Providing for Congressional Disapproval of the Rule Submitted By the Bureau of Land Management Relating to ``Miles City Field Office Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment''

Floor Speech

Mr. Speaker, we are on the floor this week debating three Congressional Review Act resolutions that would overturn balanced, forward-looking resource management plans, or RMPs, that have been carefully developed over the past 4 years.

Now, with all due respect to my friend and colleague, the chairman, I heard a lot of slogans, a couple of references to Moscow. I will just say that the CRA before this body is very simple. It is an effort by House Republicans to do something that has never been done before in the history of the Congressional Review Act, which is to overturn a resource management plan.

Why, you might ask, Mr. Speaker, do Republicans intend to take this unprecedented step? It is simply because they would like to open up millions of acres in Montana, North Dakota, and elsewhere to coal extraction. That is it, very simple.

We can probably dispense with, I guess, the hour of debate that we are allocated for purposes of these CRAs. It doesn't really get more complicated than that: Balanced resource management plans were developed in consultation with the communities and States at issue, and this Republican Congress has decided that it is of the utmost priority to, via legislative action, overturn resource management plans that, by the way, Mr. Speaker, could simply be reversed with a phone call to the Secretary of the Interior.

Last time I checked, the Secretary of the Interior happens to be the former Governor of North Dakota, so insofar as my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are so invested in overturning this resource management plan, perhaps they should call the former Governor of North Dakota, who now works 2 miles from the U.S. Capitol as the Secretary of the Interior, and ask the agency to follow the process by which a resource management plan is historically reconsidered.

Instead, we are here on the House floor debating a CRA on the resource management plan, a giveaway to some of the biggest mining and oil companies on the planet. That is how House Republicans have decided to spend our time on the floor today.

There are a lot of priorities, Mr. Speaker, that my constituents back in Colorado believe this House should consider. Reversing the draconian and cruel healthcare cuts that House Republicans pushed through just a mere 7 weeks ago is at the top of the list. I can tell you what is not on the list: CRA resolutions to overturn resource management plans so that more coal extraction and mining can be done in Montana. That is not on the list of priorities of my constituents, and I suspect that is the case for the vast majority of Americans.

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the Miles City Resource Management Plan update, it is just important contextually to say that it was a very extensive and inclusive public comment period. BLM provided a 90-day public comment period, two public meetings, a 30-day public comment period, and a 60-day review period for the Governor. BLM directly contacted over 40 private landowners, all, according to BLM, to help refine and guide development of that RMP amendment. That robust public input was instrumental in shaping a plan that reflects the values of the communities it impacts.

I want to go back to, I guess, a core point that the ranking member articulated previously, Mr. Speaker. I wonder if perhaps the chairman knows. It is a fairly empty Chamber here. I don't see any other Members. Maybe he might engage in a bit of discourse here in a colloquy.

I am trying to understand why the CRA is necessary, given that the Interior Department retains the ability to amend and modify these resource management plans in any way that the Secretary deems necessary.

I wonder, Mr. Speaker, if I might inquire through you as to whether the chair could help us better understand why they have decided to pursue the CRA rather than simply amending the resource management plan.

Mr. Speaker, I will reserve for response and that colloquy.

Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, facts matter. Under President Trump, Americans are paying more for their electricity than ever before. Energy costs right now are higher than they have ever been. They are increasing at twice the rate of inflation.

As Republicans preside over an economy in which everything is getting more expensive, spare us lectures about energy costs. Healthcare is more expensive. Groceries are more expensive. Energy costs are going through the roof. Seriously?

Their answer to all of this is more coal. That is it. That is the sum total of the Republican response to the cost-of-living crisis in the United States of America today. From Arkansas to Colorado to Minnesota and everywhere in between, more coal is their prescription, Mr. Speaker.

In Colorado, we certainly don't think that is a prudent approach. I will say I regret that the Speaker didn't indulge me in the colloquy that I had hoped I could engage in with the chairman whom, of course, I greatly respect. Mr. Speaker, he did reveal the plot here in his answer as to what the impetus was for the CRA.

