I point out that, while the current administration did recently rescind the 2024 rule this month, passage of a CRA is still necessary to prevent a future administration from, again, weaponizing IAPs similar to this one that ignore congressional intent. By replacing the 2022 IAP, BLM wouldn't be left in limbo. They would revert back to the initial IAP finalized under the first Trump administration, which did take into account Native Tribal voices, and it is consistent with the requirements included in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
Bruce Westerman: “I point out that, while the current administration did recently rescind the 2024 rule this month, passage of a CRA is…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the necessity of a Congressional Review Act to prevent future administrative actions regarding IAPs.
Share
More from Bruce Westerman
Mr. Speaker, there seems to be a lot of agreement on this issue. There is the fact that we need more critical minerals in the United States, and the demand for that is not going away. We need it for economic security. We need it for…
what about the $12 billion we put in the reconciliation bill to upgrade our air traffic control system? We are not talking about just permitting energy. We are talking about permitting safety. Look at how long it takes to build interstate…
Mr. McGUIRE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of my bill, H.R. 6365, the Wintergreen Emergency Egress Act. Wintergreen, Virginia, is a popular tourist destination located in my district. Wintergreen is one of the largest planned…
Mr. Speaker, let's look at the issue at hand here. I want to address the policy issue and the weakness in the argument that we could restrict mining companies to 10 percent Chinese ownership. That is a bad policy decision. It is a bad…





