mr. hastings: will the gentleman yield? mr. dicks: of course i yield. mr. hastings: i have been chairman now for a little over six months and i have every intention to do that and i want to work with the gentleman to do this. mr. dicks: i want to be involved. i yield to my good friend, gentleman and former ranking member, one of the best ranking members i ever had. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. we all want the same thing here. we want the endangered species act and we want it to work. as you mentioned, senator kempthorn worked on it. he -- that was when he was senator before he became governor of idaho. it was republicans in the house that stopped it because they didn't think it went far enough. unfortunately if we continue to do what we've done in the past, we're going to get exactly what we got in the past, that is no incentive for people to sit down and say, we've got to work on this and we've got to get it done. that's all we're trying to do. that's all we're trying to do. mr. dicks: i yield to the ranking member. zphri do think it might be inst

mr. hastings, yields back his time. the gentleman from florida, mr. webster, is recognized. . mr. webster: thank you, mr. speaker. this rule provides for an ample open debate, allowing our colleagues from across the aisle to offer legislative proposals to this bill. furthermore, the underlying bill addresses two critical concerns. if you listen to the speeches made in this chamber every day and every member of this house, unemployment and dependence on opec oil. as i have stated, 20,000 shovel-ready jobs can be created with the approval of this infrastructure project. approval of keystone x.l. pipeline will also serve to increase oil imports from our

mr. hastings: thank you. reclaiming my time, mr. chairman, i'll simply say, this may be a good idea but for goodness sakes, what is the benefit to a program, a $6 billion program, that only six days ago was announced that they are moving to another -- under another structure? there may be a good reason, but tell us what that reason is. so this amendment hopefully will elicit that answer and we can move forward and with that support on both sides, mr. chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from washington. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk -- desk. the chair: the clerk will report. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. engel of new york. before the short title insert the following, section, none of the funds made available by this ac

mr. hastings: i ask one more minute so the gentleman can finish his remarks. mr. garamendi: perhaps it would be easier if you would strike the last word and we have five minutes to debate. mr. hastings: i was not going to strike the last word. i was just going to respond to the gentleman. i think it's important to clarify that. mr. garamendi: i'll take the one minute. thank you for that accommodation. i think the underlying problem was well described by you and that is that the language prohibits the secretary from going forward with the study of the wild lands. i think that's wrong. . what has changed and what is appropriate as we go forward. mr. hastings: as the gentleman remembers on a direct questioning, i think what the director said there was no authority to make any designation under law of wild lands because that was a made-up term. there was no designation -- the inventory, yes. but you can't make up a new designation and that's what the issue was. and he testified that he had no authority to do that. i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. garamendi: i t

mr. hastings. mr. hastings: thank you very much, mr. chairman. i rise to offer this amendment that ensures that the most vulnerable members of our society no longer bear disproportionately more than their share of the environmental costs in their communities. mr. chairman, i first offered this measure the exact same amendment in the year 2005, and it was adopted in the -- into law. it has since been adopted into law in two other appropriations bills. this is the right thing to do. environmental justice is an effort to achieve health and environmental equity across all community lines. mr. chairman, i ask that my amendment be supported and unanimous consent to have my full statement included in the record. the chair: without objection. the statement is entered. mr. visclosky: i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. visclosky: i appreciate the recognition and rise in strong support of the gentleman's amendment. appreciate him raising the issue and him offering the amendment. and certainly strongl

mr. hastings: the gentleman yields back. if i could engage mr. barton just a moment, i yield myself 30 seconds. mr. barton: i'm happy to yield. mr. hastings: i'm curious to know if this will cause the price of gasoline to go down in your judgment? mr. barton: if my judgment, if the gentleman would yield, in my judgment providing more full supply for our refineries would liken the possibility that prices would go down. mr. hastings: likely, possibility. i'll take that pretty much as a no. mr. barton: take it as a yes. drives the prices down. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm very pleased to yield to my good friend from virginia, mr. connolly, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for two minutes. mr. connolly: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank my colleague and friend from florida. i rise in opposition to this rule and i rise in opposition on substantive grounds. the rules committee approved for our consideration here on the floor every germane amendment but one, the markey-connolly amendment which wo

