tv U.S. House of Representatives U.S House of Representatives CSPAN April 25, 2018 2:32pm-4:33pm EDT
professionals to receive royalties for their contributions to the creation of music. this bill would for the first time add producers and engineers who play an important role in the creation of sound recordings to the u.s. copyright law. music organizations representing u.s. music publishers, record labels, songwriters, composers, artists, and performance rights organizations support this bill. the reforms made by this bill are critical because the royalty system has not kept pace with the digital age. these changes will benefit consumers, creators, and the entire music marketplace. i urge my colleagues to vote for this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. not before commending the efforts of doug collins, hakim jefferies, and chairman goodlatte, as well as ranking member nadler.
for shepherding this legislation to this point. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from virginia. mr. goodlatte: mr. speaker, may i inquire how much time remains on each side? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia has 5 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from new york has 12 minutes remaining. mr. goodlatte: we reserve our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. chairman, i now yield two minutes -- mr. speaker, i now yield two minutes to the gentleman from rhode island, mr. cicilline. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from rhode island is recognized for two minutes. mr. cicilline: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise today in support of the music modernization act and proud to be a co-sponsor of this bill. i'm proud to come from the great state of rhode island, a state that sent great senator, claiborne pell torques washington. it was senator pell who authored the bill that established the national endowment for the arts and the national endowment for the humanities. senator pell knew that the greatness of our nation not only defined by strength of our
our ry or the value of g.d.p., but by our ability to promote and protect our can ture and history through the arts and humanities. in keeping with that tradition, today congress moves to make sure that artists and their our creations are protected under the music modernization act. music has always been a part of our culture and history. the power of music has brought people together in moments of celebration and soothes people in difficult times. music transcends political, ethnic, and religious boundaries. the music modernization act is a culmination of years of debate and negotiation with various stakeholders. we held dozens of hearings and heard from artist, producers, and industry experts to develop a solution that reflects the changing landscape of how people consume music and ensures creators are fairly compensated. from the start we were committed to making sure this bill was bipartisan and a compromise everyone could support. within the music community this legislation brought together an unprecedented coalition of music publishers, record labels, songwriters, artist, and
performance rights organizations. the result was a bill meant for the digital age and recognizes the contributions that many people are involved in during the creation of a song. for the first time this bill set up a collective that can give out blanket mechanical licenses to streaming services and ensure proper payments to songwriters and punlers. is bill also ensures compensation for pre-1972 artists who have been left out of the federal copyright system for far too long. it also provides a clearer process for engineers, mixers, and producers to collect royalties. it has been a privilege to be part of this historic moment. i urge all of my colleagues to support the music modernization act and i want to thank mr. jefferies, mr. collins, mr. deutch, and chairman goodlatte and ranking member nadler for their extraordinary leadership in accomplishing what is not only significant for our committee, but significant for our ability to hear and appreciate and continue to nurture our souls with the beauty of music. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from virginia. mr. speaker, at
this time i'm pleased to yield 2 1/2 minutes to another member from music loving tennessee, the veterans' the affairs committee, veterans' affairs committee, mr. roe. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. roe: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of h.r. 5447, the music modernization m act, a bipartisan bill that will finally update our nation's copyright laws and correct a terrible injustice that threatens the fuhr of quality music. music has changed perhaps more than any other industry over the past 50 years when the copyright act of 1976 was signed into law, most people got their music on a vinyl record. i still like vinyl. today you can instantly stream music to your phone from any number of services at the touch of a button. that copyright act might have been what was needed at the time, but it never could have anticipated the radical shift in ow music is consumed over the past even last 10 years. for far too long hardworking songwriters have been penalized
under the old system and been paid only pennies on the dollar for their creative works, even though their songs may have been streamed millions of times every second around the world. garth brooks' iconic song "the dance" has been streamed tens of millions of times and the songwriter, who wrote that fwulte song, was paid a few hundred dollars. that's ridiculous. it's wrong. under the current system, the creative genius that is write this music only be able to make a living doing what they love doing which is writing great songs. music modernization act seeks to fix this and properly recognize the hard work these songwriters put in their craft before they simply stop writing music because they can no longer earn enough money to survive. as a musician myself, i understand what songwriters and performers go through when getting a song out for the world to hear, it's time we recognize the contributions songwriters make to the creative process.
this bill was supported by the entire music industry. songwriters, record labels, music, publishers, streaming services just to name a few. it isn't often we have a truly bipartisan and widely supported peace of legislation to consider, but this bill we have the opportunity and can change the lives of some of our nation's most talented people for the better. i strongly support h.r. 5447 and encourage all of my colleagues to listen to their favorite song one more time before coming to the floor and think of the person who wrote it, think about what it means, and support this bill and truly make a difference in someone's life. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i now yield two minutes to a senior member of the judiciary committee, the gentlelady from texas, ms. jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. jackson lee: i thank the gentleman very much for yielding. and i make the very point that
there are three members on this floor today from the judiciary committee that has an enormous amount of seniority that have seen the long journey that our talented, genius-based musical icons in our nation have traveled to come to this point. so i say congratulations. in the markup i indicated that there was a harmonious sound coming from the judiciary committee and that it was evident that we could work together in a bipartisan manner. so i thank the chairman, mr. goodlatte, and the ranking member, mr. nadler, who have been intimately involved. i'm reminded of all of those who have come in and out of my office through the years as i served on the intellectual property committee some years back and that they were still traveling even in this year, 2018. so my applause to mr. collins and mr. jefferies for providing that musical tome.
