I am actually saddened to rise today on this particular bill. The 16 heritage areas that are either existing or proposed, many of them are very good, things that I would readily support. Unfortunately, they have been packaged into what the government book my high school students read called 'A Christmas Tree' in a very real way, in which bad proposals can be packaged around the few good proposals that are in here in hopes that people will tolerate the bad in hopes of getting a favorable recommendation from the good. My State and most State legislatures would never have tolerated this type of bill. This bill would be split up in our State so that each proposal would stand on its own merits and go up or down. Unfortunately, we do not use that procedure here. We ought to, but we do not. Even in areas where something like an appropriation can be justified by lumping things together, in an authorization, it should not. That is why I rise in opposition to H.R. 1483.
Rob Bishop: “I am actually saddened to rise today on this particular bill. The 16 heritage areas that are either existing or…”
Editor's note · Context
Opposing H.R. 1483, which reauthorizes heritage areas and criticizes the bill's packaging of proposals.
Share
More from Rob Bishop
Yesterday, I called Lisa Pittman, who is the counsel for our committee, to make sure we had somebody covering us for floor time. She chastised me then, saying that under my condition, I need to ask about calling a doctor first, not calling…
Is there any time remaining? The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Utah has 15 minutes remaining.
Instead, we decided to move ahead with what can only be described as really good political theater.
The Dingell Act, 2 years ago, was bipartisan. If this were bipartisan, we would not be here. But to illustrate that, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).