mr. hastings: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i thank my good friend from florida for yielding the time. mr. speaker, the airport and airway extension act of 2011, part four, extends aviation trust fund revenue collection and aviation program authority at current funding levels through september 16 of this year. while also imposing new restrictions on the essential air service program. frankly it's no substitute for a long-term federal aviation administration authorization. and casts further doubt on airport construction and safety improvements instead of ensuring air passenger safety, creating jobs, or investing in air traffic control modernization. as i'm sure most americans would agree, the word uncertain does not belong in a conversation about our nation's aviation system. and it certainly does not belong in the same sentence as air passenger safety. . i know a person in the congress who is a pilot that agrees with that statement. over the course of four years, however, great uncertainty surrounding long-term funding for the

mr. hastings said. it is about president obama. he could absolutely have pushed simpson-bowles and didn't do a thing. it is about the process we've had process on this has be junk. it's been absolute junk. we had good process was on h.r. 1. you want to fully debate a proposal, we had that on h.r. 1 and it went where? to the senate and the white house to die. you want good process, we had that. on the budget. that we worked on together in the budget committee. that we worked on together on the house floor. full, open debate and process and you know where that went? nowhere. in the senate and at the white house. there has been absolute good process when the time was right to do it right. and there has been no leadership from the other side of this capital and from the white house on any of those issues. not one proposal. folks had lots of things that they're against. but not one proposal that they are for. and that's why sitting out here a week from august 2,ou're right. all we're left with is bad press. because we've got seven days

mr. hastings: mr. chairman, at a time when unemployment exceeds 9%, this so-called guidance document from my point of view, being from the west, will undermine economic growth, it will increase permitting requirements and undoubtedly lead to more litigation. according to the american farm bureau, this guidance document would, and i quote, would take an overly broad view of waters of the united states and would serve as a road map to designate nearly all bodies of water, even some dry land, as subject to federal regulation that dictates land use decisions, and i end quote. mr. chairman, water is a precious commodity, especially to those of us in the west. it is a necessary resource for many activities, including ac consult, energy, transportation -- agriculture, energy, transportation and recreation. our economy and way of life cannot afford to have the federal government claim control over all waterways in this country. this administration's attempt to enact such draconian regulations through regulator

mr. hastings. mr. hastings: at this time i would ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 this question will be postponed. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house things that have nothing to do with the debate right now. and at this point, you know, we've got about three options here. one is to wait, do nothing and go past august 2 and bring on possible default which i for one am not for, nor is the speaker or any of us zanding up here. another is to go with harry reid's plan which is, as the speaker said, a blank check. something that we as republicans don't believe that most americans think ought to happen. because that lets spending continue in this town the way it has and it helps promote the economic policies of the obama administration, that it frankly wrecked this economy. thirdly we ha

mr. hastings: i'd like to enter into a colloquy with the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee. mr. chairman, the office of river protection was created to put a focus on the $53 -- on the 53 million gallons of waste in the 177 underground tanks in my district in washington. these wastes are being retrieve fled tanks and being prepared for the waste treatment plants where they'll be ultimately sent to yucca mountain. for years, domplet e. was clear that a stable funding level would allow for the successful completion and hard start of w.t.p. department -- the department has chamed its mind and would prefer to front load funding. i have been clear that even without increasing the total project costs, spending in excess of $600 -- of $690 million at the waste treatment plant now will have a limit on funds available for other projects. the waste treatment plant is dependent on two elements aside from its own budget. the robust tank farms to get the waste ready and second, yucca mountain. i appreciate the provisions in this bill to help halt the administration's illegal shutdown of y

