[Pages H1325-H1330]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   WORK HIGHLIGHTS OF WESTERN CAUCUS

  (Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2025, Mr. LaMalfa 
of California was recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the 
majority leader.)
  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak here 
as we conclude the week.
  Mr. Speaker, I wanted to take the time today to highlight some of the 
work that we are doing in the Western Caucus, made up of over 90 
Members of the U.S. House of Representatives.
  I have been privileged to become the chair of that group this year. 
Chairing the caucus, I get to bring up a lot of key issues on the floor 
and kind of illustrate to the people who are watching and wish to pay 
attention how important the issues are that we are taking up and 
continue to advance while working with the Trump administration.
  One of the cornerstones, indeed, is energy. We call ourselves the 
Western Caucus, but the issues are a little beyond the Western States. 
Indeed, they are rural issues. They are issues that affect all of our 
States and the opportunity to strengthen our entire economy with what 
we have available in the Western States and in rural areas. Indeed, our 
oil and our energy come from many, many parts of the country. The 
original oil patch was actually in western Pennsylvania.

  The Western Caucus is less about maybe what the real estate is, but 
more about the concepts of advancing rural issues and the ability to 
extract resources and to utilize resources in an ecologically sound 
way. We are all about that, too.
  The U.S. gets a bad reputation sometimes that people who are in these 
industries are misconstrued by environmental groups and such as being 
against the environment and against doing things properly. The bottom 
line on that topic is that unleashing American energy and our mineral 
resources, strengthening agriculture, and tackling the real challenges 
facing our country, like the devastating wildfires in the West, are key 
issues that the Western Caucus faces.
  One of the things that can help with some of these issues will be 
modernizing the Endangered Species Act that has been around for over 50 
years, and I see the futility as it is interpreted these days in layer 
after layer of court decisions and lawsuits that basically just hamper 
the ability for us to do the things we need to do to have stronger 
energy availability and have the other resources that are key to a 
strong economy for our country and not import all of these products.
  Indeed, with the goals set out, at least by some, to have further 
electricity usage for appliances, which we have talked about this week 
on this floor, there is requirements. There is people being mandated to 
change what their appliances are powered by.
  When you have a gas-powered stove, gas water heater, and on and on 
with mandates, whether it is my home State of California or has come 
through the previous Biden administration, this has taken away consumer 
choices and taken away the best choice for a lot of people for how to 
power these devices.
  That extends also to automobiles, trucks. If you have it, a truck 
brought it. That is an important aspect to remember, as well, is that 
just by merely sweeping away the ability to have gasoline and diesel, 
as California is doing and that they are trying to do and that the 
Federal Government had been doing until the end of the Biden 
administration, that is going to cost a lot. It is going to make it a 
lot less convenient and a lot more difficult to get raw materials and 
products from where they are created to where they are needed.
  The Endangered Species Act is part of the issue that needs to be 
modernized, as well as getting over the lawsuits and litigation that is 
used as a weapon, whether it is by Federal agencies or by so-called 
NGOs or environmental groups.
  We have been working in this Chamber, as I mentioned, this week to 
help deliver solutions to lower energy costs, cut red tape, and reverse 
the Biden administration's relentless overreach, from blocking costly 
energy efficiency mandates on consumer products to stopping unnecessary 
restrictions on American manufacturing and energy production.
  We want these things to be manufactured here by American workers, 
using American technology, American efficiency, and the cleanliness 
that comes with it. We are much more efficient and much cleaner than 
what happens in Chinese manufacturing. Our natural gas that we use in 
this country is actually cleaner than Russian natural gas. We should be 
exporting more of that to Europe and helping them out instead of them 
becoming dependent on the long reputation we have had with Russia 
there.
  When we are talking about these overreaches by government by these 
regulations, it really drives up prices, burdens businesses, and makes 
us more dependent on foreign products, foreign energy, et cetera.
  Let's restore American energy dominance, support these industries 
that put food on the table, clothing on our backs, and shelter above 
us. We should support them to make our country stronger and more 
independent. We will push back against the policies that are failing 
and harming rural America.
  Mr. Speaker, I look forward to hearing from my colleagues, some of 
whom will be joining me during this time here, and what they are 
working on as part of our Western Caucus partnership here.
  I see a couple of my colleagues have arrived here. I would like to 
recognize, if the gentlewoman is ready, my executive vice chair. The 
gentlewoman from Utah (Ms. Maloy) is with us here--I am pleased to have 
her as a partner and friend on the Western Caucus--to inform us on the 
issues that are particular to Utah, but also the Western States, as 
well.
  I am really, really pleased that she has stepped up to be in this 
role here, and I appreciate her quite a bit.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Utah (Ms. Maloy).
  Ms. MALOY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for the opportunity to be here today, and 
I commend my colleagues in the Western Caucus for their unwavering 
dedication to preserving the values and livelihoods of rural America, 
the Western States, and our Western values that we both represent.
  I will highlight today three pieces of legislation that I have 
introduced. One of them addresses abuses of the Antiquities Act, one of 
them addresses the inefficiencies and unfairness of our permitting 
system, and the other one addresses the need to get geothermal energy 
up and going more quickly and more efficiently.
  Mr. Speaker, I will start with the Antiquities Act. For decades, the 
executive branch, Presidents of the United States, mostly Democrats, 
have used the Antiquities Act of 1906 to designate vast areas as 
national monuments, and that is in an authority that we delegated to 
them in the Antiquities Act of 1906.
  The abuse of that narrow delegated authority has resulted in 
restricted access to lands, hindered economic opportunities, and it has 
left local voices unheard and frustrated.
  In my district, the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument was 
created by Bill Clinton in 1996, over the objections of Utah's 
Governor, Utah's Federal delegation, and local, county, and State-
elected officials. Those frustrations and scars and wounds have not 
healed in the years that have passed since then.

