The publication is reproduced in full below:
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
______
JOSEPH WOODROW HATCHETT UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE AND FEDERAL BUILDING--
Resumed
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Booker). Under the previous order, the Senate will resume legislative session to resume consideration of the House message to accompany S. 2938, which the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Message to accompany S. 2938, a bill to designate the United States Courthouse and Federal Building located at 111 North Adams Street in Tallahassee, Florida, as the ``Joseph Woodrow Hatchett United States Courthouse and Federal Building'', and for other purposes.
Pending:
Schumer motion to concur in the amendment of the House to the bill, with Schumer (for Murphy) amendment No. 5099 (to the House amendment), relating to the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.
Schumer amendment No. 5100 (to amendment No. 5099), to add an effective date.
Schumer motion to refer the message of the House on the bill to the Committee on Environment and Public Works, with instructions, Schumer amendment No. 5101, to add an effective date.
Schumer amendment No. 5102 (to the instructions (amendment No. 5101) of the motion to refer), to modify the effective date.
Schumer amendment No. 5103 (to amendment No. 5102), to modify the effective date.
Cloture Motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to concur in the House amendment to S. 2938, a bill to designate the United States Courthouse and Federal Building located at 111 North Adams Street in Tallahassee, Florida, as the ``Joseph Woodrow Hatchett United States Courthouse and Federal Building'', and for other purposes, with amendment No. 5099.
Charles E. Schumer, Richard J. Durbin, Christopher
Murphy, Kyrsten Sinema, Martin Heinrich, Jack Reed,
Debbie Stabenow, Jeff Merkley, Sheldon Whitehouse,
Tammy Duckworth, Richard Blumenthal, Tim Kaine, Edward
J. Markey, Patrick J. Leahy, Alex Padilla, Patty
Murray, Mazie K. Hirono.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the motion to concur in the House amendment to S. 2938, a bill to designate the United States Courthouse and Federal Building located at 111 North Adams Street in Tallahassee, Florida, as the ``Joseph Woodrow Hatchett United States Courthouse and Federal Building'', and for other purposes, with amendment No. 5099, shall be brought to a close?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Cramer).
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 65, nays 34, as follows:
YEAS--65
Baldwin Bennet Blumenthal Blunt Booker Brown Burr Cantwell Capito Cardin Carper Casey Cassidy Collins Coons Cornyn Cortez Masto Duckworth Durbin Ernst Feinstein Gillibrand Graham Hassan Heinrich Hickenlooper Hirono Kaine Kelly King Klobuchar Leahy Lujan Manchin Markey McConnell Menendez Merkley Murkowski Murphy Murray Ossoff Padilla Peters Portman Reed Romney Rosen Sanders Schatz Schumer Shaheen Sinema Smith Stabenow Tester Tillis Toomey Van Hollen Warner Warnock Warren Whitehouse Wyden Young
NAYS--34
Barrasso Blackburn Boozman Braun Cotton Crapo Cruz Daines Fischer Grassley Hagerty Hawley Hoeven Hyde-Smith Inhofe Johnson Kennedy Lankford Lee Lummis Marshall Moran Paul Risch Rounds Rubio Sasse Scott (FL) Scott (SC) Shelby Sullivan Thune Tuberville Wicker
NOT VOTING--1
Cramer
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Schatz). On this vote, the yeas are 65, the nays are 34.
Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in the affirmative, the motion is agreed to.
Cloture having been invoked, the motion to refer the amendments thereto fall.
The Senator from New Mexico.
S. 2938
Mr. HEINRICH. Mr. President, like many of my constituents in New Mexico, I am a gun owner. I have a sincerely held respect of law-
abiding gun ownership.
Many of my own most cherished memories involve the responsible use of a firearm to feed my family and to forge memories with my sons and my closest friends. But those same sons grew up doing active shooter drills in their classrooms, something that would have been absolutely unimaginable when I was their age. And just this spring, my son's high school was on lockdown when I arrived, due to a nearby shooting that actually involved students from that high school. That type of experience has become all too common in our country.