mr. hastings so again that is why i speak out. that is not what is happened here and it does this process a disservice to suggest that is what happened. it did not go back to cbo for gimmickry and it did not come back from cbo with a score that folks want it. it just came back from cbo with a score that it got. at it went through one time under a january baseline, one time under march baseline and we just got what we got. we got will be what we got and in fact it went the other direction. i mean it went that direction. i ordered it to go the other way. i don't want anybody to take what has happened here and say this is an example of what not to do. i want to tell you as someone who is new to the institution this is an example of what to do and that partisan nonsense you describe continued to go on? i suspect it will display both of our protest that i don't think that is what happened here today and i'd be happy to yield to my friend. >> my objection with this process is that you brought this bill before the rules committee yesterd

mr. hastings: reclaiming my time. i thank the gentleman for that clarification. the problem goes far beyond wolves. the e.s.a. has nearly 1,400 listed species in the u.s. and hundreds of millions of dollars being spent by local, state, federal and private entities on e.s.a. activities. yet, federal agencies are being regularly sued for poor science and poorly drafted regulations and only 20 species have been recovered. do you agree with me that the endangered species act is broken and needs to be modernized and updated? i thank the gentleman. mr. simpson: it is so highly contidgeous political and litigious that it has become a failure of public policy. authorizations expired two decades ago. because we continued to fund them, e.s.a. continues to stay on a back burner. this bill calls for a time-out in the e.s.a. delisting decisions in order to encourage authorizers and stakeholders to bring the e.s.a. in the 21st century, which is not now. mr. hastings: reclaiming my time. a couple weeks ago secretary salazar acknowled

mr. hastings's bet that this might not pass the senate, and just because they have not passed anything so far this year. it does not lead me to believe they still might not pass something, going forward. it took the house passage of h.r. 1, i would argue, to finally bring the senate to a place where we could fund continuing appropriations for 2011. you and i sit on the budget committee. did the senate passed a budget before the house passed its budget? >> i do not believe so. i believe the president's budget, which went to the senate, was defeated. >> it was not even taken until after the house had passed its own budget. if i look at history, i see nothing happening in the senate. i see the house having a robust budget debate, debating the ban holland proposal, debating the progressive caucus proposal, the house budget committee proposal, and finally bringing one to passage. then after some contemplation, perhaps some pressure from the american people, the senate decided it might bring up a couple of budgets and then went on to defeat the house budget. i do not know where else we go. what

mr. hastings. mr. hastings boats know. votes no. mr. chairman. mr. chairman votes no. >> are there further amendments? >> mr. chairman, a move to change the vision that gives one day's notice for suspension bills so that any amendment in the united states constitution being considered under suspension, the joint resolution will be available. i would like a moment to be able to speak on it. >> proceed. >> when we began this new congress, we talked about 72 hours, the speaker talked about it. legislation. and then that got interpreted as three days, which does not have to be 72 hours, and now we are being told one day, and we do not know if that is 24 hours or 12 hours or what constitutes one day by the definition, and we are talking about something, a vote on a constitutional amendment is not absolutely necessary. it is not necessary at all to avert this debt ceiling crisis. it can happen note, three days after you decide to introduce it, but amending the constitution, and a balanced budget amendment to the constitution has been considered constitutio

mr. hastings: i yield. mr. chaffetz: the gentleman yields his time. i don't take cash bets but you also talked about bouncing. the only thing that's going to bounce is the government's checks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. chaffetz: sorry. i thought he yielded to me. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman continues to reserve his time. mr. mcgovern: i'm the final speaker. mr. woodall: i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield myself the remaining time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, once again i stand in strong opposition to this closed rule and to the underlying bill. it's time for a grownup moment, mr. speaker. it's time for the members of the house, republican and democrat, to come together to address the looming crisis over the debt limit. we