this is a very important bill. it is an important bill because it was an inconsistent patchwork that offense the industry -- that offense the this is a very important bill. it is an important bill because it was industry and this address that patchwork and finally gives just compensation to those artists who recorded prior to 1972. first and foremost m.m.a. is a proposition supported by both the majority of songwriters and publishers and the digital service providers. it modernizes the process and brings music licensing into the 21st century long overdue. it puts unclaimed royalties in the hands of the community rather than sitting with digital service. it streamlines the streamline. fourth and finally, it creates a comprehensive database and markets.e grows in the for all those individuals who provided the joy earlier mentioned t. creates a formalized body run by publishers that administer the law, mechanical licensing, and composition markets. for all those individuals who provided the joy earlier streams that spot -- like spotify and apple music and others. it changes the procedure by which millions of songs are made
available and funds a creation of a comprehensive database. more importantly it helps those who prerecord it. my tribute to aretha franklin, dionne warwick, the late jackie ilson, the cherelles, pray truth, and the late cricket. the houston grand opera. mrs. barbara tucker. kirk well.son moran, of course gospel, kirk, kathy -. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. ms. jackson lee: houston is a hub and we're celebrating because of this bill. i congratulate everyone and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. good goodlatte 7 --- mr. goodlatte: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i now yield two minutes to the gentlelady from california, ms. bass. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is
recognized for two minutes. ms. bass: thank you, very much. i rise in support of the music modernization act. i also come from one of those districts that is a hub. after meeting with songwriters and producers in my district and listening to their testimony before the house judiciary committee, it's clear we risk losing the next generation of songwriters if we do not address the rate standards for digital streaming. recently i met with world renowned songwriter paul williams and i have had open discussion was hundreds of songwriters from around the country. songwriters from my district have voiced it is clearly impossible to earn a fair income via digital streaming. they are usually not the famous performers and cannot go on tour to earn a living. over 50% of their income is derived from licensing performance rights to their music. one of my constituents, michelle, shared that she made $1.3 million
streams, millions of streams of her work on one streaming services. as the grammy award winning artist and songwriter, nio, stated even if you write a hit of that streamed millions times, you are still not going to earn enough to pay rent from streaming. that's where the entire industry is moving. which is why i support the of times, songwriters equity act and the classics act and m.m.a. m.m.a. also close as loophole which has negatively impacted early music icons of motown it, jazz, and blues. according to dionne warwick, how could it be that 1979's "i'll never love this way again" receive compensation but not 1969's "i'll never fall in love again" does no. recently legacy songwriter and performer dar len love visited -- darlene love visited my office to express support. she was induct food the rock 'n' roll hall of fame of 2011 she sang backup for elvis, aretha
franklin, and frank sinatra. after decades of listening to her hard work being streamed without being compensated, with the passage of m.m.a. she and other songwriters will have access to the fair compensation they deserve. if we're serious about supporting a next generation of songwriters, we must continue to address queant kuwaited laws. -- anti-y kuwaited laws. the speaker pro tempore: it's my pleasure to jackson lee two minutes to the gentleman from ohio plrnings chabot, a member of the judiciary committee, and chairman of the small business committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized for two minutes. mr. chabot: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to express my continued support for this legislation. a lot of hard work has gone into this legislation over the years, and result is an unprecedented level of consensus from a broad coalition of stakeholders in the music industry who don't always agree. this legislation, i think, will prove to be a great benefit to
music, consumers, and creators, and producers alike. the way we listen to and experience music is much different today than it was when copyright act was enacted back in 1976. as a result, our copyright laws have become outdated and are in many ways insufficient for the music industry in the 21st century. . this provides much-needed updates to bring music licensing into the digital age. particularly improving market efficiencies and transparencies to reflect the modern music marketplace. so, again, thank you to chairman, ranking member, and various sponsors of the underlying pieces of legislation included in this bill. i urge my colleagues to support this and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i now yield one minute to the
gentleman from california, mr. lieu. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute. mr. lieu: i thank you, mr. speaker. as been said that music is a lifeblood of culture, it can transform world views, transport listeners and inspiral social movements. ensuring the law keeps up with music and its changing forms is crucial. with the support of music publishers, artists, songwriters, streaming industries, the m.m.a. will propel the music industry into the 21st century and beyond. i'm proud to be an original co-sponsor of that and want to thank chairman goodlatte and ranking member nadler as well as representatives collins and jeffries and others for their hard work on this bill. as a representative of california's 33rd district, these issues hit close to home. my district sits at the heart of california music industry. i'm proud to have worked with such a unique and engaged community that make up different parts of the industry's fabric.
today we honor that legacy by moving copyright forward. i urge my colleagues to support this bill. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from virginia. mr. goodlatte: mr. speaker, we reserve our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, how much time do we have remaining, please? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york has five minutes. mr. nadler: and the gentleman from virginia? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia has two minutes remaining. on that -- i now yield one minute to the gentlelady from california, ms. chu. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for one minute. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of the music modernization act. as co-chair of the
congressional creative rights caucus, i'm proud to stand with my colleagues to support this consensus bill that aims to modernize our copyright law. music is at the heart of how we experience life. we count on the right song to help us express a moment better than we could ourselves. for music creators that work to help them support their family, keep a roof over their head and food on the table but far too long i heard from songwriters whose compensation was less than pennies in digital plays from number one hits and music legends touring well into their 70's because their work creative before 1972 is not eligible for royalties on digital broadcast. this bill will help bring our copyright law into the digital era and address the gaps that prevent creators from receiving fair compensation for their work. i urge my colleagues to vote for this bill. the lives of our most treasured creators depend on it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves.
the gentleman from virginia. mr. goodlatte: mr. speaker, i continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i now yield two minutes to the distinguished democratic caucus chair, the lead sponsor of the amp act, which is included in this package, the gentleman from new york, mr. crowley. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. crowley: i thank my friend and colleague from new york, mr. nadler. mr. speaker, i want to thank chairman goodlatte, ranking members nadler, congressman doug collins and hakeem jeffries, and all my friends on the judiciary committee for working in such a bipartisan fashion to get this important bill to the floor. we all remember the iconic tune from the 1970's, i write the songs. well, it was first by captain and at the kneel and made popular by david cassidy and barry manilow. it inen caps lates the verse talt of music. while we rightly celebrate the artists and singers behind
these hits and great songs, there often are a number of individuals that work just as hard to make that song a hit. because to make a great song you need not just the writers and singers but also engineers and technicians and producers. people like my friend, mike clink, as well as darrell brown. they may not be as famous as guns n roses or leann rimes, the folks they help produce, but they are equally important when it comes to the process of making that music. but they are not often given the credit or compensation that they so rightly deserve. with this bill, that will finally change. we're making important updates to music copyright law to make sure everyone with a role in making hits that get stuck in their heads get paid for that fair share. i'm especially glad that my ll, the allocation for music producers, or amp, act, is included in this package. i want to thank tom rooney for
working with bhe to help make the people who work so hard to make perfect the iconic recordings we hear every day. our bill will for the first time make mention of engineers and producers in copyright law and be directly paid for the hard work they do. as a musician and songwriter myself, i'm so glad to see bipartisan agreement around these important issues. i'm proud to see all the various folks in the recording industry coalesce around these critical fixes and i'm proud to vote for this and support this bill for fair compensation for creators in the music industry. and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. goodlatte: mr. speaker, we continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i now yield one minute to the gentleman from tennessee, mr. cohen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cohen: thank you. i appreciate the time and i appreciate the work of mr. goodlatte and the other
