tv House Rules Committee on 2018 Federal Spending Part 2 CSPAN September 6, 2017 7:59pm-9:42pm EDT
about an hour and a half, 9:30 p.m. eastern time. the rules committee today reviewing the education, interior, commerce and justice department departments. again, a break now, but we expect members back at 930 eastern time and our live coverage will continue then on c-span3. while the committee is recessed, we'll show you some of the meeting by the rules committee from earlier today. >> this committee will come to order. yes, ma'am. i'm sorry? >> i was going to ask you later. thank you. >> you can ask me whatever you want to, betty. welcome to the rules committee. we are continuing the conversation that we have with members, ranking members,
subcommittee chairman and we are going to move our appropriations process further today. my colleagues from the democratic party have asked me to go ahead. we're in the middle of the afternoon. they know what's going on. they're well represented, but some of our members are out and about. you know, we're in the middle of some hearings, some things that are going on with sensitive matters, and so we're going to keep pursuing this. today we will resume amendment testimony on hr 3354, make america secure and prosperous appropriations act 2018. the committee will be taking general and amendment testimony on the commerce, justice, science and related agency division, financial services and general government division, the
interior, environment and related agencies division, and the labor, health and human services, education and related agencies division of the bill. once again, if you're planning to offer an amendment, this message is for members and offices that may be listening at this time. if you're planning on offering any amendment testimony to divisions a, c, d or f, we will be taking that testimony following these first two panels, which will be introducing their product, then subject to amendment. members are advised that they can also submit testimony. we're not requesting that everyone come here. we are requesting that if you would wish your testimony to be included into the record, it needs to be given to the rules committee or to a ranking member and her staff. republicans to the front office.
so without anything further i do want to welcome you. we're delighted that you're here. chairman cal verdict, ranking member mccull lum to testify on the interior and the environment division of the bill, as well as chairman john culver son from houston, texas. mr. culver son, yesterday we spent the appropriate amount of time acknowledging not only the sacrifice, the bravery, the working together, all groups of people on a common cause of saving lives, taking care of children and elderly people and those in harm's way, but we also offered elsee hastings a happy 81st birthday yesterday. so you're a day late, but not a dollar short. you'll have a chance to tell alsee happy birthday. but we spent time yesterday to
acknowledge that and as a member of that houston community, we want to -- i'm a suburb of houston. i live in dallas. but i want to say that we are trying to do our part in dallas to take care of people from houston and most sincerely we appreciate and respect all the people there and what they're going through. so we're going to also have joe certificate ran notice who saw me this morning and reminded me he would be here at 2:00 to testify on the commerce, justice, science and other related agencies of the bill. so thank you to each of you for being here. without objection, it will be read into the record and before we go any further, i want to ask the gentleman from florida if he would choose to have any opening statement or comments? gentleman is recognized. >> mr. chairman, thank you very much and thank you for the birthday greetings both
yesterday and today. i'm just another a little older and deeper in debt. in my view, mr. chairman, the bill before us, i'm delighted that i'll see the witnesses that are here, all of them are people that i have great respect for and i recognize their hard work. but i do believe that this bill blindly ignores sound science and would place the health, safety and lively hoods of the american people at risk by slashing critical environmental protection agency and interior department funding for climate change and environmental enforcement. ideological policy riders or continue the assault on our environment and undermining the administration's ability if it were willing to keep our land, water and air clean and to protect threatened species.
yesterday, mr. chairman, i did point out the real irony and richness of the fact that the national ocean anic and as months feerk administration is being funded less, and mr. certificate ran notice and mishow we appointed out to us the significance of that at the time that all of this was prepared, i'm sure harvey wasn't in their eye sites and i'm sure that the hurricane is looming out there, irma, was not a part of the consideration. hopefully we will have some amendment along the way that will assist in coming to reality. also, mr. chairman, over the break i visited one of the lead
facilities this this country on ocean policy, and i don't think it makes good sense to prohibit funds to implement the national ocean policy. impeding local work, which i believe is benefiting the ocean economy, safety and rez yens and a lot of the focus that i have had since i'm in congress deals with coral and former senator mark kirk and i when he was in the house, we had successful legislation that addressed that subject. it's critical, in my view, so i hope some of the shortsightedness is taken up by amendments by republicans and democrats to correct some of that. thank you, mr. chairman. >> judge hastings, thank you so much for your comments. the person to address that would be mr. cull ber son.
mr. cull ber son is very aware of -- and by the way, the country is now also of the two other storms that are progressing towards potentially your home state and other east coast states. and i believe you saw us address that this morning with a little bit more money than what we said we'd do just three days ago. so it does -- a day does matter. no, ma'am does matter. and now that we know what we know, you're going to get a chance to ask those questions. i think the opportunity to advice mr. cull better son gives him a chance to be prepared too. judge, thank you very much. okay. panel, we have spent a good bit of time yesterday and last night. we are interested in a number of
issues, but your presentation about the way you see the world and what you've done, your product to support that, is why you're here today. and quite honestly, we respect and appreciate the hard work that you do day in and day out. i think people recognize that we're up here late hours, long hours. you have been too. and your product and your performance and to your satisfaction is important to us. so mr. cal verdict, start with you. >> thank you, mr. chairman, as reported by the appropriation committee the fiscal year 2018 interior environment bill is funded at 31.456 billion, which is 824 million blow the fiscal year 2017 enacted level and 4.3 billion above the budget request. this legislation makes a concerted effort to prioritize critical needs within our reduced allocation while also addressing specific interests and concerns brought to our
attention through 5,200 member requests. in the interest of time i won't outline all the programs and activities funded in this bill, but i would like to point out a few highlights. the committee has provided robust wild land fire funding in this bill, fire suppression accounts are again fully funded at the ten-year average level and the bill increases fupding for hazardous fuel reduction. the bill funds the payments in lou of taxes program at the fiscal year 2017 inacted level, rural counties in 49 of the 50 states rely on these funds to make up for lost tax revenue. overall funding for epa is reduced by 534 million or 6.5% from last year. the bill continues to invest in water infrastructure and cleaning up contaminated land. these programs help create jobs and spur economic development in communities across the country. this legislation provides 5
billion worth of investment in water infrastructure funding through the wifa program and a clean water and drinking water revolving loan funds. this bill provides increases to accelerate the cleanup of contaminated superfund and brown field sites. the bill provides 2.9 billion for the national park service and increases the construction account by 10 million and maintains increases provided last year to address long-standing park operations and deferred maintenance needs. eve also addressed a number of concerns within the fish and wildlife service accounts. the bill restores core programs and popular grant programs to fiscal 2017 enacted level. it also restores funds to combat international wildlife tracking, protects fish hatch aers from cuts and closures, continues funding to fight evasive muscles and asian karp and reducing the backlog of species that are recovered but not yet delisted.
the bill provides 275 million for the land and water conservation fund, programs that enjoy bipartisan support. the bill also makes critical investments in indian country, a top priority of this committee. it honors our commitment with particular emphasis on indian health, law enforcement, education, and water settlements. i'd like to thank my good friend and ranking member betty mccowell lum for working with me to address these and other critical needs. while we may disagree on some issues, we never are disagreeable and continue to work well together. i'd also like to thank the hard work of our staff on both sides. a lot of time as you mentioned went into this, a lot of late hours, night and weekends to get this bill before us today. mr. chairman, this is a good bill. thank you for the opportunity to testify today. i'm maep to respond to any questions you or members of the rules committee may have.
