For general debate expired. The bill shall be considered for amendment under the fiveminute rule and consider as an orange bill the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on Natural Resources printed in the bill. The Committee Amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read, no amendment to the Committee Amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed n part c of house report 116264, each such amendment be offered in the by the member designated in the report shall be considered read and shall be debatable equally divided, controlled by the proponent and opponent and not be subject to amendment and should not be subject to division of the question. It is now in order to consider amendment number 1 printed in part b of 116264, for what purpose does the gentlewoman from arizona seek recognition . Mr. Gosar as the designee of ms. Lesko, i have an amendment at the desk. The clerk amendment number 1 printed in part c of house report 116264 offered by mr. Gosar of arizona. The chair pursuant to House Resolution 656, the gentleman from arizona and a member opposed each will control five minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona. Mr. Gosar my amendment this act shall not become effective until the secretary of interior finds that the withdrawal will not affect Jobs Available to native americans, other minorities and women. I believe deeply protecting the environment and protecting the poningpo employment especially those in underserved communities. Resource benefits benefits local economies. As noted in the markup, the temporary political mineral withdrawal imposed in 2012 by the Obama Administration which focused on banning mining cost arizona and utah thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in economic activity. We should not entertain any withdrawal without confirmation that this bill will not dversely affect native americans, minorities and women. I reserve. Mr. Grijalva i raise to claim time in opposition to the amendment. The chair the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. Mr. Grijalva thank you, mr. Chairman. This amendment is not a good faith effort to protect native communities, minorities or women. It is a gotcha amendment intended to kill the bill. It is insulting that our colleagues would use native communities as pawns to kill this proposal knowing full well that native people have too often had to bear the brunt of uranium toxic impacts. On the Navajo Nation, there are hundreds of abandoned Uranium Mines waiting to be cleaned up. They pollute water and damage Public Health. A recent study found dozens of contaminated Water Resources on the Navajo Nation and one arter of the residents had raised. Another native American Community live downstream of Uranium Mines. That is why the Navajo Nation, the National Congress of American Indians and Intertribal Association of arizona along with regional tribes support a permanent withdrawal. These are indigenous voices are not props, they are not quaint or docile, they are smart advocates for their people and the situation now and more importantly for the future of generations to come. They deserve our respect. Anything less i think crosses the line. This amendment republicans arent listening to these native voices. They are threatening the health of native communities to score cheap political points. This amendment will not help native communities but kill the very protections they are asking this congress to act. Mining will not be the future of that part of arizona and especially true for women and minority communities. During the Public Comment process that went into the original withdrawal, the Previous Administration resued Job Opportunities in the region. They found that mining would likely support 295 jobs. This in contrast to 12,000 jobs directly supported by Grand Canyon National Park which rely on healthy uraniumfree grand canyon. If we are serious, we need to be talking about how to better support our Outdoor Recreation and tourism economies that would help all the communities in the area. Mining is not a field known for its diversity. In 2018, less than 14 in all workers in mining were women and less than is 13 of color. The Outdoor Recreation industry making a major purpose to diversify and bring people of wim. And i would point out the amendment original sponsor voting record. The original sponsor voted against violence against women act which an amendment dealt particularly particular focus on missing and murdered indigenous. Voted against the equality act and one of the most important bills in this chamber to protect ribal sovereignty. The original sponsor and many of her colleagues have declined opportunities. I am more than happy to work with any of my colleagues to uplift underrepresented voices but this amendment is not a legitimate attempt to do so. But to weapon nies the parties that we worked so hard to protect. I urge my colleagues to vote no and i reserve. The chair the gentleman from arizona reserves. The gentleman from arizona, mr. Gosar. Mr. Gosar i would like to know if the gentleman supports a mine in arizona. That is a question. The chair does the gentleman reserve . R. Gosar i reserve. Mr. Grijalva continue to reserve. The chair mr. Gosar is recognized. Mr. Gosar now we find out the true understanding of the gentleman from arizona, mr. Grijalva doesnt approve of any mines whatsoever. Why that is so important here is that we talk about Indigenous People and the empowerment. Just recently the navajo generating commission which was commissioned by congress to provide power from for the water for c. A. P. That revolutionized arizona for its growth, the delivery of water, was all given to the tribes, the navajo and hopi. The coal mine and power plant. These are great paying vobs. They have benefits, empowers the native americans. What is interesting, now we are shuddering this enterprise down. 80 of the hopis budget per year is going away. 60 of the navajo budget is going away. What is the answer from our colleagues on the other side . Welfare. Oh my lord, my god, i cant believe what im hearing. Welfare is the answer. Lets go back and have a geological conversation. Rocks set you free. This is where everybody goes. Look at these breach of pipes that are exposed. They are water soluble. Gravity takes it down. Thats why you are getting that infiltration into the water. Im not here to hurt anybody. I refuse to do that. But im not here to turn my back on native americans who are empowered instead of victimized. With that, i reserve. The chair the gentleman from arizona, mr. Gosar, reserves. The gentleman from arizona, mr. Grijalva is recognized. Mr. Grijalva this amendment is a gotcha amendment. The substance of the amendment is misdirected to say the least and ignores history and ignores the reality that we are in right now and that is, when i began to get involved in this issue more than a decade ago, it was in response to discussions that i the th the navajo tribe, hopi tribe and with other indigenous nations in and around the grand canyon. And the consensus and the unity around the issue that we have to protect the grand canyon was important, not only for religious and cultural and sacred reasons, but also for the fact that thats their home. At the end of the day, the vote today is in response to that work, to their advocacy, to their support and input they had on the legislation. It is a vote to affirm by this congress that indeed, the concerns they raised are real and important. I would urge a no vote on the amendment. And i yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentleman from arizona, mr. Gosar. Mr. Gosar once again, my points have been made. This is a good amendment because what it does, it looks at the overall application to make sure that we are not blindsiding our native americans. We heard from numerous groups over and over again that do not agree with this bill. In fact, when the gentleman from arizona on the other side actually had a press conference, they gathered leaders and the leaders they had no idea they were there for the press conference. Once again, what mine would the gentleman from arizona on the other side actually endorse . The answer was contradicts. That tells you who he is playing for. Not for native americans. Maybe its the Wilderness Society and i wonder if they get their payments from china and russia. I wonder if there is a collaboration here. This is a great amendment and talks about empowering people with jobs and directing their aspect of life. Thats what is invigorating about america. Victimization does none of that. I yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it mr. Gosar i ask ask for a recorded sote. The chair pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona will be postponed. It is in order to consider amendment number 2 printed in house report 116264. For what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition . Mr. Gosar i have an amendment at the desk. Caller the clerk will designate designate the amendment. The clerk amendment number 2 printed in part c of house report number 116264, offered by mr. Gosar of arizona. Caller pursuant to house the gentleman from arizona plrks gosar, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. Mr. Gosar this amendment would delay the implementation of this legislation until after a Mineral Survey is completed to ensure that there are no other Mineral Resources in the withdrawal area. After a Mineral Survey is completed to ensure there are no other Mineral Resources in the withdrawal area, including the Rare Earth Minerals excuse me. Mr. Chairman, what this amendment basically does is it takes my district out of this withdrawal. 70 of the active mine sites and proposed mine sites are in my district. And we want to make sure that we are not victimized. That we are taken out. I out of this withdrawal area. This body actually had rules that they tried to follow that they didnt usurp members districts. They worked with those member districts. With that i would ask that we endorse that and withdraw my district from this withdrawal. With that i reserve. Caller the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. For what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition . Mr. Grijalva i rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment. The clerk the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. Mr. Grijalva thank you, mr. Chairman. I recognize there are some sensitivity even misunderstanding in this chamber to legislating another members district. I would point out that there is something that we do that we do almost every day we are here. Wele wrote on policies that impact the nation. Also point out that the gentleman from arizona offered numerous amendments to build in new mexico, chaco canyon legislation, that will be considered later today, those lands are certainly not in his istrict. Furthermore, every member of the chamber has the responsibility to support sovereign tribal nation who is have asked this body to protect the grand canyon. Serving the American People requires we take a National View into account. The land protected in h. R. 1373 are public lands belonging to every american. They protect iconic american landscape, the grand canyon. Important to people across this country. I can easily think of 30 million americans who want to see the clean waters of the Colorado River protected. The Colorado River provides Drinking Water to phoenix, tucson, las vegas, los angeles, and to countless cities and towns across the west t needs to be protected from uranium mining. The lands in the gentlemans district were not included in this bill arbitrarily. They were added after an extensive multiyear study and public process