tv David Cameron Holds Final Prime Ministers Questions CSPAN July 13, 2016 8:02pm-8:42pm EDT
the chair: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman is recognized. mr. young: i can assure the young lady that the natives on the north side of alaska support this. they've been working closely with the oil industry as partners. i think we ought to accept the fact that they are the most affected and if they want it, we ought to support it. with that, i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from minnesota. ms. mccollum: mr. chairman, to -- the gentleman from alaska, if there's no other speakers, i have the right to close so i'll reserve. mr. young: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from minnesota is recognized. ms. mccollum: i think this is something where people in this chamber know that the gentleman from alaska and i are going to disagree on. i will state for the record that i have spoken with many native alaskans who do oppose this and so they're not all of one mind throughout alaska on this issue, that they are concerned about
he effect of a -- the effect a catastrophic oil spill would have on their society. i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from alaska. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 90 printed in house report 114-683. for what purpose does the gentleman from alaska seek recognition? mr. young: mr. chairman, i have an amendment to offer. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 90 printed in house report 114-683rk offered by mr. young of alaska. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 80, the gentleman from alaska, mr. young, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: mr. chairman, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the chair: without objection, so order. mr. young: my amendment prevents
funds from this act being used to implement a department of interior plan for the national arctic wildlife refuge which designates the entirety as a wilderness. this would include the 1002 area that was set aside by this congress for exploration in the future, an area that holds 10 billion barrels of oil at a min mull and probably three trillion cubic feet of natural gas. this is why i'm trying to do this. we did this act. we set this area aside. now the department is trying to make it all wilderness with no drilling to take place. i ask for a yes vote and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the yom from minnesota seek recognition? ms. mccollum: i oppose the amendment and at this point in time i would like to yield two minutes to mr. kilmer. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. kilmer: thank you, mr. chairman. i thank the gentlelady for yielding. i rise respectfully in
opposition to this amendment offered by my friend and colleague from alaska this would block the implementation of the comprehensive conservation plan for the arctic national wildlife refuge, a plan that will already have been in place for two years by the time this language will take effect and a plan that received blood support upon its implementation. more than 19 million acres, the arctic refuge is one of the crown jewels of our nation's public land and like yellowstone and the grand canyon before it, it deserves to be protected for generations to come. included in the c.c.p. is a increased on for wildlife designation, with signatures of millions of supporters. the heart of it is what is called the center for wildlife active to i. the current recommendation would ensure the pristine habitats remain intact.
this is critical for supporting native wildlife and maintaining traditional and subsistence activities on the refunal. since president eisenhowerest tablied the arctic national wildlife range, members of both parties stood up to protect this truly unique national treasure. republican senator william rob introduced the first bill to designate the coastal plain as wilderness in 1987. it's been introduced every congress since and in this congress, 128 members from both sides of the aisle have pledged their support. so while i have the utmost respect for my friend and colleague, mr. young, i urge my colleagues to vote no on this amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back, the gentlewoman from minnesota reserves and the gentleman from alaska is recognized. mr. young: this was an act of congress to set aside the 1002 area, by the senator from washington state. this is an area that has great potential, 74 miles away from existing pipeline. it's also an area that has a
village that supports the trilling and development in 1002. i'm just saying that no agency has the right to overcome a law of the congress, i'm not talking about the 19 million acres, i'm talking about the small acreage, not really the big -- any bigger than dulles airport, to allow that to continue to be considered by the congress of the united states who set it aside at the insistence of scoop jackson of washington state, with the help of senator ted stevens and myself for potential drilling. it has to have an act of congress but you can't drill in a wildernesarea. i'm saying no money shall be spent new york regulatory agency can turn and make it an off limits area to develop oil if this congress would deserve. -- would decide and i urge a yes vote. i reserve. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. mccollum: i would like to yield a minute and a half to the gentleman from california, mr. huffman. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. huffman: my friend from
alaska is correct, the ultimate decision and the final disposition of this incredible place is up to the congress of the united states. however, the question before us now is how should this area be managed until congress finally resolves this issue. i'm proud to have authored an amendment a few months back that showed that there is bipartisan support in the house for a final wilderness determination. i believe eventually that bipartisan support will be a majority of the congress but in the meantime, those of us working to protect this very important, iconic place know that we are expressing the voice of the american people. nearly a million people commented in support of the wilderness recommendation. these are people from all 50 states, it includes nate i americans, it includes native alaskans. it includes people from the faith community, the business community, the environmental community. this is a uniquely important
place with wildlife that in many cases are not found anywhere else. and with a connection for all of us because the migratory bird species that spend part of their lives in the coastal plain of the arctic refuge have traveled almost all 50 states in other parts of their life stage. so we all have a stake in this. we need to do the right thing. i believe the administration is doing the right thing by managing this area as wilderness while we continue to work on an act of congress that will set until long-standing question. with that, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expire thsmed egentlewoman from minnesota reserves. the gentleman from alaska is recognized. mr. young: most people don't know what they're talking about and we follow the laws of the congress, we should, and i respectfully suggest that i'm not suggesting the whole, i'm not supporting it right now, the arctic wildlife range, i'm talking about 100,000 acres of land that we set aside, the congress. the senate agreed to it.