and happy birthday, mr. hastings and thank you. >> mr. cal verdict, thank you very much. you brought your able ranking member with you. she is, as you are no stranger to the rules committee and she's one of our favorite when she comes up here. the gentle woman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and good to see you ranking member slaughter and of course, happy 81st, mr. hastings. to the members in this room who either have correct family members or directly represent states that have been impacted by the disaster, we work together to serve all americans at their time of need. i appreciate the opportunity today to be before you to discuss division a, the fyi 2018 interior environment and related agencies appropriations bill. i'd like to be clear, however, that i believe consideration of the entire bill on the house
floor should be under an open rule. the traditional process for appropriating legislation is being undermined by the use of the structured rules. furthermore, appropriation bill should be considered independently and not lumped together in these unwielding packages. the omnibus bill continues down a partisan path. the important programs in the interior environment bill suffer from a low 302 b allocation which is devised by the majority in a pros that was neither open or transparent. the subcommittee's allocation is $824 million less than last year's enacted level. a cut of this magnitude short changes the protection of our nation's natural and cultural resources and has real consequences for american families and communities. adequate funding for the interior environment division is at a critical time when the
trump administration is attacking science behind climate change, rolling back regulations to protect clean air and water, and even halting health studies that examine whether some mining practices harm nearby communities. we are at a defining moment in history. our actions to combat climate change now will impact the world that we pass on to our children and grandchildren. we cannot afford to disregard the over welcoming sb tisk evidence that the planet is warm. sea levels are rising and glash yers are melting. last month i residenced firsthand at glashier national park in montana. the park's glash yers are receding at an accelerating rate with just 25 remaining. across the west including glashier the frequency and intensity of wildfires continue to worsen. in fact, this last week wildfire destroyed one of the park's
historic shall az. we've all seen the destruction inflicted by hurricane harvey. as the waters recede, the environmental protection agency will play a key role in keeping americans safe. and once again, we are reminded about the daily importance that environmental protections have on our lives. as members of congress, we must meet our responsibility to adequately fund the epa so it can carry out its mission. and this bill does not do that. the majority has chosen to slash funding to the environmental protection agency by $534 million. the epa is shouldering 65% of the overall cut to this subcommittee. the epa protects human health, safety and ensures clean air and clean water for all of us. this agency's budget is already $2.2 billion below fy 10 levels and it is simply irresponsible to cut the epa any further.
i also must express my concern and disappointment with partisan riders in this bill that pan der to special interests at the expense of the public good. they jeopardize the protection and recovery for vulnerable species, restrict protection of our oceans, undermine clean water and clean air safeguards and even prevent the development of renewal energyment these riders do not belong in this bill. but despite my disappointment in these riders and lack of an open floor process and a wholey inadequate allocation for the interior environment bill, i want to be clear in expressing my appreciation for the hard work of chairman culvert, his staff and the democratic staff and the work that all of our subcommittee members do together. it has been my pleasure to work on this bill, and i thank him for his open and collaborative approach. i'm particularly proud of our subcommittee's none partisan, and i say nonpartisan effort to
address the issues facing native americans despite our low allocation, this bill recommends an increase of $108 million over fy 2017 enacted levels for programs critical to indian country. the health, education and safety in triable communications is a federal responsibility that our whole subcommittee takes very seriously and that is one very bright spot in this bill. mr. chairman, i request that when hr 3554 it comes to the floor it be considered under an open rule so the house can have a thorough informed debate on this pill. the american people deserve every consideration of federal funding and policies that affect the health of our environment and our communities and are fundamental to the legacy we leave for future generation. i want to thank you and members of the rural committee to testify on hr 3345 together and i look forward to working with
my chairman as we move forward on the floor. >> mismccull lom, thank you very much not only for your testimony but for your work with mr. cal verdict and this staff that on both sides who worked very diligently. we heard the story yesterday about from the chairman and ranking member low we about them working together. not agreeing on everything, but them finding common ground in lots of areas. and i appreciate you being here with mr. cal verdict to do exactly that today. medical cull ber son, we are dplietd that you are here and the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and ranking member slourt. i want to thank you all for the prayers and support you've offered the people of houston and southeast texas, southwest louisiana. and for bringing the hurricane harvey relief bill so quickly to the floor. that's going to make a big difference in helping to relieve some of the people -- >> it really does and we need to
recognize that we have puerto rico directly in that irate now. and so as we speak houston, southeast texas, louisiana, we'll have to remember florida, we'll have to remember virgin islands, we'll have to remember puerto rico, which is an american territory, which is very important to us. and our two members who are from those territories know that they -- we have an active process involved in that too. and i know you recognize that. >> absolutely. >> above all. >> and mr. you know all of the people -- >> mr. certificate an notice reminded me of this this morning. >> yes, sir. he reminded me. as if i needed reminding. i do: no. no. he was talking about one of our
territories. >> we thank you very much for the support. as chairman of the science and proepgtsz committee i'm here to explain the cjs bill and ask that you provide an appropriate rule for its consideration as part of the larger appropriations package. i spent the last week in neighborhoods out in boats. >> do you want a cuough drop. >> it's been a rough week. as you know, our cjs subcommittee has jurisdiction over a diverse range of agencies that are responsible for combatting terrorism, he is speej age, forecasting the weather, exploring space and advancing science. the cjs division of the bill we worked in arm on provides $54 billion in discretionary funding.
we look forward to an overall budget agreement that we hope will give us a little more roomment thank you very much. we have in the limited allocation we have available to us because of the size of the debt and the deficit, we're very conscious of that working hard to try to find ways to limit federal spending and balance all of these priorities. but with a limited funds that we have, we have allocated our constituents very precious and hard earned tax dollars to fund priority programs while reducing funding for activities that we deem were less essential to the operation of federal government. and one of our principle priorities, mr. chairman, and rarnging members, was law enforcement. wemtd to milwaukee sure the fbi is well taken care of so the fbi has been provided with $8.8 billion. it's an increase that will enable them to fight cyber crime, terrorism and espn age and we have expressed funding for federal law enforcement across the board to enhance their ability to protect the nation against violent crime, gang members, to combat human
smuggling, human trafficking. unfortunately, houston, texas is a hub for human trafficking, which is a heartbreaking and our bill does everything we can to fully fund those agencies to help them fight not only human trafficking but opioid trafficking. there's one little town in west virginia 300 people in it that have been prescribed 9 million objection codoen pills. that's just criminal. something we've just got to deal with this opioid crisis. we have provided funds, mr. chairman, for 65 new immigration judge teams to deal with the 500,000 case backlog of immigration cases that have been waiting to be processed and handled. it $22 million increase for u.s. attorneys and u. s. marshals, a $98 million increase for the drug enforcement agency and a
$35 million for alcohol, tobacco and firearms. i especially want to say thank you to all of the federal and local and state law enforcement agencies and all the first responders that have done so much to help the people of texas and southwest louisiana in this -- with this hurricane. so we've also provided strong funding for those local and state law enforcement programs that protect women, children and police officers, including 527 million for human trafficking and to protect women against violence. 72.5 million, mr. chairman, to protect policing and exploited children. 500 million -- 220 million for the state criminal alien assistance program to reimburse state and local jails and prisons for the cost of housing individuals who committed crimes and enter the country illegally. the bill provides 19.9 billion for nasa, which is a $218 million increase. nasa has had too much on its plate for far too long and too
little money to do it. so we've done our best together, working arm in arm with the subcommittee to make sure that the american space program is the best on earth and will ensure that the united states continues to lead not only in space exexploration and technology but in aeronautics research and discovery in space and science. the bill provides for the development of the space launch system and will send american 'nauts beyond low earth orbit and also increases funding to man terry funding. the bill does not adopt the cut to the national science foundation. we protect it investment in basic scientific research which is so essential to our nation's security and economic growth. and we made sure that in order to, however, live within our allocation we had to reduce funding in some areas.