The gun violence our communities are experiencing is appalling, and it is unacceptable. It is evident from the unthinkable mass shootings that we have witnessed in Uvalde and Buffalo and Tulsa and Vestavia Hills and El Paso. And it is evident in the mounting number of gun homicide and gun suicides that have taken tens of thousands of lives each year.
My home State of New Mexico continues to struggle with one of the highest rates of gun deaths in the country; and in recent years, far too many New Mexicans have lost friends and family members to this epidemic of violence.
I personally refuse to accept the idea that we are so divided in this country that we can't do something to make this situation better. That is why I join my good friend Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut and a number of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to try and chart a meaningful path forward. Over these past weeks, we have engaged in challenging but productive conversations. We found areas of agreement on real solutions that we can and we will pass here in the U.S. Senate.
Our bipartisan negotiations and the legislation that they have produced prove that we can work together in this body. And they show that when we set aside the vicious politics that have held us back for too long on this particular issue, we can actually create policies that save lives.
The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act includes Federal resources to help States and Tribes implement crisis intervention programs.
New Mexico passed a law to establish one of these programs just last year. The goal was to ensure that deadly weapons were kept out of the hands of those that a court, with due process, determined to be a significant danger to themselves or others. But as of last month, New Mexico had only used our law nine times, primarily due to a lack of funding and resources and training.
Just last month, on Mother's Day, New Mexico tragically lost two teens, shot and killed by a man who very likely could have had his firearm removed using New Mexico's crisis intervention law.
The alleged suspect had been issued a temporary restraining order at the request of his former girlfriend and the mother of one of the victims. The restraining order showed that he was in possession of two firearms. Unfortunately, the local sheriff's office failed to recognize the threat that he posed and didn't use our State's law to remove the firearms that he used to take the lives of two young New Mexicans.
If we can provide our law enforcement officers and courts the funding and training they need to make crisis intervention laws effective, we can protect our communities and ensure that future lives are not lost. The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act will help us do just that.
Our legislation also enhances the review process for firearms buyers under 21 years of age. This new process will require an investigative period to review criminal and mental health records, including checks with State databases and local law enforcement.
Over the last 4 years, six of the nine deadliest mass shootings were by people who were 21 or younger. The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act ensures we respond to this deadly trend in a meaningful way.
Our legislation also makes clear who the Federal firearm licensing requirements apply to, leading to more firearm sales that require a background check.
We are finally making sure that convicted domestic violence abusers and individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders are included in the Federal background check database, whether or not the abuser is married to the victim. That has long been a major failure in Federal law, and it has allowed dangerous abusers, who are dating but not married to their partners but whom we know pose a violent threat, to acquire deadly weapons. This provision alone will save an enormous number of lives.
Our legislation will also make historic investments in community behavioral health and school-based mental health services, and it will increase access to behavioral health services through telehealth.
The bill will help support school violence prevention efforts and provide training to school personnel and students so that they can recognize the signs that so often precede some of these violent shootings events.
Over the course of our negotiations, I worked especially hard on a few key provisions with my colleague from Maine, Senator Susan Collins. Our provisions will crack down on straw purchasing and trafficking of firearms. These provisions will directly reduce gun violence in our home States and internationally. Let me take a moment to explain how.
Under current law, it is a minor paperwork offense to buy a gun for someone else. And even then, that only applies if you buy the gun from a Federal firearm licensee. Under the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, we are making it a serious crime to buy a gun for someone else when you know that person will use the gun to commit a felony or that they are not allowed to buy a gun themselves. That applies whether you buy the gun from a Federal firearm licensee or not.
The consequences of this simple change will be real. It will keep deadly weapons out of the hands of people who would use them to hurt others, and it will level serious consequences for those who break the law.
Just last year, a New Mexico State Police officer was tragically killed during a traffic stop in Deming, NM. Officer Darrion Jarrott was shot and killed by a convicted felon whose wife had allegedly purchased the gun for him. She is now being prosecuted under the paperwork offense that is currently on the books. But under the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, she would be facing more severe and deserved consequences for her role in the death of a State police officer.