the conference agreed to it. and here we are trying to let regulatory agency tell us how to manage it. that's inappropriate. i listened to the gentleman on the floor today talking about overregulation of the e.p.a. that's what's wrong with this nation today, regular willer to law allowing the executive branch to run this nation, without the people's voice being heard. that's what's happening here. i suggest respectfully, i urge my colleagues to vote yes on my amendment and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. mccollum: thank you, mr. chairman. i've had the opportunity to be up in this area. this protected area encompasses a wild range of arctic and subarctic ecosystems. and the native flora and fauna is magnificent. the refuge is incredible with and i ological diversity simply understand that the
gentleman from alaska feels strongly about this issue and in a way that i feel differently about it. and that he has been an advocate for his state for decades. but on this important issue, we just simply december agree. lastly, i would be remiss if i didn't point out one more obvious truth. the president will not sign a bill loaded up with anti-environmental riders just like this one. so we only make our path through this bill harder by included it. i hope my colleagues would join me in opposing this and with that, the gentleman, i believe, has yielded back his time, so i yield back mine as well. the chair: the gentleman yields back -- the gentlewoman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from alaska. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. ms. mccollum: roll call. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18. ms. mccollum: i ask for a roll call.
the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from alaska will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from minnesota seek recognition? ms. mccollum: at this time i rise to strike the last word. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. mccollum: i yield to the gentleman from missouri in order to enter into a colloquy with the chairman and ranking member of the subcommittee. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, i rise to support the world war i centennial commission. the united states entered world war i in 1917 more than four million americans served in the great war, including 350,000 african-americans and the first woman ever to enlist in the united states armed forces, and in order to properly commemorate and celebrate the brave service these americans gave to us, the world war i centennial
commission was established by this body in 2013. mr. cleaver: in addition to the memorial, the commission is responsible for planning and executing educational and community activities. i would ask the chair and ranking member to work with me as this bill progresses to to -- to find the necessary resourcers in commission to do its work. and while it is true that there are no world war i veterans still among us, their sacrifice must not be forgotten. ms. mccollum: reclaiming my time, i pledge to work with the gentleman and i yield to chairman calvert. mr. calvert: i understand and share the gentleman's interest in the world war i commission. we may be willing to consider funds but we need to make sure the process is open and transparent resm port language encourages the commission to submit a budget request in the future so we may review it in detail. the commission will serve as the lead organizer for the nation's
commemorative event so america can tell the story to have the great war that profoundly shaped our history. i agree with the gentleman from missouri that the work of the commission is important and look forward to working with the gentleman on this issue. mr. cleaver: thank you, mr. chairman. ms. mccollum: i apologize to my colleague, mr. simpson. with that, i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. it is now in order to consider amendment number 91 printed in house report 114-6 3. for what purpose does the gentleman from alaska seek recognition? mr. young: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 91, printed in house report 114-683, offered by mr. young of alaska. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 820, the gentleman from alaska, mr. young, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: thank you, mr. chairman. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection -- the chair: without objection, so ordered. mr. young: my amendment prohibits funds in this act to
be used to inch amount the final plan to take money away from the fish and game to manage fish and game for subsistence and nonsubsistence uses on federal lands in alaska. in addition it prohibits funds being use odd the national park service rule that interferes .ith state wildlife it violates the national conservation act and signed into law in 1980, protects the ability to have the state of alaska to manage wildlife icross the state on state, private and federal lands. this chamber voted in fare of a similar amendment in h.r. 2604 back in february. these regulations are nothing more than the illegal overreach of the federal government on the state of alaska, when it's in the constitution that they manage all fish and game in the
state of alaska. i reserve. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. mccollum: i claim time in opposition to this amendment and yield a maine and a half to the gentleman from california, mr. cardinass. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. carnas: i stand to strongly oppose this amendment. from some of the most egregious hunting an killing methods. these methods including shooting defenseless swimming car boo from a motor boat, using airplanes to scout and shoot grizzly bears, luring grizzlies with rotting meat and pet food to get point blank kills, killing wolf, black bear and coyote mothers, their dependent pups and cubs at their dens, and trapping of grizzly and black bears with steel-jawed leg hold traps and wire snares. these methods are inhumane and contrary to our values here in this great country.