we've eliminated programs that are no longer necessary, were not critical to the operation of the federal government and we also froze or reduced funding for several agencies or programs that can operate with a little less, finally, mr. chairman, the bill continues protections for americans second amendment constitutional rights. we have also continued language from previous bills that prohibit the transfer of housing or prisoners at gone tan mow bay into the united states. i'm happy to answer any questions that you or the committee may have. thank you, mr. chairman. >> chairman culver son, thank you very much. mr. certificate ran though, the gentleman is required. >> thank you, mr. chairman. at the expense of being repetitious, let me just tell my chairman, mr. cull ber son, that our prayers and our thoughts were with you during that period. >> thank you. >> and we are here and i'm here to give my vote on
appropriations to make sure that texas, louisiana and those places are made whole again because it's the proper thing to do. it's the main thing to do. and one thought that entered my mind is interesting that is i was watching union i vision and i saw first responders from puerto rico putting their gear together to go to texas. and now as we speak, irma is putting porlt oh rico in a situation that could be as bad as texas. and so if there's no other reason to be good brothers and sisters, it's the fact that you never when it's going to happen to you. thank you, mr. chairman, ranking member slaughter and other members of the committee for the opportunity to testify before you today. as a ranking member of the i am
deeply disappointed to appear before you to talk about an omnibus bill rather than appear individual consideration of a bill that chairman cull ber son and i have worked on today. and let me say in order to make my presentation short, i didn't include a lot of what we do agree on. programs that i knew i didn't have to fight for because he believes in them too. i want to point out why the bill has problems, but that doesn't mean that i don't respect the work he did or the fact that we agree on so many things. if any money comes our way between now and the senate, i know a lot of those will be taken care of. although i strongly oppose a bill in these circumstances, i believe it is important that in this process moves forward, the cjs portion of the bill be considered under an open rule.
this is the traditional manner under which appropriations legislation is considered, and i think members on both sides of the aisle would strongly prefer a return to regular order with or without these process problems, the cjs portion of the bill is not one, unfortunately, that i can support in its current form. this bill after score keeping adjustments is cut by approximately 1% below last year's level. this is far below the level needed to adequately fund the programs of this bill which are crucial to economic development, scientific innovation and protecting our nation's cherished values. for example, the legal service corporation, manufacturing extense partnership program and the domestic development administration all absorb significant funds below current funding levels. the census bureau is greatly under funded and will be unable
to complete the important and necessary work that must be done now to prepare for the 2020 census. these are programs that have democratic and republican support and demonstrate how this bill is insufficiently funded. i'm also troubled that this bill allows many of the administration's most troubling priorities and initiatives related to immigration and civil rights to move forward without the necessary congressional oversight. in the wake of charlottesville, there are many in this country who are justifyably questioning our president's commitment to tolerance, fairness and inclusiveness. theed administration's budget request for the department of justice raises those questions as well. a proposal to harm immigrants by increasing criminal enforcement is furnded in this bill. there is no attempt here to limit the department's actions to undermine affirmative action,
support voter registration and disproportionately hurt minority populations and ignore lgbt protections. all of these efforts at doj might be in keeping with the president's values, but these are ideals that have long been rejected by a majority of the american people. i would like to mention one amendment which i am offering, which is number 111. this amendment would take $10 million from the burn jack program to allow men -- to the burn jack program to allow them to provide grants to states and lots to help them investigate and prosecute hate crimes and would provide a significant signal that the federal government will not tolerate hatred and bigotry. i hope the amendment will be made in order. while i don't support this bill, i do support each member's right to offer amendments that they believe will improve the final
product. once again, i want to thank you and i want to thank all the committee members for the support you've given us in the past and for the support that you give my district and my other district, the kmop wealth of puerto rico. thank you. >> mr. certificate ran oh, thank you very much. the avenues of work that you've done for years, all four of you, have played themselves out in the new administration. there are going to be some agreements and some disagreements, and i get that. but i think that as i look at both of your products, i think that the daunting, overriding viewpoint is you're having to do what you do with less money. you're having to make decisions and it is and will be
increasingly difficult to get the priorities correct, in line. as judge hastings i'm sure is going to have an opportunity with mr. culver son here to ekts tract what you may not have known then but you know now and does this really reflect what we're doing. but one thing i want to say is and mismckol lum spoke about it, mr. cal verdict spoke about it, i have watched both of you are your activities related to tribes and trying to make sure that our native americans not only in the interior package but in the basic rights and opportunities have had an outpouring of opportunities with both of you. the gentleman, mr. coal, vice chairman of this committee is a person who is deeply committed to that sometime ago i was with mr. cal verdict in 2009 out in
california when he was trying to work on water issues. i remember standing in a reception area with him for an hour or two trying to work through how we would address these type of issues if we were in the majority. and mr. cal verdict offered wise counsel and good advice. so there may be areas where we lack in, there may be areas where we're successful in. i applaud all four of you for working on them. mr. cal verdict, i have spent some bit of time in lately on some issues dealing with what might be interior which also might be ago culture of the national park service. i wanted to be a ranger when i grew up at some point. that was either before or after i wanted to be a firefighter. as my mother would say, i didn't
make it. i seemingly didn't have any ambition, so i became a member of congress. but what i want you to know is that the work that you do to protect our wildlife, a way of life in the west and these issues, including triable issues, i appreciate the struggle. >> thank you. >> mr. culver son, you and mr. certificate an notice have a bulk of issues that have consumed my time. so i know they consumed your time. the ability within these areas of commerce, justice, state are sensitive areas, and they're areas that seemingly we've got to get right. so i will look forward to the testimony that comes behind us. we'll attempt to follow some bit of wisdom. the committee here, including
members, including even our newest committee member, mrs. chainy, have definite ideas about the world and we appreciate your viewpoint and bringing it forward today. so i really just offer accolades. i've been through the bills, very much so and know the hard work and tough decisions that have been made in that process. mr. burn. >> i wanted to ask mr. cull ber son a question. first of all, he and i share a tremendous support for nasa. its not just the things that he does to principle the imagination of people all across the world about what our frontiers can be, but it's the concrete things that nasa has done for us. i want to con great late you on the hard work. late in the game we got an amendment to your budget or your bill that would take $100
million out of nacea and put it in the b rn e program, just to make that clear. it's a great program and i just wonder about where you would come down on whether it makes sense for us to take $100 million out of this work you've done so much on with regard to nasa to put into it the jacks program. >> thank you very much. i know -- i hope we're going to have a broader budget agreement and you'll see in conference where we reach that agreement. one of our top priorities will be to help the legal services corporation and to help the burn jag program. but, no, i hope you will not make that amendment an order. i've talked to the author and he's reconsidered it. because one thing we don't want to do is cut nasa's earth science program. we don't want to cut nasa's great scientific exexploration program. it's going to make its final dive into saturn's atmosphere.
