Manuel Lujan: “There is a little bit of irony on this amendment that, again, I can't overlook, and we raised it a little bit earlier.…”

“There is a little bit of irony on this amendment that, again, I can't overlook, and we raised it a little bit earlier. The previous debate, which was around protecting the Grand Canyon, included an argument from my colleague that there should be some support for the Member whose district that we were debating. Earlier, the gentleman from Arizona offered an amendment to an Arizona public lands bill that would have removed the lands in his district from the bill. Yet here we have a bill in New Mexico, in the Third Congressional District that I so proudly represent, which is supported by the Governor of the State of New Mexico and by the entire New Mexico delegation, and the gentleman from Arizona is still trying to make those changes--changes, I would offer, that don't make a bit of difference when it comes to the substantive side of the bill. This amendment would not improve the bill. In fact, it would make it harder for Tribal communities to protect the lands this bill was intended to preserve. The gentleman claims that he wants to ensure the State has access to the lands in the withdrawal zone so that they can potentially earn revenue on these lands. Well, there is something that has happened in the State of New Mexico over the last many years. In New Mexico, the State Land Office, which has jurisdiction over these lands, has placed a moratorium on these lands within the buffer zone because the State recognizes the importance of protecting Chaco Canyon.…”