Of course, it is not as simple as amending or modifying the resource management plan. The reason House Republicans are pursuing this tool is to prevent not just this Department of the Interior but any Department of the Interior into perpetuity from issuing a resource management plan that is in any way substantially similar to the one that is at issue here. That is what this is about. That is this effort.

I don't think my colleagues on my side of the aisle will be confused by the chairman's arguments. Just in case, I want to make sure it is crystal clear for the record that a vote in favor of this CRA is not a vote to modify or amend the resource management plan. It is a vote to prevent the agency and subagency, in the case of the BLM, from promulgating any resource management plan that remotely tries to do something similar to what has been done here.

Mr. Speaker, I understand my colleague. Again, on the other side of the aisle, they have their ideological reasons for pursuing that. It is more coal. Again, that is the sum total. It is two words. In my view, I think most Americans would think and agree that this isn't how we should be spending our time.

Mr. Speaker, I was trying to keep track, and I lost track at some point, but my colleague from Minnesota I think said the word ``Biden'' eight times, if I am not mistaken.

Mr. Speaker, if you couple that with references to the prior administration, then that jumps up to 12 or 13.

It is unclear to me when Republicans are going to stop complaining and actually do something to address the challenges that face our country. They spend more time talking about Joe Biden than they do about reducing costs. Every sentence from that side of the aisle, Biden, a verb, an adjective, and more coal. That is essentially the sum total of every sentence.

By the way, my colleagues, I suspect, are watching from their offices. I know that more of my colleagues are going to come to the floor here to engage in debate on, I don't know--how many CRAs are they putting on the floor today, three, four, or five?

That is all we do around here are CRAs. I encourage them as they are watching to, please, when they come to the floor, maybe spend some time talking about their affirmative vision for the country and not so much time talking about the prior President.

Republicans are in charge. Republicans have a majority in the House and a majority in the Senate and the Presidency, and we spend all of our time on the House floor doing CRAs or resolutions of disapproval, the weakest vehicle that this House could consider.

Mr. Speaker, I know you are aware of this, but the House has been on vacation for like the last 6 weeks. Republicans recessed us out of session early, a 6-week vacation for Republicans. Finally, we are back in Washington, September, 10 months into the Trump Presidency, and this is how you choose to spend your time, with resolutions of disapproval and reversing resource management plans for North Dakota?

Of all of the concerns of the people in Arkansas or Colorado, this is the priority?

It is a shame, Mr. Speaker. It is deeply disappointing and disheartening, I suspect to most Americans, to those who might be watching C-SPAN, to learn that this august body in the world's greatest democracy is wasting its time debating resource management plans issued by the prior administration.

Mr. Speaker, I will give a brief closing because, as I said, I think all we are doing today are these resolutions of disapproval, so I am going to have more opportunities, apparently, to make this argument. I encourage my colleagues to dispense with what, in my view, are actually very dishonest arguments about these resource management plans. I think fundamentally they should continue the work that was done by the prior administration through an open and a transparent process.

That is the way these resource management plans are meant to be developed. I get it. I understand that my Republican colleagues have disagreements about the resource management plans. That is understood.

Mr. Speaker, call Secretary Burgum. Call the BLM director. I don't think there is a BLM director 10 months into the administration. Call whoever is running the show over at the BLM now and ask them to reopen the process.

Mr. Speaker, listen to the Tribes, listen to the American people, and update the resource management plan. That is the way it is done.

Using the Congressional Review Act to overturn the plan is the wrong approach. I understand why it may seem easier for Republicans to just bring the hammer down and use this blunt instrument, but all you will be left with, Mr. Speaker, are smashed pieces, and you will forever close the ability of these agencies to protect some of the most treasured lands in our country, lands that belong to the citizens of this country, to you, Mr. Speaker, your children, your grandchildren, and the future generations.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the CRA, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source