sponsors, mr. nadler, and everybody else. this was really an issue where we showed that congress can be productive, can get something done working with all of the different groups and bringing them together. it's a successful effort. music is very important to my hometown of memphis which is of course the hometown of elvis presley, where sam philips put them into sun records and produced rock 'n' roll of little richard that did not reach people's ears and it set the world on fire. in memphis we had isaac hayes who had done so much. sam and dave. david porter. many, many memphisians who participated. i have personal friends in jackson brown, j.d., who are great songwriters and performers and have not received necessarily their financial due as they should and fairness and this will get them that. as mr. crowley mentioned, it will get engineers and producers payment for their
work to help create these musical creations that people love. i appreciate the sponsors and proud i was able to be a co-sponsor. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. goodlatte: mr. speaker, i continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i now yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. doggett. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. doggett: thank you. my hometown of austin, texas, is modestly known as live music capital of the world. and the title is well-justified. from south by southwest musical festival in the spring to austin city limits on a couple weekends in october, it is a wonderful place for live music. and it is the musicians and those who support them in technical ways weekday, week end out, in between, that make this industry so vital and who contribute so much to our local
economy. this piece of legislation is a step in the right direction. there's much more that needs to be done to assure that our musicians and all that are involved in the creative economy get their fair compensation. i'm pleased this step is taken because these are really not only talented and creative people but small business people and they deserve to have the property that they generate, their talent, their music that ad so much joy to our lives fairly compensated. this is a good step forward, and i certainly support the legislation and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york's time has expired. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. goodlatte: mr. speaker, may i inquire how much time is remaining. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia has two minutes remaining. and the new york gentleman has his time expired. mr. goodlatte: well, i guess it's time for me to close and i
yield myself such time as i may consume. mr. speaker -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. goodlatte: mr. speaker, this is landmark legislation that has been decades in coming. we have not had a significant review of our music licensing and copyright laws in many, many, many years and there are many people to be thanked, including the staff of the judiciary committee on both sides of the aisle. i particularly want to recognize joe kealy, who is the chief counsel of our internet -- intellectual property subcommittee. i also want to thank the leadership of the committee who have worked for many, many years on intellectual property issues, shelly husband, our chief of staff and general counsel, and brandon richie, our chief counsel of the committee. time doesn't allow me to recognize everyone, but i especially want to recognize our intellectual property subcommittee vice chairman doug collins. he and his staff have put
literally hundreds and hundreds of hours into aspects of this legislation. and i want to personally thank him for that work as well. this legislation has very strong bipartisan support. it is supported by groups who look at intellectual property issues across the ideological spectrum, and it's nearly universally supported by the music industry and the technology companies and others that provide the platforms on which that music is performed. it is going to more fairly treat so many sectors of the music industry that it would be a shame not to see this legislation pass the house with a very strong bipartisan vote, go to the senate, pass there, and then onto the president's desk where i have every confidence it will be signed into law. during the course of many years of review of our copyright
laws, we learned that our music licensing laws were no longer working as intended for songwriters, artists, and creators, people behind the scenes, for the companies that deliver the music in innovative ways, to our consumers. so the music modernization act, a product of the judiciary committee's compe hencive copyright review, is a bipartisan bill. i urge my colleagues to join together and pass it and send it to the senate. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5447, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative -- mr. goodlatte: mr. speaker. mr. speaker, on that i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted.
the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? mr. bishop: mr. speaker, pursuant to house resolution 839 i call up h.r. 3144 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 492, h.r. 3144, a bill to provide for operations of the federal columbia river power system, pursuant to a certain operation plan for a specified period of time and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the amendment printed in part b of house report 115-650 is adopted and the bill as amended is considered read. the bill as amended shall be debatable for one hour. the gentleman from utah, mr. bishop, and the gentleman from arizona, mr. grijalva, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the
gentleman from utah, mr. bishop. mr. bishop: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.r. 3144. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. bishop: mr. speaker, at this time i would like to yield eight minutes to the sponsor, the gentlewoman from washington, mrs. mcmorris rogers, to introduce this piece of legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from washington is recognized for eight minutes. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: thank you, chairman bishop. congress created the bonneville power administration or b.p.a. in 1937. on the heels of the great depression, to distribute power generated from the development of two federally authorized dams, bonneville and grand coolly dam. our dams transformed washington state. from what was a barren, dry land into one of the most productive agriculture regions in the world. these marvels of engineering also provided the pacific northwest with the nation's cheapest and most reliable energy supply.
during world war ii, it was the federal power supplied by b.p.a. that was instrumental in the ramp-up of the aluminum industry, that went into boeing's b-17's and b-29's. and pourd the production of nearly 750 large ships before the end of the war. in the words of president harry truman, without grand coolly and bonneville, it would have been almost impossible to win this war. in 1945, congress altogether ritesed the construction of four large dams along the snake river. ice harbor, little goose and lower granite, to grow what we call today the federal columbia river power system. these four dams can power up to nearly two million homes, or a city the size of seattle. and are crucial to meet b.p.a.'s peak loads during those hottest days in the summer when the wind doesn't blow or the coldest days in the winter when we do not have sunlight.
this year eastern washington had a harsh winter, with many days below freezing. during the coldest days, b.p.a. relied on the ability of these four dams to ramp up production and meet the demand. without a reliable base load, i feared and b.p.a. confirmed many in eastern washington would have lost power. it's important to look back at history when we think about b.p.a. the columbia river system, and the future of energy in our region. last week b.p.a. made its 34th consecutive payment of $1.3 billion to the u.s. treasury. they were able to do this because of the value of our region's low-cost, carbon-free energy. as a result of selling the hydropower production along the columbia river. and in fact, in washington state, nearly 70% of our energy comes from hydropower. some argue that these dams in particular have negatively
impacted migratory fish. yet these dams average fish survival rates of nearly 97%. and while recent ocean impacts, which scientists call a blob, have slowed salmon just the last couple of years, more total salmon have returned this year than before the dams were actually put in place. more than 600,000 fall chinook are forecasted this year. many times higher than when they were first listed under the endangered species act. these record-setting fish passage rates are a result of significant federal investments in new technologies, like fish friendly turbines, habitat restoration, and local collaboration. i mention the local collaboration because i want to quote the columbia river system adaptive management implementation plan that was produced by the department of interior. b.p.a., the u.s. army corps and noaa.
quote, the obama administration undertook an extensive effort to review the 2008 biological opinion and found that the 2008 biop is biologically and legally sound based upon the best available scientific information, and satisfies the e.s.a. jeopardy standard. our river system also functions as a superhighway for agriculture goods. my home state of washington is one of the most trade--- the most trade-dependent state in the country. and because of the river system, having r alone it saved 160,000 trucks on the roads. this biop is supported by the states, by tribes, by utilities, ports, irrigation district, and other pacific northwest water users. the need for this legislation became clear when an unelected judge rejected the collaborative
work. claiming that he knows better how to manage the columbia river than all of the scientists, tribes, elected officials and others that are using the river every day. this oregon federal district judge invalidated the biop and set a course that will leakly put b.p.a.'s future -- likely put b.p.a.'s future and the yearly investments of hundreds of millions of dollars in jeopardy. he wants to us start at the beginning and put breaching the dams back on the table. electricity rates have gone up nearly 30% the last few years, with an average increase of 5.4% for 2018 and 2019. adding unnecessary litigation and additional spill requirements only add to these costs. for example, the judge granted a spill order on april 3 that will cost us an estimated $40 million , the ratepayers in the pacific northwest.
