The speaker pro tempore on this vote the yeas are 227. The nays are 190. The resolution is adopted. Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. He house will come to order. The house will come to order. Please, members take conversations off the floor. Cease conversations. Clear thewell, clear the aisle. Clear the well, clear the aisle. Please ceaseual conversationsd. Cease all conversations. Lease clear the aisle. He house will come to order. The house will come to order. The chair would ask all present to rise for the purpose of a moment of silence. The chair asks that the house now observe a moment of silence in remembrance of our brave men and women in uniform who have given their lives in the service of our nation in iraq and afghanistan and the families of all who serve in our armed forces and their families. Woit, fiveminute voting will continue without objection, fiveminute voting will continue. The Unfinished Business is the motion on the gentleman from texas, mr. Farenthold, to suspend the rules and pass h. R. 1 28 as amended on which the yeas and nays are ordered. The clerk will report the title of the bill. The clerk h. R. 1228, a bill to designate the facility of the United StatesPostal Service located at 300 packer land drive in green bay, wisconsin, as the corporal justice d. Ross post office building. The speaker pro tempore the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended. Members will record their votes by electronic device. This is a fiveminute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc. , in cooperation with the United States house of representatives. Any use of the closedcaptioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u. S. House of representatives. ] the speaker pro tempore on this vote the yeas are 418. The nays are zero. 2 3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. Without objection, the title is amended. The speaker pro tempore for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition . Mr. Hastings mr. Speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and includeheir remarks and extraneous material on h. R. 1459. The speaker pro tempore without objection. The house will be in order. Pursuant to House Resolution 524 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the consideration of h. R. 1459. The chair appoints the gentleman from texas, mr. Poe, to preside over the committee f 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. 1459 which the clerk will report by title. The clerk a bill to ensure that the National Environmental policy act of 1969 applies to the declaration of National Monuments, and for other urposes. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as read the first time. The gentleman from washington, mr. Hastings, and the gentleman from arizona, mr. Grijalva, each will control 30 minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from washington. Mr. Hastings mr. Chairman the chair the gentleman from washington will suspend. Mr. Hastings the committee is not in order. The chair the committee will be in order. Members, take their conversations off the floor. That includes the staff. The gentleman from washington may proceed. Mr. Hastings mr. Chairman, i yield myself such time as i may consume. The chair the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he wishes to use. Mr. Hastings thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, president obama has not been shy about his willingness or his desire to circumvent congress and take unilateral action on a variety of issues. This lack of shyness includes the designation of new National Monuments. In fact, during the president s first term in office, an internal memo was leaked to potentially lock up more than 13 million acres of western land with the simple stroke of the president s pen. Major land use decisions should such as this should be made not be made behind closed doors and should fully involve the local citizens whose livelihood would be directly affected by such action. Thats why, mr. Chairman, i trongly support h. R. 1459, the ensuring public involvement in the creation of National Monuments act, sponsored by our colleague from utah, mr. Bishop. This legislation requires would require Public Participation before a president can designate a National Monument under the Antiquities Act. Mr. Speaker, the committee is not in order. The chair the gentleman is correct. The committee will be in order. Members and staff, take their conversations off the floor. The gentleman from washington may proceed. Mr. Hastings thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, let me repeat this last sentence that i gave, because this is the heart of the legislation. This legislation would require Public Participation before a president can designate a National Monument under the Antiquities Act. Over 100 years ago, the Antiquities Act was passed to allow a president to unilaterally designate National Monuments without any input or involvement from the people, communities or elected officials of the areas that would be directly impacted. However, this authority was intended to be used under narrow circumstances and in emergencies to prevent destruction of a precious place. But unfortunately we have seen this power abused by president s of both parties. Its been used as a tool to score political points rather than to protect areas facing imminent threat or harm. National money umets are one of the most monuments are one of the most restrictive of all land use designations. They can significantly block Public Access and limit Public Recreation and other jobcreating economic activities. The American People and their elected leaders deserve to have a say which of their lands deserves special protections as National Monuments and which should instead be allowed to contribute to the full arrange of recreational, conservation, economic and resource benefits that carefully manage multiple that carefully manage multiple use lands provide. H. R. 1459 would guarantee public involvement and ensure that the designation process is transparent by requiring all National Monuments designations made under the Antiquities Act to comply with the nepa process. Most, if not all, major land use decisions are statutorily required to go through the nepa process. Designations made by the president should be treated no differently than those other processes. I will openly state, however, that i and many of my republican colleagues, believe that nepa is a law that should be streamlined and updated. However, this bill is about transparency and ensuring that the public has a voice. So let me ask the rhetorical question, mr. Chairman. If my democrat colleagues believe that nepa is a worthwhile law that works and that nepa is important, why should they oppose making sure that president ial designations should not go through the same process . This bill continues to uphold the original intention of the Antiquities Act which is to allow the president to act in emergency situations. It protects the president s ability to act if there is an imminent threat to an american antiquity by allowing for a temporary emergency designation of 500 of 5,000 acres or less for a threeyear period. After that time, in order to ensure Public Participation in the process, the designation would be made permanent if the nepa process is completed or if its approved by congress. The bill would also limit National Monument declarations to no more than one per state during any fouryear president ial term and prevent the inclusion of private property without the prior written consent of the Property Owners. National monument designations deserve public input from the people and communities directly impacted. This bill is necessary to stop unilateral actions by the president and ensure participation by the american public. I commend subcommittee chairman bishop for his work on this bill, and i encourage my colleagues to support it and with that