that accounted for a long list of regional factors before recommending withdrawal. The land in the gentlemans districts are essential to protecting the grand canyon and the Colorado River watershed from uranium toxic impacts. We also need to consider the support for this proposal on the ground n a bipartisan poll almost 2 3 of arizonans supported the permanent protections for the lands around the grand canyon, including those in the gentlemans district. Representative ohalleran who represents the vast majority of the lands in this bill is an original cosponsor and a vocal supporter because he knows that this bill is important to all his constituents. H. R. 1373 receives local support from tribal communities including havasupai, Navajo Nation, hopi nation, the walla pie walapie and the national ongress of American Indians. Who have a major stake in protecting the clean waters. H. R. 1373 is supported by recreation at sportsman, conservationists, and hundreds of local organizations and individuals from arizona and across this nation. This bill is broadly is a broadly supported effort to protect public lands that belong to all americans. The bill is an effort to protect the grand canyon. A vocal minority of opponents who will never be swayed should not stop the voice overwhelming voice of the American People. I encourage my colleagues to vote no on this amendment and i reserve. The chair the gentleman from arizona, mr. Grijalva, reserves. The gentleman from arizona, mr. Gosar, is recognized. Mr. Gosar thank you, mr. Chairman. Im sure glad that the opposition brought that up about new mexico. Because what we are actually doing is we are representing the voices that didnt get a chance to speak out on behalf of their claim. Their allotments. Well get to that. Well show you exactly why we are doing that. I have my time. You can have your member yield. In my district there are eight distorque mines included in this withdrawal area. Six are in my district. Also included in the withdrawal area is the potential for 20 new mines that would provide hundreds of high paying jobs to the local communities north of grand canyon. Not only am i opposed to the inclusion of the mojave county, so are the board of supervisors who unanimously voted to oppose this bill. In addition to the board of supervisors, local business organizations are also opposed to this bill including lake alf sue Havasu Chamber of commerce and others. Local businesses should have a say. They should not be swayed. I ask to be included in the record is a unanimous letter against this bill, 1373, from the mojave county supervisors. The chair the gentlemans request will be covered by general leave. Mr. Gosar i reserve. The chair the gentleman from arizona reserves the balance of his time. The gentleman from arizona, mr. Gri hal, is recognized. Mr. Grijalva i reserve. May i inquire if there is if the gentleman has any further speakers . Im prepared to close but i reserve at this point. The chair the gentleman from arizona, mr. Grijalva, reserves the balance of his time. The gentleman from arizona, mr. Gosar, is recognized. Mr. Gosar thank you, mr. Chairman. Lets go back we have heard about the health implications. Once again we look at these it issues outlined in the yellow and red. What ends up happening you see them dissolve in water and in air. So when you look at the grand canyon you are seeing the seepage that comes into the grand canyon water shed naturally. What we are doing is cleaning this up. Wouldnt that be amazing, amazing that we are actually interceding on the best behavior and best acknowledgements of the people around there. Amazing. I would hardly call this a problem. In fact, immediate restoration of these lands is impeccable. Yes, we have this negative connotation about what the past has done. But this is where the history and our new Technology Actually intercede where we are intervening on this, making an improving the landscape. Thats amazing. Thats absolutely amazing. Once again, this is untouched. Mans not here. This is what natures done to expose this. Once again you have an exposed pipe. You have a ravine that carries water that sheets off. Once again by taking that out, taking that piece of pipe out, it facilitates permanentation down in the lower aquifers, replenishing limited water supply we have. Its amazing what the rocks do. They set you free. My district has said, listen, exclude us from this overreach by the federal government. The federal government has hardly been a champion in regards to native americans and people in this area. We rule by fiat and scare people. Once again this is a good Bush Administration bill. We want to be excluded from this withdrawal. I would hope that everyone would listen to the people from my district. With that i ask for everyone to vote for this and yield back. The chair the gentleman from arizona, mr. Grijalva. Mr. Grijalva thank you again. In opo significance to the amendment as i said earlier. I think we keep forgetting the essence of what we are talking about here today. The essence is the grand canyon. Something that is recognized nationally not only as an environmental and icon, but the dependency that 40 Million People have on the water of the grand canyon. Nd while we want to minimize this reality is that the history tells us and Current Health studies tell us of the impact that native communities have suffered because of uranium contamination in their water, in their air, and in their land. Those are reasons enough to put aside a very special place and permanently ban uranium mining. This amendment cuts an exception based on territorial imperative, some provincial thought we are not all part of one great nation. This nation, this is a National Issue and should be treated that way. I urge a no vote on the amendment. The chair does the gentleman yield . Mr. Greegri hal have a yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona, so many as are in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. The amendments not agreed. To mr. Gosar i ask for a recorded vote. The chair pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona mlb postponed. Arizona will be postponed. It is now in order to consider amendment number 3 printed in part c of house report 116264. For what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition . Mr. Gosar i have an amendment at the desk. The chair the clerk will designate the amendment. The clerk amendment number 3, printsed in part c of house report number 116264, offered by mr. Gosar of arizona. The chair pursuant to House Resolution 656, the gentleman from arizona, mr. Gosar, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona, mr. Gosar. Mr. Gosar thank you, mr. Chairman. H. R. 1373 permanently bans oil, natural gas, geothermal, uranium, and other Critical Minerals and rare earth leasing and production on over a million acres of land in arizona. This commonsense amendment does not kill the bill t delays the Effective Date until we have done adequate mapping and surveying of the mineral and resources in this area. Specifically the amendment allows the bill to go into effect when the secretary of the interior completes a Mineral Survey of the area proposed for withdrawal including uranium, rare earth elements, geothermal, and oil and Gas Resources and determines there are no Mineral Resources, geothermal resources, or Critical Minerals present other than uranium. The temporary political mineral withdrawal imposed in 2012 by the Obama Administration that 2k30e focused exclusively on man banning mining cost the surrounding areas in arizona and utah between 2,000 and 4,000 jobs and 29 billion in overall Regional Economic activity. The Previous Administrations misguided actions killed more than 7,000 hard rock mining claims in the area over a three year span. This legislation would expand the withdrawal area and also expand the mineral withdrawal in the withdrawal area to include oil and gas leasing, geothermal leasing, and other Mineral Development in addition to mining. Mr. Chairman, there are rare earths and other valuable minerals, including copper and uranium in this area. There is also a great amount of geothermal potential. We should at least know all the minerals and resources, potential in this million acre area, before we permanently lock it up. This just requires mapping and surveying of the targeted areas for the withdrawal. Once again i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman from arizona reserves the balance of his time. For what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition . Mr. Grijalva thank you, mr. Chairman. I rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment. The chair the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. Mr. Grijalva thank you, mr. Chairman. This amendment would allow the secretary to bill this proposal in pursuant of information we already have. My colleagues across the aisle continually allude to the lack of information we have about this region. The lack of study and lack of science. They seem to ignore the extensive multiyear study that preceded the current withdrawal. The study looked at local economies. It reviewed the best available science. Took into account Public Comments. And considered how uranium mining might impact the grand canyon region. In the end, the renew produced a 1,500 page Environmental Impact report outlining in detail the rationales for different actions. Within the report, there was Detailed Analysis considering other Mineral Resources in the region, the study the gentleman is now predicating the withdrawal on. The study found there were a handful of Mineral Resources in the region but made clear these elements were secondary to uranium and occurred insufficient to drive mine development. When you look at mineral claims in the withdrawal area, they are almost all, almost all for uranium. We cant pretend there is some great unknowns. Uranium is the primary resource and we know the major threat that uranium poses to clean water, Public Health and to the grand canyon itself. The mines have polluted groundwater and destroyed many communities across the southwest. Kan omp to consider a b uranium mine, no remediation has been done. The side is covered in waste, ock and pond sludge. And infiltrating the soil and elevating the pollution. This mine is one of hundreds of closed mines awaiting remediation. They provide no assurances they will do anything to spoil the land and leave taxpayers with the bill. Despite the gentleman from arizona protest, we know where the resources are and what the threats are to this region. You dont need to duplicate a study that we shouldnt be mining in the grand canyon and let misinformed talking points kill this bill. I reserve. The chair the gentleman from arizona reserves. The gentleman from arizona, mr. Gosar is recognized. Mr. Gosar you are seeing the collapse of the geological formation. What is interesting about that, it concentrates Different Minerals there, not just uranium, copper, there are a number of things that have become very critical in our technology sector. This is a very important application here. And we want to make sure we are studying that. Now if we are talking about process, reclamation 80 years ago, we didnt ask them to be bonded or investigate them for mitigation. This is what american mining does. It takes what they need, it returns it and i would be very interested to take a Geiger Counter check this versus this. I wonder if theres an improvement. It is. Once again, the arguments are bland. They are fraudulent. In this aspect we show mitigation. What we can do is leverage and have a mine site like that, we can leverage them and say in order to do this, we need you to mitigate these other mining sites. Its