mandating spill means that huge amounts of water will go over the dam 24 hours a day, seven days a week, instead of actually producing electricity. this bill order is experimental science that will likely increase power costs, decrease the grid's reliability, hurt habitat and actually kill fish. in 2028, utilities will be renegotiating their contracts and they're making decisions now. this uncertainty is plaguing the pacific northwest and the columbia river system. as a result, i am proud of the work that we have done coming together in a bipartisan way to support this legislation, to provide certainty. this bill will codify the current biop until 2022, and prevent unnecessary costs to people and ratepayers all around the pacific northwest. it also reasserts congress' authority over the dams.
a hearing was held in the natural resources committee last fall and the bill recently passed out of committee with bipartisan support. technical changes were made to ensure necessary maintenance and improvements to the army corps dams would continue without interruption. we hear the other side talk about being against the status quo, calling it illegal, and an unprecedented assault on the endangered species act. unfortunately this narrative is misleading and it doesn't take into account the whole picture, nor the success of the dam. for example, the port of clarkston has seen new businesses from the american queen steamboat company, tourism that is coming to our communities, that is bringing jobs and bringing people. this bill is a fiscally responsible alternative to the current judicial overreach that doesn't take into account all of the river users. if enacted, this certainty will provide us and help reduce the
costs on the people of eastern washington by stopping this $40 million spill experiment, encourage clean energy, lower carbon emissions, and save taxpayer dollars $16 million, while saving fish. bottom line, dams and fish can co-exist. and after more than two decades in the courtroom, let's let the scientists, not one judge, manage our river system, and get to work to further improve fish recovery efforts. and with that, i yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from utah reserves. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. grijalva: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. grijalva: thank you. mr. speaker, the bill we're debating today, i'm sorry to say, is yet another attempt by my republican colleagues to accelerate the extinction of our nation's fisheries.
h.r. 3144 weakens protections for runs of wild salmon and steel head in the pacific northwest. which are extremely important to commercial, recreational, and tribal fishing interests. this is the worst possible time for such an extreme approach. last year for the first time federal scientists surveying the pacific northwest salmon population came up with empty nets. and yet here we are moving a bill that would only worsen the salmon crisis. while disappointing, i can't say today's bill is entirely surprising. in fact, this bill is just the latest attack by my republican colleagues in their broader war on salmon and the salmon fishing industry. we saw these same attacks on sam whn house republicans jammed -- salmon when house republicans jammed the grow act through the house recently. this bill sought to eliminate protections for california salmon and put california's native fisheries on the path to extinction. meaning thousands of job losses
across california, oregon, and washington state. house republicans pushed the bill through, even though estimates show that 78% of californians -- california's native salmon will be extinct this century under current trends. instead of trying to counter these trends, house republicans decided it was more important to help some of their big business buddies who would rather drain our public rivers even further for private profit. and now we're here today with another bill that harms our wild salmon and the businesses that depend on their existence. it's no surprise that our committees received numerous letters from businesses and fishing industry groups opposed to h.r. 3144. the committee also received several letters from guiding and outdoor retail businesses, the food industry, and for many other businesses that depend on functioning ecosystems and the columbia basin salmon.
aside from being bad for many businesses, this bill also represents a troubling attack on our nation's bedrock environmental laws, and the legal process. since the early 1990's, federal courts have found the federal dam operations at the federal columbia river power system endanger the existence of the pacific northwest salmon runs and violate our nation's laws, including the endangered species act. as a result, federal agencies have been ordered several times to develop a new dam operation plan to recover the region's dwindling salmon populations. instead of requiring federal dam operations to finally come into compliance with the law, and develop a salmon recovery plan that works, h.r. 3144 locks in an outdated illegal plan until at least 2022, that will cause great harm to wild salmon, and struggling fishing communities. furthermore, this bill blocks recent court orders requiring
additional salmon protection measures and -- at federal dams. it also bans federal agencies from even studying the possible changes to dam operations that can improve salmon survival, such as increased spill. in short, this bill causes great harm to wild salmon and many businesses, tribes and communities that depend on them. for these reasons, i urge my colleagues to vote no and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. bishop: i'm happy to yield three minutes or so to the gentleman who lives in this area and knows firsthand what is taking place there, ms. herrera beutler. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from washington state is recognized. ms. herrera beutler: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you for the work your committee has been doing to support vibrant salmon runs, as well as protect low-cost, renewable, clean energy. leading scientists and federal agencies, northwest states, sovereign tribes, and notably
the obama administration crafted what is known as the 2014 biological opinion on how the columbia river federal hydropower system should operate. the biop as it's called was developed with the utmost standards of integrity and trans-- and transparency and, importantly, collaboration. conservative republicans and the obama administration got together and used the best available science, under this plan's implementation we've seen several years of record or near-record returns of adult salmon. the plan is working. so why are we here today? unfortunately in 2016, a u.s. district judge rejected the 2014 biop and ordered the federal agencies start the process over with a requirement that they look at breaching the four snake river dams. here's the reality, folks. if we were -- i can't express how important this hydrosystem is for the entire northwest. i've heard you couldn't match the energy produced by these
dams with six or more coal-fired power plants. none of us want to return to that. more recently, that same judge who issued the order, issued a mandated spill over the columbia and snake river dams. spill occurs when water and young migrating salmon are shot over the dams. spill is like medicine. the right dosage can help you. but too much can harm or even kill you. the same is true for salmon. the judge's ruling lacks scientific backing, as federal fishery scientists believe these spill mandates will provide little or no benefit to juvenile salmon or returning adult salmon. as we've seen, these actions are not only in blatant contradiction to the best available science, they're also a direct attack on ratepayers, the families and small businesses and the local economies who depend on affordable, clean, reliable energy. ratepayers in our region spend almost up to $1 billion a year
when all is said and done on protecting these wild runs through science-backed spill that already takes place in other mitigation efforts. but abusive litigation robs hundreds of millions of dollars per year of hard-earned tax money from the pockets of my constituents, the price tag on the judge's spill mandates an -- the -- are estimated to be an additional $40 million taken from ratepayers this year. so now we need to pass this bill for the sake of salmon runs if the sake of rate payers and for the sake of the environment. this is not a partisan bill, it's bipartisan. it represents restoring the obama administration-led collaborative plan to responsibly manage our salmon population and hydroelectric infrastructure. a couple more seconds? the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for 30 seconds. ms. herrera beutler: the exact
same opponents of this bill who claim it would gut protection, the -- i erepeat, the exact same group, asked the courts to keep the 2014 biop in place. before they opposed it, the bill's opponents asked to do what our bill does. so scientists, federal agencies of jurisdiction and yes, at one time, even the bill's opponents have said the agencies should operate under the 2014 biop while a new plan is developed. s that vote for listed salmon because it keeps current measures in place and we know they're working. it is a vote for the region's economy, and it avoids wasting millions of dollars. and it is a vote for our economy because we cannot match the clean energy produced. i urge a yes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona is recognized. ms. grijalva: i yield three from s to the gentlewoman
massachusetts, ms. saunders. -- tsongas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. ms. tsongas: the bald eagle, american alligator and great whale are a few examples of iconic species who have recovered fre this brink of extinction thanks to the endangered species act. despite its broad success, today the shouse speaking -- seeking to pass yet another bill that undermines this bedrock environmental law. and causes irreparable harm to salmon and steelhead species, species already at great risk of extinction, species that play an irreplaceable role in the pacific northwest ecosystem. their presence benefits more than 130 other species, including the critically endangered southern resident killer whales whose existence depends on healthy salmon runs.