  Mr. Speaker, my Ending Presidential Overreach on Public Lands Act 
ensures that the decisions of this magnitude affecting public lands are 
made collaboratively, respecting the role of Congress with our 
jurisdiction over public land, and taking input from local voices. It 
should be Congress that makes those widespread, large-scale land 
management decisions.
  Mr. Speaker, the next one I will talk about is the FREE Act, which 
encourages agencies to look at the permits they issue and determine 
which ones can be done by permit by rule, which means they have a 
predetermined list of requirements for a permit and firm timelines on 
making those decisions. An applicant can bring an agency everything on 
that list, and the agency can either say: Yes, this is adequate for

[[Page H1326]]

a permit, and issue the permit, or say: No, it is not adequate for a 
permit, and give the applicant what they need to do to remedy that so 
that we can have quicker permitting, especially on infrastructure 
projects.
  Right now, it takes years and millions of dollars to permit 
infrastructure projects, especially in States like Utah, where most of 
the land is managed by the Federal Government and everything we do has 
to go through multiple layers of Federal processes.
  Lastly, the GEO Act addresses the time that it takes to permit 
geothermal energy projects. Geothermal energy is abundant in Utah. We 
are leading out in a lot of ways on developing new geothermal 
resources. Yet, the time it takes to get the permit to build a 
geothermal plant is prohibiting us from developing some of the 
resources and getting clean, reliable baseload power online that this 
country needs now and will need even more in the future.

                              {time}  1230

  These three bills are not all of my bills, but I wanted to highlight 
those three today because they are about safeguarding public lands, 
fostering economic growth, and empowering our communities. They are 
about letting ranchers, families, small businesses, and entrepreneurs 
benefit from thoughtful and responsive government as opposed to 
government that drowns out their voices and ignores their needs.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support these measures, which 
offer pragmatic solutions to real challenges in Utah, throughout the 
West, and throughout the whole country.
  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ms. Maloy for her remarks. I 
appreciate it.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the gentlewoman a little bit about the 
Antiquities Act because I have shared a lot of that frustration, as 
well.
  The Biden administration, on the way out the door, declared several 
monument areas--a couple in California, one on the ocean area. It 
really seems it has been down to just being an executive action with 
very little input by Congress, and I know that is what she is working 
on in her legislation.
  I can think of a couple of recent examples. Over 600 million acres 
are turned into an ocean monument area. When you do the math on that, 
that ends up being about a million square miles of a 1,000-mile square. 
That is a giant chunk of ocean that is no longer really usable for 
normal things like fishing and things like that.
  In my home State, up in my district, they declared almost a quarter-
million-acre area--they really had little consultation with the folks 
there. It had like a mining operation, and the timber management needed 
to happen, so it has been quite abusive.
  I ask the gentlewoman what she thinks the long-term effects have been 
on energy in the West, energy exploration, and the types of things we 
need to be doing.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Utah (Ms. Maloy) for the 
purpose of a colloquy.
  Ms. MALOY. It has had a negative impact on energy production--as soon 
as I get in front of a microphone, I have a tickle in my throat--by 
restricting the areas that are open for use, withdrawing them from 
mineral exploration, oil and gas exploration, and energy production.
  The original intent of the Presidential proclamation authority in the 
Antiquities Act was for the President to be able to move quickly and 
declare a national monument in an area with antiquities, or an area of 
scientific interest, to hold it until Congress could make a decision.
  Since 1976, when the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, FLPMA, 
passed, it has been the policy of the Federal Government that we don't 
dispose of land anymore, so that threat has been removed. The need for 
a President to move quickly no longer exists, and the act is just being 
used to create land policy that couldn't get through Congress.
  The process matters when it comes to land management. We need to take 
back the authority we gave Presidents because they are not using it in 
the way Congress intended it to be used. It is being abused, and we 
need to end that abuse by exercising our legislative powers.
  Mr. LaMALFA. I agree. It seems that it has really flipped into this 
one direction on the invoking of a new monument or wilderness area, 
what have you. I know your State of Utah has been hit pretty hard by 
several.
  It is not that we are against these measures to protect particular 
areas, but what we are talking about is gigantic swaths of land instead 
of something a little more focused.
  The original intent was a focus on the particular historic or 
geographic areas, maybe like an old-growth forest area or something 
like that, areas where there might be Native American ruins that we 
want to particularly focus on. Instead, we get these gigantic acreages.
  I know the Trump administration is going to be looking at some of 
these here as he did previously.
  I also like what you were speaking about on your geothermal process 
there because it should be an all-of-the-above way of looking at 
things, on types of energy we have available, and geothermal is clean 
power. It is one that is available 24/7. You don't have to wait for the 
wind to blow, the Sun to come up, or the clouds to go away.
  We need a lot more baseload power. Look at what is going on with the 
tech centers, the amount of AI that is going to be coming onboard and 
the amount of energy that it is going to be consuming.
  These data centers are going to use a mass amount of new electricity 
if they are allowed to, and they have talked about wanting to do it all 
as renewable.
  If geothermal can be a source in those areas, that is one thing, but 
we are going to have to get real on where our power is going to come 
from because we have to have reliable baseload power.
  Geothermal has had a very difficult permitting process. Any idea what 
kind of timeline? How many years does it take to get one through if you 
can get them through?
  Ms. MALOY. I don't know what the current timeline is, but I know it 
has taken years when it should take months.
  We know what a geothermal power plant looks like. We know how to do 
it in a way that is environmentally sensitive. We are just taking time 
and money to get to that end point that we already know we are headed 
to.
  Mr. LaMALFA. Indeed, as another example, there was a copper mine--it 
is not the same as a geothermal power plant, but one particular one in 
the West took 29 years to permit. When you are talking about any kind 
of thing that is moving forward on self-sufficiency in minerals or 
energy dominance that the U.S. needs to have, it takes a decade or 
more, in many cases, to get this done.
  A desalination plant in southern California, along the coast--I think 
out of Huntington Beach; the Poseidon project it was called. They 
fought for two decades to try to get a desalination plant.