been something that our side has proposed nonstop. But the other side refuses to let that happen because they claim that its not going to be up to standard. People are scared of their own laws. This looks pretty good to me. And when i look at mitigation aspects and what is here and available, that is for the common cause for the American People. Its an investment and you are not doing your Due Diligence unless you know exactly what you have today and for the future. I ask my colleagues to vote for this amendment. Its smart and critical and from that standpoint, empowering. Vote yes on the amendment. And i yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentleman from arizona, mr. Grijalva is recognized. Mr. Grijalva thank you, mr. Chairman. In closing in opposition to the amendment, in july, the president formed the Nuclear Working Group essentially to deal with the questions coming from the uranium Mining Industry, in particular energy fuels and u. R. Energy. The issue there was an tealt to try to defend the indefensible and trying to open up the grand canyon once more looking at lifting the moratorium so the urgency of the legislation before us is based on actions the administration has taken up to this point. The secretary represented u. R. Energy u. S. A. From 2009 to 2012. My point is that enough advocates exist for the Mining Industry as we stand, but what we are asking in defeat of this amendment that the Public Interest have some advocates. And members of this body can take care of that Public Interest and not the profit interests that are driving mining and uranium mining. The Public Interest is the Public Health, grand canyon and water supply and the tribes and indigenous and communities that exist there have decade coming to this congress and asking for support and relief. This bill begins to provide both. I urge a no vote and i yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from of arizona. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the noes the amendment is not agreed to. Mr. Gosar i ask for a recorded vote. He chair pursuant to rule clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona will be postponed. Mr. Grijalva i move that the committee do now rise. The chair the question is on the motion that the committee rise. Hose in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. The ayes have it. The motion is adopted. Accordingly, the committee rises. The speaker pro tempore the ouse will be in order. The chair mr. Speaker, the committee of the whole house on the state of the union having had under consideration h. R. 1373, directs me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon. The speaker pro tempore the of then is on the Motion Committee of the whole house of the state of the Union Reports that the committee has had under consideration h. R. 1373 and has come to no resolution thereon. For what purpose does the gentlelady from new mexico seek recognition . I ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on h. R. 2181 the speaker pro tempore without objection. So ordered. I yield such time as i may consume. The speaker pro tempore pursuant to House Resolution 656 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of h. R. 2181. The chair appoints the gentleman from texas, mr. Cuellar, to preside over the committee of the whole. The chair the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of h. R. 2181, which the clerk will report by title. The clerk a bill to provide for the withdrawal and protection of certain federal land in the state of new mexico. The chair pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read for the first time. General debate shall be confined to the bill and the amendments specified in section 3 of House Resolution 65 and not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and Ranking Member of the committee on Natural Resources. The gentlewoman from new mexico, and the gentleman from arizona,. Gosar, each will 340 minutes. The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from new mexico. Ms. Hayworth i yield myself such ms. Haaland i yield myself such time as i may consume. Im from the turquoise plan and enrolled member of laguna pueblo. We are on indian land and i ask to speak on this important bill. I rise in strong support of h. R. 2181, the chaco Cultural HeritageArea Protection act. And first i would like to thank y colleague assistant speaker, ben lieu judge for their of hard work on this important legislation. This proposal sponsored by my lujan new mr. Mexicos clean air from the impacts of oil and gas extraction. This bill would clean lands around chaco cultural historic park to protect that site and the riges undiscovered resources from further oil and gas extraction. The canyon has been home to my people for centuries. As the 35th generation new mexican and what is now the southwest United States, i can say there are few places more exceptional than the chaco region. Over hundreds of years, my ancestors geared and constructed massive multi story structures at chaco canyon that can be the administrative and Economic Center of the region. It is a Certified International dark sky park where visitors can gaze at the dark sky that my ancestors did over 1,000 years ago. These sites and the object jeggets they contain tell the history of my people and connect us to our past. The pueblo and Navajo Nation have connections with the greater chaco region as a spiritual place to be honored and respected. This congress, the National Resources committee have heard from the leaders of four pueblo nation and all counsel of governors and elected leaders of Navajo Nation, from senior officials in tribal and pueblo plegget s and from a ora of americans. The entire new mexico congressional delegation and the governor of our state support h. R. 2181. This bill enjoys broad support on the ground and bipartisan support here in this chamber because protecting indigenous Cultural Resources protecting chaco canyon should not be a partisan issue. This proposal is about respecting our history and protecting our culture. We owe it to tribal communities, to the people of new mexico and to people the world over to permanently protect the chaco region. Earlier this year, i traveled to the chaco cultural historic park with several of my colleagues. While in new mexico, we had the opportunity to use infrared cameras to watch pollution spewing from oil and gas operations, creating a toxic cloud the size of delaware that hangs over the skies of northwest new mexico. 90 of the federal lands are already open to oil and gas extraction and new mexicans are all too familiar with the toxic aspects it has on clean air, clean water, their health and health of their children. When you are out there watching the methane plumes and experiencing the dust and the noise and their impact, its easy to see why oil and gas extractions dont belong next to a spiritual site. If you dont about believe, ask ask interior secretary when he visited chaco canyon with senator heinrich and he was struck by the significance of the park because he committed to a oneyear moratorium on drilling around chaco canyon to allow congress to act on proposals like the one before us today. I thank the secretary for his efforts, but one year is not enough protection for a site that holds centuries of history and culture. That is why i ask you all to support chaco canyon today, to support the pueblo people, the Navajo Nation and the people of new mexico by voting in favor of h. R. 2181. Thank you, mr. Chair. And i reserve the balance of my time. Mr. Gosar i rise in opposition to h. R. 2181. This is yet another piece of legislation advanced by my colleagues on behalf of radical environmental movement. This bill will unilaterally lock up oil and Gas Development on 316,000 acres of federally owned land in new mexico. The Development Department of interior is in the process of drafting a Resource Management plan for this area. But this process is still under review and the Resource Management plan has not yet been released. This bill would permanently ban all Energy Development in the area before we know all the facts and before our sciencebased Environmental Review is completed. Decisions made in washington regarding how to manage federally owned land have implications beyond the borders of the acreage in question. Those who own land or operate businesses near federally owned parcels are oftentimes significantly impacted by poor management decisions made by the federal bureaucrats who do not live there or understand the needs of rural western communities. Similarly, my colleagues claim that this bill will do no harm to those who own lands and mineral rights in the surrounding area, but this bill could mean millions in lost revenue for those who own lands along the proposed withdrawal boundary. While it is technically crew trithat the acreage off limits to true that the acreage off limits is own. There are land throughout the area privately owned by members of the Navajo Nation. If you look at this map, anything you see in this purple area are owned, particularly in this area what we are talking about, are owned by the navajo allotees. When you are looking at the expansion of this park, it impews access to that area. Now, as you see the navajo owned Land Minerals are scattered throughout and located outside the withdrawal area. If these lands become restricted and further cut off from development opportunities, if the neighboring land can never be developed as required under this bill, the economic value of that private minerals is diminished and the navajo will have a harder time attracting investments on their land. Once again you see all the way through this area, particularly in this band alongside there. So access is critical. We are testimony to the fact in the Natural Resources committee this summer. We heard testimony in opposition stating, our voices as allotted landowners are being silenced by the environmentalists claiming to speak for all of us. These lands were given to our great, great grandparents in exchange for citizenship, and we have rights as citizens and landowners to develop our land for oil and gas as we see fit. She tivened, if b. L. M. Lands are withdrawn around our allotments, that means oil and Gas Companies cannot access our lands because they wont be able to access the federal lands. I want to submit this testimony for the record. The chair the gentlemans request will be covered by general leave. Mr. Gosar two chapters of the Navajo Nation representing a combined 6,000 residents passed resolutions opposing this bill because it would jeopardize development and potentially infringe our royalty payments. I would like to submit that for the order o. The chair the request will be covered by general leave. Mr. Gosar i should note these are significant sums which the navajo allotees depend on each and every year. According to a 2017 department of interior i. G. Report, 20,855 navajo allotees received a selective 96 million per year from revenues raised through responsible oil and Gas Development on their allotments. Quite simply infringing on their right to develop their Mineral Resources jeopardizes their quality of life. Furthermore, oil and Gas Development has blessed the state of new mexico with significant budget win falls in recent years. Just last week the department of interior announced the state of new mexico would receive 1. 17 billion, with a b, in revenue from the federal oil and Gas Development. The highest disbursement in the states history. 2018 was a record breaker year for oil and Gas Development in new mexico. With state revenues reaching 2. 