we should support the scientists, rangers and wildlife managers in the fish and wildlife service and national park service in their efforts to maintain healthy ecosystems. i urge my colleagues to vote no and strike this -- strike this poison pill rider from this bill. these are egregious things that we should not tolerate and we should not codify them in law. thank you very much. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from minnesota reserves. the gentleman from alaska is recognized. mr. young: i'm deeply disappointed in the comments just made. because all he said is not true. the state does not -- the state does not snare, they do not trap, state does not kill wantonly. the state manages. to have the federal government manage the game when it is the law, the constitution, state of alaska, an agreement made with this body, now to have an agency to take that over and the propaganda espoused on this floor from the humane society
is inappropriate of this body. it's a flat-out lie. that's what it is. that is not true. the state manages and they have not used these practices. but they have a right and should have a right to manage the fish and game on the property, which was guaranteed to us. i understand where this pressure's coming from. we in alaska face this every day. no one understands -- we have people in alaska, we have natives in alaska that actually want the state to manage their fish and game. or would like to manage it by themselves, which i do support. but to have the federal government come in is wrong. it's against our constitution and i will stand by this bill, this amendment, to stop moneys to be spent by an agency overreaching. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from minnesota is recognized. ms. mccollum: at this time, mr. chair, i'd like to reserve two
minutes to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. fitzpatrick. the chair: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for two minutes. mr. fitzpatrick: i thank the gentlelady for yielding. mr. chairman, i rise in opposition to the amendment. i respect the concern of the gentleman from alaska, mr. young, and his advocacy for his state. but i oppose this proposal, which in this case does not present an opportunity for a balanced approach to wildlife management. let me clarify why the national wildlife refuge is proposing these rules. according to the united states fish and wildlife services, certain types of inhumane hunting such as bear baiting and den hunting has affected federal refuge areas for wildlife. in fact, one refuge in a peninsula had an emergency closing due to extreme decrease in numbers of brown bears, caused by these hunting practices. rather than shutting down areas where these hunting methods are causing the overculling -- overkilling of alaskan, native alaskan predator, and
restricting access to all hunters, it seems reasonable to me to provide a balanced approach, which provides for a means of traditional permit-based hunting. nothing in the rule of the united states fish and wildlife service, nothing in the rule would limit traditional hunting practices or tactics. but rather it continues and protects existing hunting practices. unfortunately this amendment does not address the wildlife diversity and mechanisms in place to maintain it. therefore it impacts the national wildlife refuge's ability to maintain its parks in a responsible manner and provide native animals with a refuge. we as members of congress have a federal responsibility to ensure that our national wildlife refuges are being used in the most responsible manner possible. the very agency congress has vested with the responsibility to manage our wildlife thinks these killing tactics pose a threat to the necessary diversity of the wildlife. and i agree with them.