this is not just about the pacific northwest. any effort to undermine the endangered species act and thereby its protectioners in species and landscapes that make our country uniquely american impacts us all. several federal agencies and courts have determined that dam operations in the columbia and snake rivers cause significant harm to 13 speas cease or populations of salmon and steelhead listed under the endangered species act. instofede allowing science-based management practices that protect both endangered species and the many users of these rivers including hydropower generators this legislation locks in a failing operation plan that has already been found in violation of the endangered species act. knowingly endangering the existence of salmon is in direct violation of the law. and betrays the long bipartisan tradition of the endangered speas cease act. instead to have rolling back critical safe forwards and recovery efforts, we should
reject this legislation and support a transparent, stake holder driven process that protects endangered species and the many fishermen, businesses, communities, and tribes who depend on a sustainable columbia river. i urge my colleagues to vote no on h.r. 3144 and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from arizona reserve. the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. bishop: i'm pleased to yield three minutes to the gentleman from oregon, another person who lives in this area and realizes that this judicial decision is not necessarily based on science and can actually do harm to the endangered species, three minutes to mr. schrader from oregon. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. schrader: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to include in the record the following letters from the national electric cooperative association and the national electric contractors association. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so order. mr. schrader: it's time to put science back in the decision
making process for oregon and the salmon recovery strategy. rather than having the courts dictate the best way to have recovery, we should let the experts in u.s. fish and wildlife, noaa and others lead the way. h.r. 3144 allows that to occur. rather than having fish policy deintide lawsuit, it lets the experts do their job. quite simply, it will ail lou the federal columbia river power system to be managed according to the 2014 obama administration approved biological opinion until a new biop can be completed in 2020. u.s. fish and wile life, noaa and others have spent years managing this fishery. their hard work suzz summarily thrown out by the court in favor of continued litigation. in fact a third, yes a third, of our power bills in the northwest is dedicated to fish recovery. we've been diligent. bonneville rate payers stepped
up time and again. we made strides despite battling the effects of climate change, eags acidify case and overfish big foreign nations. some things we can control, some thing we cannot. like sea lion depp rah dation, we can. despite scientific evidence and warnings, fish and wildlife biologists asea lions account for 20% or more of the adult say mo -- salmon loss in the columbia river system we're not doing anything about it. even our governors agree we need to do something about that let's deal with that rather than one injunction after another of more spill over the tops of the dams that is not based in good science this latest order will cost $40 million to $50 million with the jury out on its effective of juvenile survival and subsequent adult return. let's at least get some scientific data to see if it's a good idea. 3144 would allow that to happen. b.p.a. is at a crossroads.
natural gas is abundant, but its low cost coupled with demands for fish mitigation threaten our hydropower system that accounts for 50% of the electricity in the northwest. b.p.a. cannot absorb more spill requirements with subsequent loss of power generation and revenue without having to curtail the very fish mitigation recovery programs that litigants want. that have been helping recover our endangered salmon. b.p.a. is becoming uncompetitive due to these costs. if they go away, what happens? more natural gas. more fossil fuels. it makes no sense if your goal is balancing smart, scientific-based fish recovery to put b.p.a. out of business and eliminate local control that the northwest has had on determination its own future. the entire northwest delegation worked togethered on this and we'd like to continue to do so. we need to stop the constant
litigation. let the experts do their job. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on 144. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. grijalva: i ask to enter into the record a letter of on soifings the governor of washington, a letter of opposition from governor inslee. 40 undersigned businesses in opposition to the legislation, and over 22 environmental and outdoor organizations in opposition to the legislation. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. grijalva: thank you, mr. speaker. let me yield four minutes to the gentleman from oregon, congressman blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for four minutes. mr. blumenauer: i appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in
permitting me to speak on this and the element he is put into the record. these are tough issues. the bonneville dam is in my district. i have been involved with these issues for decades. i've watched the give and take. part of what we're facing today is the legacy of our move in to create the bonneville system without really knowing what we were doing when we started. there was a rich fisheries existent, rumor has it you could actually, people claim you could walk across the backs of the salmon when they were spawning. he dams implemented good for producing energy, not good for the fishery system both in term os they have river and the marine ecosystem that depends on it. and it's not just a commitment to the endangered species act and the environment.