2 billion in total. Refly half of these revenues were returned directly to the States School investing in higher pay for teachers and staff while other funds were allocated for Infrastructure Projects and Public Services. These funds were provided by oil and gas operations on not only federal lands but on state trust lands as well. Roughly 8 of the withdrawal area in this bill is owned by the state of new mexico and can be developed for the benefit of its citizens. Enacting this bill will cut off the Revenue Streams from both federal and state Energy Development, reducing future revenues for Educational Initiatives like those signed into law earlier this year. Mr. Chairman, the chaco cultural history park is already protected and off limits to oil and Gas Development. If leasing were to occur in the surrounding area, it would be subject to a multitude of federal laws and regulations before any development could begin. Including the National Historic preservation act, designed to protect culturally significant areas and artifacts on all federal lands. Before we declare a permanent ban on Energy Development in such a large area, we need all the facts. We need to have complete scientific review and Stakeholder Engagement process already under way. We need to thoroughly weigh the benefits and concerns and we need to consider all those who are impacted. Not doing so could have significant consequences for the navajo allotees and for the state of new mexicos budget and priorities for its citizens w that i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman from arizona reserves the balance of his time. The gentlewoman from new mexico is recognized. Ms. Haaland i yield four minutes to the gentleman from new mexico. The chair the gentleman from new mexico is recognized for four minutes. Mr. Lujan thank you, mr. Chairman. My colleague from arizona, mr. Gosar, in the previous debate had some incredible charge that he was displaying n it he proclaimed, the rocks shall set you free. I was born and raise and my faith taught me that the truth shall set you free, mr. Chairman. I was also taught that people are entitled to their own opinions, mr. Chairman, but not their own facts. If my colleague from arizona participated in those hearings as he said he did, and he heard the witnesses from the bureau f Land Management, the witness in the bureau of land manage nthis direct question Land Management in this direct question about the rights of navajo allotees being taken away, as some of my republican colleagues will argue that protecting chaco will impact the navajo allotees right to develop valid rights, this is blatantly false. Let the silence sit in. It is false. The bureau of Land Management testified before congress and said that this legislation, and i quote, would not affect tribal interests or allotees. So, mr. Chairman, its critically important we have a conversation about the importance of protecting chaco because while we have taken steps to defend chaco, chaco is at risk of being hurt. Of being dess rate cruiserweighted. Desecrated. Of being destroyed. Thats why we have come together. I invite my colleague to join us and visit chaco. Visit with the elders, the women who are there, the children in proximity of those fumes that my colleague, the chairwoman, deb haaland from new mexico, was able to describe. Where you dont just smell the methane, Technology Today allows you to see those plumes move into peoples homes. This legislation, mr. Chairman, is very clear. It puts in place a practice by the bureau of Land Management. It takes out of production federal land. The lies need to stop about telling our navajo brothers and sisters that our allotees that this will hurt their access to those lands. That this will restrict access to those lands. As a matter of fact, mr. Chairman, just to be thorough an amendment that i will offer later today will make it even more clear that this is only about taking b. L. M. Land out of production. So, mr. Chairman, with all the work that we have left to do with us, this is a piece of legislation supported by the new mexico delegation. Something that based on the amendment that my colleague from arizona, mr. Gosar, just offered, might understand. Its supported by myself, the representative from the district, congresswoman deb had a lapd. One of the first tuineiive american women elected to the congress. You heard the passion in her voice. Shes carrying that weight of her ancestors on her shoulders as she debates the fight to protect this sacred land. U. S. Senator Martin Heinrich, u. S. Senator tom udall, the governor of the state of new mexico, the commissioner of public lands. If you need a longer list of elected leaders from new mexico that support this bill, i can make it available. Lets work together, mr. Chairman, and the last thing that ill say is im very proud that this legislation will pass with bipartisan support. Pray on it. Think about where our loved ones have been laid to rest. We wouldnt want those gravesites being dess great cruiserweighted. We dont want desecrated. We dont want this site being desecrated, either. The chair the gentlewoman from new mexico reserves. Gentleman from arizona is recognized. Mr. Gosar i thank the chairman. I love the passion in the gentlemans voice. Once again its not me, its the allotees that brought their voice forward. The navajo allotees. They have seen time and time again promises made by the federal government and promises not kept. Once again who would you rather believe . The allotees or the b. L. M. . Personally i would side with the allotees. When you look at the map, it tells you the story you need to know. If we are going to make an amendment, we should guarantee access to any of that application through this area. Not just through the b. L. M. But all this area. Because those are the resources of the state. Has the gentleman read the bill . Mr. Gosar yeah. Mr. Lujan he would see the text is very clear this takes bureau of Land Management, land out. Not allotee land. If the gentleman would review the clarifying amendment, he would also see that as well. Dont just take my word for t look at the text and look the advice from your staff. Mr. Gosar reclaiming my time. It takes it off mineral exposure but doesnt give access. With that i yield four minutes to the gentleman from louisiana. The chair the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for four minutes. Mr. Johnson thank you, mr. Speaker. I appreciate my colleagues presentation here. Its clear and concise. He raises important points. I rise in opposition to h. R. 2181, the chaco Cultural Heritage protection act as well. This is a flawed bill. Its simply another attempt by our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to prevent our country from taking the next steps in this era of American Energy dominance. Whats important here is that American Energy dominance is a great strategy. Its a strategy that helps all americans. Those in this immediate area and around the country. The legislation before us will permanently restrict oil and Gas Development in the area immediately surrounding the chaco cultural National Historic park. Bear in mind as has been pointed out, exploration is already restricted within the park. Thats rightfully so. Its bad policy to create an arbitrary buffer zone for a prohibition on development in the area around the park. In this congress, our friend on the other side of the aisle have made their priorities Crystal Clear regarding the management of our countrys resources. So far they have placed moratoriums in the eastern gulf of mexico, pacific and atlantic planning areas, and anwr. Apparently thats not enough. What we are hearing today now we need to ban production in the new mexico areas as well. Mr. Speaker, at what point do we say enough is enough . The evidence shows time and again that placing restrictions on Energy Development only increases prices for american consumers. And make no mistake, these increases have the largest impact on our most vulnerable communities. I said this on the floor in september. Many of us have. Ill say it today. The United States is blessed because our land is filled with an abaundance of Natural Resources. My own Congressional District back in louisiana is home to one of the largest natural gas reserves in the country. We believe, we insist that we have the means and the responsibility to use those god given resources to create jobs, foster economic growth, and pave the way to an era of American Energy dominance. Oppressive policies like the ones before us today have been our own worst enemy. I urge my colleagues to vote no on this bill. I yield back the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentleman from arizona reserves. The gentlewoman from new mexico is recognized. Miss had a land lan miss had a lond i yield two minutes to the gentleman from arizona. The chair the gentleman from arizona is recognized for two minutes. I rise in the support of this bill. He the chaco canyon. Native people have occupied this region continuously since 10,000 b. C. Creating roads and beautiful crafts and art work. There are more than 4,000 arty facts and Cultural Resources that provide modern day native people to their ancestors thousands of years ago. Oil and Gas Exploration could destroy resources in that area. In fact, it has never been a comprehensive nativeled study in the chaco region. It is fitting we are talking about protecting chaco canyon in grand canyon in arizona on the same day. Both are National Treasures needlessly threatened padding the bottom line. I strongly support the bill debated earlier and i urge my colleagues to support this bill and Protection Zones around chaco canyon. This is sacred ground. We have an obligation to protect for future generations to enscroy and learn about. We must pass this bill to teach our children and childrens children about the native American People who live in the southwest. I urge my colleagues to pass this bill and i yield back. The chair the gentleman from arizona is recognized. Mr. Gosar i yield four minutes to the gentleman from arkansas. The chair the gentleman from arkansas is recognized. Mr. Westerman i rise in opposition. This unnecessary bill would permanently ban oil and Gas Development on 316,000 acres of land in new mexico and also incur 3 million in increased spending costs with no builtin mechanism to pay for it. H. R. 2181r proposed land grab would surround chaco natural historic park. The park is already under federal protections including a prohibition on Mineral Development. This bill would add 10 extra miles of protected area around the perimeter of the park. This arbitrary addition could have longterm negative repercussions on the state of new mexico. H. R. 2181 would impact the Navajo Nation members it claims to protect. Many of them own lands and mineral rights in the area. But this bill would make it virtually impossible for them to develop the Energy Resources to which they are rightfully entitled. The complex puzzle of federal, state, tribal land in the disputed area would result in gnificant hurdles creating a defacto distraction ban. They came to capitol hill to testify in front of the Natural Resources committee on behalf of 131 Navajo Nation members about how detrimental h. R. 2181 would be to their land. This bill ignores the request continues the pattern of government overreach in the west. H. R. 2181 side steps the interior department Resource Management plan for the area. Is currently undergoing review and will be publicly released at some point. Before we know all the father, this is uncalled for. I have spoken at length about American Energy dominance and Good Environmental stewardship because i believe they can go hand in hand. Every indicator shows that Energy Production is becoming cleaner, faster and cheaper by the day. Refusing to