  We can't build water storage in California, it seems, or other areas, 
so everybody says, ``Desal, we can use the Pacific Ocean,'' until you 
try to permit it. They fought for 20 years to work through the permit 
process and jumped through every hoop, like what requirement will make 
them happy to take care of the brine, the landscape itself. After all 
that time, they were still denied by the California Coastal Commission 
and others to be able to do that.
  Permitting does need to be reformed, not thrown away, because we want 
to have a process where people can have a say and a look at what is 
happening.
  By the same token, when we talk about the Antiquities Act, people 
need to have a say, as well, not just 2,500 miles away in Washington, 
D.C., where a stroke of the pen does it, as Ms. Maloy mentioned here. 
Local input from their legislature, their Governor, and their 
delegation to D.C. basically was ignored on national monuments that 
were done in Utah. We didn't hear a whole lot up in northern California 
on the one done recently, either. It was kind of one-sided.
  I appreciate you bringing those to the forefront here today, and you 
are welcome to make any more comments you wish, but we will move on a 
little bit to Western water for right now, too.
  It is a key issue for agriculture and hydroelectric, with safety from 
flood, and even recreation, as well as a lot of

[[Page H1327]]

the folks who are wanting more water for fish needs, fish passage and 
such. They sure enjoy the benefits of having stored water in the 
Western dams or any dams.
  I will point out as an example here Shasta Dam in northern 
California. It is the Central Valley Project, as it is known. It is a 
Federal project built in the thirties that came online strongly in the 
early forties.
  This is an amazing project. Indeed, it is the cornerstone of 
California water as well as some of the Colorado River water sources we 
have, but this is 4.5 million acre-feet in one dam and one lake up in 
Shasta County, California.
  The way it is operated is extremely important, and when we don't have 
as good of decisions being made, at least in my opinion, on how that 
water is stored, how it is kept, and how it is allocated, then people 
suffer on that unnecessarily.
  Right now, this lake sits at about 600,000 acre-feet still to fill it 
up. The thing that gets me is that we are seeing farmers and others in 
the water districts in central California in San Joaquin Valley, where 
so much of our important food supply for the whole country comes from, 
stuck at 35 or 40 percent of what used to be the normal allocation.
  Part of that is that they can't point to the water supply. I think it 
is a bit of a misnomer. There is plenty of water around. I will 
illustrate that here in a moment, but this lake, when it is 4.5 million 
acre-feet full, along with our other lakes, why isn't that allocation 
to agriculture and others closer to 100 percent?
  It hasn't reached 100 percent in a long time, and a lot of that is 
based on what we talked about a moment ago here, the Endangered Species 
Act and its weaponization in the last 50-plus years.
  It is not a matter of us not caring about species and trying to 
recover them and conserve them. It is that it is used as a weapon to 
stop further water storage or the other issues we were talking about, 
other energy projects, even forestry practices that would be helpful to 
not have continued wildfire at the massive scale we are seeing, 
especially in the Western States.
  What I want to see happening for Lake Shasta, for example, is that 
they can use more scientific forecasting of what the systems of weather 
are going to be looking like in a given year, in a given season. We are 
about to end the rainy season as the Bureau of Reclamation and Army 
Corps of Engineers--Army Corps is in charge of flood controls, so they 
control the top portion of this dam, Lake Oroville down near where I 
live, and many others around the whole country. Their charge is for 
flood control.
  They will require that a certain gap from the top of the dam down 40, 
50 feet or so. A particular amount of storage has to be available until 
the end of the rainy season, which is pretty much April 1. At that 
point, you are allowed to fill the lake. The lake can fill on up.
  Over 600,000 acre-feet down, they are assessing the snowpack, more or 
less, as I speak, but with still another weather pattern coming in here 
quite soon that would probably enhance that snowpack number, as well.
  What gets me is that we have allowed Bureau of Reclamation and Army 
Corps 2 million acre-feet to leave this lake, to leave this system, 
since early January, and that has flowed down, in this case, to 
Sacramento River and on out to the delta.
  If you want to see something about delta numbers, this poster here 
isn't quite updated, but it illustrates how the water flows down from 
