Revolutionary War And War Of 1812 Battlefield Protection Act

Floor Speech

Revolutionary War And War Of 1812 Battlefield Protection Act

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, I do not disagree with my colleague from Oklahoma that we should, as the Federal Government, know more about our assets, know more about our land and buildings, what it costs to manage and maintain them, to operate these properties. It is a reasonable request. Where he is going with this is something we should be working together to develop and perhaps refine the concept of what he is asking for through a freestanding bill. My concern with the amendment, as it is now, is that we have to make sure as we gain this information, we have a way to protect it. Right now it would be the Office of Management and Budget that has sole responsibility for making decisions in terms of military intelligence, Department of Energy facilities, and what gets included within public reports. That concerns me and, therefore, I will be objecting to the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. MURKOWSKI. To follow up with the Senator from New Mexico, we do recognize there is political sensitivity when we are asking for information regarding the military, our intelligence and security information. We want to make sure there are protections there. The Senator from Oklahoma is correct that there is that provision in the bill. But what it does is, it gives the Office of Management and Budget the authority to make the determination as to what will be included in this public report. I would be far more comfortable if it were the Department of Defense that made that determination, not the Office of Management and Budget. Again, the Senator from Oklahoma is correct in pushing us to look to make sure that we know where our assets are and how much it costs to operate and maintain and manage them. We should be looking to that in the future.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, as we conclude the debate on this public lands package, I think it is important to remind colleagues of perhaps a few facts--a little bit of the history as to how we got here.

As the chairman of the Energy Committee indicated, this omnibus public lands package consists of 160 bills and what they represent in terms of the legislation and efforts of communities, of individuals, of groups, of legislators, to come to a point where they may finally be seeing a resolution on the issues they have been working on, and I think it is important to put this into context.

One of the measures in this public lands package that relates to my State is an issue we have been working on--a land exchange--for almost two decades now in an effort to try to resolve it. Through a great deal of compromise with agencies, with public interest groups, and with policymakers, we have legislation that we believe works.

My colleague from Utah, Senator Bennett, has been working on a provision that he, too, acknowledges has been over 10 years in the making. My colleague, Senator Crapo, from Idaho, has been working on legislation that has been 8 years in the process. We on the Energy Committee have been working with Members to try to advance good projects and legislation that work in their respective States.

Our public lands States are a little different from what we see on the East Coast. When you have 60 percent of the land in your State owned by the Federal Government, oftentimes just getting a transaction approved requires an act of Congress. So what we have today in this package, big as it is, is a culmination of countless years of work by lawmakers in this body. It is time that we advance many of these very important measures.

This bill is a very bipartisan measure. It is, as I say, 160 bills, but there are both Republican sponsors and Democratic sponsors. It is the work of a lot of compromise on both sides. All but a handful of these bills within the Energy Committee's jurisdiction were ordered reported by the committee on a unanimous voice vote.

We need to recognize that this is not the work of the 111th Congress. It is not even the work of the 110th. It was before that. This is carryover work in an attempt to take care of a lot of unfinished business.

I am optimistic that this bill will pass both this body and the other body and be finally signed into law. I am also optimistic that the 111th Congress can then make a fresh start with public lands legislation and perhaps find a better way to reach consensus on these types of bills.

I hope the process for consideration of this package today is a harbinger of the future.

The package we have contains language that the House had sought to add to clarify that access to recreation, including hunting, fishing, and trapping, would not be limited by land designations in this bill. This language was bipartisan and bicameral, and the support truly is there.

The amendments Senator Coburn brought before this body--six serious, relevant amendments--while I have not agreed with the specifics of some of those amendments we have considered, I do take the issues and the concerns raised by them very seriously. I always have and will continue to commit to continue to do so in the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources; as we look to legislation in the future, whether it is the issue of prioritization or acknowledging an inventory of what we own, what we are required to operate and maintain is something that is worthwhile to pursue.

Some of the issues that were raised--for instance, that of eminent domain, locking up our Nation's energy resources--these are issues that are clearly legitimate. But I suggest a broad-brush or one-size-fits-all prohibition does not work in the real world.

The bills in this package were carefully evaluated for these and so very many concerns as they went through the committee. The Energy Committee is very concerned. Our focus is on access to our Nation's energy resources. There was that consideration made bill by bill.

The last comment I wish to make is, it has been suggested that somehow or another this lands package is a Federal land grab. In fact, the bill actually transfers over 23,000 acres of Federal land into the private or State sectors through conveyance, exchange or sale. In most instances, the Federal Government is giving more land into private hands than they are getting or the exchanges are of equal acres or equal value.

Again, I will not suggest the process we have gone through has been the easiest. It is difficult when you have the number of bills we have and issues that are contentious and that require a great deal of effort and compromise. But the product before this body today is one where I would agree with our chairman of the Energy Committee, it does help to protect our country's great assets, it does allow for better enhancements of our public lands, and I think it is worthy of consideration by this full body. I encourage its support.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, just to add to the comments of Senator Bingaman, it is appropriate that we acknowledge our staff. I appreciate him doing so. I thank those who worked on the Republican side as well. But I also wish to acknowledge some of the Members on our side who have been very dogged in an effort to reach final compromise on this legislation.

Senator Crapo from Idaho has been diligent in his efforts, working alongside Senator Bennett from Utah and Senator Kyl. I appreciate their efforts in getting us to where we are today.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source