allow safe Energy Development on federal land isnt environmentally friendly, but just a power grab. If resources become increasingly unproductive we need to tap in in sustainable ways and dont restrict future development. Any leasing in these areas is subject to a host of federal regulations and oversight already. Ny already. Any Development Must comply with the natural Historic Preservation act and nepa. These are in place to protect historic sites. We are dating areas completely outside the boundaries of the chaco cultural area. My democratic colleagues are not hearing the concerns of local Navajo Nation members or waiting to read the analysis of the area. These hasty conclusions are unnecessary with devastating effects on the revenue stream. I urge my fellow members to consider the negative implications of this bill and vote against h. R. 2181 and i yield back. The chair the gentleman from arkansas yields back. The gentleman from arizona reserves. The gentlewoman from new mexico is recognized. Ms. Haaland i would like to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from new mexico. The chair the gentleman from new mexico is recognized. I want to respond to my colleague who was speaking. This area is within those terior boundaries of the archeological sites and indigenous lappeds that we refer to as chaco. Come out to new mexico. Ill take you out there. Congresswoman he would like to hose you. You brought up this notion that this development is subject to federal law. Could i have another 30 seconds . Ms. Haaland i yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from new mexico. Mr. Lujan if the gentleman would go to noaa website, we have two methane clouds. We have the worst, even though im sorry my colleague is not able to stay for this debate. Mr. Chairman, right now there is a theft taking place on u. S. Taxpayers because there is illegal leaking of methane taking place. There is technology that allows you when you are out there, you can smell it. People live right there. Lets find away to be smart about this. I agree with that, but there are places we have to protect. This is one of them. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentlewoman from new mexico is recognized. Ms. Haaland mr. Chairman, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from new york. Mr. Tonko i thank the gentlelady for yielding. I rise in strong support of h. R. 2181, chaco Cultural Heritage protection act of 2019. Chaco canyon was the center of a vibrant culture that became the center point for culture in the prehistoric corner areas. Thousands of sites and Cultural Resources are spread across the haco region and pump jacks are increasingly present across the landscape. Only a small portion of the regions sacred sites and resources are protected within the chaco cultural natural historical park. The greater chaco region is a prime example of how sacred sites are facing inkeysed threats from encroaching oil and Gas Development and the trum administration Energy Dominance agenda. The bureau of Land Management has leased land for oil and gas extraction and under the Trump Administration, b. L. M. Has proposed to lease parcells near chaco on three different occasions. Fossil fuel ex stracks threatens the region and clean air and water as well as the. New mexico methanes emissions are the highest in the country and will only get worse. That released methane, a Greenhouse Gas that is 34 times more impactful than co2 is a significant contributor to the ongoing climate crisis. Save our nation and vote to protect the ancient ruins from the oil and gas extraction. With that, i yield back. The chair the gentleman from new york yields back. The gentleman from arizona is recognized. Mr. Gosar i would love to engage with the gentleman from new mexico if he would not mind. You bring this concept of methane kaptur. There is an easy solution. Are you in favor of providing a pipeline . We can recover 100 of the methane emissions when we have a pipeline because it becomes profitable and something we could utilize. Mr. Lujan would it surprise the gentleman from arizona they are using duct tape to sale leaks from methane plumes in new mexico. Do you think that is allowed . Mr. Gosar im a Technology Nerd and this would set this on fire. If we are looking at technology and ought to be looking at it in a right way. Beneficial for living longer. Mr. Lujan would the gentleman yield. Mr. Gosar my point is, the First Technology out there for pipeline, that is very consistent with almost 100 capture. Wouldnt you entertain that . Mr. Lujan would the gentleman yield . I think the gentleman and i may be able to find some common ground, mr. Chairman. There are available technologies today as the gentleman may know being in tune with modern Technology Associated with oil and Gas Exploration that can identify leaks and prevent those leaks and can eliminate intentional flaring of those technologies but you have to find them and seal those leaks. I would be happy to work with the gentleman to identify a funding stream so we can identify every leak of methane across america, and prevent intentional methane. This is all about compromise and may be an area, mr. Gosar, we might be able to find some common ground. Ill put your eyes on that camera and see the plumes and may try to fix it with duct tape. But we should use Real Technology and eliminate those leaks and plumes and make it illegal to intension neal splare intentionally flair. Mr. Gosar i have no problem. Lets go down to texas where we have a coalfired plant that captures 100 of any emission and takes it down to the gas areas and injeggets back it squeezing what the oil and gas is and condenses it into limestone. I appreciate the gentleman for his back and forth. And with that, i reserve. The chair the gentleman from arizona reserves. The gentlewoman from new mexico is recognized. Ms. Haaland mr. Chair, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from arizona. The chair the gentleman from arizona, mr. Grijalva is recognized for two minutes. Mr. Grijalva i rise in support h. R. 2181, chaco heritage protection act. This proposal that is sponsored lujan and thisr. Is another important step towards recognizing and elevating the voices and presence of fate i have communities in this chamber. As the chairwoman mentioned, our committee has period from pueblos and tribal leaders about how important it is to protect chaco. They want hair homeland protected from oil and gas drilling. This is an important piece of legislation and it is agreed upon proposal that balances Regional Development to ensure that special places and Sacred Places are off limits and fits well into the work this chamber is doing today and has been doing all congress. We are listening to diverse voices, protecting the rights of native communities and conserving public lands for current and future generations. I hope our colleagues will join us in this important work to protect irreplaceable sites important to fate i have communities supported by folks on the ground and critical to the story of this nation of ours. With that, i yield back. The chair the gentleman from arizona yields back. The gentlewoman from new mexico reserves. The gentleman from arizona, mr. Gosar, is recognized. Mr. Gosar i yield five minutes to mr. Bishop from utah. The chair the gentleman is recognized. Mr. Bishop wonderful do be back downing here on the floor with all of you and i would have been here earlier if you had not scheduled a hearing at the same time while our Committee Bills are on the floor. We had both of those at some rate. Im sorry i missed the first one. Three bills that are so bad, they make the umpire last night actually look good. This one has a problem that still exists. If the state of new mexico and new mexico leaders want to giveaway the 1. 17 billion you just got a check from last time from this development, thats ok with me. It probably means that more money will come to my state eventually from that pot. But it is not ok to forget that those people who really understand what they are talking about, those who live closely in the area, really need to have their voices heard specifically. And i have to equate once again as has been brought up already, but reemphasize the two chapters in closest proximity that really have an impact on here both voted against this bill. They both sent resolutions against this bill. Those that actually have seen what it is like to deal with the federal government on that personal basis have sent resolutions against this bill. This bill has the potential of disrupting 20,000 native americans, almost all navajo who are allotees in this particular area. Even though some will contend the federal government said there will not be a problem, if we look at the history of dealing with the federal government, then obviously the concerns that the private sector has and those citizens who live in this area for bill this bill is obvious. There is historical precedent when that should take place. Until there is some kind of verification of that, then we ought to be very careful in which way we decide to go in this particular order. Let me say also one other thing here. This is a frustration i have with the entire process. As we know procedures, bad procedure creates badpolicy. The bill that we just discussed dealt with a park that has a huge maintenance backlog. Even though changing the mining procedures around the park will have nothing to do with the water, it doesnt solve the maintenance backlog. This bill all will deal with withdrawals from bureau of Land Management lands which once again have a huge maintenance backlog. Im going to say once again to our friends on the other side, if you want to talk about parklands in arizona, b. L. M. Lands in new mexico, whatever those lands in colorado are going to be, all on the same day, and we have that huge maintenance backlog, for heavens sake bring that bill to the floor. I realize how controversial it may be. There is only 328 cosponsors of the bill. Im sure that probably would be able to go on suspension. But until we have actually addressed the maintenance backlog and not held that up as some kind of sad quid pro quo or sad element of trying to blackmail for Something Else or try to attach bad elements to it that will negate the impact of that bill, we are piddling around here. Bring that bill for the maintenance backlog to the floor. Let us have a vote. Move on to solve real problems instead of those that we are creating with these three bills that are going to be before us today. Are they terrible bills . Who knows . Will they result in better quality in other western states that have publiclands . Who knows. Are some of the native americans who live in that area very skeptical of it . Obviously. Is there a history of the inability of working these things out . Obviously. Should they have worked out the details with the b. L. M. Before we actually introduced yeah, obviously. Once again we have three bills that make that play on first base look really good in comparison. With that, mr. Chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman from utah yield back the balance of his time. The gentleman from arizona reserves. The gentlewoman from new mexico is recognized. Ms. Haaland mr. Chair, i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from colorado. The chair the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. Ms. Degette thank you, mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, as we have heard chaco canyon is a unesco World Heritage site and the reason its listed this way is because its a place of magic and history. Anyone who has slept there under the stars, as i have, and as i would urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to