the north and such and flows through the Bay Delta out to the ocean. 
These numbers are a little bit older. I have to update my poster here, 
but it shows a gap. In this case here with this timeline, 29 flowed 
into the delta. Down below, it shows 22 million acre-feet flowed out. 
That is a heck of a lot of water to lose that we didn't capture more 
of.
  We have an excellent opportunity to do better at that and keep more 
water for hydroelectric power, agriculture, recreation, and people's 
use in the urban areas. There is a bit of a misnomer that people in 
agriculture use way more water than what is actually the case.
  Of stored water in the State, 50 percent goes for environmental 
purposes, 40 percent and descending goes for agriculture, and about 10 
percent for urban and people's use. That is of captured water. There is 
about another 50 percent of the total rainfall and snowpack that falls 
on the State that flows out to the ocean or other areas that ends up 
being--basically, you could call it environmental water as well because 
people don't get to use it. It is doing what it does in the rivers and 
streams and such.
  We keep hearing that these farmers are wasting water, and people in 
the cities have to conserve more. Conservation is good. Farmers using 
better practices is good, as well. If you are telling people in the 
urban areas--and wait till this really happens to them. This is when we 
will get their attention, when they get rationed down to 42 gallons per 
day per person and you see these kinds of numbers.
  When you see that much water going out to the delta because we have 
people refusing to build the storage and run the pumps, for example, at 
the south end of the delta, that could be filling up what is known as 
San Luis Reservoir, which hasn't been topped off yet. It was topped off 
2 years ago, but last year and this year, under similar snowpack and 
rain circumstances, they haven't allowed the pumps to run hard enough 
to fill it.
  I am hoping--a lot of stuff seems to be based on hope--that we can 
have enough melt into Shasta Lake or Lake Oroville and the other large 
ones that they will fill up and there will be enough water for 
everybody.
  How do you count on having that amount of water, that amount of 
rainfall, in March and April? I have lived there my whole life. You 
don't always get heavy rains in March and April that would help top off 
these reservoirs.

                              {time}  1245

  It is, indeed, important to California, but it is an important 
Western issue, and what gets produced in those areas is important to 
everybody. I recognize that it is not just a California issue, but an 
entire Western issue. That is why the Western Caucus will be focusing 
partly on that.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Begich), 
another colleague of mine who will bring his perspective on what is 
happening in the great northern area of Alaska and the amazing amounts 
of resources they have there that this country enjoys and consumes, and 
it does so responsibly as well. I thank him for joining us.
  Mr. BEGICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss the many 
opportunities of Alaska.
  As America's most Western State, most Eastern State, and most 
Northern State, Alaska is nearly 20 percent of the United States' 
landmass. We have more than half of the United States coastline, and it 
is estimated that we have more undiscovered estimated natural gas and 
oil resources than any other State in the country.
  We have nearly every critical mineral on the critical minerals list 
in Alaska. We have base metals, precious metals, and of course we have 
rare earths in abundance. We have incredible timber resources, and we 
produce about 60 percent of America's seafood. Alaska is a crucial 
State, and I am proud to be a member of our House's Western Caucus.
  I am the only Member from the State of Alaska. We have about 730,000 
people who live in a State that is 2\1/2\ times the size of Texas. We 
are vast. We are independent, and we want to make sure that we have the 
ability to develop the resources that we have been blessed with.
  Under President Trump's leadership, we have seen executive orders 
that specifically allow for development of our critical minerals, those 
rare earths that I spoke of, and of our natural resources, including 
tremendous energy resources in ANWR, NPR-A, and elsewhere. That is what 
Alaskans want. Alaskans want the ability to be independent, to develop 
their resources responsibly, and to stand on their own two feet.
  I am thrilled to be a part of this body, a body that is focused on 
making sure that Alaska's resource potential is fully unlocked, that 
our mineral potential is fully unlocked, and that we restore domestic 
supply chains again.
  As we restore those supply chains, we know that those supply chains 
begin with resources and begin with energy