we've learned so much not only about saturn, but we've lrnd, for example, one of the ice moons of saturn has a worldwide ocean with a free floating ice shell. that's true in the ocean world of you're opena. this is one area we are in agreement which it comes to nasa. our bill has funded nasa at the highest level in the history of the agency because it does return so much to the economy, to technology, none of us would have these devices if it weren't for nasa and the work that they do. in fact, it was the social media on the smartphones that saved a lot of lives in houston that people organized and used. so, yes, sir, i encourage you -- i hope the rules committee would not make that amendment an order. i hope he'll reconsider and withdraw it. >> well, i'll certainly work with you and anybody to solve that problem to preserve the money for nasa. the general that runs the space
flight center in huntsville is from my district and he told me that he grew up back when we didn't have much on our beaches in alabama on his granddaddy's beach house which was just a cinder block one hoif story building flat roof and he would sit out there at night with no city lights around him and he would lay on the roof and looks at the stars and as long as we have programs in nasa and stuff to do in education to try to keep young boys and girls looking up at the stars and thinking about what we could do to push out the boundaries and the frontiers we face, the better off we are. so i stand with you -- >> thank you very much. >> one of the greatest parts of this job has been able to help make the dreams of the future come true and there's no one in the federal government better able to do that than nasa and i'm preesd to report to you that our bill contains a 52-year plan for nasa. it lays out initially a plan to discover life in another world and the ocean urpa and the ocean of the outer solar system. directs nasa to -- and find life
on that nearest planet. and at the same time develop an enter stellar rocket propulling which means developed at marshall to go no less than ten% the speed of light and launch humanity's first -- that will be an american spacecraft that discovers-for the first time in another world in the ocean's of you're opena and it will be an american spacecraft -- >> i'll probably not be around for that, but i hope that that takes place after i'm gone. i'll be one of those little things up in star dust down here. >> i think this is something we can all get behind. >> one of the interesting things about space is the dramatic size of it and we have in dallas something called a ross per oh museum and they put signs up all
over the place which update people on facts of science. there's a billboard that said 1300 erts would fit in the sun. i know it's 93 million miles to the sun and i know it's a long way off, but i'd never know 1300 erts and it's these kind of things. it's extraordinary. >> if i may for a second. not too many of you even know or remember my comment justice state story, but i was ranking member under l ronlers and i was ranking member under frank wolf. those were the days when an appropriations bill stood alone and not 387 votes on the board. i know some people would think that that never happened, but it
used to happen. and one of the reasons i waited all these years to get back to be ranking member of this subcommittee and it worked out is because of nasa. and many people would say, well, you're from new york city, what are you worried about nasa? well, without making a bad pun, i'm one of those few americans or many americans who believe that america is already great, and what's made us great was we invested money. my concern about these bills is the fact that a desire to bring down the debt, i understand that, and the desire to cut spending and i understand that. we may be cutting investment in the future. that's what made us great. we're great already. we just need more people to share in its greatness. but we have to be careful. who am i to preach, but we have to be careful that we don't cut to the bone and hurt what made
us great. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chair. i just want to say to mismckol lum i certainly do agree with your idea of open rule. that's something we haven't seen in a very long time. and i appreciate like you do what we used to do on votes and allowing people amendments. we haven't had one up here in a long time, right, on our side. so we'll ask for an open rule, but we won't get one. we're going to continue to pursue that. and joe, i think people in new york city ought to worry about everything, don't you? you say people ask you why you care about nasa? >> they worry more about the -- >> they did file suit today on daca. >> they do. >> in the state of new york. >> they care about everything. >> right. >> and there is nothing more exciting, mr. chairman, than to have an 'naught visit a school.
if you've ever had that experience, if you haven't, please have it. an as troe naught comes to a school, the children go crazy in a wonderful way. it's wonderful. >> mr. cull ber son, do you think we're going to do man flight or are we going to do it without that? >> no. we have in our bill fully funded human space flight program, commercial sector will be -- when you think of the commercial sector. >> yes. >> misslaughter as catching a cab out in front of your office building. you'll have multiple choices of commercial providers that can take you to low earth orbit. deep space nasa will be the -- just as president eisenhower was a member of the interstate highway system, think this era under this president is going to be remembered as the father of the enter plan terry highway system. nasa should be thought of as taking us into deep space, enter plan terry and enter stellar travel while commercial as low earth orbit. >> and all i want is high-speed
rail. but apparently america does not, so all right. >> this is one of the great joyjoys of this bill. it's something we can all agree on. >> it's really done a lot, certainly, to make a lot of young people want to go to be astronauts and study engineering, 'troe physics. >> and become math me tigsz. >> we've just got to make sure we have more jobs for them, right. >> nasa will help do that with the technology spin office. >> all right. thank you all. >> thank you. >> judge hastings? >> as i listened to mr. cull ber son about the legacy and he spoke of president eisenhower and i-95, the interstate highway system, legacies sometimes died
pretty easily in this institution. it was president nixon that did the environmental protection agency. somewhere along the line we're not fulfilling what may have been his vision at that point or the legacy that he leaves us rightly or that we should be about the business of protection. the chairman has given me an opportunity to ask you what was a rhetorical question, and i won't belabor the point in the interest of time. but pretty obviously at the time that you all did your work you did not have in your sites hurricane harvey or irma or any other. i will repeat what i said yesterday and that is that this congress, congress should be about the business of addressing disaster relief with a wider scope rather than waiting for
happenings to come along. i spoke yesterday what is the truth, and that is in california there are substantial fires ongoing. in oregon, the same. montana, the same. come summer we'll have drouts. then after winter we'll have floods. and somehow or another we hobl along and to my way of thinking we should is a broader scope. and i've called for the committees of jurisdiction to be the repository of disaster relief so as how we don't have to have helter skelter approach or have politics enter into it the way that this bill has.
the policy riders in here are in my view were not necessary in order for us to get the things done. and it makes it hard for those of us that mr. burns spoke of nasa. you spoke and mr. certificate ran notice, and i'm sure mismckol lum and mr. cal vert have the same views with regard to our expiration in space. but let's not be unmindful that we cut nasa substantially from its program. and while i agree with you about some aspects of the private business, sometimes it's hard to catch a cab, depending upon who you are and where you are. and so i don't know whether all of that is sound reasoning as an an an nalg. but that said i admire the work that you have done with the limitations that you had. and i do appreciate the fact that you had hearings. the process is important to us
all here. we talk about it. senator mccain just recently opined about the need for our congress to get become to regular order. perhaps after this session we will recognize the importance of working together no matter who is in charge or we're going to need to do that. so, mr. chairman, i know now they know that harvey has occurred and we are about the business and rightly so of doing everything that we can and should to help the people in that region. and we must also be prepared for whatever happens with irma wherever it goes. and i might add we're just midway to hurricane season just as a for example. and let's want forget earthquakes and other -- tornadoes, all of those things are going to happen, and we seem to wait for them to happen before we do the things that may very well put us in a position
to address them more meaningfulel, more rapidly. thank you, mr. chairman. >> judge, thank you very much. words of wisdom too. and let me tell you, this is not a hurricane to take lightly. mr. collins, the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i just want to thank you for your testimony here but especially for chairman cal verdict. one of the -- the fish hatch aers system and the language that we've worked for several years now. just quick sometimes we think about these programs and their economic impact and such as a little town in my district and what had happened was it put those in the lowest level for priority. and for -- despite even the benefits of what happened, so what we did is put this language that you all helped us work on and we appreciate it so much for educational, vierlt al,
resources, repopulating those trout streams. it's really interesting for every that are that we put in to that hash air for the repopulation, we get $40 actual return for new fishermen, oppor things that come. and hatcheries, like the -- it is a job and tourism creator that is unmatched and it goes to the environmental sides. and good stewards while at the same time balancing needs. i want to say thanks and we he have worked together well on other things. i appreciate y'all's willingness to be here. i was a child of the late '60s nasa, that was my early childhood. when you talk about space, that is something for me that really reacts. i tell people all the time, why are we involve fled this? there is a great public interest here. i had someone come up to me, they were really upset, why do we need nobody nasa?
