Date: 1990-10-12
Speaker: RALPH REGULA (republican)
Chamber: H

ranking member. one of my best friends in the Congress. and one of the finest legislators. intends to offer an amenmdent that will place. to some extent. restrictive content in the standards that NEA and NEH must use in deciding what grants they will approve. I should also say in addition to the amendment to be offered by the gentleman from Ohio . there is also made in order In this bill by the rule an amendment by the gentleman from Montana . who is chairman of the subcommitee of the Education and Labor Committee of the House which brought the Endowment authorizing bill to the floor yesterday. He proposes to offer as an amendment that bill as passed by the House yesterday. and he proposes to offer that amendment in full as an addition to this bill so that it becomes a part of the appropriations bill. I G 1550 In addition to other controversies that we have. the gentleman from Oklahoma proposes to offer an amendment which will increase the grazing fees for the public lands in the West. This has been a controversy that has raged for many years. and Members from the West have told me that they will fight this proposal by the gentleman from Oklahoma to the extent that they can. I should tell the Members before I close that we have brought a very good bill to the floor. We are within our 302(b) allocation. the first one. and we will be within our amended 302(b) allocation with an amendment that I will offer in the course of the discussion on the bill. We are. or will be. within our new outlay ceilings. and we will be within our new budget authority levels so that we come within the limits that are proscribed under the 302(b) allocation by the House. In total. the new budget authority in this bill is $11.9 billion. an increase of $475 million or 4.2 percent over the $11.4 billion provided in fiscal year 1990. In relation to the budget request. this bill is $2 billion over the Presidents proposal. In large part. the increase over 1990 simply keeps our land management agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management. the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. the National Park Service. the Forest Service. and the Bureau of Indian Affairs going. For example. the bill provides funding for the proposed January 1991 pay increase so that these personnel Intensive agencies and other agencies under our jurisdiction will not have to absorb these costs. Absorption of pay costs over the past several years has steadily eroded these agencies abilities to provide quality services and stewardship of our public lands. One of the Park Service regional directors indicated that individual park units are In need of intensive care. With this bill. we hope to at least get the parks and other land management agencies into the recovery room. Many of you have expressed interest in the land and water conservation fund. We have provided a total of $345 million from the land and water conservation fund including $50 million for grants to the States. This is a significant increase from the $20 million provided in recent years for the States and a $78 million increase for Federal land acquisition. The committee has been most concerned about the health needs of the Indian people. The bill includes almost $1.6 billion for the Indian Health Service. This represents an increase of 27 percent above fiscal year 1990. It is our hope that the amount provided will be a start In providing a credible level of health services for the Indian people. Today. service is often provided from inadequate facilities which are often overcrowded and without adequate equipment despite our past efforts in this area. The committee has included initial funding for the Presidents treeplanting initiative. The bill provides $20 million for the private foundation which will mobilize the corporate and civic sectors to donate funds and labor to plant and care for an eventual goal of 30 million trees to be planted in communities around the Nation. The committee has also provided $15 million for the Urban Forestry Program and $10 million for the stewardship initiative. Recent events in the Middle East have focused attention on energy. particularly the United States growing dependence on imported oil. In addition. clean air legislation and related environmental concerns including possible global climate change have raised questions involving the use of fossil energy resources utilizing existing technologies. Criticism abounds that the Nation has no energy policy. and pundits yearn for a simple solution to these problems. OpEd pieces are reminiscent of those in former crises expounding solutions favorable to the particular viewpoint. resource. or industry to which the writer is attached. or propounding vague generalities as policy. This committee and Congress have been supporting activities for over a decade which do form a basis for reasonable energy policy. They are diverse and do not provide global solutions to problems. We see no reason to change these basic approaches. although the current situation may draw more attention to them. It is also possible that additional efforts in other areas may be necessary. In the 1970s both theadministration and Congress provided ample funding for research and development in energy conservation and fossil energy as a result of the original energy crisis of 1973. In addition. funds were provided to support the construction and filling of the strategic petroleum reserve. From 1981 forward. however. administrations have refused to support continuation of adequate research and development. It has only been because of this committees efforts and constant support that adequate funds have been provided for conservation and fossil energy programs. always over administration objections. Appropriations have been at least twice. the administrations requests in these areas since 1981. Even the Clean Coal Technology Program. now a cornerstone of administration policy. was. when proposed by Congress. opposed by the administration. The strategic petroleum reserve. now relied upon as a vital link