Date: 1992-07-22
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I rise in support of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas [Mr. STENHOLMI to strike the language included in the fiscal 1993 Interior appropriations bill to increase the grazing fee for public lands in the West. This is a very controversial end complex issue. with strongly held views on both sides. I realize the grazing fee increases in the bill. was included with the best of intentions. Regardless of the intent. however. I must oppose this attempt to legislate on an appropriations bill. The grazing fee issue- is a matter that should be dealt with. and resolved by the authorizing committees. and not on an appropriations bill. Let me make clear that I share the interest of many Members of this body of the need to develop a grazing fee formula and Federal grazing program thit will provide a longterm policy direction for the Federal agencies that administer this program. A longterm policy is needed to provide stability for the program. A longterm policy is needed to sustain the use of these natural resources. And a longterm policy is needed to provide financial certainty for the ranchers and the rural communities who are directly affected. This should be done by the authorizing committees. My colleagues. an appropriations bill is simply not the vehicle on which to try to legislate a longterm policy on this important issue. Members of the House Agriculture Committee have been reviewing this issue. Our Subcommittee on Livestock. Dairy. and Poultrywhich Mr. STENHOLM chairshas held hearings. The subcommittee has been recently to Oregon and Idaho where the effect of changes in the grazing fee formula will be directly felt. I stand ready to work with my colleagues to address this issue. But today I must oppose the provision in the Interior appropriations bill. Support the Stenholm amendment to strike. Mr. Chairman. this is a very controversial and complex issue with strongly held views on both sides of the issue. It is a wellintended amendment. But regardless of the good intentions. I must oppose this amendment. Mr. Chairman. let me address myself to the. members of the authorizing committees. the committee chairmen. and let me make it perfectly clear that the issue may well be discussed. but the fact is that this is the wrong legislation and the wrong bill at the wrong time. We in the Committee on Agriculture have been studying this issue. The subcommittee led by the gentleman from Texas [Mr. SmzHoLm] has been recently to Idaho and to Oregon. Yes. a longtime policy is needed. there is no denying that. We need it to provide stability for the progran. A longterm policy is needed to sustain the use of our national resources and a longterm policy is needed to provide financial certainty for the ranchers and the rural communities that depend on this program. But this should be done by the authorizing committees. not in an appropriations bill. where you do not look at all the Issues. where no hearings have been held. where no one has gone out into the field. Even though the distinguished chairman of one of the authorizing committees. my good friend and dear friend. the gentleman from California [Mr. MU.LERJ. spoke. he has a personal issue. and this I have to respect. But let me tell the authbrizing committees. this is no way to legislate. We do not know yet. This is a 1year appropriations bill. but this part may be permanent. I do not know. But the issue is that It has to be done. and It should be done in the proper manner by the authorizing committees. and not here at 8:30 at night by the Coinmittee on Appropriations that under the rule does not have the authority to legislate. Mr. Chairman. they are doing it only -because they were given a waiver on the rule. That is why we are here. The rule gave them a waiver. and then. to make amends. they gave me the right to offer an amendment. This is no way to legislate. I assure Members. and I urge an "aye" vote on the Stenholm amendment.