i looked at them and said web g, we got more than tang out of nasa. we got the internet that you tagged me on.got more than tang. we got the internet that you tagged me on. a lot of stuff. so the idea of what is on the future and horizon. so thank you. thank you for the language on the fish hatchery. i appreciate that. >> appreciate the gentleman's comments. mr. polis? the gentleman does not seek time. the gentleman from the state, great state of washington. >> great state of washington. thank you, mr. chairman. i just wanted to take -- first of all, mr. hastings, i'm a firm believer we should celebrate the whole month when it is your birthday. be prepared, it could be a long one. as one of the newest members of the appropriation committee, i wanted to express my appreciation are fot hard work that goes on in that committee. and it is hours as a rules committee that on a seasonal
basis. and both of these sub committees have had to accept the challenge of not only investing into the future that mentioned on several occasions already, also solving problems currently faced, all with a smaller amounts of money to spend doing it. and i think that you've done a good job of rising to that challenge. and just wanted to acknowledge all of your work and all of your committee members' work. rising to that occasion. i appreciate that, mr. chairman. also, i just wanted to make a comment that we've, it's not an open system, i guess, by definition, but certainly when you have well over 1,000 amendments that are offered and a third to have of them likely skeped, if not more, that is a pretty dog gone transparent process and one that allows members to fully participate in this process. i just wanted to express my
appreciation for your ability to give us that opportunity, mr. chairman. with that, i'll yield back. >> thank you, very much. you know, occasionally, occasionally we are forced into some circumstances that are not as pleasant as others and unfortunately, all of the members of the committee have been here some some period of time and seen some ebb and flow. and while i offer an explanation and try and make it move and work, you were just forced into a circumstance where you had to hustle also. you had to deliver a product and you did not sit around and say, well, it'll never be accepted by the senate. in fact, it's public policy and making us think about what we're doing. we're at a time of making priorities work. but we also recognize, and i think mr. hastings does too, we
got to do the essentials. and we've got to get them right. and i think both of you represent the essentials. all four of you in both of these bills and i want to thank you very much. i'd like to remind y'all before you leave, our awesome stenographer, anything you brought would help her, yes ma'am, that would help her, enable her the opportunity to get key words down and double check her mathematics as she moves forward. i want to thank you for taking time to be with us today. >> mr. chairman? >> yes, sir. >> it is important note these have been on-line and available for the public for full scrutiny since the month of july. so we've been as transparent as we can be. we are proud of these bills. and the public has had a chance to read them now since july. >> in english and spanish. >> that's right. >> in english and spanish. great. thank you very much. we will now move forward.
i would like to welcome panel 2. chairman tom graves of georgia. ranking member, mr. quigley, is here. on the financial services, general government devision of the bill, as well as our own tom cole -- mr. quigley, welcome. chairman cole and ranking member delaro, labor and health and human services educational related agencies of the bill. so we will recognize them as they come. we are delighted. to have you without objection. anything you have in writing will be entered into the record. that will help our awesome stenographer as she developed the most professional product available from our work day.
gentlemen, welcome. mr. graves? saw you this morning. know you were fired up and prepared to be with us today. gentleman is recognized. >> mr. chairman, i thank the committee and for your diligence. i know this has been a long process. thank you for allowing the appropriations committee to bring our work product to you over the last accept ral daseve days if not weeks. it is important for me to bring to you the 2018 financial services and general government act. i believe this is the prosperous part of make america secure and prosperous act we are debating here in the next day or so. and i'll explain why that is. first, this bill includes many reforms that have been found in the choice act, which has already passed the house of representatives earlier this spring, you will recall. by dodd-frank lregulations. agencies, processies and reigning in rogue agencies that
we know far too rampant. we will allow the economy and markets to begin working again for americans and restore financial freedoms to help americans earn a living and achieve their dreams. >> and investing in small businesses by providing just under $1 billion. and that's with a b. to the small business administration. and i just want you to think about that impact that it has throughout our communities and for small businesses he andan entrepreneurs who are just now getting excited and experiencing that american dream again. this will be significant funding for small business loans and particularly for veterans programs that funnel through the sba. this bill also carries the entire financial institution bankruptcy act, which passed the house in a bipartisan vote earlier. there is also irs funding kept to 200 the levels, with target investments particularly in customer service and signer
cybersecurity. that's where our committee has been focused on oversight and how the irs operates. it prohibits targeting groups based on political beliefs or for exercising their first amend ment rights among with many other protections for a taxpayer, something i've been hearing about, and i know each of you have as we were back in our district during august. now combat the opioid crisis we have $360 million for federal drug programs, like the drug courts and drug-free community programs. it is important to note we carry pro life provisions customary of the past that both house and senate passed previously. but we have expanded upon that to include the harrison amendment.
that is fund for multistate plans that cover abortion and further including provision that includes district of columbia's assisted suicide measure. this bill comes in at just over $20 billion. and i'll point out while that is a large number, that is a 5% reduction of what we just passed here a few months ago. 5% cut just from last year. and when crafting this bill myself as well as mr. quigley, took directions straight from the members of the house of representatives. with over 1700 different requests included, you should note that this bill is a result of your interest and the requests that have been bipartisan in fashion and including in bipartisan amendments and was supported in our committee in a bipartisan fashion out of committee. although tough decisions were made, there is no doubt about that, but i just would like to point out once again as i close that this, this bill was put together with a strong focus on financial freedom for all-americans.