[[Page H1328]]

to process those resources. Alaska is the cornerstone of this strategy, 
and we are excited to be a part of that conversation. I look forward to 
the opportunities that we will be bringing forward in the 119th 
Congress to advance Alaska's interests, our Nation's interests, and 
restore domestic manufacturing in this Nation again.
  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate Mr. Begich's remarks. Indeed, 
with all the rich resources we have in Alaska, it would be amazing if 
we could get the permitting process so they can produce these rare 
earths and critical minerals in our country instead of relying on them 
from adversaries that are not going to be reliable long term. I 
appreciate him bringing that to our attention, and the work that he and 
others are battling to do up there.
  Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Downing), 
one of our new Members here as well who represents half of Montana. He 
doesn't get to have the whole State anymore, I think, with two Members 
there. I appreciate his joining us here.
  Mr. Speaker, indeed, these large States are home to so many rich 
resources that are important to our country, and we are glad to have 
Western Caucus membership that is recognizing that and working with us 
here.
  Mr. DOWNING. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for 
yielding.
  Montana has many mottos, official and unofficial: The Last Best 
Place, Big Sky Country, the Treasure State. This last one recognizes 
the rich natural resources we have in the great State of Montana right 
underneath our feet.
  Up until recently, Biden's anti-American policies have allowed 
foreign actors to dominate mineral markets, and this has stifled 
domestic energy production to the detriment of Western States like 
Montana.
  I had the opportunity to return home last week, and I heard about 
these issues firsthand from miners across the Second District. In fact, 
I probably spent more time below ground than I did above it. Actually, 
I really enjoyed that.
  I am going to talk first about Stillwater County. In Stillwater 
County, the miners of the Sibanye-Stillwater Mine are hard at work 
producing the only platinum and palladium that is mined in America. 
Years of feckless trade policy on the part of the Biden administration 
has allowed malign foreign actors like Russia to flood commodities 
markets, crippling smaller producers like Sibanye-Stillwater.
  Russia, which represents more than a third of the market, has been 
subsidizing and dumping these critical minerals, causing artificially 
low commodity prices.
  This resulted in the layoff of approximately 700 hardworking miners 
just last year as the negative effect from dumping has not only 
affected the commodity price, but it has made it so that the commodity 
price is below the actual cost to extract it. The ripple effects are 
still being felt throughout my district.
  This is why Montana's congressional delegation is stepping up. I 
stand shoulder to shoulder with Congressman Zinke and Senators Daines 
and Sheehy. We introduced the Stop Russian Market Manipulation Act. 
This bans imports of critical minerals from Russia.
  We are creating a competitive market for U.S. mineral producers not 
driven down by dumping from foreign actors and extending a vital 
lifeline to operations like Stillwater. This not only allows these 
mines to support their work forces, but this also drives the local 
economy, my State economy, and is also a factor in the security of the 
United States of America.
  Our bill encourages domestic production, decreases reliance on 
foreign minerals, shores up supply chains, and significantly bolsters 
national security, all while dealing a critical blow to Putin's war 
machine. These factors combine to make a real difference in the lives 
of hardworking Montanans who rely on these jobs to make ends meet.
  Signal Peak Mine, in Musselshell County, has faced a similar reality 
after years of regulatory foot-dragging and America-last energy policy 
threatened Montana's only underground coal mining operation.
  I spoke with miners who expressed concern about Signal Peak's future 
amidst permitting uncertainty and resource unavailability. My Crow 
Revenue Act eliminates this uncertainty by facilitating a critical land 
transfer that unlocks access to minable Federal coal while providing 
the Crow Tribe with a piece of the revenue. With bicameral support, I 
am confident we will get this bill across the finish line for our 
Tribal communities and our State economy. More importantly, this is 
another step in ensuring American energy dominance.
  In closing, let me make one thing abundantly clear: There is a new 
sheriff in town. None of these efforts would stand a chance of becoming 
law without this administration. President Trump has taken swift 
executive action to declare a national energy emergency, reopened 
exploration on Federal lands and waters, appointed an all-star Cabinet 
with the likes of Secretary Wright and Secretary Burgum to streamline 
permitting and unleash American energy.
  This is why I am hopeful for projects like Black Butte Copper near 
White Sulphur Springs that are committed to unlocking the Treasure 
State's resources and driving rural economic development, all in a 
responsible manner. I can't wait to see what these next 4 years bring 
for my State and others like it. Let us not squander this opportunity 
and work together to make American mining great again.
  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Downing for his perspective on 
that. We are finding that these Western States, the Western Caucus 
focus area, I guess, is very rich in so much of what we need here. I 
appreciate his work with those folks in the mines to illustrate how 
important they are to the whole country and our energy grid, et cetera.
  I thank him for his time with us, and the technical issues with the 
podium emphasized the point.
  I am pleased to have excited, new freshman Members who really want to 
take charge and get going here. It is good stuff.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield now to the gentlewoman from North Dakota (Mrs. 
Fedorchak), a new Member who has shown a lot of enthusiasm in jumping 
in with us here in the Western Caucus and helping to make it happen.
  She represents another at-large district, which means the entire 
State. Even though there are maybe not a lot of people in these areas, 
what they do is extremely important.
  Mrs. FEDORCHAK. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to be here. 
This little podium seems to have a mind of its own, so I will leave it 
down so it doesn't scare us all again.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues in the Western Caucus for leading 
the charge to strengthen rural America's future.
  As a fourth-generation North Dakotan, I have seen how the hard work 
of our energy and agriculture producers fuels our economy, strengthens 
our communities, and secures our very way of life.
  That is why on Monday, I introduced a resolution to overturn the 
Biden administration's reinstatement of the Once-in-Always-in rule. 
This is a shortsighted, bureaucratic mandate that punishes energy 
producers, manufacturers, and small businesses for investing in 
emissions reduction.
  This rule permanently classifies certain industrial facilities as 
major sources of hazardous air pollutants, even if they take meaningful 
steps to reduce emissions below the Federal thresholds. That makes no 
sense. Facilities that make major investments to reduce emissions 
should be rewarded, not locked into outdated, costly regulations that 
discourage further improvements.
  By refusing to let businesses reclassify after making progress, this 
rule removes any real incentive to invest in cleaner technologies. 
Instead of supporting innovation, it sends a clear message: Don't even 
bother.
  Democrats like to use the mantra of hope and change. This regulatory 
approach says there is no hope, so don't change. That is not 
environmental stewardship. That is Washington overreach.
  The United States has reduced emissions more than any other nation 
since 2005, all while leading the world in energy production. We should 
be building on that success, not undermining it with policies like this 
outdated, overly

