NEW BOARD LINK, GO TO THIS LINK FOR THE CURRENT GAME: http://virtualamerica.ipbhost.com
Welcome to Virtual America. We hope you enjoy your visit.

If you're looking to join and sign up for the first time, register here! You'll want to familiarize yourself with the rules of Virtual America which you can find here. And you'll want to read up on how to sign in and create your character here. After all than you can sign in and get to playing! We're all friends here and we're certain you'll enjoy it here at Virtual America!

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
HR 85 Federal Land Management Act
Topic Started: 16 Jun 2013, 01:38 PM (106 Views)
Heather Holson
Member Avatar

72 hours for debate

Quote:
 
Congressman Peter J. Lucas and Congresswoman Andrea Martinez, for themselves, Congressman Richard Williams and Congressman Amos Goodwin,Mr. Greenberg, propose

A BILL to prevent the purchase by the U.S. Government of further lands without an urgent need, to re-direct a portion of the savings to addressing the repair backlog in existing lands, and for other and connected purposes.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress Assembled as Follows

Section 1 Short Title

This Act may be cited as the “Federal Land Management” Act of 2013.

Section 2 Findings

(1) The Federal Government currently owns around one third of all land in the United States.

(2) According to the Congressional Budget Office, relevant agencies would better meet “environmental objectives such as habitat protection and access to recreation ... by improving management in currently held areas rather than providing minimal management over a larger domain.”

(3) According to the Government Accountability Office, the National Park Service alone has a maintenance backlog of $5 billion.

(4) On average, the Federal Government spends $466 million a year buying further land while the maintenance backlog on existing lands is still growing. This equates to a ten yearly cost of $4.6 billion.

Section 3 Moratorium on Land Purchases

(1) Except as detailed in Section 4 below, the Federal Government shall not purchase any further lands.

Section 4 Exceptions

(1) The moratorium in Section 3 above shall not apply to land transfers from state, local, territorial and tribal governments or between government agencies provided

(i) these are for no or only nominal consideration, and
(ii) there is a valid reason for the transfer, and
(iii) details of the transfers and reasons are submitted annually in a report to a relevant Congressional committee.

(2)

(i) This Act does not apply to any purchase that has already reached a stage involving legal commitment on the date this Act is signed into law.
(ii) If the purchase of a particular parcel of land is already being considered at an advanced stage when this Act is signed into law, the purchase may proceed on the authorisation of the Secretary of the Interior, provided that the purchase can be met out of the Department’s current budget and the Secretary reports to a relevant Congressional committee submitting details of and valid reasons for the purchase within 30 days of completing the purchase.

(3) With the authorisation of the Secretary of the Interior, purchases of land may be authorised, provided that
(i) the total spend on such purchases in one budgetary year does not exceed $25 million
(ii) details of the purchases and valid reasons for them are submitted to a relevant Congressional committee annually, and within 30 days of competing any purchase involving a sum of $1 million or more.

(4) Nothing in this Act prevents a specific appropriation or authorisation for the purchase of specific parcels of land or the purchase of land for a specific purpose and to a specified maximum spend being authorised by Congress.

(5) In cases only of extreme urgency and necessity, the President may by Executive Order authorise further purchases above the limits imposed by sub section (3) above, provided that
(i) he shall report within 14 days to a relevant Congressional committee with details of the transaction including reasons for the purchase and reasons for the urgency
(ii) the cost of any such purchase shall, if Congress subsequently direct, be counted against the budget of the Office of the President.

Section 5 National Parks Service Maintenance Backlog

(1) A sum of $500 million shall be made available to the National Parks Service for the purposes of clearing a portion of the Service’s maintenance backlog.

(2) This sum shall be held by the Treasury and paid only for specific projects as and when authorised by the Secretary of the Interior following proper scrutiny.

(3) The sums appropriated shall be used for priority maintenance and repairs.

(4) Any sums not paid or committed within 3 years of this Act being signed into law shall be returned to general funds.

(5) The National Parks Service shall, 3 years from the date this Act is signed into law, report to an appropriate Congressional committee on the extent of their maintenance backlog and the extent of reductions in the same over the previous 3 years.

Section 6 Enactment

This Act shall have effect upon being signed into law.
Edited by Heather Holson, 16 Jun 2013, 04:05 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Call
Member Avatar
I like potatos
Madame Speaker,

If possible, may I be added as a Co-sponsor of this great piece of legislation?

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
peter
Member Avatar
Lucas for President: Take Back America!
Madame Speaker

This legislation is just common sense. It cuts out wasteful and unnecessary spending and then uses some of that money to do something useful and the rest to help pay down the deficit. I ask for passage by unanimous consent.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heather Holson
Member Avatar

Motion recognized 24 hours for objection. The Gentleman will be added.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
AK3
Member Avatar

Madam Speaker,

I object. The Federal government has an obligation to keep our environment clean for all citizens, and preserve our natural beauty for future generations. We don't need to hamper America's environmental standing by cutting down and destroying more natural beauty for unnecessary urban development. I, for one, think it's beyond time the Federal Government actually expand its buying of land to promote a healthier environment and protect our atmosphere. This bill seeks to contradict my belief, and I have to object to its passage via UC.

I yield
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heather Holson
Member Avatar

Objection noted. Debate continues.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Melissa Sanchez
Member Avatar

Madam Speaker,

Can someone explain what land we are currently purchasing?


I yield the floor, but reserve the balance of my time.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
peter
Member Avatar
Lucas for President: Take Back America!
Madame Speaker

Some of the land concerned is of scientific interest, though when this is the case private charities and conversation groups are often keen to buy the land as well. A lot of the land purchased is for recreational use, and as the Bill's findings point out, the GAO have previously determined that this money would be better spent maintaining land already under federal ownership. In total, 247,495,479 acres of land currently fall under federal ownership. If we can't maintain the land we already have, we shouldn't be buying any more.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Vissering
Member Avatar
I'm radioactive.
Madame Speaker,

I join my colleagues in the minority in support of this legislation. Not only does this reduce spending, but it also stops the federal government from buying land that'll just sit there and be unused. To me, this is just common sense.

I yield the floor
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Ambrose Griffith
Member Avatar

AK3
16 Jun 2013, 04:37 PM
Madam Speaker,

I object. The Federal government has an obligation to keep our environment clean for all citizens, and preserve our natural beauty for future generations. We don't need to hamper America's environmental standing by cutting down and destroying more natural beauty for unnecessary urban development. I, for one, think it's beyond time the Federal Government actually expand its buying of land to promote a healthier environment and protect our atmosphere. This bill seeks to contradict my belief, and I have to object to its passage via UC.

I yield
Hear, hear! Madame Speaker, this bill is self-defeating because the health of the environment is an urgent need -- although I doubt it's author would take such a view. I intend to vote wholeheartedly against this piece of legislation which will do little more than contribute to the environmental degradation of our country.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Melissa Sanchez
Member Avatar

Madam Speaker,

If I am not mistaken, most of those conservation groups make their purchases with the idea that they will eventually recover their funds by reselling to the government at cost.

Would they stop buying if the Federal Government stopped buying?

I yield the floor at this time, but reserve the remainder of my time.
Edited by Melissa Sanchez, 17 Jun 2013, 07:00 AM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heather Holson
Member Avatar

Debate has now ended and this legislation shall be moved for a vote.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · House Debate Archives · Next Topic »
Locked Topic


Theme by Sith of the ZBTZ