and i believe this bill all m e america pros sperous again. i thank you for your work on that and appreciate all of your tough work as we bring this to the floor. i want to thank our subcommittee, staff, office, it's been a heck after month. thank you for consideration of your support.oafter month. thank you for consideration of your support.fafter month. thank you for consideration of your support. after month. thank you for consideration of your support.after month. thank you for consideration of your support.fter month. thank you for consideration of your support.ter month. thank you for consideration of your support.er month. thank you for consideration of your support.r month. thank you for consideration of your support. month. thank you for consideration of your support. >> if the committee would come back to order. ladies and gentlemen, we are pleased you have taken time to come back and i know some of these all-day efforts require a lot of people, patience and other matters. evidently you have something that you have appropriately asked me if you could come and be with us. we're delighted that you're here. >> thank you very much. [ inaudible ]
>> well, we appreciate that. we also try to accommodate members and we appreciate your time. we believe that efbverybody's feedback is important. plus, we're still celebrating the judge's birthday. >> is there any cake? >> that's not all bad. without objection, anything you brought in writing will be entered in the record. mr. raskin, what we will do, is do something we don't of do, but we will allow to you give your testimony. people offer you questions. then you exit. >> thank you. >> gentleman is recognized. >> i will go as quickly as possible. >> gentleman is recognized. >> thank you. i have two amendments and i will try to move through them as quickly as possible. one is number 67. and thank you, mr. chairman, and ranking member slaughter he and all of the members of the committee. it is a bipartisan amendment that would prohibit funding to be used to implement a recent
change to department of justice policy can which greatly expands the government's civil asset enforcement program. the new policy reviefs a controversial and i think unconstitutional practice that has been deprived by democrats and republicans alike under this practice law enforcement may seize cash and property suspected of being connected to criminal activity without arresting the property owner for probable cause of having committed a crime and without even charging the property owner with criminal offense much less proving beyond all reasonable doubt from a jury that the property was attained unproperly. it is forfeited on suspicion, then you have to hire a lawyer to go to court to prove the property is innocent, if you ever want to see it again. new policy announced in july by attorney general sessions helps state and local police officers take cash and property from people who are merely suspected of a crime and allows law
enforcement to dodge stricter state laws limiting civil asset forfeit you're by having their cases moved to the federal level.you're by having their cases moved to the federal level. i think it is by due process laws that police should not be able to stop people on the street, in their cars or in their homes without a search warrant, without arrest, without charging them with a crime and simply confiscate their condos or cars or whatever and say we think the property is somehow contaminated. we are presumed under our constitution to be innocent of crimes and property should be presumed innocent as well. and innocent americans should not lose their right to do process or private property rights because someone else believes the government should be presumed correct and authorized to take people's property from them. an interesting series in "the washington post" detailing civil asset forfeiture abuse in 2014 finding that state and local
police agencies made $55,000 in seesi seizing property under the forfeiture program. doj imposed restrictions to limit when the government could adopt forfeit you're case answers banned state and local police from using local law without using warrants. the new policy lift restrictions and so this amendment wouldbann from using local law without using warrants. the new policy lift restrictions and so this amendment would forbid the use of money to enact the policy. that the first one. the second one is amendment 73. this would strike section 438 from the interior portion of rh-3354. 438 would prohibit construction and operation of wind turbines less than 24 nautical miles from the state of maryland shoreline
effectively killing current off-shore wind development projects that are on the verge of construction in my state. as former maryland state senator and champion of projects nationwide i strongly oppose this language. it would create dramatic federal overreach and undermine economic and environmental and health benefits of off-shore wind energy promg ekts in my state. breaking up carefully constructed state project with federal appropriations sledge hammer would set a terrible precedent for wind energy projects across the country. maryland public service commission approving two wind projects off the coast of maryland that would position maryland as national leader in off-shore wind energy. the commission representing one of the final steps in a project more than six years in the making with extensive debate and planning in my state and careful negotiations involving public businesses, governor's office and maryland general assembly. as state senator i work closely with my colleagues on both sides
of the aisle through many years of association and can attest of the painstaking efforts we built of all stake holders to advance clean energy agenda with broad input. the maryland cited overwhelming support for wind projects from citizens, businesses and public officials and public hearings. inserting a rider to override the will of marylanders after years of public input and process represents abuse of authority that flies in the face of basic principles of state autonomy. preventing them from moving forward would keep job prospects and the jobs that energy provides. according to labor statistics, fastest growing m america is wind turbine positions. they pay 25 bucks an hour. they are expected to create more than 9,000 jobs positioning the state as front-runner in fast
growing u.s. off-shore wind energy industry. additionally two companies involved in the project are expected to generate $1.8 billion of instate expenditures during development construction and operational phases not including tax revenues to the state. maryland is eager to capitalize on the significant economic development opportunities these projects afford. there are also obviously considerable environmental benefits such as pollutants and emissions. the maryland psc estimated off-shore wind project would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 19,000 tons for 20 years greatly assisting maryland and reducing the goal of carbon emissions of 40% over the next three decades. special pleading for maryland aside mr. chairman i urge you to make my i mendment for the benefit of off-shore wind development nationally section 438 frustrates off-shore wind
development by burdensome requirements. turbines have been built roughly 12 nautical miles from the coastline which is generally out of sight from the shore. 438 restricts projects and sets a poor precedent for future development making off-shore wind more burdensome and costly for developers. 438 undermines certainty that businesses need plan, modifying the sanctity of the lease and for companies pursuing off-shore wind projects that may be a deterrent to innovative ideas in the pursuit of wind energy. it is alarming with direct and negative consequences for maryland and ominous potential to undermine similar promg ekje nationwide. i further would urge support from all my colleagues for my amendment on the house floor. thank you so much. >> thank you. judge hastings, any questions of the gentleman?
does any member of the committee have questions for the gentleman? well, i do. look, i don't know a lot about your first amendment, and as sets seized sfwat and local government. what i do know is unfortunately that i spend a good bit of time trying to study up on a number of issues and i see on a regular basis, don't know that it's involved exactly as you have, but where people routinely will bring in a great big 18-wheeler nobody knows who owns it. maybe the driver didn't know he had 18 illegals in the back of it. maybe he he didn't know he had pounds of methamphetamines. he gets out and claims no
knowledge of it. the federal government couldn't seize that? >> that's an easy case, mr. chairman. there, the contraband is right there. have you probable cause to arrest guy and take him off to jail. the moment the arrest is made -- >> i didn't say he arrested him. i pleaded he didn't know what he was doing. >> sure. everybody claims they are innocent. but if people are caught smuggling illegal people through, there can be search weren't and make an arrest -- >> well what my point is is that often times law enforcement sees $450,000 cash and you know, you explain to the person, and he said i don't know how i got it and i'm not sure and i'm not claiming it. you're saying they can't pick that money up?
even though the person there claims they don't know anything about it? >> let me give you some examples -- >> because they do know they don't want to go to prison. >> you have to check out "the washington post" series. i will make it available to you. i'll tell you one example. an older gentleman, chinese american citizen, saved up $35,000 in order to buy a building and i any texas, actually, for a chinese restaurant. and he wasn't using a bank. he saved the money and had it in his car. he was stopped by the police. the police were suspicious that he had all this money. they thought it was drug money. they seized it. he wasn't arrested for crime. he was able to get an attorney and went to aclu and he got it back. >> who held the money? >> the police department held the money. >> police department?
>> the police department. one of the things that came out in this whole series which is why the doj owe ribriginally ch the policy, what happens is that attorney general sessions is going back to old policy but they changed the policy because a lot of police departments were seizing money from lots of businesses. a business in my district in frederick county that got money seized. bank account just frozen and money taken without anyone charged with anything. and later they ended up being exonerated. in the meantime they didn't have use of their money. but in a lot of cases, the people never a go to court. so they've got get a lawyer to try to get their money back. so i just think it is a basic principle of due process that your property, unless the government can prove it is ill gotten gains or you are using it for illegal purposes. >> well a windfall of $430,000 in the back seat of someone's car and they claim they didn't know it was there, tells me, so
is mickey mouse. so, look, i appreciate you being here. i could be described as being the law enforcement guy. and i think that would be true. i appreciate you bringing this to us. we will consider it. please make sure, we have an awesome ste nothinographer here she would like anything you have in writing. >> i will pass it to her. >> mr. chairman, delighted to see you. have you waited here four or five hours today. but you know, sometimes these things happen. >> i got a lot of work done. >> good. the gentleman is recognized. >> and i thank you very much for allowing me to testify. i will be brief. this is an amendment for the interior portion of this legislation and it is an amendment that passed the house a couple of times. previously and what it does is reaffirms and preserves the
rights of stiets write their own water quality plans. my amendment simply prohibits environmental protection age ensfri using chesapeake pay totally maximum daily load in so-called water shed implementation plans to hijack state's water quality strategies. for last several years, the epa implemented a total maximum daily load pblueprint for six states in chesapeake bay water shed. through implementation, the epa has given every state in the water shed an ultimatum. either the state does exactly what epa says or faces threat of epa takeover of its water quality programs. congress intended that the implementation of clean water act be a collaborative approach. through which the states and federal government work together opinion this process was not meant to be to the whims and
bureaucrats in washington, d.c. my amendment instructs epa to respect the important role states play in implementing the clean water act. i want to make it perfectly clear the amendment would not stop the epa from working with the states to restore chesapeake pay which is an important priority. nor would it undermine clean-up efforts under way. only the ability to take over a state's plan or take retaliatory actions against he the state if it does not meet epa-mandated goals. again, ensure estates rights from being in tact and not usurped by the ea. mr. chairman, members of the committee, thank you for your time. would urge you to make this amendment an order under your rule as you have done in the past. >> thank you very much. m mr. /* ms. titus, welcome.