[[Page H1329]]

burdensome Biden regulation that stifle investment and progress.
  North Dakota is proof that responsible energy production and 
environmental stewardship go hand in hand. It is not one or the other. 
Our State has never violated Federal air quality standards. I will say 
that again. Our State has never violated Federal air quality standards, 
while being one of the largest energy producers in the whole country. 
This is a testament to the more than $2 billion our energy producers 
have invested in emissions control technologies. They did that because 
they took their responsibility seriously. They want to be good stewards 
of our resources and of our air and water.
  American businesses are dedicated to protecting the health, safety, 
and vibrancy of their communities. What they need is regulatory 
certainty, not a rule that locks them into compliance with outdated 
standards even after they have done the right thing. This is about more 
than just one burdensome regulation. It is about standing up for the 
industries that power our economy and rejecting Washington's one-size-
fits-all approach.
  American energy solutions are climate solutions. American energy 
producers are providing the solutions that are going to solve energy 
needs and environmental needs for the world over. Let's encourage 
investment in technology, not support regulations that make it 
impossible to do business.
  I am proud to lead this effort in the House, and I urge my colleagues 
to support this resolution. Let's restore regulatory certainty, the 
number one cry from the industry that I meet with. We need regulatory 
certainty. Let's send a clear message that we stand with American 
energy producers, farmers, manufacturers, and we stand with innovation.