we're dealing here with commitments to native americans. who have been ill served with their treaty rights. that's one of the reasons why we have litigated this for years. because they had valid treaty rights as a sovereign people and the united states violated them. and only recently under the pressure of litigation that we were responsive to their needs and some changes were made. now it's not just the current federal judge, we've had objections through the judiciary looking at some of the compromises that people have made. i understand the political pressures. i watch it in terms of the economy, in terms of transportation. in terms of native american. in terms of fish and wildlife. in terms of agricultural interests. these are difficult and troublesome efforts and there's no good response because we have
made more commitments than the mighty columbia river can deliver on. we treat it like a machine and we have difficulty reck re-con siling. the judge in case has found that the plan was wanting. and has put in place a system for the new buyout. this legislation is not going to stop litigation. if it passes, i'll guarantee you we'll be back in court and i think there's a very strong likelihood that rather than moving it forward, it'll delay it. look at the record in terms of the opponents to approaches like this on how they fared in court. it's not a good record. now i would suggest strongly that we are better served by allowing this process to go forward. respect nepa. respect the endangered species. respect the process that is put
in place. and look at all the options. now i'm not saying tomorrow we're going to tear down snake river dams. there are lots of options short of dam removal. but when we start taking things off the table we limit our ability to meet our responsibilities under the law and under our treaty obligations and candidly , in what's going to be best -- in the best interest of solving a very complex issue. i would hope that we would reject this legislation not only because i think it is ill-advised, i think it undercuts the environment, our obligations to the native americans that it will delay rather than accelerate it, but i think it provides a precedent that we don't want to have. i don't think we want to have congress intervening in the midst of these process, perseding --
mr. grijalva: i yield the gentleman a minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional minute. mr. blumenauer: when i look at what this congress, particularly under republican rule, has done trying to intervene, to supersede science, to have political decisions on things that really deserve balance with the environment, with treaty rights, dealing with the long-term perspective, it's not a very encouraging record. i strongly urge that we side with environmentalist groups, with our two governors work a number of us in the delegation, allow this process to work and not undercut it and put us back in court. if so, i guarantee we'll be back here next year and the year after that with things worse rather than better. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from arizona reserves. the gentleman from utah is
recognized. r. bishop: as one of the opponents said, the biop exceeds the rules. speaking on behalf of the eight tribes that endorse this in his area, the gentleman from washington, mr. newhouse, is recognized for two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. newhouse: i want to thank the chairman of the natural resources committee for yielding. mr. speaker, earlier this afternoon, i had the opportunity during debate on the rule to rise and speak about the -- about this bill as well as the great coalition of stake holders who have collaborated to support h.r. 3144. some of the strongest voices are that of our local public utility districts and rural electric cooperatives across the pacific northwest who have been immensely helpful in their advocacy and engagement of this legislation. i have here a stack of letters
and resolutions of support, mr. speaker, from these groups in oregon, idaho and my home state of washington and would respectfully request they be submitted for the record. . the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. newhouse: i would like to express my sincere gratitude for their support as well. mr. speaker, many advocates for the environmental lobby claim to be pro-science. but it is clear that far too often they only rely on that science when it's convenient. the spill order mandated by this judge could have harmful effects on the very fish species the biop was created to protect. and yet my colleagues in opposition to this bill say that we are the ones trying to hurt the fish. federal agencies and scientific experts warn of the risks these spill mandates can place on the fish. we should listen to these experts. we should support science. now is the time to be pushing --
not the time to be pushing ideology. now is the time to be pushing pro-science pragmatism to both save our salmon and save our dams. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from utah reserves. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. grijalva: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield three minutes to a member of the natural resources, ranking member on that kerks the gentleman from california, mr. lowenthal. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for three minutes. mr. lowenthal: thank you, mr. speaker. endangered species -- endangered salmon are not the only species that h.r. 3144 puts at risk. by removing critical protections for salmon runs, this bill would also push one of our most treasured whale species closer to extinction. as pointed out by congresswoman tsongas, the southern resident killer whales are critically
endangered. in fact, there are only 76 of them that are left. these whales depend upon healthy and abundant salmon populations for survival. more than 50% of their diet comes from chinook salmon in the columbia river basin. without access to these wild salmon populations, southern resident killer whales are literally starving to death. in order to save both of these iconic species, we cannot undermine important habitat restoration efforts or improve -- or improvements in dam operations. both of which are essential to promoting survival in the river systems where these salmon spawn. unfortunately h.r. 3144 would do just the opposite.
in addition, the southern resident killer whales provide immense economic benefits to the pacific northwest. whale watching is a major tourist attraction in washington, and it's contributed an additional $65 million to the state's economy each year. losing these killer whales would not only have an irreversible effect on the marine ecosystem, it would be a huge blow to the tourism industry and to the local businesses that rely on their survival. h.r. 3144 may be known as the salmon extinction act, but frankly we should tack on southern resident killer whales to that name. without access to waters beyond the snake river dams, salmon populations will continue to plummet, and without salmon, the southern resident killer whales will die.
the fate of these species, both these species, rests in our hands. i urge you to stand with me and stand with the whales and vote against h.r. 3144. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from arizona reserves. the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. bishop: thank you, mr. speaker. unfortunately noaa did a study which said that the hatchery production of salmon in this area is more than -- more than offsets any loss from the dams. even though we have this issue of an endangered species trying to eat another endangered species and which one are we going to support, i'm going to yield two minutes to the gentleman from colorado, mr. lamborn, who is a member of our committee, who understands this particular issue. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for two minutes. mr. lamborn: i thank the gentleman for his leadership. h.r. 3144, introduced by mrs. mcmorris rogers of washington, was considered by the subcommittee i chair. it looks to provide certainty and reliability to the pacific northwest. this system includes four large dams on the lower snake river in
washington state that provide the region a number of benefits, including renewable, emission-free hydropower. despite all of these benefits, the power system has been mired in third party litigation for decades. some groups have focused their efforts on removing the four dams under the false assumption that it will improve endangered fish species. in reality, however, these dams already have survival rates for lmon in the upper 90 percentile. a federal court ordered round the clock spillover of the dams that went into effect last week. these additional spills will do little to help the fish species, and in reality do nothing more than leave the region's tax ratepayers to foot a spill surcharge estimated to cost up to $40 million per year. this bill ensures that the power system is operated in accordance with the current operations plans until certain reasonable targets are met. it was found to be legally and
scientifically sound by the obama administration, and has resounding support amongst stakeholders in the region. we need to ensure science is guiding the operations of the power system. and not judicial orders and special interests -- special interest ideologies. we need a consensus approach by local stakeholders, not a mandate imposed by judicial fiat. this bipartisan bill is supported by trade unions, the farm bureau, regional stakeholders, and a number of public utility districts. i urge my colleagues to support this good piece of legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from utah reserves. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. grijalva: thank you very much. i'd like to yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from california, vice chair of the resources -- vice ranking member of the resources committee, mr. huffman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for the remaining time of the gentleman from arizona. mr. huffman: i thank the gentleman from arizona. and thank you, mr. speaker.
