Raúl Grijalva: “Once again, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment, which would unnecessarily waive fundamental environmental…”

“Once again, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment, which would unnecessarily waive fundamental environmental laws for wildfire mitigation activity adjacent to roads. Madam Chair, the underlying bill we are considering today is a polluter wish list of environmental shortcuts designed to open our public lands to more and more extraction while cutting the public out of the decisionmaking process. The bottom line is, I simply do not think that Congress should be in the business of waiving requirements outlined in the Endangered Species Act or the National Environmental Protection Act. These laws provide critical protections that guide the management of our public lands and waters--critical protections that do not hinder efforts to mitigate wildfire risk or manage our forests. In fact, many of the activities contemplated by the amendment are covered under existing categorical exclusions, which allow land management agencies to carry out routine projects in a fast, efficient, and flexible manner. I will not deny that carrying out wildfire mitigation projects across our national forest and public land is a critical priority. However, we do not have to cast aside environmental standards to get it done. Madam Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. LaMALFA.…”