gentleman is recognized. >> thank you. i have titus 54 and titus 18. titus 54 prevent slaughter of wild horses and bureaus under the care of land management for contractors. i want to thank a bipartisan coalition of members from across the country who joined me in this fight to protect these beautiful creatures from federally directed destruction. including congressman polis, king, corbello and louhig louhigh-grisham. my district is surrounded by iconic landscapes. unique flora and fauna and cultural resources that tell the story of some of the continent's very oldest civilizations and earliest human inhabitants. nevada is also the home of the largest population of wild hors
horses in the nation. so i'm under no illusion that there are real challenges to the management of our wild horse and boro population. i'm not here arguing we stay the course. but the changes proposed by some of hi colleagues to lift the more than two decades ban on federal funded slaughter of these not malls is not the answer it management.anot malls answer it management.not malls answer it management.inot malls answer it management.mnot malls answer it management.alnot malle answer it management.snot malls the answer it management.ot male answer it management.t malls is answer it management. malls is answer it management.malls is n answer it management.alls is no answer it management.lls is not answer it management.s is not t answer it management.s is not tr it management. is not the answe it management.is not the answer it management. is not the answe it management. there are solutions other than what i mentioned other than killing these animals. smart decision making and investment by the government. in 2007 when we were closest to the scientifically determined management levels, blm failed to
carry out an aggressive and proven fertility treatment fro grm pro gram to reduce new births. as a result we have scent number of wild horses continue to rise. but it's not too late to do the right thing. if congress were to lift the killing prohibition, tens of thousands of these horses and boros would be destroyed but then what? without a plan in place we will just continue to kill off a certain number of the ncreature year after year. instead we need a real sustainable management plan based on scientific land use principles. we only spend about 1% of the wild horse budget on fertility control. yet last year, blm spent nearly 67% on holding facilities which many experts argued not only are inhumane but actually increase the population. now i stay is not time to remove
protections and allow the slaughter of these iconic den stans of the range. but we can be smarter, kinder, and more efficient and save taxpayer dollars as well as the magnificent creatures. i would urge the committee to please send this amendment number 54 to the floor and let our colleagues take a vote on this issue that means so much to the people of and people from all across the country. we have letters and calls and all to submit for the record. thank you for your consideration of amendment number 54. >> yes, ma'am. we're delighted that you're here. >> thank you. the oath amendment is amendment number 18 that deals with our national monuments. i want it thank my colleague from texas, congressman o'rourke for joining me on this amendment. this involves some of the most cultural sensitive land and most
iconic in the country. from devil's tower national monument in congresswoman cheney's home state. designated over a hundred years ago and go butte national monuments in nevada designated more recently these are special places that deserve our federal protection. earlier this year, the president ordered his secretary to review 200 of the decembsignations mad over the last few decades, claim theg we ing they were made without adequate outreach. the secretary pose editor photo opens, attended private event and made cursory site visits but many meetings with advocates in southern were cancelled. this stands in stark contrast to the hard work put in by thousands of people advocating for national monuments over the last several years.
citizens from coast to coast could voice their concerns about the administration's plan to either remove the designation or reduce public plans as national monuments. at end of the public comment period, more than 2.5 million comments have been filed. overwhelming majority in defense of protecting our national monuments, including over 100,000 from nevada alone. you heard opponents claim these monuments negatively impact our economy but that just has absolutely not true. not true in nevada or across the country. all together our national parks and public lands generate 18.4 billion annually for local communities, support 320,000 jobs and add about $35 billion to local economyes. in southern nevada 1 out of every 5 visitors who comes
through my district also visit one of the state's national monuments. last year alone more than 8 will million went to nevada's bureau of land management areas and before the new monuments were added to the list, visits to these ier yaes generated over $400 million for economic activity and recreational tourism in the region. so that's why it is not just environmental groups to protect these public lands. also las vegas visitor, resort association and las vegas metro chamber of commerce. two weeks have gone by since secretary zincy issued his report about what to do with the monuments. we vpt hea we haven't heard anything. this not sures they wonensured
undermined or eliminateed.ensur undermined or eliminateed. we haven't made changes in over 50 years, and the changes were just minimal. i would urge your support of this amendment. thank you you for your attention. >> mr. o'rourke, do you intend to support the amendment is that why you're here? >> i am -- >> excuse me, speak on behalf of her amendment? i didn't mean vote for. or are you here for other mat sners. >> other matters. >> thank you.t sners. >> other matters. >> thank you.e sners. >> other matters. >> thank you.r sners. >> other matters. >> thank you.matters sners. >> other matters. >> thank you.sners. >> other matters. >> thank you.. >> other matters. >> thank you. >> you spend so much time up here, by will have to give you shock treatment. >> i do like it here. i should say before i start on the main thrust of my comments that in the next panel, you will have another gentleman from
virginia, mr. scott, and he has an amendment related to black lung clinics that i'm supportive of. that being said, i've come on amendments that i have to help us in the coal fields of southwest virginia. and i appreciate your time and committee committee's time in considering these amendments. these two amendments are hand in glove. you can't approve one without the other because they work together. the same number of states currently funded by abandon mine r reclamation fund for abandoned mine land in conjunction with economic and community development and reused goals. the money has been sitting there for years but until recently if there wasn't a whole lot of activity going on because they today restore the land that was all their purpose was, now communities or groups with apply for money to restore the land but also look at an economic and
community development possibility with that land. so there's real opportunities for us in central appalachia. funding for the grants was first established in 2016 but provided exclusively to three app latchian states with the greatest amount of unfunded reclamation needs. unfortunately this didn't include coal communities that were economic devastated, as you know, mr. chairman. so many communities in my district are trying to deal with things. there's a little uptick in coal production but there is like a depression. including the top six states, pennsylvania, west virginia and kentucky, states of virginia, alabama and ohio, and so we would hope that we could add back in the second tier of states to that.
now, i brought along a map because sometimes a map can do a better job explaining things. this orangey area, i guess i should hold it up with two hands. that is my congressional district and coal fields of southwest virginia. i got to use my hands. there are mines along the kentucky border which are current mines. historic has been the case befowhere the mine is right on the border. there was a mine reopened, an surface mine, but an underground mine, reopened and the mouth is in west virginia but all of the coal is in virginia. so kweef gotwe've got a situati we have west virginia and kentucky are getting money to restore their lands with an economic purpose and their colleagues, all of whom are the same community, hatfields and mccoys on both sides of the line, all the same community. but their colleagues on the
virginia side of the line aren't receiving anything. i put in two amendments to try to rectify that. what we are trying to do is we are trying ton hurt pennsylvania west virginia and kentucky. in ortd order to make everything flow with the way the rules are required, i today put in an additional 25 million for secondary states. last year they only got 10 million. if you want to cut back to 10 million i would be grateful but then you have to use a waiver. so following rules, we have 23 hill million to help other economies in other states as well. it would help my district. i suspect ohio. i don't know about alabama, but i suspect there as well. you have the high walls and situations that are dangerous but also economic development in areas that could sorely use it. it is great program.
to credit former chairman rogers came up with the concept. it is working. it can do a lot of things. but all six states that are out there, we are taking money from central funds. not a huge amount. we are are putting it into these three states. and hopefully with doing that, we can create jobs. and mr. chairman, i hope y'all would consider making that an order. i hope that the amendment would go forward. or amendments. we todhad to do two. i did put in a reduction of $5 million overall that goes back into the pot so i can maybe pick up some of my friends on the right as voting. the main thing i'm trying to help the people of southwest virginia and those impacted in ohio and alabama. thank you, mr. chairman.