today we're being asked to pass yet another bill that undermines the endangered species act and accelerates the extinction of our nation's fish and wildlife. especially -- specifically h.r. 3144, the salmon extinction act, undermines protections for several runs of wild salmon and steel head in the pacific northwest. the northwest's iconic salmon runs are extremely important to commercial, recreational and tribal fishing interests across the country. my republican colleagues are pushing this bill even though the region's salmon runs are currently at crisis levels. recently we've even seen reporting that for the first time federal scientists who were surveying northwest salmon populations came up with empty nets. and yet here we are today advancing a bill that will do nothing but accelerate our nation's existing salmon declines. the bill also represents a troubling attack on the legal process. if enacted, it would overturn
legally sound court decisions simply because the bill's sponsors don't like them. instead of following the law, this bill forcibly mandates the use of an outdated, illegal salmon recovery plan for the federal columbia river power system. the recovery plan in question has clearly been found by the courts to violate the law. and the endangered species act. it's illegal. and congress, through this bill, would be saying, do it anyway. i should note that this bill also undermines one of our nation's other bedrock environmental laws. the national environmental policy act or nepa. by barring a host of actions that could potentially recover this region's salmon runs, which are currently, again, on the brink of extinction. the sponsor of this bill, and i -- and -- of this bill and do i agree on one thing, however. when talking about this bill representative mcmorris rodgers recently said dams and fish can co-exist and i too think that is
possible. the debate here is not about dams versus no dams. the debate is about striking the appropriate balance between responsible hydropower development and sound fisheries protection. for too long there's been an imbalance. when we consider these issues. our country built thousands of dams in the 20th century before we realized the harm that can be caused to our nation's fisheries. so today we're left with many legacy low-value dams that don't justify their cost and their impacts to our nation's fishery and natural resources. so as we consider what to do about these older low-value dams, our decision making must be guided by the best available science and a consideration of all available options. not what politicians in congress want. unfortunately this bill takes us in the wrong direction by blocking responsive, science-based fisheries management. it would actually lock in a
disastrous status quo until at least the year 2022, a status quo that's expensive, illegal and inadequate, an approach that causes great harm to wild salmon, struggling fishing communities, tribes and energy consumers. the status quo is not working. this bill says, keep doing it anyway. it's time for federal agencies to pursue new, innovative solutions that are better for both fisheries and hydropower generation. this bill pushes a one-sided, divisive approach that will only cause further harm. and that's why it's opposed by the governors of both washington and oregon, by tribal interests, by hundreds of businesses that depend on healthy salmon runs, and also by numerous conservation organizations. i urge my colleagues to vote no and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from arizona refreshes -- reserves. the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. bishop: with this i yield five minutes to the gentleman from arizona, mr. gosar. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentleman from arizona is recognized for five minutes. mr. gosar: thank you. i rise in support of the bill offered by congresswoman mcmorris rodgers. this is a great piece of legislation that supports smart hydroelectric operation, a stable and integrated energy grid, and, above all, reinforces that the united states congress has a vested interest in ensuring it, congress, rather than the judiciary promulgates federal policy. h.r. 3144 keeps in place the operational plan developed by consensus through multiple agency processes and based in the best available science. for four dams in washington state, which have wrongfully come under siege recently due to an arbitrary court order by a judge in oregon. in general, continuing to lean on hydropower as a long-term component of our nation's electrical grid is an absolute no-brainer. hydropower is a clean source of energy and its reliability and cost effectiveness are just a few of the reasons it enjoys the
stature it has today. it needs to maintain that stature, cling -- including the requirement of careful, science-based policy crafting when changes to hydropolicy are in question, if we are to guarantee a reliable hydropolicy energy for our future. to their mindset, dams are not natural parts of the landscape and therefore they represent a most serious threat to the planet. to them changes to the natural landscapes are an at ma. despite the fact that only real constant to our planet and the environment is change itself. the judge's in order this case in question is unfortunately in keeping with this very same mindset. this is not a stretch to say because he in fact fails to rely on the only available and complete science that informed past decisions concerning the federal columbia river power system. these past decisions, keep in mind, included the obama administration's green lighting of the current operation plan in
2014 that the judge seeks to overturn with his spill order. what the judge did in this case was to take it upon himself to depart from agency consensus based on a sound science, and order change to the operation plan of the power system, just because he wanted to. he ordered this major policy change first, which will cost electricity customers in the region $40 million annually, by the way. and peg future changes to the outcome of a nepa review which is just getting waund i. but the only grounds for so radical a policy change would be if nepa review in question called for those changes when it's finally finished. the judge doesn't know what the outcome of the nepa review will be. obviously. because it's still being conducted. he made his decision without basis, and now the country is supposed to pay for it. some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle constantly rail about how they oppose bills and proposals and prevent the national environmental policy act review process from being carried out.
well, folks, h.r. 3144 also allows continuation of a court ordered national nepa review process. it if my colleagues practice what they preach, then they would support this bill as it allows a nepa review process to be carried out. congress has an obligation to remind everyone involved that we are the constitutionally authorized policymakers, and that we choose to make policy, and require agency decision making on the basis of sound science. . this will keep the plan in place until 202 unless the nepa process review finishes first at which point the nepa-supported plan would commence. it abides by the n pembings a process even though this judge's order fails to do that. h.r. 3144 allows the court-ordered nepa process to continue without the spill experiment. the fear is without this, the
spill regime will be put in place cha causes more cost but provides no apparent benefit to the fish it purports to help. what's crucial to keep in mind asst the broader significant of this bill to any member who has a major public works infrastructure operating in their district. without this bill it is possible that this judge's terrible precedent could stand. at that point nothing stands in the way of an activist judge across the country waking up one day and deciding to put a halt to this a whole slew of public i think fra structures which make this is country tick. h.r. p 144 is necessary to establish congressional intent. sound process must win the day over the capriciousness of an activist judge or his political leanings. i offer letters of support from the loal utility districts in support of h.r. 3144. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentleman yields back. the gentleman from utah reserves. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. grijalva: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i want to speak to another problem, an issue, with this bill that one of my colleagues brought up in his statement and that is the great harm it will cause to the tribal interest in the pacific northwest. native people of the northwest see that most of their ancestral -- ceded most of their ancestral homeland to the united states in exchange for the right to catch salmon and steelhead at accustomed places. the federal government has a long history of failing to protect these fishing rights. if enacted, h.r. 3144 would further harm tribal fisheries, which are critically important source of food. they're of great cultural and religious significant to the tribes. just this week, the pierce tribe contacted our economy to urge us
to reject h.r. 3144 and i think congress should heed this call and reject this piece of legislation. with that, mr. chairman, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair rill e-- will receive a mess act. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been asked inform the e to house that the senate has passed the bill in which the con cushes of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from recognized. mr. bishop: how many more speakers does the gentleman have. mr. grijalva: i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona is recognized.
