Mr. Chair, clearly, the best thing that can be said about this amendment is it is the last one of this particular bill, and we can move on. The negative part that I have to say about this amendment is the same thing I said about the other amendments. It is a study that is halfway there; it is not comprehensive; it doesn't cover all elements that should be studied; and in fact, it will produce a skewed result because of what narrowly comes within it. There should be a study that says what jobs will or will not happen from this. That would be a study. That would be a portion of it that would be worth it. But it is not covered in what we are attempting to do here. In fact, if you think about it, this is kind of a bizarre approach to things. We already have a base bill to be passed that will ban this activity, and then we are going to institute a whole bunch of studies to see if we should have done the base bill in the first place. This is totally backward in the way bills should be done. If the gentleman really believed in the study and wanted to get the data, for heaven's sake, do that before introducing a bill that bans the activity in the first place. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
On the recordSeptember 11, 2019
Share & report
More from Rob Bishop
Nov 16, 2020
Instead of helping, it seems the Majority is more interested in putting fishermen's livelihood at risk in the name of faux conservation.
Nov 16, 2020
The Majority is pushing a so-called 30x30 idea, locking up 30 percent of our oceans by 2030, all under the guise of protecting biodiversity while tackling climate change.
Oct 1, 2020
Mr. Speaker, is the Speaker telling me that if the Republicans have cleared this bill and are in favor of it, it has to have a written clearance from the Democrat side more than simply verbal commitment to the Tribes? The SPEAKER pro…
Nov 16, 2020
the major threat to sustainable jobs, food, recreational opportunities, and revenue from U.S. marine fisheries is not overfishing, but underfishing.