                              {time}  1300

  Mr. Speaker, our Nation has been blessed abundantly with natural 
resources. Misguided regulations and policies are strangling the very 
people in our Nation who are building and producing everything that we 
need. They are strangling the people who create jobs, who produce the 
products, the food, who pay taxes, who employ people. People make our 
communities strong. We need to stop doing that. We need to correct 
course in our approach for government and regulations.
  Our Republican House Conference, the President, and the Senate 
Republicans are committed to doing this for America and to making our 
Nation, our States, our energy producers, our farmers, our 
manufacturers, and our communities great again.
  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Fedorchak. Those 
were great points she emphasized for us. It is a common theme here, and 
I thank her for that.
  Mr. Speaker, there is red tape and endless delays in doing the work 
that needs to be done to produce what comes from the Western States, 
Western Caucus, and our whole country. I have to remember and to 
emphasize these products come from all over. When we talk about mined 
materials, farmed materials, and wood, it is all important. The same 
laws that affect us in the Western States affect us everywhere.
  Why do we spend so many years on permits to do things that we know 
how to do well? Indeed, the United States does this with a better set 
of environmental regulations and are way more conscientious than what 
will be produced in China or some of the other Pacific Rim areas. We 
have the technology to do it the best, as Mrs. Fedorchak was talking 
about.
  I don't talk about CO<inf>2</inf> a whole lot because I think 
CO<inf>2</inf> is an essential building block. It is not a pollutant, 
as has been whipped for so many years amongst regulatory agencies and 
NGOs and such. If we look at how the United States has been doing, we 
are one of only a couple of countries that has been able to level off 
and even reduce CO<inf>2</inf> production.
  We are going to get to the point where it will be so critically 
harmful to our industry that we need to reassess how burdensome these 
regulations are, especially as CO<inf>2</inf> is not a poisonous 
pollutant, per se. I mean, plants need it, and all things in moderation 
we might say. It is important that we have some reality on how these 
regulations affect us.
  We have talked about water storage. We have talked about energy 
production. When we talk about our water storage, we know how important 
hydroelectric energy is in that it is a CO<inf>2</inf>-free source. Ms. 
Maloy talked about geothermal. That is a clean source of energy to 
produce electricity.
  What we haven't touched on much but is a potential issue the Western 
Caucus will be working on is nuclear energy, another CO<inf>2</inf>-
free source of electricity. If we want to deal with CO<inf>2</inf>, 
here it is.
  These forms of electricity generation continue to be pushed out or 
pushed off in the regulatory climate we have here. We have the 
opportunity to mine uranium--a lot of it in the Western States--and 
build the plants that are going to serve our urban centers.
  I was talking earlier about how AI and data centers are going to use 
so much more electricity, as well, if the electrification of cars and 
trucks keeps getting pushed. Where is that electricity going to come 
from?
  It is amazing how we mandate this in a lah-de-dah atmosphere of, 
well, we are just going to have more EVs. The folks regulating that and 
pushing that are not accountable for where that electricity is going to 
come from. They think more and more acres of prime farmland covered 
with solar panels is going to do it or offshore windmills will produce 
a certain amount of electricity. They find that they have problems with 
that. There might be negative effects on the wildlife and the ocean 
life there.
  We need to have the ability to take a look back at these layers and 
layers of court decisions since these laws were made with good 
intentions back in the early 1970s. We talk about the Endangered 
Species Act, NEPA regulations, Clean Water Act, or the Clean Air Act. 
All had good intentions, but they have been weaponized by NGOs, 
environmental organizations, and even those certain belief systems of 
government. My home State of California is weaponized to stop some very 
good projects from happening.
  When we talk about the Endangered Species Act reform, there are 
species that are basically used to stop water storage, stop highways 
from being built, stop power plants from being built, and even things 
like levees being repaired in areas that have the potential to be 
flooded.
  One project in my district took 20-plus years to finally get approved 
and through for a project on a levee that already existed. They 
required that it be set back from the river more. Then a bunch of 
habitat created out of the farmers' orchards that were adjacent to that 
on the outside of the old levee but now inside the new levee. That took 
over 20-plus years.
  It is because a species was listed as an endangered species by the 
Fish and Wildlife 20 or 25 years ago, maybe longer. Fifteen years ago 
they recommended to delist it. Mr. Speaker, it seems you can hardly 
delist anything under the way these rules have been misinterpreted.
  One issue ravaging much of the West and right now has really taken 
hold in my district has been the wolf population that has been 
introduced. I know the Biden administration had done some of that at 
the end with over 40 wolves being dumped into Colorado last minute on 
their way out the door.
  Wolves in California have really taken hold in the northeast part of 
the State. They are ravaging Modoc County, Siskiyou County, Lassen 
County, Eastern Shasta, and other areas to a little bit lesser extent. 
The deer population is being decimated.
  When they run out of deer, guess where they look next? They look at 
livestock. Here is an example. I don't mean to be morbid, but people 
need to see what this really looks like. Here is a wolf toting off a 
deer right here. There is a deer head right there. This isn't native to 
that area. These are Canadian gray wolves. These are great big, 
powerful, scary wolves that really aren't indigenous to the farther 
Western States.

  It is still listed. We are making efforts to delist this wolf from 
that list, but it is running into problems and difficulties because of 
the environmental movement saying, no, we need to have mating pairs in 
every county in order to satisfy their desires on that.
  These wolves are plentiful in areas like Minnesota and neighboring 
States