do, knows what a special, unique place this is and why it must be protected. But there are many ways one can damage a historic site. Obviously you can damage the very soil that it sits on. But you can also damage the air and the quality that the visitors to this site find every year. Oil and Gas Development produces smog and gas flames that harm animals, van hollen tation, and people that live nearby. It vegetation, and people that live nearby. It marks the pristine night skies that attracts thousands of years every year. It emits methane that leads to ozone pollution. And it is just not worth destroying this precious treasure. I support reasonable oil and Gas Development throughout the west. My state, new mexico, arizona, utah so many places. But just because we should have oil and Gas Development in appropriate places doesnt mean we should have it everywhere. Certainly not near or in chaco canyon. Thats why i support this legislation and urge all of my colleagues to vote yes. I yield back. The chair the gentlewoman from colorado yield back the balance of her time. The gentlewoman from new mexico reserves. The gentleman from arizona is recognized. Mr. Gosar mr. Chairman, to the gentlelady from new mexico i have no further speakers. The chair the gentleman reserves. The gentlewoman from new mexico is recognized. Ms. Haaland i have no further speakers on o my side, either. I reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentlewoman from new mexico reserves. The gentleman from arizona, mr. Gosar, is recognized. Mr. Gosar thank you, mr. Chairman. For the record i would like to reiterate a number of institution that is are against h. R. 2181. To preface that we set precedent and we codify precedent. So thats why youll have multiple states disagreeing with h. R. 2181. So for those that are against h. R. 2181, you have the american exploration and mining association. There is a group letter. Arizona liberty, group letter. Arizona mining association, group letter. Arizona pork producers, group letter. Arizona Rock Products association, group letter. Citizens for for private Property Rights, a letter. Denver lumber company, a letter. Encore energy corporation. New mexico business coalition, new mexico cattle growers association, new Mexico Federal lands council, new mexico wool growers association, western energy alliance, and womens mining coalition. These are just some of the people that are against it. When we look at this board, we have this designation you see it here in chaco canyon. What wisdom did they have when they first put this together . Thats what i want to ask. The dimensions here are for a reason. Why are we expending this . Expanding this . Particularly when there is so little trust in the federal government. I think we just realized we had to move a part of our government, i think the b. L. M. If i remember right, out to grand junction, colorado. So that we actually had some bureaucrats who understood the delemkwlas out dilemmas out there in western culture and western states. Yes, western states gave up a lot. Gave a lot compared to the eastern cohorts. We gave property to the federal government for stewardship. However that has been abused. The products that we were supposed to get off those lands as public lands have dwindled. Eastern states call us beggars in rirlts to pit, payment in lieu of taxes, because we cant tax these federal lands. We are begging for pennies on the dollar. Somethings wrong with that. We are also vested in the Community Application of the best management of these resources. And getting the highest yield out of it. Ts like an investment how do we get the best out of this area . When you look at this, no wonder the navajo allotees dont trust the federal government. Tell me when the federal government has honored their promise. Look at arizona. The navajo generating station. This is a promise to the navajo and hopi tribes to have work that was dependent upon them. That gave them the benefit, that entrepreneurial and reflection of minerals. 60 o of the navajo 60 of the navajo economy is based off the navajo generating station at the mine. Thats gone. 80 of the hopis of the mine and n. G. S. , thats gone. So no wonder these navajo allotees dont trust the federal government. I dont blame them. Trust is a series of promises kept. Until we can start honoring our promises, we got to stop. We got to stop this foolishness. Theres plenty of land there. I want my energy. There is a way of going about t we engage with the gentleman from new mexico. Going to be a wonderful aspect to Start Talking about technology in regards to recouping 100 of the methane and anything else that comes out. I come from Northern Arizona where i can see the stars. I dont want to lose sight of that because i think it was buzz lightyear said to infinity and beyond. Thats the way we should also be. Its not about victimization. Its about empowerment. I believe these navajo allotees deserve their rights to make sure that the government honors their promise. I want cultural sites to be honored. I wonder what the difference is when this side is helped in this parameter and why we are going about the business to expand it further. Once again enough is enough. I would happily yield. Mr. Lujan i appreciate the gentleman yielding because one of the resolutions from the two chapters was raised and i think it was raised by the gentleman as well. I wanted to make sure we had a chance to review that. If that resolution is reviewed, if you look at paragraph four, which is where the concern that was brought up by the allotees to the chapter leaders, the very distinguished and honorable chapter leaders was raised, what it says is this, i quote, navajo allotment landowners express their concern that the quote, chaco Cultural Heritage area protect action of 2018, close quote, might infringe on their royalty payments they are presenting benefit interesting oil and Gas Development on their allot many lands. Navajo communities including the navajo reservation have always been in a very depressed economic state for many years. Such development of Natural Resources gives navajo families benefit in their daily lives. The bureau of Land Management did provide assurance that there would be no impact to those royalty payments. To answer the question of might infringe, the department of interior, the bureau of Land Management have said absolutely not would there be an infringement. I appreciate the gentlemans time and clarification. Mr. Gosar reclaiming my time. I thank the gentleman for that. Once again trust is a series of promises kept. When has the federal government held their trust up to the tribal men . Even allotees. Doesnt matter if they are native american. We have had a number of mining claims that have been stymied because the Forest Service or b. L. M. Will not give them access even though they have allowed and stated that they would have access to that claim. Once again its a hollow promise. Once again i beseech individuals, until the government starts honoring promises, they are not entitled to the high arcial of trust hierarchical of trust. I trust people more than the government. A government that can give you will can take all. Im not for that. Im for empowerment not victimization. What i have seen i dont like. When i have seen what was promised to the navajo people, hopi people, its lame. We are going to take these goodpaying jobs in Northern Arizona and we are going to give them welfare . How discouraging is that . Does that lift a persons spirit . No, it doesnt. Doesnt give them upward mobility. I thought that was the american xperience. Its sad we are at this point in time. I think we need more dialogue. We need more discussions. Yes, the Ranking Member made the comment. Good process build good policy, build good politics. None of that exists right now. Until we get back to the civil debate on this, and it continually wont exist. With that i ask people to my colleagues to vote against this bill. I yield the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman from arizona yield back the balance of his time of the the gentlewoman from new mexico is recognized. Ms. Haaland i yield myself such time as i may consume. The chair the gentlewoman is recognized. Ms. Haaland thank you, mr. Chair. H. R. 2181 is a broadly supported proposal to protect the Cultural Resources of chaco canyon. This bill has the support of the all Pueblo Council of governors, the Navajo Nation, the entire new mexico delegation, and the new mexico governor, not to mention any number of elected officials across our beautiful state. This proposal has been worked on for a very long time and over many hours, weeks, and years many voices have been heard. If we are serious about lifting up tribal voices and responding to the priorities of native American Communities, we need to listen to the tribal leaders who are asking us to protect chaco canyon. The people of new mexico know the impacts oil and gas rement can have on clean air, water and health of our children. 90 of the San Juan Basin is available for oil and gas leasing. We can protect the sacred land because gas and oil doesnt need to take up every single inch of our state. This proposal is about protecting a small sacred area for tribal communities who have a connection to this special place and still use this area for ceremonies, to pray and worship. There may be dissenting voices, but we must listen to the elected leaders who represent these places. And quite frankly, the majority of new mexicans who support this legislation on this issue. The delegation, the governor and the elected tribal leaders who have spoken in a unified voice asked us to protect chaco canyon. I thank representative lujan for his hard work and i encourage my colleagues to vote yes on h. R. 2181 and come to new mexico and visit this beautiful place and know for certain why it is we are fighting so hard to protect it. And i yield back the balance of my time. The chair all time for general debate has expired. The bill shall be considered for amendment under the fiveminute 116264 amendment in and the bill as amended shall be considered as read. No further amendment to the bill as amended except those in part 116264. E report each such further amendment may be offered in the order printed in the the report by a member designated in the report shall be considered read and time specified in the report equally divided by a proponent and opponent, shall not be subject to amendment and shall not be bject to demand for division of the question. It is now in order to consider amendment number 1 printed in 264. E of house report 116 mr. Lujan i have an amendment at the desk. The chair the clerk will designate the amendment. The clerk amendment number 1 printed in mart e of house report 116264 offered by mr. Lujan of new mexico. The chair the gentleman from new mexico, mr. Lujan and a member opposed each will control five minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from new mexico. Mr. Lujan im optimistic this amendment may even pass on a voice vote because i have been listening to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle about importance of having clarifying language to meet the goals we have laid out. Im hopeful this may be a short debate, but one that will definitely pass and make sure we are embracing both sides of the aisle. Mr. Chairman, this simple amendment would further clarify that this proposal only withdraws federal resources. The withdrawal of h. R. 2181 would not impact nor remove valid existing rights. This includes any lands and minerals owned by a tribe or a member of a tribe including allotment land and would include any valid rights to lands or minerals housed by the state of new mexico. I