This legislation will also stop the type of organized straw purchasing and trafficking that we have seen too often in New Mexico and elsewhere. Right now, law enforcement has to watch as an organized chain of straw purchases happen one after another, intended to protect the person most at fault--the mastermind of the operation--by keeping them far removed from the purchase that happens at an FFL, at a Federal firearm licensee.
Our law enforcement watched this happen, but they can only go after the person who walked into the FFL and made the very first of that series of straw purchases--that is usually the person least involved in the scheme. But that is about to change. Soon, these ringleaders won't be able to distance themselves from the law anymore.
With our new straw purchase provision, law enforcement will be able to go after every link in the illegal chain of purchases to take down the entire ring, not just the vulnerable individuals these rings sometimes rely on to make the initial purchase.
There is more. While trafficking firearms into the United States is a major Federal crime under existing law, trafficking firearms out of the United States has not been. For years, this has meant that firearms trafficked out of the United States are the primary supply of guns used to commit violent crimes in Mexico, in El Salvador, in Honduras, and in Guatemala.
It has also invited dangerous firearm trafficking into communities on both sides of our Nation's southern and northern borders. We saw this in my home State about a decade ago when a major firearms trafficking ring was uncovered in Columbus, NM. This trafficking operation involved the chief of police, the mayor, a village trustee, and an estimated 190 firearms, including large numbers of handguns and assault rifles. And the crime they were charged with? Lying on their paperwork.
Not anymore. The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act takes this violence on with the severity that it deserves. It gives law enforcement the tools they need to stop this activity and the violence it directly and indirectly creates in our communities and within our borders. By taking on the violence that families are fleeing in their home countries--
violence that our inadequate gun laws have actually contributed to--we are also taking meaningful action to address a root cause behind so many refugees coming to our country.
Now, I fully recognize that the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act is a compromise. Many of the parents and students who have raised their voices to demand action on gun violence would like us to go further. But progress has to start somewhere. The hardest part of every negotiation is letting go of the perfect for the possible, and I am confident that the legislation we are voting on will make a real difference in reducing gun violence--a difference that will be measured in lives. It will boost public safety, it will invest in mental health, and it will keep more firearms out of the hands of those who would use them against their communities.
The painful truth is that we can never bring back those precious children whose lives were cut short in Uvalde, TX; in Parkland, FL; in Newtown, CT; or Aztec High School, West Mesa High School, Deming Middle School, and Washington Middle School in my State. We can never offer enough words to heal the grieving families all across the country who have lost their sons and daughters and their brothers and sisters and their fathers and mothers to gun violence. But what we can do by voting to pass this legislation in the Senate is to honor their memory--not just with condolences and hopes and prayers but with concrete action.
I would encourage all of my colleagues to support the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. Each life that we save by passing this legislation will mean literally everything to that person's loved ones, and that is what this is all about.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
Unanimous Consent Request--S. 251
Mr. TUBERVILLE. Mr. President, today is a great day. Today marks the 50th anniversary of title IX. For half a century, we have witnessed the impact title IX has had on generations of women in sports. Title IX provided women the long-denied platform that had always been afforded men. It ensured female athletes have the same access to funding, facilities, and athletic scholarships, but it also gave young women the opportunity to compete, to learn the life lessons of hard work and perseverance, to go to college on an athletic scholarship, to overcome obstacles in order to reach their God-given potential.
Since 1972, female participation in sports at the college level has risen more than 600 percent, and today, 43 percent of high school girls participate in some competitive sports, compared to 50 years ago--only 3 to 5 percent. What a turnaround.
For all these reasons, decades later, we have proof that title IX has worked. Sports can transform lives. I have seen it. I began my coaching career as a high school girls basketball coach just a few years after title IX was enacted, and now, 50 years later, America's female athletes are not only the best performing on the world stage in team and individual sports, but they also are the leaders in our communities and in our country.
Title IX sent an incredible--an incredible--message to female athletes across the Nation, which is, you can compete, you can win, and you will be afforded a fair and level playing field to do so.