in providing price and supply stability and insurance. was subject to repeated administration attempts at curtailment and freezes during the 1980s. We believe that clean coal technology. the strategic petroleum reserve. and energy conservation research and development programs currently supported by the administration are in large part in existence because of the constancy of support by this committee and Congress. From both an oil import and an environmental point of view. conservation of energy resources makes sense. Although this years budget request finally recognized conservation as a genuine priority. it was at levels less than the committee believes are necessary. In addition. the committee recommends significant increases over previous levels in grant programs providing for lowincome weatherization and conservation improvements to institutional buildings such as schools and hospitals. Overall. the committee recommendation for energy conservation programs is $497.684.000. a 134percent increase over the budget request of $212.591.000 and 22 percent above fiscal year 1990 levels. The committee has also increased fossil energy research from the budget request of $202.309.000 to $443.258.000. a 119 percent increase. The increases provide substantial funding to investigate substitutes for imported oil from coal and oil shale. increase domestic oil and gas production. and burn coal more cleanly and efficiently. Funding for the successful Clean Coal Technology Program was provided previously and allows for two more procurement rounds for demonstrating technology cleaner and more efficient in the use of coal than current technologies. Finally. the committee supports continued funding for filling of strategic petroleum reserves at rates that approximate those of recent years. The reserve surely has provided a cushion against possible oil shortages in the current situation and mediated against even larger price increases because of panic. None of the programs just described are glamourous or breathtaking. none provide an instantaneous solution to energy concerns. and no others will. The search for a magical and easy solution to energy problems is futile. Additional options should be addressed. such as increasing prices and taxes. more support for renewable resources. incentives for efficiency. and others. Some further actions may be taken after due consideration by Congress and the administration but it will take a sustained effort. supporting both current programs and any new activity. to provide for energy needs in the future. The committee has recommended the continuation of restrictions on offshore leasing for oil and gas development in environmentally sensitive areas of the Outer Continental Shelf. These leasing moratoriums have been a continuing topic of debate before this committee over the last several years. This past June. President Bush announced his support for moratoriums on oil and gas leasing and development over the next 10 years in many of the OCS areas placed under restriction by the Congress. Areas included in the Presidents moratorium statement are southern Florida near Everglades National Park. northern. central. and southern California. the north Atlantic from Rhode Island northward to Canada. and the frontier area off the coasts of Washington and Oregon. The committee was pleased to receive these longawaited decisions by the President which support the actions taken by this committee over the past 10 years. In addition to the areas identified by the President. the committee has recommended continuing restrictions on developing leases in Bristol Bay. AK. and on leasing nearshore areas in the midAtlantic. The committee also has recommended delaying lease sale 137 in the Florida panhandle. The entire Florida delegation in the House has supported the delay In sale 137 to allow this sale to be considered under the new approach to OCS leasing announced by the Department of the Interior. wherein specific tracts will be identified for sale rather than the current practice of opening an entire area for leasing. Since the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq. some have suggested that OCS moratoriums should be abandoned In order to provide additional domestic supplies of oil. Such a suggestion implies that OCS leasing will lead to a readily available supply of oil and gas. This is not the case. Many of these prospective leases will never produce oil and gas and those that do generally will not yield production until 8 to 15 years after the lease sale. On the other hand. the environmental risks associated with leasing. exploration. and development are very real in areas such as the Florida Keys and this committee agrees with the President that in such instances the risks outweigh the potential producible oil and *as resources In certain environmentally sensitive areas. The committee report accompanying H.R. 5769. House Report 101789. inadvertently omitted a paragraph on page 35 related to the Santa Fe Trail. The following paragraph should have been included: The committee directs the National Park Service to recognize this trail as part of the Santa Fe Historic National Trail and administer it as such. I want also. In closing. to say that again it has been a pleasure to be associated and to be working with the gentleman from Ohio as ranking member and with the gentleman from Oregon . the gentleman from Washington [Mr. DrcKs]. the gentleman from Pennsylvania . the gentleman from Alabama . the gentleman from Mississippi . the gentleman from Massachusetts . the gentleman from California [Mr. LowERY3. the gentleman from Pennsylvania . and the gentleman from Massachusetts . all Members who make up the Interior Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations. All of them made a major contribution to this bill. It is an excellent bill. and we recommend it to the House for passage. At this point I would like to insert In the RECORD a table detailing the various accounts included in the bill 1991 Interior Aawrovriations Bill FY 1990 FY 1991 Bil Dil compared with Bill compared wit" Enacted Estimate Enacted -Estimate