introduced this bill to prevent further encroachment of federal oil and Gas Development on the sacred sites of the greater chaco canyon region. These sites have withstood the tests of time. They have stood for thousands of years and give us a window into the past. Yet every year, oil and Gas Development on federal lands inch closer and closer threatening these sites and thousands of ancient artifcacts. The historical park has significant religious, cultural and archeological value to the original peoples of the southwest. Under this administration, chaco does continue to face greater threats. Under the Trump Administration, the b. L. M. Has proposed to sell leases near chaco canyon three times since march of 2018 but i will give credit to the administration. Each time under the trump station, the sales were withdrawn by the b. L. M. Under the department of interior after pushback from the native American Communities and each each he time the administration promised meaningful consultation, which is leading up to our trust responsibility, something that i share with my colleague on the other side of the aisle. The meaningful consultation never took place and the leases were up again for sale only months later. Time for congress to heed the interest of the communities across new mexico who want to see the site protected and withdraw the federal lands and minerals around chaco canyon. As you have seen and heard, 90 of the San Juan Basin are open to drilling. I understand the concerns have e raised by alloteys that this will impact their ability. The bill clearly protects them. If my colleagues have any concern, this amendment provides further clarifying language to ensure that those protections are very clear. This proposal will not impact anyones ability to develop their valid rights, including navajo allotees. The legislation only affects federal Government Land and minerals owned. Lets be clear. My legislation supports the interests of tribes and their sovereignty. H. R. 2181 is supported by native American Communities. The proposals received the support representing 20 public lowest and the Navajo Nation. Leaders were at the table helping to decide how these resources should be protected. I forever remember the conversations i had with navajo elders and children who continue to their their concerns with protecting the sacred site. I close by reminding us once again when we lay our loved ones to rest, well do everything we can to protect those sacred sites. This weekend, i found myself next to a church in the community i live remembering those that have fallen, pulling up the weeds, raking the ground, pay my respects. I cant imagine how myself or my mom would feel if those places would be desecrated. Thats all we are asking. Lets come together and protect these sacred sites and do it together. I reserve. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. For what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition . Mr. Gosar i rise in opposition, although im not opposed to the amendment. Got to give me time. You know, when i look at this, i try to amendude to this to to get access, i have to tell you it doesnt go far enough. I think what we have to do is guarantee access so congress is specifically and intentionally demanding they have that access. Because you as well as i know, once again government problems exist. Ill give the gentleman an example. In the last land package, we have a land package that included the la paz Land Exchange by b. L. M. It has been accessed. Our legislation actually said of it did not impugn any the mineral estates but the b. L. M. Came back and said that doesnt guarantee you access to it. Thats why i think it doesnt go far enough. I would like it to say it requires the allotees access to those lands. But im not opposed to it. I think slightly makes it better. So with that, im going to yield to the Ranking Member from the Natural Resources committee, the gentleman from utah, mr. Bishop. One minute. The chair the chair recognizes the gentleman from utah. Bishop i support your amendment but doesnt go far enough. If you want peace within it you have to amend the statutes. For that, its an improvement but still does not solve the base problem that even if you are taking away rights on federal property and you have private rights that abut it, it has a impact on private rights at the same time and those are the things that need to be guaranteed because those are people that could be losing teb tens of thousands of dollars because the action on the federal land has an impact on the private land and that cant be solved in the finding. This is a good effort to clarify what Congress Hopes to be accomplishing. And for that, i commend the gentleman for presenting this particular amendment and happy to be able to vote for it. I yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentleman from arizona. Mr. Gosar i thank the gentleman from new mexico. Think we see eye to eye where we are going with this. The native peoples, the people of the state, the private owners. With that, i yield back and no opposition to this amendment. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentleman from new mexico is recognized. Mr. Lujan just to close, i very much appreciate the tension i was brought to section 6 of the amendment which says nothing in this act affects the mineral rights of an indian tribe or member of an indian tribe to trust land or allotment lant or includes rightsofway for water, power or Road Development on the federal land to assist communities adjacent to or in the vicinity of the federal land. I respect my colleague and former chair of the committee and look forward to working with them. And i yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new mexico. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair the ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. Now in order to consider amendment number 2 printed in part e of house report 116264, for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition . Mr. Gosar i have an amendment. The clerk amendment number 2 printed in part e of house report 116264 offered by mr. Gosar of arizona. The chair pursuant to House Resolution 656, the gentleman from arizona, mr. Gosar, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona, mr. Gosar. Mr. Gosar this amendment would allow federal lands included in the withdrawal area to be exchanged with state trust entities and native american tribes. Currently, over a third of the land in new mexico is owned by the federal government. The 316,000 acre withdrawal this bill creates includes substantial parcells of private lant and state trust lands. State trust lappeds funds Public Services in the west, especially education. Federal overreach such as this legislation puts that funding at risk. Allowing the conveyance of certain lands in the withdrawal to state trust agencies will help mitigate the effects of this withdrawal on local services and infrastructure. Allowing the conveyance of federally held land will go a long way to address the critical problems of this legislation which is access. Denying access to these lands is simply wrong sm the growing federal estate is not a good thing for the longterm future of the west. Instead of locking up more land, we should be focused on increasing multiple uses. We can have our cake and eat it, too. Instead of locking up more land, we should be focused on locking the potential of the west empowering people to enjoy it. I reserve. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. For what purpose does the gentleman from new mexico seek recognition . Mr. Lujan i rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment. The chair the gentleman is recognized. Mr. Lujan mr. Chairman, there is a little bit of irony on this amendment that i cant overlook and we raised it a little bit earlier. The previous debate which was pursuant around protecting the grand canyon included an argument from my colleague that there should be some support for the member whose district that we are debating. Earlier, the gentleman from arizona offered an amendment to an arizona Public Lands Bill that would have been that would have removed the lands in his district from the bill. Yet, here we have a bill in new mexico in the 3rd Congressional District that i so proudly represent, supported by the governor of the state of new mexico by the entire new mexico delegation and the gentleman from arizona still trying to make those changes, changes i ould offer that dont make a bit of difference when it comes to the substantive side of the bill. This would make it harder for tribal communities to protect the lands this bill was intended to preserve. The gentleman claims that he wants to ensure the state has access to the lands in the withdrawal zone so they could potentially earn revenue on these lands. Something has happened in the state of new mexico over the last many years. In new mexico, the state land office which has jurisdiction over these lands has placed a moratorium on these lands within the buffer zone because the state recognizes the importance of protecting chaco canyon. We need to recognize the importance of thee sacred homelands does not end at the bounds of the chaco cultural National Historic park. A claim that has been falsely made by my colleagues earlier today. The entire greater chaco region contains discovered and undiscovered Cultural Resources important to pueblo communities, to tribal communities, to our brothers and sisters that have a connection to this region. We need to create this Protection Zone to ensure that these resources are not disturbed or destroyed by future oil and Gas Exploration on federal lands. My colleagues have noted, even secretary agrees with this sentiment. Thats the secretary of entiror upped the Trump Administration. That intear your under the Trump Administration. Interior under the Trump Administration. That is why he worked with Martin Heinrich for a oneyear withdrawal around the region to allow congress to act on these protections. I want to thank my colleagues for taking the urgency and initiative to act within the allotted time that was given to us by the secretary of the interior. This amendment ignores the importance of these resources, ignores the desire of the state. Would make it harder for native communities to protect their lands. With that i want to thank my colleagues for the time today. I want to encourage my colleagues to oppose this amendment. I hope to continue to work with my colleagues in the congress so we can get adoption of this important legislation with the strong bipartisan vote as possible. With that i yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentleman from arizona is recognized. Mr. Gosar i thank the chairman. Im not from new mexico. But i do have an interest in education. Because that was one of the Standard Operating Procedures that we were promised on public land. If im not mistaken the tribes are beneficiaries as well of that educational fund. And so when you start looking at this, depriving that fund of its due resources, i dont know about new mexico, but arizona has a problem paying for its educational system. Its not because we dont have enough money. Its because we dont have enough land. Thats a problem. So im here on behalf of the beneficiaries that the government promised. So from that standpoint i dont see a dichotomy in the rgument. Till we can understand, till we have a better facilitation of that exchange, once again doing something expediently as we had the discussion earlier about access to those allotees. Once again government hasnt been the solution that its claimed to be. It we almost have to guide them hand in foot pushing them to the right decision. With that i