and I could disagree on the principle and not the way it is drafted.

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

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, again, this amendment, unfortunately, like the last one, is flawed. In fact, in my opinion, it is not even relevant. It prohibits the administration from using funds to expand the Boundary Waters wilderness.

I want to be clear. The executive branch cannot expand wilderness, period. They can't. Only an act of Congress, only we can expand wilderness. Unless Republican House leadership is planning on bringing a bill to the floor to expand the BWCA wilderness boundaries or a bill allowing the administration to unilaterally designate public lands as wilderness area, this amendment makes no sense.

Like the past amendment, this amendment is directed at the Boundary Waters Wilderness Canoe Area. Unfortunately, they betray a fundamental understanding of what wilderness is and how it is designated.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, the school public trust lands that are being purchased are not being purchased to be put into wilderness. They can't be. The Forest Service can purchase them, and the county can purchase them if they are up for sale. The State of Minnesota has a say in it. I served in the State house. However, the Biden-Harris administration cannot--cannot--even if purchased designate them as wilderness unless we, as the Congress, the House and Senate, vote affirmatively to do so and then send a bill to the President's desk.

I understand the passion. It is clear that my colleague, the gentleman from the Eighth Congressional District, and I have different points of view on the BWCA and its protection of this pristine water up there, but these two amendments just bring the Boundary Waters Canoe Wilderness Area into a political fight that it doesn't belong in because the amendments are not drafted properly.

Mr. Chair, I am probably ready to close, but I am going to reserve the balance of my time for now.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, once again, I understand what the gentleman is attempting to do, but the way this is drafted doesn't do it.

I want my colleagues to think hard about amendments that fundamentally represent the laws that govern wilderness areas, including the Boundary Waters.

I hear you loud and clear that you don't agree with decisions made by this current administration, but the decisions that you are talking about into the future are not part of the Boundary Waters Wilderness Canoe Area.

Mr. Chair, for that reason, I reject this amendment because it is technically flawed, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source