I have personally witnessed how title IX protections allowed young women to gain all the opportunities and life lessons that participating in sports has to offer. That is why, just 3 months into my time as a U.S. Senator, I introduced an amendment to prohibit Federal funding to schools that allow biological males to compete in women's sports. And I, along with 23 of my colleagues, introduced the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act. This bill would make it a violation of Federal law for a recipient of Federal funds who operates or sponsors athletic programs to permit biological males to compete in women's sports activities. The bill also establishes the long-needed definition of
``sex'' in title IX to be recognized based solely on a person's reproductive biology and genetics at birth.
Democrats have turned their backs on these efforts, and by doing so, they have turned their backs on female athletes all across our country. Just last month, I sent a letter to U.S. Department of Education Secretary Miguel Cardona warning the administration to rethink their rule change.
On this 50th anniversary, we should be asking ourselves how we can preserve title IX and preserve fairness for all female athletes across our country, but unfortunately, women's athletics are currently under attack by the Biden administration. Just this morning, we learned that the Department of Education will publish a proposed rule to change title IX to align with the administration's progressive agenda. These proposed changes would allow biological males to compete in women's sports. What a tragedy. It would take a wrecking ball to the five decades of title IX success for women. The Biden administration's proposed rule flies in the face of the so-called science that Democrats are quick to pledge their allegiance to by ignoring the scientific differences in the biological makeup of male and female athletes. Apparently, science only matters when it conforms to Democrats' partisan agenda.
Allowing biological males to compete in women's sports will set women's rights back 50 years, to a time before title IX. It will discourage young girls from entering the court, jumping in the pool, or walking onto the field, knowing that they have to compete with the deck stacked half against them, and the winner will already be determined. With the proposed rule change, female athletes can only hope--can only hope--to finish in second or third place. There is no pregame speech or halftime talk that you can give a woman or girl who feels like they aren't competing on a fair playing field.
The Biden administration should do the right thing and rethink their decision to disenfranchise female athletes of the future.
This fight is far from over. The very least the Senate can do for the future of female sports is to reinforce the protections already afforded women in title IX.
Mr. President, that is why I call up S. 251, the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act of 2021. I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged from further consideration of S. 251 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Hawaii.
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I rise today in opposition to S. 251, legislation that would ban transgender women and girls from participating in sports consistent with their gender.
My Republican colleagues falsely claim that allowing transgender women and girls to play sports is harmful to cisgender women and girls. They continue to hurl insulting lies about transgender girls dominating sports, but what is true is that these bans are deeply harmful to transgender girls, particularly transgender girls of color, girls who are gender-nonconforming or born with intersex traits, as well as cisgender girls.
These sex tests invade every girl's privacy and open the door to harass anyone who is perceived as different.
If my Republican colleagues were actually worried about women and girls in athletics, they would join in our efforts to address unequal athletic opportunities in school, unequal pay, sexual abuse and harassment, and more. But this isn't about supporting women and girls; this is about discrimination.
Earlier today, I stood in Statuary Hall as we unveiled the portrait of the late Congresswoman Patsy T. Mink on today's 50th anniversary of title IX becoming law. Title IX, which was renamed the Patsy T. Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act, says:
No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participating in, be denied the benefit of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
Thirty-seven words that are just as relevant today as they were 50 years ago.
Patsy fought for equal opportunities for all, and this bill stands in direct opposition to her work. And to listen to my colleague talking about title IX as being that act that is going to support his bill, I can tell you, as someone who knew and was friends with Patsy T. Mink, she would be standing right next to me to say that title IX in no way or shape supports what my colleague is attempting to do.
Republicans have the wrong priorities. We shouldn't be banning anyone from playing sports; we should be fighting the discrimination that all women and girls continue to face in athletics, in the classroom, and in workplaces.
I am proud to stand up and oppose this harmful legislation and continue to advance Patsy Mink's legacy of equal opportunities for all.
Mr. President, for these reasons, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. TUBERVILLE. Mr. President, what I would like to say about equal opportunity is that over the last few years, biological males playing in women's sports have won 22 championships. The girls--other girls--
were playing for second and third.