still rise in favor of this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The question is on amendment offered by the gentleman from new mexico. The gentleman from arizona, so many as are in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. The amendment is not agreed. To mr. Gosar i ask for a recorded vote. The chair pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, pursuant to clause 6 of rule 16, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona will be postponed. It is now in order to consider amendment number 3 printed in part b of the house report number 116264. For what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition . Mr. Gosar mr. Chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. The chair the clerk will designate the amendment. The clerk amendment number 3, printed in part e of house report number 116264, offered by mr. Gosar of arizona. The chair pursuant to haugs 656, the gentleman from arizona, mr. Gosar, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from arizona, mr. Gosar. Mr. Gosar thank you, mr. Chairman. This amendment would ensure this bill would not take effect if the withdrawal in question is proven to affect development or economic value of native american mineral rights on allotments. Private Property Rights are a fundamental american ideal. The 316,000 acre withdrawal this bill creates includes substantial parcels of privately held land, much of which is owned by native american allotees. The benefits of owning mineral rights are obvious for native communities. In 2015 alone, the federal indian Mineral Office distributed 96 million to more than 20,000 allotees around the country. At the june 35, 2019 harg, on h. R. 2181, the Natural ResourcesCommittee Heard estimony from delaura jesus, a citizen of the Navajo Nation. And a navajo allotee who owns Mineral Resources in the proposed area. He testified that h. R. 2181 will put many of our mineral rights off limits and stop a much needed source of income to feed, shelter, clothe, and protect our families, end quote. Apparently the voice of miss jesus and others who have spoken have not been heard. This amendment is an effort to acknowledge their livelihoods could be drastically diminished by this legislation. I ask the members of this body to put themselves in the shoes of the native american allotees who have staked their livelihood on the mineral rights on their properties that are rightfully theirs. Only to have the federal government strip them of their rights. I believe that is an injustice and urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. With that i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman from arizona reserves of the balance of his time. For what purpose does the gentlewoman from new mexico seek recognition . Ms. Haaland i rise to claim time in opposition to this amendment. The chair the gentlewoman is recognized. Ms. Haaland thank you, mr. Chair. I strongly oppose this amendment because it would allow second bernhardt to bill this bill, preventing protections for the important cultural sites at chaco canyon. In response to this amendment i would point you to the text of h. R. 2181, the bill text states, i quote, nothing in this act affects the mineral rights of an indian tribe or member of an indian tribe or trust land or allotted land. It could not be any clearer than that. Yet we have had this debate in hearings, markups, even moments ago during debate and in amendment. I understand and appreciate the concerns of the navajo allotees and i appreciated when his jesus came before our committee to share her concerns with us. It is important we take these perspectives into consideration, which is why i appreciate representative lujans effort to make explicitly clear that this bill will have no impact on the rights of allotted owners. But at the same time we need to listen to the voices of native communities and their elected leaders who are calling on us to protect chaco canyon. We have heard it already today, but this bill receives a complete support of the Navajo Nation, the all Pueblo Council of governors which represents 19 pueblos in new mexico and one in texas. These tribal leaders want to see the chaco landscape protected from oil and gas drilling. They dont want to see cultural sites damaged by pump jacks or have the pollution of extraction i trude on these sacred sites intrude on these sacred sites. The restrictions in this proposal are not new. They have been informally in place for years under the bomb Obama Administration without any clear impact on any allotees. We need to act now to formalize these protections because the Trump Administration and their Energy Dominance agenda threaten these important resources. Lease sales have been offered around chaco canyon three times since march of 2018. We must listen to the voices of tribal communities and to protect chaco canyon. I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentlewoman from new mexico reserves the balance of her time. The gentleman from arizona virginia tech. Mr. Gosar i thank the chairman. I will love to hear that argument on the discussion on anwr. That would have been interesting to have. And when i look at this, its become very evident in my time here in congress to find programs that had no authorization by congress that were enacted. Interesting. Interesting, once again in a government that is not trusted, trust is a series of promises kept. Once again this reiterates the private Property Ownership of these allotees to make sure that it is not impugned. I do not see the definition of that causing a quandry. Once again, these are allotees us to deserving and for require to make sure they are held whole. Once again i find it shortsighted in the application that no one wants to accept. The other side doesnt accept this amendment. With that i wish everyone would vote for this amendment. With that i yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentlewoman from new mexico is recognized. Ms. Haaland mr. Chair, we have heard this argument. We have hard and rehashed it over and over again. And not only that but my colleague, mr. Lujan, said it very plainly, the allotees will not be hampered by h. R. 2181. I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment and i yield my time. The chair the gentlewoman yield back the balance of her ime. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. So many as are in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. The amendment is not agreed to. Mr. Gosar i ask for a recorded vote. The chair pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona will be postponed. Its now in order to consider amendment number 4 printed in art e of house report 116264. For what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition . Mr. Arrington i have an amendment at the desk, mr. Chairman. The chair the clerk will designate the amendment. The clerk amendment number 4 printed in part e of house report number 116264, offered by mr. Arrington of texas. The chair pursuant to House Resolution 656, the gentleman from texas, mr. Arrington, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. Mr. Arrington thank you, mr. Chairman. There is a navajo saying that a rocky vineyard does not need a prayer. It needs a pick ax t we dont need protectionist prayers from elites in washington who think they have all the answers. We need a pick ax for prosperity and opportunity for folks living in rural america. And the navajo people in new mexico. Mr. Chairman, i rise today to offer an amendment to h. R. 2181, the chaco Culture HeritageArea Protection act. My amendment would prevent the proposed ban on future oil and Gas Development from going into effect in an area that already has adequate protections. Protection that is are there to ensure these operations wont have any adverse impact on historic and sacred lands in the chaco canyon historic park. The reality is there are already a litany of state and federal laws in place to ensure Environmental Protection and to prevent Mineral Development from affecting sensitive infrastructure and sacred artifacts within this exclusion zone. Energy companies have had a positive track record when it comes to working with the federal government to comply with these laws for necessary permits and approvals. Since producers already meet the standards set in several comprehensive environmental laws, this proposed ban on new oil and Gas Development in this area in my opinion is unnecessary. Its misguided, and its overreaching. In fact, drilling for minerals in already prohibited within the chaco canyon historic park, keeping the culturally sensitive artifacts safe from any sort of potential disturbance caused by oil and Gas Development. This bill is nothing more than a buffer zone on top of an already existing buffer zone that is protected cultural artifacts effectively for 100 years. Unfortunately, if enacted this bill would create significant access and extraction complications for the navajos. This adverse impact is a result and would be a result of this checkerboard nature of the mineral rights and how federal, state, and tribal and private lands are intersecting. Even though the areas proven to house abundant oil and gas reserves, the restrictions on accessing federal land would make doing business in that area almost impossible. Leading to a leading to a de facto extraction ban on the navajos own rights. The socalled buffer zone is arbitrary, completely unnecessary, again, in my opinion. The whole purpose of establishing the chaco culture National Historic area was to protect every area of historic significance and, again, its worked for a century now. That goals already been achieved. The protection is already ensured. Extending the boundaries and adding anchorage acreage to the heritage area will not enhance protection of areas of historical significance, but instead will limit the potential of private landowners to steward and reap the rewards of their privately held land passed down to them from their ancestors. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman from texas reserves the balance of his time. For what purpose does the gentlewoman from new mexico seek recognition . I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment. The chair the gentlewoman is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chair. I strongly oppose this amendment because it would negate the withdrawal and prevent us from protecting chaco canyon. The gentlemans amendment would allow for new drilling to occur on lands within the withdrawal area so long as certain standards are met. Essentially, this amendment would protect the status quo. Ms. Haaland a status quo opposed by the Pueblo Council of governors, the Navajo Nation, the entire new mexico delegation, the governor, and even the administration. When secretary bernhardt visited chaco last spring, he agreed to a oneyear moratorium because he knew that new drilling posed a threat to these sacred resources. Now this amendment seeks to overturn those temporary protections offered by the Trump Administration and to prevent permanent protections from being enacted. That cannot stand. Furthermore, this amendment contains numerous drafting edits that would make it impossible to enact. It names the park site incorrectly, it refers to undefined terms and its unclear its unclear wording would essentially allow anyone to drill in the withdrawal area. This is clearly not a goodfaith amendment and it is clearly not an amendment intended to improve this proposal. Its simply an attempt to open these sacred sands, these sacred lands, excuse me, with resources that extend beyond the park to extraction, because some of our colleagues cannot be satisfied until every acre of land in this countrha