[[Page H1330]]

and the central part of Canada. It is not an endangered species. There 
are plenty of numbers there. Mr. Speaker, if you want to look at a gray 
wolf, travel to that part of the country because we don't need to have 
them everywhere in order to somehow deem them as recovered.
  I like the giraffe analogy. If we want to look at a giraffe, go to 
places in Africa. If we want to look at it in North America, go to the 
zoo. We don't have them here. We can't deem them an endangered species 
in North America because we don't have them here. Someone would have to 
start a new program to encourage and build a giraffe habitat to bring a 
species that really doesn't belong in that area.
  It doesn't make a lot of sense, and it is really devastating. Over 
200 calves have been taken in the northern California area and part of 
Oregon, as well. Here, we see a calf that has been devastated. It has 
been just completely annihilated and fed upon by a pack of wolves 
there. Again, I am not doing this to be morbid.
  Mr. Speaker, I hope it does shock you. I hope it does shock you 
because this is really happening to the livelihoods of the people who 
are producing food that Americans want and that others want. They can't 
do so because of a wolf population that has been introduced by 
government at the behest of basically urban people who think, oh, that 
would be a nice ideal to have these wolves in that area. They don't 
have to live with the results.
  These wolves have become so brazen in how they act in the area. It 
has taken a sheep. Any livestock is on the menu for them because when 
they start running out of the local wildlife, they are going to take 
what they need.
  The ability for people to push back on that, to haze them, or to move 
them away is very, very limited by how U.S. Fish and Wildlife has made 
the rules. They have very, very few options to keep them not only out 
of their herds but away from their doorstep, including this doorstep 
right here.
  Yes, this is the family dog right here. This is what is happening to 
families that are working in and living in those rural areas for four, 
five, six, or longer, generations. They provide food and put it on the 
table for Americans, and this is what they have to live with today. 
They can't let their pets out in some of these areas anymore. They 
can't let their kids go down to the bus stop without being guarded and 
to do normal things like go to school.
  People are afraid to go outside their homes at night in certain areas 
because they hear the wolves howling, and the wolves don't feel any 
fear of mankind. They don't feel any deterrent due to the very limited 
and meager measures that people can take to deter them. They are not 
allowed to shoot them. They are not allowed to shoot over them. They 
are not allowed to be very aggressive with vehicles and such.
  Indeed, one anecdote I received on visiting some folks in the 
district is that they have drones they try to fly over and move the 
wolves away from the herds and away from their area. Funny, the wolf 
just looks up at it and lays down and watches it. They fly pieces of a 
flag or a ribbon on their fence and hope that ribbon flapping in the 
wind will scare the wolf away. It is called fladry.
  The wolves are pretty smart. They are going to go around that. When 
they are running in packs like that, they are very effective at moving 
the livestock, moving them, herding them to other areas. There are 
stories about them coming in and wiping out an entire flock of sheep on 
one farm just for the heck of it. A single wolf in one case killed 30 
sheep, killed the dog, and basically scared the horse, ran the horse 
over a cliff area, killing it. That is more or less for sport.
  This is what is happening to people. This is what is happening in the 
northeast part of my State and all over the West. The elk and deer 
population is being devastated in these areas. We don't talk about that 
much because it is an ideal under the Endangered Species Act that we 
have to move these animals wherever someone deems they need to go, 
indeed, when we have populations that will sustain and prevent 
extinction just from what is in the upper Midwest and Canada.
  What is it going to come down to? Do people have to be victimized to 
get a nice, idyllic scene like this with people hiking the trails? The 
Pacific Crest Trail runs through that portion of my district. Have 
warnings been sent out by the people promoting this wolf population to 
those who are looking to utilize these trails, such as the Pacific 
Crest Trail, or to climb the different mountains around northern 
California?

  Are there adequate warnings going out to the urban areas when people 
expect they are going be able to do this as they come travel and 
recreate a little later on this spring and summer and fall? Are they 
doing that?
  We have this idyllic scene of a family hiking out there. Do they know 
possibly there might be wolves lurking in here if they are hungry and 
they have run out of deer to attack? The farmers and ranchers have sold 
their livestock herds or pulled them out or just lost them to wolf 
attacks. They are going to get hungry and start coming after anything 
they can find. Are people going to be on that list?
  Am I being dramatic? No, this is the reality. This can happen. Will 
this scene be allowed anymore in those areas? Well, it is a wolf 
habitat now. We don't have any people recreating on their lands, on 
their national lands, on their parklands, the forestlands that are 
deemed to be multiuse. That use is being narrowed more and more to not 
doing timber operations and preventing wildfire and having wildlife 
flourish but to satisfy a very narrow group.
  This is part of the work that we need to get done. The Western Caucus 
is going to be focusing on endangered species reform, our energy, and 
agriculture. We need to make the farm bill a reality here soon because 
the farm bill has had extensions so far. We need to pass a full farm 
bill this year that is good for 5 years. Agriculture is a very 
important cornerstone of Western Caucus priorities, as well as a 
national priority.
  We have our work cut out for us, but we have a great team on our 
Western Caucus staff. Nearly 100 Members of the House are in this, as 
well as our colleagues over in the Senate, led by my good friend, 
Senator Lummis from Wyoming. It is a very positive thing, and I am 
looking forward to the work here. I am honored to be able to chair 
that.
  Mr. Speaker, with that, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________