Mr. Chairman, we are not really sure what this amendment is trying to achieve. If the underlying goal of the bill is to make sure that every national monument designation goes through a NEPA process or is approved by Congress, this amendment makes things more confusing. The amendment states that all monuments established through the use of the Antiquities Act shall expire after 3 years. It goes on to say that they may become permanent if the President follows the review process under NEPA. Does this mean the President could declare the designation a categorical exclusion? If so, what is the point of the amendment? Does that mean the administration has to file an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement? Can they just issue a finding of no significant impact? Again, the amendment does nothing to fix or clarify the underlying bill. I oppose the legislation and the adoption of the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.
Share & report
More from Raúl Grijalva
One of the things that I see is that erosion of that public institution, and part of it is trying to control what people read and do not read.
Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this amendment. This amendment draws attention to the dubious and deceptive strategy of placing migrants on buses under false pretenses and without any coordination or even a courtesy call. Both Governor…
The Western Shoshone Defense Project (WSDP) firmly opposes the Mining Regulatory Clarity Act, which represents an unprecedented giveaway of public lands to mining corporations.
Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the legislation. I am disappointed that today we once again are discussing the continued Republican insistence that immigration is a Federal land…