i urge my colleagues to support the ability of the fish and wildlife service to effectively manage our national wildlife refuges for future generations of americans. i urge a no vote on the amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from minnesota reserves. the gentleman from alaska is recognized. mr. young: i appreciate the comments from the gentleman. i will say, though, all these instances are being referred to have not happened under state management. i will suggest respectfully the fish and wildlife is no longer a manager of fish and wildlife. they've become people that prohibit activity on the refuges. that was not why these refuges were made. it was made by the people that hunt and fish. and now we're having another groups say this is inhumane. it has nothing to do with it. i'm a little bit shocked that we're reading the things from the humane society, peta and all these other groups. it's not the true facts. i ask you to please look at the
true facts. the management is crucial to the state of alaska. as i mentioned before, we ought to really think about maybe management by the native corporations on their lands too. but to have the federal government manage, which has done a miserable job of management and game, their idea of managementment is to leave them walk around -- management is to leave them walk around, let nature take care of it. i happen to know a little bit about nature. it doesn't take care of it. we're just talking about management. the state has that right under the constitution. so i urge a yes vote on my amendment and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from minnesota is recognized. ms. mccollum: thank you, mr. chair. this amendment circumvents established rulemaking process, which solicits public input, and uses best available science to reach a decision. alaska's aggressive predatory control practices and disregard for science-based management in approach to the service would
negatively impact the stability of the ecosystems and wildlife throughout the region. as 31 biologists and scientists stated in march, 28, 2016, with a letter to the interior secretary service director, i quote, the most current and best available science is clear that predator control measures intended to restore the herd such as moose and cariboo are doomed to failure because the herds need to access nutrition, their main limiting factor, alaska's intensive management scheme, is the wrong approach. and to conserving natural systemses. so, with that i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from alaska. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 92 printed in house report 114-683.
for what purpose does the gentleman from alaska seek recognition? mr. young: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 92 printed in house report 114-683 offered by mr. young of alaska. the chair: pursuant to husband resolution 820, the gentleman from alaska, mr. young, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: mr. chairman, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the chair: without objection, so ordered. mr. young: mr. chairman, my amendment is very simple. it prevents funding from this act to be used to remove three arctic sales that have already taken place, 2017, 2022, outer continental shelf gas and leasing proposed program. the economic benefits associated with offshore development are tremendous. in those two areas alone, we have the potential to produce barrels of - 23.6 oil and natural gas. potentially creating 54,700 jobs and nationwide will
generate billions of dollars in revenue for the state and local government. may i suggest respectfully this money can be used in conservation efforts. land and water conservation funds. you can't have that program without development of oil. yet everybody i know on that side supports the program. the second thing is, if i can say one thing, we sit with our heads in the sand when across the border, china, the other nations, are developing. we must in fact be part players of this program. to do it wisely, do it safely, and do it for the benefit of the american people. if you don't believe in fossil fuels, i understand that. there's no way that we're not going to be using fossil fuels for many years to come. if we are to do so, let's use that which is safe. and we've already proven it can be done safely in the arctic. it's not to volunteer that people think it is, it's 150 feet deep. if we don't do this, off our shores it will be done by foreign countries.
i'm asking the interior to the to -- not to withdraw those sales. it means money to the treasury, it means we have less of a dependence on foreign oil, and it means we'll be actively involved when other countries are involved, we'll be there with our equipment, we'll be able to have an oil spill recovery if they spill the oil, because they will not. i know the parties playing in this. we will. i urge adoption of my amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from minnesota seek recognition? ms. mccollum: mr. chairman, i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. ms. mccollum: thank you, mr. chair. this amendment would mandate, would mandate that the bureau of ocean and energy management include specific areas in the alaska region of the outer 2017, tal shelf in its 2022 lease sales schedule. this amendment would undermine the bureau's fundamental mission to manage the development of offshore resources in an environmentally and economically responsible
manner. in 2017, 2022 outer continental shelf oil and gas lease program was proposed in march of this year, and the public comment has only closed a few week ago. the bureau's required by law, required by law to consider the environmental impacts of the leasing decision. and this includes a comprehensive program environmental impact statement. and it is inappropriate to circumvent this process. these sales should be informed by sound science, using the best data available. this amendment would violate multiple environmental statutes, including nepa, the maritime mammal protection act, the endangered species act, and the coastal zone management act. the amendment undermines the environmental protection required by law and therefore i must oppose the amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from alaska is recognized. mr. young: mr. chairman, these sales, these leases were put up