mr. grijalva: i think -- thank you, mr. speaker. the concerns have been laid out by people that have spoken against this legislation. 3144. and essentially, this legislation, h.r. 3144, violates bedrock environmental laws. those have been stated by members that have spoken against the legislation. it harms businesses. it hurts the tribes. in the northwest. it's an attack on the legal process. and in the left arm it'll hurt rate payers. i urge a no vote on h.r. 3144 and yield back the remainedmoifer time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the zpwrelt utah is recognized. mr. bishop: i recognize myself for such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. bishop: i'm happy to be here
to present this bill especially as our good friend, mr. todd i working on s been this, he's returning back to his home state of washington where he realize house important this bill is. this bill has support in washington and from idaho and montana as well as eight other tribes in this area, as well as the united power trade association, the rural contractors association, public power association, association of wheat growers, scores of other individuals i'd like to submit for the record a complete list of organizations that support this bill and letters that support this legislation either by u.c. or general leave. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. bishop: i also would like to insert into the record an exchange of letters with chairman shuster and thank him for agreeing to help expedite
coffings the bill today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. bishop: here's the bottom line for this piece of legislation. states aee to it. there are nine tribes in the air -- area and eight of them support it. the obama administration endorsed this a judge decided to change all of that and change all of that and ordered a spill with no apparent rationale to it. there's no one over here that hates salmon. we're not trying to kill them all. heaven knows the only way i like to kill salmon is if i'm consuming them myself. however in 2011, another spill took place on this particular river which had the process of actually killing this endangered species that was there. this judge's order without any kind of rationale to it could indeed be one of the situations that actually sterilize this is river and the species rather than protecting the river and the species. look, let's allow river
operators to operate the river. let's allow scientists to conduct the science. and let judges go back to granting divorces. allowing a judge with no background in these issues to dictate river operations and subvert the science is totally irresponsible on our part. this is a piece of legislation that clearly is a win for the rate payers to the tune of $40 million they'd have to do if this decision by the judge stands. it's also win for taxpayers to the tune of about $16 million. it's a win for the fish by preventing a potentially deadly environmental decision that has no basis in actual science. and once again it was the last administration that created the pattern in which we are going. let's go back to that and do it. if another science, or biological opinion needs to be done let it happen. but don't allow the judge to
change what the river operators are saying is the wisest policy until you do that. that's the basis of this particular bill. it helps the power. it helps the fish. it helps all of us. and let's face it if you're not using that hydropower, you're going to have to pick up fossil fuel power to make up the difference. see which one actually is healthier for the environment. mr. speaker, i commend my colleagues for doing this. i urge all in the house to support this legislation. which is a bipartisan bill that has bipartisan support. with that, i yield back the remained over my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. all time for debate has expire. pursuant to house resolution 839, the previous question is ordered on the bill as amended. those in favor say aye. -- the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to provide for operations of the federal columbia river power system pursuant to a certain operation plan for a specified period of
time and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from washington seek recognition? >> i have a motion to recommit at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentlewoman opposed to the bill? >> i am opposed. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman qualify. the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: ms. jayapal of washington to recommit the bill back to the committee on natural resources and report the same back to the house forthwith with the following amendment. section 5, her cost for consumers. nothing shall prohibit the sale of electricity generated by the columbia river system at the lowest reasonable amount. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized in support of her motion. ms. jayapal: this is the final amendment to the bill which will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. if adopted it will immediately
proceed to final passage as amended. i make the motion to ensure the millions of american who rely on public power can continue receiving afordable pow power. president trump in his latest budget proposed charging millions of americans more for their electricity. the president wants to charge americans what we he calls market-based rates which means millions of americans who rely on public power will pay more than what they pay now this proposal has rightly provoked bipartisan opposition and i hope my republican colleagues will join me in rejecting this ill-advised proposal which will result in higher bills for millions of our constituents. i should also add that the underlying bill is based on a false premise, that rates can be lowered by shirking our responsibilities to protect our environment, restore our salmon populations, and follow the law. after all, restoring our region's salmon populations will reduce our costs in the long run. this underlying bill takes us in the wrong direction and it's
important to inshrewd some context on this complicated issue. starting in the 1930's, the federal government began the construction of 31 hydroelectric dams on the columbia river. these dams which make up the federal columbia river power crps provide f power through the the northwest. however it's become clear they have operated in ways that pose serious threats to our region's salmon runs and violate our environmental laws. several courts, including the ninth circuit court of appeals and the oregon u.s. district court have ruled as such. the courts ordered a new biological opinion. as well as a nepa review in order to bring the plans in alignment with federal law. rather than letting this critical process continue, h.r. 3144 aims to circumvent our court system and the law by blocking legally ordered salmon protection measures. congress should not be in the
business of closing the door on legal and regulatory review processes simply because some members don't like them. some claim that the court process will make it more expensive for rate payers due to decisions like the one to increase spill over the dam which is this bill would illegally block. this process which is meant to release additional water over the tops of the dams to ensure that juvenile salmon can migrate out is a critical step in increasing salmon recovery. recovery rates. it is currently up for debate whether or not rate payers will see an increase of any sort in the cost in the short-term but the long-term benefits of changes like this one are indisputable. the 13 species of steelhead and salmon threatened by these dams are crucial to our region and our fishing industry relies on them for its survival. in 2011, mr. speaker, 34,500 jobs were provided by a healthy sport fishing industry which contributed more than $3.8
billion to the economy in washington, oregon, and idaho. and according to a recent poll in washington state, a strong majority of voters are actually willing to pay up to $7 a month in additional costs in order to save our wild salmon and improve water quality because they know how incredibly important it is to all of our economies and our communities. whether or not the increase spill will raise costs, that's not clear, but what is clear is that conserving these critical populations is a priority for the people in the pacific northwest. the irony, mr. speaker is that h.r. 3144 will ultimately cost our rate payers even more money in the long term prosm tecting our salmon populations is 100% necessary. it is our obligation under the endangered species act. so simply closing our eyes and hoping this all goes away is not an option. additionally, the native peoples of the pacific northwest have the undeniable treaty rights to
catch these salmon and steelhead at accustomed places, meaning that these populations have to be maintained. we can't continue to fail to uphold our end of this deal and this bill would move us further away from where we need to be. this issue has to be addressed. and the review process mandated by the courts is doing just that. by denying the opportunity to implement necessary science-based changes required to bring the fcrps in line with federal law, h.r. 3144 will cost rate payers more down the line. restoring the salmon population will be incredibly expensive and gutting fisheries protections and kicking the can down the road does not save our rate payers well. we must move forward with the ongoing biological opinion review and the nepa process but we also have to ensure that we are continuing to be mindful of our rate payers in the region this bill will ultimately cost rate payers more, not less, and mr. speaker, it is possible to find a solution that works.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek reck nizz? mr. bishop: i claim time in opposition to the motion. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. bishop: i do appreciate the commitment of the gentlelady from washington. the effort to solve some problems. many of the issues that were brought up. unfortunately, many of the issues addressed simply are not covered in the motion to recommit at the same time. great speeches, not necessarily really relating to the motion. if you actually do look at what the motion will do, ultimately, it's very clear it will ensure that rates do go up, carbon emissions will go up, farmers, families, union members, small businesses, they will all have to eventually pay for it. . the underlying bipartisan legislation, though, not so poorly worded gimeck that cedes more authority to courts and lawyers, will protect ray payers and endanger salmon and
the what's and the taxpayers at the -- whales and the taxpayers at the same time. but, rather than -- in all due respect, i actually feel happy i was here when we saw display the senate actually passing something. so i would suggest in all humility to the other side that if they actually wanted to do something which would encourage y commitment and my approval of an m.t.r., it would to realize and recognize something that happened 10 years ago this friday in which the socialist member from milwaukee, wisconsin, 107 years ago friday introduced a resolution to dissolve the senate. now, if that was a motion to recommit, that i would firmly endorse and firmly because that would actually help us move forward. unfortunately, that's not the motion to recommit in front of us. the motion to recommit does not help us move forward. i ask for a no vote on the motion to recommit and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back.
without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the noes have it. the motion is not agreed to. jalen rose may i request a record -- a jayapal: may i request recorded vote, the yeas and nays? the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes y electronic device. pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 20, the 15-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by five-minute votes on passage of h.r. 3144, if ordered, and suspending the rules and passing h.r. 5447. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
those opposed, no. the ayes have it and the bill is passed and without objection -- for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> on this i would like a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]