>> you got any friends, have you to be careful hanging around here too much. >> that's true but i like have friends everywhere. >> there you go. thank you very much. i have been to these areas. i do recognize there is a in kentucky, she gets it, we want to ask which one are you? come on, now. fortunately, not under oath. >> i live just far enough away that i never had to take sides. [ inaudible ] [ laughter ] >> thank you very much. we appreciate not only your time but your insistence are trying to add professionalism to that. >> welcome to the rules committee. you've gotten good at this. >> just a few times now. >> always will. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. madam ranking members.
members of the committee. i want to talk about three matters for your consideration. 106 division c. justice and science provision. preventing the department of justice from using funds to conduct eminent domain precedings to construct a border wall. in other words preclude use of taxpayer dollars it take property from private property land owners along the u.s./mexico border at a time the u.s.-mexico bode bord u.s.-mexico border has never been safer by any metric you want to look at. and because doing so would betray the fundamental principal of eminent domain, taking for a public purpose. there is no public purpose served in doing that right now. we know we have the lowest northbound apprehensions we know those comesing northbound by and
large are children and young families, my chairman, you see are fleeing the most horrific violence in central america. some of the deadliest cities and countries on the planet bar none. they are by and large not trying to evade protection but turn themselves into customs officers at our ports of entry. a wall would not serve any protective purpose. you look at the u.s. cities on the u.s. mexico border cities like el paso in texas but also look at laredo and mccallen and other u.s. border can committees. they are safer than the cities into the interior. i would argue because of our connection with mexico and large number of immigrants who call these communities home and are fundamental to safety and security of those commune pipts second is 147. in division f. which prevents federal funding from going to the healthy texas women's program and ensures that
medicaid dollars are spent as intended to provide beneficiaries to access of range of family providers. thank you ranking member slaughter for joining this amendment. mr. chairman, as you know, 1115 waivere waivers have to promote medicaid program and investigate new ways to expand access to quality health care. the healthy texas women program accomplishes neither aim. we are struggling with a cries of maternal mortality. texas is among the worst of the 50 states and some of the worst in the world right now nor mothers, sisters and daughters we are losing preventably.fnor mothers, sisters and daughters we are losing preventably.or mothers, sisters and daughters we are losing preventably. we are closing more than quarter of the family planning clinics. this is not the way.
among moermgs we see an increase in teen births to so that texas leads the country in repeat teen pregnancies. we saw 15% third and final amendment is related. number 2 it 148 in division t 4. number 2 it 148 in division t . maternal and child health should be used for the study of child birth in the united states. and improve maternity care for the highest risk populations and i would argue in the facts bear this out, texas at highest risk right now compared to any other
state and again compared to most of the developed world. in the interest of time p mr. chairman i will conclude and yield back but i'm grateful for your and committee's consideration of these three amendments and i ask that you consider making them an order. >> thank you very much. >> ms. slaughter? >> thank you. mr. griffin, reclamation money, do -- contribute to that? >> yes, that's part of the process. they contribute to the fund then funds sit there and wait for someone to come along and reclaim them for the previously abandoned mine land. >> what percentage would you say mine owners contribute? >> i would have to look it up. i wouldn't want to tell you something wrong. i believe over time they have contributed it all. it comes from production of coal. >> all right.
a sort of tax on coal? >> yes ma'am. i will try to check on that. if i find i'm wrong i will let you know. >> that's all right. i think that makes sense. mr. titus, i approve of your amendments. it makes good sense. i hate -- teddy roosevelt would be very upset with all this happening, would he not? and i'm pleased with yours. i hope everybody's amendments are made an order. i'm sorry, i didn't hear yours mr. goodlat. but you're always good for a laugh or two. i'm sure they were fine. i would be pleased if you would consider make ping mr. o'rourke mr. titus. thank you. >> mr. mcgovern. >> thank you. advocating for appropriate order. i support an order rule on this and so whether i agree with you or not, i hope they are an order. with that, i yield back. >> gentleman from texas.
>> there he is. >> so thank you, mr. chairman. >> and mr. o'rourke, i have a question for you. were you aware of activity taking place on the authorizing committee, not appropriations committee, but authorizing committee specifically committee of energy and commerce on dealing with issues surrounding maternal mortality. not just in texas but in the nation? so we have a roundtable and we invited actually two of the members of the texas task force, dr. hankins from galveston was able to attend that roundtable. we also had individuals from the centers of disease control. there is a lack of uniformity on maternal mortality is reported
in the country. not just in texas. but in all 50 states. and the territories. that creates some difficulties as to how to get a number that is a metric that is actually usable in texas did change in early 2011. going from 42-day standard to one-year standard. i know this because when i got my license renewed that year, i had to take the hour on ethics regarding death certificates. that's one of the changes that occurred in our state and it s has, i don't want it say the sole cause but one of the causes of texas being on outlier and our witness from cdc testified to that fact. i think there is some utility in getting them, obviously we have
to be careful, states have the jurisdiction there to require the reporting and what numbers and what timeframe is reported. but there would be value in harmonizing the reporting requirements throughout the 50 states. there are some bills that are are before congress to do that. and that's one. things that we're actively looking at right now in the subcommittee. the other thing is to ensure there are an appropriate number of providers. and particularly to be able to use maternity providers and health professions shortage areas. previously only internal medicine, primary care. but addition of ob doctors is something we passed in the house and actually look forward to getting that done at some point and signed into law this year. i want you to be aware of the efforts.
it is not like this is occurring in a vacuum. one maternal death is too many. i will share with you. when i was training at parkland hospital, the mortality, toks eema or hyper he tension, those are not the three that appear at the top of the list. it is suicide, opioid and overdose. they he have changed the pic tour of maternal mortality. i'm not sure of the timeframe that that has happened but between the mid 19 70s and now is the time reference i have for you. this is a serious problem. requiring all stand on deck. state counter parts i think did the right thing in extending the maternal mortality task force.
it was to expire this year but they extended i believe to year 2020. in a special session that just concluded. but there are things going on in your authorizing committee in the house of representatives has actually been deeply involved in this. i'm very grateful with your work on this. there were decisions that were seem to not have the intended effects. i want to make sure that we prioritize research funding solutions to the highest risk populations. texas, even if we just use absolute numbers from 2010 to 2014, there were 600 deaths and by comparisons i've seen, thank
you, we are again an outlier maybe nationally compared to other countries, but members who take this issue seriously regardless of party. grateful for your sharing that. >> i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. gentleman from florida? >> thank you. i support making all amendments an order. >> with that, i thank the panel for their testimony. if you will leave anything have you in writing for our stenographer. this dconcludes our panel. i would like to invite up the next panel. the gentleman from drk kentucke. bar. gentleman from washington. gentleman from west virginia, mr. jenkins. >> we're now returning after a break.