I am disappointed that my colleague thinks this is not about equal rights. I am disappointed that my colleague won't stand up for women and women's rights. We should all be here fighting for the same thing.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Supreme Court Security Funding Act of 2022
Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of the Supreme Court Security Funding Act of 2022, which I introduced with Senator Warner just last week. Yesterday evening, the Senate approved by unanimous consent this bipartisan legislation, which provides emergency security resources to the Supreme Court of the United States and to the U.S. Marshals Service.
The House of Representatives must approve this bill without amendment or delay and send it to the President's desk before adjourning this week. The need is urgent and obvious. There is no question the Supreme Court, its Justices, their families, and Court employees are under unprecedented and unexpected threat. This includes recent highly publicized threats against Justice Kavanaugh and Justice Sotomayor. These threats may well become more acute in the coming weeks as the Court concludes its term.
There is no question that protecting the Court from these threats requires additional resources in Fiscal Year 2022 because unexpected resources are being deployed. This legislation provides those necessary resources.
More specifically, the U.S. Marshals Service has been providing around-the-clock security for the nine Justices at their homes and needs 10.3 million in emergency funding to cover these costs for the remainder of this fiscal year. The Supreme Court needs 9.1 million to cover its increased security costs for this fiscal year. These include overtime pay for Supreme Court Police officers, mutual aid payment to assisting law enforcement agencies, and increased physical security around the Supreme Court Building.
If Congress doesn't immediately provide this funding, the Court and Marshals Service may be forced to transfer funds from other critical functions and entities, like the U.S. District Courts and U.S. Courts of Appeal. That is an unacceptable outcome given the obvious and urgent need for this security funding and the gravity of the threat against one of our three constitutional branches.
Congress recently passed--and the President signed into law--
legislation by Senators Cornyn and Coons to increase the scope of authorized Supreme Court Police protection to include the Justices' immediate family members. Congress rightly provided this additional security authorization to protect the Court.
These expanded authorities are important, but there should be no question regarding whether Congress will separately provide the resources necessary to protect the Supreme Court during its hour of need.
I thank my colleague from Virginia, Senator Warner, for working with me on this legislation. I also want to thank the senior Senator from Alabama, Vice Chairman Shelby, and his staff, as well as the senior Senator from Vermont, Chairman Leahy, for their help and their guidance. Finally, I thank my Senate colleagues for their cooperation in ensuring the swift passage of this legislation in the Senate.
Now, I urge the House of Representatives to promptly send this bill to the President's desk before it adjourns later this week.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. King). The Senator from South Dakota.
Great Outdoors Month
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, June is Great Outdoors Month. It is a theme that definitely speaks to me. I am an outdoors guy through and through. I love pheasant hunting, boating, swimming, running. I will shoot hoops whenever I get the chance, indoors or outdoors, but this is nothing better than doing it outdoors.
When I was a kid, my dad attached a basket to a pole in our backyard, and there was nothing my siblings and I liked better than spending long summer days and sometimes fall days and spring days shooting hoops in our backyard in Murdo.
The outdoors was a huge part of my life as a kid. We spent the long summer days outside, barring the hour every day my mother made us come inside to read. On summer evenings, my dad would take us to get ice cream cones, and then we would drive down to the White River to watch the sunset.
Another outdoor pastime we embraced was hunting. My dad taught my siblings and me to hunt, and I loved going out with him. Pheasant hunting remains one of my favorite outdoor activities, and I get excited every year as the third Saturday in October--the official start to pheasant season--rolls around.
It is a tradition that I am happy to be able to share with the next generation, as my dad shared it with me. There is nothing better than a day spent outdoors with friends and family, followed by a communal meal, sometimes involving pheasant.
Being in the outdoors isn't just enjoyable; I think it is a part of the good life. The health benefits of time spent outdoors are well-
established, and I know a day--or even an hour--out in the fresh air always clears my mind and refreshes my spirit.
With more and more of our life spent in front of screens, I think time spent outdoors and disconnected is even more important than ever. I am grateful for all those hours we spent as kids running around outside and for family activities outdoors, like our summer trip to the Black Hills. We used to go out there for Labor Day, stay in this little non-air-conditioned cabin and just enjoy the outdoors.
We would hike, and we would visit caves. We would go to Mount Rushmore, head to the lake--I loved and still love visiting Sylvan Lake in South Dakota.