for lease in 2017-2022. we're not asking for any additional new leases. we're asking for the leases remain in the sales. then we address the environmental issue as the sales take place, before we have development. i'm suggesting respectfully we don't have those areas open, these three arctic sale areas, leases will not be issued in any other area. oil's not where you want it to be. it's where it is. so i'm saying, we can address all the issues the good lady's concerned with after the sales take place. we receive the money and if they can't be done safely, it can be stopped at that time. this happened with shale. so i just say, this is an idea not to let an agency or administration get ahead of itself and say, oh, we're going to take those leases back. that's a prerogative of the agency, yes. but the leases were put up to begin with. so we ought to take and accept. that let's go through the process and the process will follow through and then we'll decide the environmental impact, the culture, and then
we'll have the way to do it right and correctly. with that i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from minnesota is recognized. ms. mccollum: mr. chair, my colleague from alaska, i don't have any other speakers, it's just me. thank you so much. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. mccollum: thank you. obviously we disagree once again. my concern is this amendment would mandate the bureau of ocean and energy management to include specific areas in the 2017-2022 lease sale schedule. and that the bureau needs to uphold the law. it is required to follow the law, to consider environmental impacts of leasing decisions. with that, this amendment would also violate, as i pointed out, very -- quite a few statutes. nepa, maritime mammal protection, coastal zone management act. therefore i must oppose the amendment. with that i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time.
the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from alaska. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. ms. mccollum: mr. chairman, i request a roll call. thank you. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from alaska will be postponed. ment. postponed. amendment number 93, for what purpose does the gentleman from alaska seek recognition? the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 93, ,rinted in house report 114-683 offered by the gentleman from alaska.
the chair: the chair recognizes the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: this amendment is very simple. it's an area called the 40 miles a mining area in the state of alaska, that's been mined since 1895 and for some reason, for 170 acres, there was an attempt by the b.l.m. to go in and stop these mining. these are not large mines, they're mom and pop operations. they put down ridiculous regulations for reclamation and want them to reclaim the land back to the original state before it was ever a mine, not for the disturbance of the mining they were doing. it's amazing to me they'd even think about doing this. i'm talking about people that have been there 20 years, most ,f them retired, they're really hey're the mom and pop companies, spirit of alaska. now the agency coming in, you have to have a reclamation area, this is the way we want it done. yet they don't recognize what's
been done in the past and how it's worked and what they're proposing is wrong and could cost a considerable amount of money to those small mom and pop pine miners. we have this agency for 140 acres, that's all they're talking about. for some reason, got an idea we want to put them out of business. i'm just saying no, they have not to impose these regulations. follow the state mining law and the reclamation that takes place now works. let them continue to do that. we can reclaim the land. they're agreeable to that. they just can't do what they're asking them to do because they can't afford to do it. this is a simple amendment to protect mom and pop groups like any other state, but the federal government is trying to take it away. i urge a yes vote on this amendment and reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves.
for what purpose does the gentlewoman from minnesota seek recognition? ms. mccollum: i rise in opposition to this amendment. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. mccollum: most of the 186 active mining operations on b.l.m., federal managemented lands in the placer mining operation, between 400 and 800 miles of b.l.m. federal managed streams have historic or active planing -- mining imact and there's bush impact and there's a legacy of historic claims with reduced ecosystem function. b.l.m. continues various outreach activities including public meetings and interactions with individual miners and is working with industry to incorporate best practice management. and to use new science-based reclamation techniques to accelerate stream recovery. i hear what the gentleman is saying about state lands and state recovery and what the state of alaska chooses to do with recovery in its own boundaries of state boundaries is one thing. but these are federal lands. in the course of reck la mated
activities, it may be necessary to increase an annual cost to miners to recover these streams and restore the ecosystem function. the amendment prohibits assessing the cost of reclaiming these miners, who are profiting from federal mineral access on federal lands, b.l.m. lands. the taxpayer across this country should not be shouldering the burden of these restoration costs, responsible parties should. that's why i strongly oppose this amendment. with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from alaska is recognized. ms. young: my good lady friend, we're only talking about 49 families. this is small. i'm not talking about all the other mining, 40 mile miners. and i mean, they've been there forever. you can go there and it's like looking into a museum. 1895. and they're -- they have claims,
it's their land. and they're claiming it because it is placer mine, b.l.m. is claiming they have the authority to impose a reclamation system that does not work. did they consult? no. i'm just saying, keep in mind, we're not talking about corporations, we're not talking about large industry. we're talking about, very frankly, you can go up there, i wish you would, you'd find out they're a pretty good group of older alaskans, some hippies, we still have a few of those left, and they're just -- they're not making any money. this is an occupation but if they have to do what the b.l.m. is suggesting they do, and by the way, there's fish in that stream now and it was mined in 1895. what they're asking will break. they can't do it. you'll say good. that's taking people, this is a huge area. it's not big area -- it's not -- total area.
