about funds being expended but the ones saved, the $1.8 billion in cumulative energy costs. the billions of dollars we will save by addressing climate change. in 2015 in the gentleman's home state of california, they had the worst water shortage in 1,200 years which has been intensified by global warming. in my home state of wisconsin, farmers are facing disease from higher humidity and warmer winter temperatures. this isn't about expending funds but saving taxpayer funds which people on the other side i would think would want to do. i hope you would support this amendment and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. california california being from california, we have our own versions of what's going on with the drought and certainly the

science that i look at is different than the gentleman's look at the science he's at. but that's what policy debates are all about. we should debate that here in the congress and debate it in the senate and it shouldn't be decisions that are made unilaterally by any president of the united states. that's why we have a democracy here and not a king. and so, i would oppose this amendment and encourage all the members to oppose this amendment and yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. pocan: i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from wisconsin. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. pocan: i would like a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from wisconsin will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 104 printed in house report 114-683.

for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? mr. polis: i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment number 104 brinted in house report 114-683 offered by mr. polis of colorado. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 820, the gentleman from colorado, mr. polis and a member opposed each will control five minutes. mr. polis: i offer this amendment with my colleague, mr. grijalva. the amendment is simple. it offers a choice for those of us in congress make, it's a choice for members to vote whether we want to keep our public lands public or not. very simply, my amendment says that none of the funds available through this bill can be used in violation of the law with regard to keeping our public lands public. this amendment would not undo anything or undermine congressional or administrative

land exchanges that are done legally. the amendment would, however, prohibit the use of funds in this bill to pursue any extra legal ways to turn federal land over to private owners through various things like a commission or others that have been espoused. the district i represent in colorado is over 60% public lands. public lands are not only beautiful and majestic but the fundamental drivers of our mountain area economies in counties like grand and eagle. public lands are good for our body, mind and soul. u.s. veteran who lives in colorado recently said, i fought to protect what makes our nation great and that includes the public lands that belong to every american. not only are public lands good for our souls but one of our largest economic drivers in our state in the rocky mountain region and across the country.

billions of dollars are generated and visiting our public lands supports 6 million jobs. from small businesses, ski resorts, gas stations and diners, our economy thrives largely in part because of the public lands in areas like the one i represent. a recent poll reveal 396% of americans support public lands. it is a top priority for our families. people want to see our public lands stay public and see the maintenance as a critical focus of the federal government. states don't have the resources to take on the responsibilities for maintaining and keeping our federal lands safe. selling these lands to outright to private owners would undoubtedly lead to loss of access, loss of jobs. it would devastate our economy and hurt the quality of life in the districts like mine.

if you talk to people on the ground who use these lands, like expertsmen, bikers, campers, they don't want our land, land they use, taken away from them. and those concerned with environmental well-being, water quality and public health support our public lands. i offer a clear choice, support the protection of public lands and let's cast a vote to do that. i ask my colleagues to support the amendment. and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. calvert: i rise to oppose the amendment. i agree with the gentleman current law regarding public lands must be followed, there's nothing in this bill that contradicts that. we're not going to be getting rid of public lands in this bill. as such, there is no purpose or relevancey for this. and so i would oppose this.

i think this is trying to get people all excited that we are going to be getting rid of public lapped in this bill, which is not true. i encourage my colleagues to oppose this amendment and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. mr. polis: i thank the gentleman that there's not any sale of public lands in this bill. there are members in this body, the chair of the authorizing committee in this general area who speaks regularly about privatizing our public lands. so there is a real threat. this is not something that comes out of nowhere and the peace of mind we would get by including this language in an appropriations bill would make it very clear that congress supports the opinion of the american people, supports the economy in districts like mine and wants to keep our public lands public. i ask my colleagues to support this amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. calvert: there is no need for this amendment and i yield

back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from colorado. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. polis: i request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from colorado will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 105 printed in house report 114-683. for what purpose does gentlelady california seek recognition? ms. speier: i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment number 105 printed in house report 114-683. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 820, the gentlelady from california and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california. ms. speier: i offer this bipartisan amendment to the department of interior to ensure my constituents and those who

visit the golden gate national recreation area will be able to enjoy the park. the golden gate national recreation area is in the bay area and was envisioned to have multiple uses. this is enshined in the mission statement to preserve and enhance the resources of the land north and south for the education, recreation and inspiration of people today and in the future. the national park service is moving forward on a severely restrictive rule on an activity that many bay residents presently enjoy and that is dog walking. dog walking off leash has been a loud in certain areas but under a new proposed rule, this would dramatically restrict access. while they want to treat all arks the same, we have enjoyed off-leash walking.

as one of our few nation urban parks, it fits a unique place in our community. i have heard from thousands of people opposing the rule. dog owners must act responsibly and as a dog owner myself i understand i must make sure my dog is well trained and safe to all visitors. ggnra think all of the -leash e off to all off dogs. i love my dog buddy, a yellow lab, i love walking him and he enjoys being off leash. this amendment is for buddy and all the buddies in the area. he has been there for me and i'm here for him. and i reserve.