I loved being there with my parents and siblings, and I loved taking my daughters there on trips like the ones I took growing up. Nobody who visits South Dakota should miss the Black Hills.
I am not sure there is a more beautiful place on Earth--the interplay of light and shadow on the trees and rocks late on a summer afternoon, the endless South Dakota sky reflected in the blue of Sylvan Lake and other lakes in the Black Hills, the Milky Way carpeting the night sky with millions of diamonds. There is no better place to spend time in the great outdoors than South Dakota.
Our State is filled with natural wonders, the Missouri River, Jewel Cave and Wind Cave, two of the longest caves in the world. Together, they offer hundreds of miles of underground passageways to explore, filled with glimmering crystals and remarkable rock formations.
We have the magnificent Black Hills National Forest in Custer State Park, rolling prairies, and, of course, the Badlands. If you haven't experienced the rugged beauty of the Badlands, you are missing out--
extraordinary layered rock formations that look like they might have come from another planet, a wealth of fossils.
Everybody should see the sunset over the Badlands at least once in their life, turning the tops of the rocks to a sea of fiery orange.
And, of course, no mention of South Dakota's great outdoors would be complete without a mention of Mount Rushmore, one of our national treasures. Nature got a little help from man here, and the result is magnificent. You can't help but be awed when you see Mount Rushmore soaring up in front of you. And you can't help but feel a little prouder to be a citizen of this great land.
Our Nation's great outdoor spaces need to be cared for so that we can preserve them for future generations--from wildlife enthusiasts to hikers and runners to farmers and ranchers. I am a longtime supporter of the Conservation Reserve Program.
Agricultural producers are familiar with the Conservation Reserve Program, or what we call CRP, which provides incentives for farmers, ranchers, and landowners to take environmentally sensitive land out of production for 10 to 15 years.
The Conservation Reserve Program helps the environment by improving soil health and water quality and providing habitat for wildlife, including endangered and threatened species. I pushed for an increase in the CRP acreage cap in the 2018 farm bill, and the final bill raised that acreage cap to 27 million acres.
Currently, I am working on further improvements of CRP that I will work to get included in the 2023 farm bill. Based on my conversations with farmers and ranchers, I developed the Conservation Reserve Program Improvement Act, which I introduced in March. This legislation would make CRP grazing a more attractive option by providing cost-share payments for all CRP practices for the establishment of grazing infrastructure, including fencing and water distribution.
It would also increase the annual payment limit for CRP--which has not changed since 1985--to help account for inflation and the increase in land value.
This would enhance the appeal of CRP for farmers and ranchers, improving their bottom line while helping to protect the environment and increase wildlife habitat.
Another priority of mine is improving forest management in the Black Hills National Forest to reduce the risk of wildfires and damaging insect infestations.
I have introduced two pieces of legislation during this Congress to help improve management of our national forests, including the Black Hills. Currently on-the-ground management activities, including timber thinning, are significantly lagging in the Black Hills National Forest and other forests throughout the country.
My Expediting Forest Restoration and Recovery Act would require the U.S. Forest Service to expedite treatment of more than 70 million acres of National Forest System lands to reduce the threat of insect and disease infestations and catastrophic wildfires.
My Black Hills Forest Protection and Jobs Preservation Act is also designed to help expedite forest management projects in the Black Hills and elsewhere. The bill, which I introduced with my Wyoming colleague, Senator John Barrasso, would require the U.S. Forest Service to quickly issue National Environmental Policy Act decisions that are necessary to carry out forest management projects, including thinning of overly dense timber stands in the Black Hills National Forest.
Our bill would also expedite timber production projects in the Black Hills National Forest and neighboring national forests to help maintain the timber sale program that plays a critical role in keeping these forests healthy while also supporting the regional economy.
I am grateful to live in a State that has so much to offer when it comes to the great outdoors. And I will continue to work to protect and preserve our national treasures, and I hope every American will take advantage of Great Outdoors Month to get outside and enjoy our natural world.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
____________________
SOURCE: Congressional Record Vol. 168, No. 107
The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
Senators' salaries are historically higher than the median US income.
Alerts Sign-up