i'm not arguing. i'm just talking about this little 40 mile group. give them a break, let them go out and make enough money to buy saturday night party time. i urge the passage of my amendment. i yelled back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman is recognize. ms. mccollum: the gentleman from alaska has convinced me of one thing, that i need to go back to alaska and spend some time with you there. i still oppose this amendment. the american taxpayer should not be, you know, accepting the burden of restoration costs to make sure that these water ways are reclaimed to how they should be and with that, i am going to continue to oppose this amendment. thank you. i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from alaska. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to.
for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> pursuant to house resolution 820, i offer amendments en bloc. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendments. the clerk: en bloc number 2, consisting of amendments 108, 109, 110, 115rks117, 121, 124, 125, and 126, printed in house report 114-683, offered by mr. calvert of california. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 820, the gentleman from california, mr. calvert, and the gentlewoman from maine, ms. pingree, each will control 10 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. calvert: the majority and minority have agreed to these amendments en bloc. they are noncontroversial amendments that affect a variety of issues. additionally the sponsor of the amendments have agreed to
consideration of these amendments en bloc. i urge adoption of the amendments and reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from maine seek recognition? ms. pingree: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from texas, ms. sheila jackson lee. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for three minutes. ms. jackson lee: i thank the gentlelady and i thank the ranking member and the chairman of the subcommittee for their kindness and their support of the jackson lee amendment. let me indicate that in the sum total of these amendments, amendments number 124, 125, 126, my amendments promote and support, or promote support for national historic areas in our nation, promote partnership strategies and preserving our urban wildlife refuges and promotes outreach programs by the smithsonian institution on the fantastic historical and
artistic knowledge our smithsonian houses and facilitates and in appreciation for america and all over the world. in particular, my amendment number 124 is an amendment that expresses support for the national historic areas and for continuation of national policy of observing for public use historic sites, buildings and other on thes of national significance. my amendment number 125 is an amendment that would prohibit the use of funds to eliminate the urban wildlife refuge partnership. and additionally, amendment that would prohibit the use of funds to limit outreach programs administered by the smithsonian. the idea behind these three amendments is to recognize the great history of this nation, even as young as this country is. in particular, i have in my congressional district freedmanstown, that had logan's camp a place of freed african-american slaves which rew into an amazing community.
in addition, the allen brothers that founded houston are buried in that same neighborhood. in addition to that, we have something called the juneteenth trail, that's the trail of which the slaves traveled from galveston up to houston with an enormous amount of history and that is part of the history of celebrating juneteenth. to preserve that is very important. in the second amendment, i want to make sure we maintain a program that helps in introducing urban youth to the wonders of wildlife and historic preservation. finally, i think it is important that we recognize the historic importance of the smithsonian and continue to emphasize its outreach capacity to ensure that it reaches americans of all levels to speak about the story of this great nation. my amendments again ask the simple question, is our history worthy of knowing and studying and preserving?
it is. is it important to work with our state and local government to help them preserve their history. my amendments answer that question by supporting policies that will work with state and local governments, and reach out to urban youth so they'll understand the wildlife preservation through the urban wildlife preservation and of course the smithsonian that in fact mr. chairman provides an eye to the history of this nation. i ask my colleague to support jackson lee amendments 124, 125, 126 in the en bloc amendment. with that, i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman's time has expire the gentlewoman from maine reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. calvert: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from maine is recognized. ms. pingree: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield three minutes to the gentleman from michigan, mr. kildee. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. kildee: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to my friend for yielding and think ranking member and to the