Raúl Grijalva: “Let me point out some obvious points. This amendment, as I said earlier, would undermine conservation of public lands…”

“Let me point out some obvious points. This amendment, as I said earlier, would undermine conservation of public lands and stall efforts to ensure that our public places tell the very important diverse story of America and be representative of all Americans. Development and conservation--to say that this would deny jobs and opportunities to particular regions is not true. Over 9 million acres are available right now under energy leases from the Obama administration compared to--those were added to it--only 4.1 million acres that are now land that is protected. Since its enactment in 1906, 16 Presidents have used it. 160 of America's best known landscapes have been preserved. National monuments designated under the Antiquities Act are comprised of existing Federal lands only. No new lands are added to the Federal estate by these designations. National monument designations have better reflected the complexity-- and Presidents have used that--of our Nation, ensuring that the voices of a changing and diverse community, which is this country, is told as we change and as we go forward. I would urge a ``no'' vote. Undercutting an authority that existed for 100 years that has brought benefit to the Nation, enhanced the cultural, historic, and conservation ethics of this Nation should be preserved. With that, I urge a ``no'' vote amendment. It is unneeded, restrictive, and goes against a tradition and an authority that has existed in this country for 100 years.…”