i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman from washington reserves his time. The gentleman from arizona, mr. Grijalva. Mr. Grijalva thank you, mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as i may consume. The chair the gentleman from arizona may use as much time as he wishes to use. Mr. Grijalva thank you, mr. Chairman. This week the majority advanced the bill that would block the administration from implementing extreme buffer zone rules intended to protect waterways from the impacts of mountain top removal coal mining and adding to the list of their attacks on the environment, House Republicans ignore the fact that americans want clean water, clean skies and more, not less, National Parks and National Monuments. Because now they are forcing a vote on h. R. 1459, a bill that will make it harder for president s to create new National Monuments, adding layers upon layers of duplicative oversight and nonnecessary congressional review. This is not what our constituents are asking congress to do. Its simply another attempt by the majority to stall the protection of federal land. In its 100year history, the Antiquities Act has been used by 16 out of 19 president s. In fact, Teddy Roosevelt used it to to protect the grand canyon and use it had to protect the grand canyon and we must not make it more difficult for future president s to let land aside and honor our shared history, but thats exactly what this legislation is trying to do. There are two ways to create a new National Monument. Congress can pass a law or the president can use the Antiquities Act. As we all know, its becoming increasingly difficult to pass a law even for popular bipartisan conservation measures. Bills languish in congress for years, and the Antiquities Act is often the only way to move some of these projects across the goal line. The majority will refute this by pointing out pointing the finger at the senate, blaming the other side of the hill for inaction and highlighting their own track record of passing bills out of the house. That is a smokescreen. They have only moved a fraction of the conservation bills sitting before the house. Many even do not get a subcommittee hearing, and some of these proposals have been around for 10 years. Democrats are very pleased as democrats, we are very pleased to create new wilderness in the Sleeping Bear DunesNational Lake shore. Dont get me wrong. This is a good legislation, but passing one standalone wilderness bill, one national one National Monument and one new National Park bill in three years is not proof that congress could do the work of conserving land and creating National Monuments. For example, i introduced a bill to establish a National Monument in my district that would honor and recognize land considered sacred by native American Communities in the southwest. Its an area full of ancient petroglyphs increasingly under threat for looting and vandalism. A National Monument designation would ensure that these Cultural Treasures receive the level of protections they deserve. This proposal is supported by the National Congress of American Indians and every tribe in arizona. Like many of my colleagues in similar National Monument proposals, i am unable to get even a hearing on that particular bill. If the majority is truly concerned about public input or congressional review of National Monuments and conservation of federal land, why dont they consider bills to establish new monuments, parks, heritage areas or wilderness . Nearly 100 conservation designated bills have been introduced in the last two congresses. Four have become law. This track record doesnt prove that we need more congressional review. On the congressional trear, if the majority is to contrary, if the majority is so eager to apply this to the antiquities ct, why would they limit the scope on other lands . The majority has skrd and advanced measures to timber operations, mining activity and oil and gas lease. Following this logic, theres too much view following this logic, there is too much review when Foreign Corporations want to extract american taxpayer owned National Resources but not enough when we set aside land for future generations. House republicans have attempted to rewrite California Water law, undermine the endangered species act and blow up the steam buffer rule and approve state and private takeover of federal land. Putting up barriers to president ial proclamations of National Monuments as envisioned by h. R. 1459 is just another failure in the antienvironmental cap. H. R. 1459 will set up arbitrary per state limits on president ial monument decisions and require congressional review of any monument under 5,000 acres, monuments over 5,000 acres wont have to be approved by congress but they will be delayed by a process intended to evaluate the Environmental Impact on major of major federal access. I hate to break it to the majority, but the conservation and the establishment of National Monuments dont have the same footprint as open pit mines and oil wells. Republicans want us to believe that this bill is about protecting private property. The Antiquities Act only applies to federal land. Let me repeat. Only applies to peril land. If there are only applies to federal land. If there are people who have inholdings within that federal land, why are they standing in the way of federal Land Acquisition and depriving those Property Owners who are willing sellers the right to sell . H. R. 1459 is a wasteful and duplicative piece of legislation that will, like most bills passed out of this chance, have no chance of ever becoming law. I urge my colleagues to oppose h. R. 1459, and i reserve the remainder of our time. The chair the gentleman from arizona reserves. The gentleman from washington is recognized. Mr. Hastings thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, im very pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from new mexico, mr. Pearce. The chair the gentleman from new mexico will speak for two minutes. Mr. Pearce thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate the work of the gentleman from washington and for his yielding time. Youve just heard one view of what the bill does from our friends on the other side of the aisle. I would bring a different view. Just a couple months ago, secretary jewel visited my he city in my district, las cruces to create a president ial executive order creating a monument. Keep in mind that monument bill could not be passed through this house under democrat rule. It could not be passed through the Republicancontrolled Senate with a republican sponsor. It could not be passed through the Democratcontrolled Senate when they had a filibusterproof majority. And now then the president is going to come and unilaterally declare almost 1 3 of the county to be restricted. The west is starving education because of the Public Ownership of land. Anytime you create a monument, then you restrict the ability of local economies to survive. So the first monument, the first wilderness area that was created by congress is in my district. The hila national wilderness, and theyre starving for jobs in that entire region. Theyre asking, when can we have our jobs back . So the gentleman describes somehow we as republicans objecting. No, all were saying is that the president needs to live by the same rules as everyone else. The president is not above the law. Neither is his secretary. This bill is very simple. It is transparent. It says that the nepa process is about public involvement. That public involvement is what has scared away both democrats and republicans trying to make this 600,000acre wilderness happen in the Second District of new mexico. This bill needs to be passed because washington needs to understand the people own the land. I yield back and thank the gentleman for giving me time. The chair the gentleman yields back. The gentleman from washington reserves. The gentleman from arizona. Mr. Grijalva thank you, mr. Chairman. I give such ti