Saturday, September 25, 2021

The House Natural Resources Committee thwarted the attempt to cancel the private climate group funding

The Natural Resources Committee of the House of Representatives debated fiercely during the $30 billion price increase for the committee and the settlement instructions for the $3.5 trillion spending bill passed by the House of Representatives on August 24. Delegates proposed many amendments, including Rep. Lauren Bobert (R.-Co) Amendment 223, which would cut approximately $3.5 billion in proposed funding for new civilian climate forces.

A sort of letter Four Democratic members of Congress defended by the Civilian Climate Corps described it as an updated version of the Civilian Protection Corps during the Great Depression. An employment plan for 1.5 million people will “invest in natural climate solutions, clean energy and resilience” and “solve environmental justice issues.”

Project funding, see section 70201 of the committee for details bill, Which will include ancillary climates allocated to the National Park Service (US$1.7 billion), Fish and Wildlife Service (US$400 million), Bureau of Land Management (US$900 million), and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (US$120 million) Group funding, and the Tribal Climate Corps ($500 million).

Boebert said: “When many of our industries are already struggling to find workers, there is absolutely no need to invest in such a program.” He added that the climate team’s responsibilities are “vague.”

Rep. Joseph Negus (D.-Colo.) objected that the climate team will train the next generation of park managers and other leaders in natural resource management.

He said he spent the day before with the fire chief, scientists and others, who “showed to me-very clearly-that our forest urgently needs treatment.”

“I hope we can get a bipartisan vote against this amendment,” Negus said.

Representative Paul Gosar (R.-Ariz.) spoke in support.

“We don’t need more people-we need people who can do their jobs,” Gossar said. “Our forests are burning because we ignore them.”

“The placement of civilians here is just another aberration,” Gosar added.

Representative Cliff Benz (R.-Ore.) responded to Gossar’s concerns and pointed out that the original Civilian Protection Corps was conceived when “the unemployment rate reached 20% and people could not find jobs anywhere.” of.

As of early August, CNBC Report In the United States, there are 1 million more job vacancies than job seekers.

Read Also:  Oldest human footprints in North America found in New Mexico

“This is one of the many self-deceiving parts of the bill that I’m talking about,” said Bentz, who said that he recently met with people who cleaned the forest and it was difficult for them to find employees.

Representative Nydia Velázquez (D.-NY) opposed the amendment, saying it would interfere with the Biden administration’s efforts to “rebuild better”.

Ranking member Bruce Westman (R.-Ark.) then expressed his support for the amendment, saying that the proposed legion is a “large government employment program.”

“We don’t need another Roosevelt-era project-the idea that this will help land management is also a wrong idea,” Westerman said, saying that there are already many opportunities and non-profits for forest management in the private sector. Between organizations.

Read Also:  Former ABC News executive says Chris Cuomo harassed him

“We should focus on the actual management of our federal land,” Westman added.

Committee Chairman Raul Grijalva subsequently admitted that he opposed the Boebert amendment. (He pointed out that he “violated [his] Own rules” to do so).

He said: “Civilians who target young people and target diversity are more than just being strong,” he said. Work “also requires people to know what they are doing.”

“This is an investment in the future management and management of public land and waters,” Grijalva added.

Rep. Tom McClintock (R.-Calif.) also spoke in support of the amendment, saying that he noticed that “when a bill drops, we tend to add more bureaucracy.”

“We already have a lot of protection teams,” he said, mentioning California State Plan,and many more.

He expressed concern about the purpose of this force and wondered if it was a “taxpayer-funded community organization work” responsible for monitoring “prohibited climate false information.”

“What exactly is this new bureaucracy going to accomplish?” asked McClintock

Representative Grijalva conducted a voice vote and judged that the amendment was rejected. Rep. Boebert requested a recorded vote, but it was postponed by Rep. Grijalva.

Nathan Wooster is an environmental reporter for The Epoch Times.


This News Originally From – The Epoch Times

The House Natural Resources Committee thwarted the attempt to cancel the private climate group funding
Nation World News Desk
Nation World News is the fastest emerging news website covering all the latest news, world’s top stories, science news entertainment sports cricket’s latest discoveries, new technology gadgets, politics news, and more.
Latest news
Related news
- Advertisement -

Leave a Reply