mr. hastings, no. mr. chairman, aye. >> the motion is agreed to and this will be managed by yours truly on the floor s misslaughter. thank you offering much in the pacific and move this process along so we can do what needs to be done without objection, the committee stands adjourned. committee stands adjourned. >> the house rules committee has been meeting to pass them into john boehner's debt ceiling and deficit reduction measure. here is how the associated press describes the amendment. the rework of the bill designed to attract conservative fats would commission a future increase in the debt ceiling on passage of a balanced budget an image of the constitution that would require two-thirds majorities in both houses of congress. the next that is now the committee, rules committee has gaveled out, the u.s. house will come in some time we expect in the next half-hour or hour or so. we will keep you posted on when they will come in, when they will convene, debating the rules for discussion this afternoon. v

mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned 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 242. the nays are 178. a majority voting in the affirmative, the resolution is adopted, without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the house will be in order. members, please remove your conversations from the floor. plose clear the well -- please clear the well and the aisles. the house will be in order. the majority side, please rem

mr. hastings has confirmed what i said in my opening statement. last weekend there was a bipartisan agreement that put this package together that we have before us. i said that change at the end of the weekend. i am simply reiterating. >> this is the senate amendment. this is the agreed upon package that was put together by the speaker of the house of representatives. this is a senate amendment that we're considering. this is the senate bill we have before us. >> this is the agreed upon deal. the speaker of the house of representatives as we all have seen because of all these things taking place has been working over the past days and weeks to put this agreement together. >> there is a substitute offered. i believe that there have to be offered by a member of the house. likes the rules committee has jurisdiction. we will be making a jurisdiction we proceed. >> do you mean the rules committee will be the sponsor? >> i will be managing this on the house floor. we will can see with it? >> here is taking it up. >> am i correct? a house member must als

mr. hastings's bet that this might not pass the senate, and just because they have not passed anything so far this year. it does not lead me to believe they still might not pass something, going forward. it took the house passage of h.r. 1, i would argue, to finally bring the senate to a place where we could fund continuing appropriations for 2011. you and i sit on the budget committee. did the senate passed a budget before the house passed its budget? >> i do not believe so. i believe the president's budget, which went to the senate, was defeated. >> it was not even taken until after the house had passed its own budget. if i look at history, i see nothing happening in the senate. i see the house having a robust budget debate, debating the ban holland proposal, debating the progressive caucus proposal, the house budget committee proposal , and finally bringing one to passage. then after some contemplation, perhaps some pressure from the american people, the senate decided it might bring up a couple of budgets and then went on to defeat the house budget. i do not know where else we go. wha

mr. chairman hastings and for holding the hearing. it was about a year ago that the bp oil spill looker creating the worst environmental disaster scene and was also about a year ago under democratic leadership the house passed the act which would have implemented critical reforms to the primitive and oversight development and included in that legislation was a restructuring of the former mms and i'm glad you're hearing from the administration on how the mms is occurring. you should totally opposed to any kind of offshore drilling or in a preliminary steps the would lead to that drilling off the coast of the atlantic. i believe that because i think the imbalance, the negative impact on the tourism among other things, which has had a huge industry along the atlantic coast far out ways any benefit that would come from whatever oil or natural gas could be found out there. so i very much opposed to the fact that the administration is now moving ahead with a seismic survey in the atlantic. i think we should just have a moratorium on any kin

haste with all deliberate speed and i agree with my chairman here. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from indiana is recognized. mr. stutzman: i yield myself the remainder of my time, mr. chairman. i point out, i understand the gentleman's point about c.b.o. spending their dollars on this publication but we see these publications around capitol hill everywhere. you go to any congressional office, and you'll see documents and publications that people never use. and again, let's advance ourselves into the day and age we live in and using these documents in electronic format. also my understanding is that this is returning the 16% reduction is returning us to the twipe levels. if my understanding is correct. i believe we need to reduce ourselves further than that. again, this is a very simple amendment. i think the american people would afree with this and that we are saving every dollar and looking at every opportunity to save tax dollars. mr. chairman, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. crenshaw: i yield myself such time as i i might consume to say to th