Raúl Grijalva: “As we have mentioned, H.R. 2016 already contains an extensive savings clause which makes absolutely clear that the…”

“As we have mentioned, H.R. 2016 already contains an extensive savings clause which makes absolutely clear that the simple act of writing the NLCS into statute will not change the way individual units are managed. The inclusion of this savings clause should relieve Members of the need to come to the floor today and further amend the bill to enumerate each and every possible use of public lands for specific mention in the legislation. The underlying bill already makes plain the fact that energy development, along with other authorized uses of these lands, will continue in those areas where they are currently allowed, even after H.R. 2016 is enacted. Apparently, this broad savings clause is not plain enough. This amendment would single out energy production for special mention as one of those uses not impacted by the bill. From the standpoint of writing clean, clear legislation that avoids redundancy and needless repetition, I oppose the amendment. However, if this language provides an extra level of assurance and comfort for some Members, this amendment does not really change the bill, and I am prepared to accept it.”