Jeff Flake

There is. In fact, there was a project in St. Louis, I will mention one specifically, under the stimulus funds, frankly, and that was a shovel-ready project. But then--and a nonunion shop actually offered the low bid, but was refused the…

I thank the gentleman for yielding. The reason it's needed, as I mentioned, is because some of the Federal Agencies have taken the President's language in the executive order to mean that they can require or should require PLAs.

Wherever they make sense, that's fine. I just don't want a finger on the scale either way. Mr. LaTOURETTE. I hear you. And if that was true, the wording of your amendment would be----

It simply takes the thumb off the scale that's there right now because these agencies have issued guidance. Now, you can say that the agencies may take this as a thumb on the other side of the scale.

We don't have to because the agencies have issued guidance that we can look at where they have interpreted the President's executive order as to require the use of PLAs. That's why we offered the amendment.

I'm not sure if they know what they're interpreting then. But CRS, which looks at this, says it's neutral, so make no mistake----

No. There's an important word there, ``mandatory.'' It wouldn't allow the mandatory use. It's back to neutrality.

I urge adoption of the amendment and yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake). The amendment was agreed to. Amendment No. 133 Offered by Mr…

I have an amendment at the desk. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: Page 559, line 7, strike ``such time as'' and insert ``30 days after the date on which''. The Acting CHAIR…

I have an amendment at the desk, designated as No. 3. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment. The Clerk read as follows: Page 101, after line 10, insert the following new section: Sec. 542. None of the funds made available…

I have an amendment at the desk labeled as Flake No. 2. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment. The Clerk read as follows: At the end of the bill (before the short title), add the following: limitation on funds for selectusa…

I just want to say I support the legislation in the underlying bill, and I would urge support for this amendment as well, and I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman…

I have an amendment at the desk. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: Page 12, after line 18, insert the following new subparagraph: ``(E) a list of the department or agency…

I thank the gentleman. I have concerns, overall, on the transportation provisions, but this provision is very good, the Keystone provision, and it should remain in.

Thank you. I should mention that as a diverse package of critical natural resource bills, the Sportsmen's Heritage Act is poised to protect and enhance opportunities for sportsmen across the Nation. I urge its passage. Again, I thank the…

The assumption that we are going to get $2,500 in savings, net savings, not shift to the taxpayer when these exchanges start, is fanciful at best.

I thank the gentleman for yielding. I rise in opposition to the rule. I like some of the reforms in this bill. There are some reforms that have been overdue and are necessary. The problem I have is that if this rule waives all points of…

Again, I want to say I support this legislation. It's good legislation. I look forward to working with the gentleman as we move ahead, and I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be withdrawn. The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Bass). Is there…

Great. Thank you. And I want to apologize in advance. I do have to leave, as well, afterwards.

And it endangers desperately needed economic activity in the region.

It violates a longstanding, negotiated legislative agreement, as was outlined by Senator McCain, who was here and participated in those negotiations.

This regulatory overreach is based on specious environmental concerns, as was outlined by Congressman Franks.

The Administration claims that it is undergoing a deliberative process, but it is crystal-clear that they plan to move as early as the end of the month with this unnecessary long-term withdrawal of lands in the Arizona Strip to new mining…

It conflicts with our energy security goals.

I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would just point out, if we want to address the royalty issue on this and other mining ventures, let's address the Mining Act of 1872. There were attempts to do this in the nineties, attempts to…