WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, delivered remarks on the Senate floor, blasting Republicans for their latest effort to use a Congressional Review Act resolution of disapproval to upend Resource Management Plans (RMPs).
If signed into law, this Congressional Review Act (CRA) will rescind a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Resource Management Plan in northeastern Wyoming. Along with the resolutions disapproving of other RMPs previously passed by Congress, this resolution would erase years of public input, jeopardize legal standing of permits and leases issued since 1996, and sow chaos and uncertainty on how public lands are used.
“Just last month, I stood here on this floor to speak about the dangers of using a Congressional Resolution of Disapproval to change Resource Management Plans for public lands around the country. I described how using Congressional Resolutions to circumvent public input would upend decades of public land planning practice,” started Heinrich. “Since then, Congress has passed three separate Congressional Resolutions of Disapproval to amend Resource Management Plans. One in central and northern Alaska, one in eastern Montana, and one in North Dakota. And now, this week, the Senate will vote on a new Resolution of Disapproval under the Congressional Review Act. This time for northeastern Wyoming.”
“To put it bluntly, Senate Republicans found a way to rewrite the rules of the game because they didn’t like its outcome,” Heinrich continued. “When we vote for CRAs as a way to manage our public lands, we vote against including communities in the process. We shut them out from the decision-making process, when we should be inviting them in. And third, today’s vote doesn’t account for the hundreds of millions of dollars per day that are generated for local economies by public land recreation and recreators.”
A video of Heinrich’s floor speech can be found here.
A transcript of Heinrich’s remarks as delivered is below:
Thank you, Mr. President.
Just last month, I stood here on this floor to speak about the dangers of using a Congressional Resolution of Disapproval to change Resource Management Plans for public lands around the country.
I described how using Congressional Resolutions to circumvent public input would upend decades of public land planning practice.
How it would put our entire public lands management processes at risk.
Since then, Congress has passed three separate Congressional Resolutions of Disapproval to amend Resource Management Plans.
One in central and northern Alaska, one in eastern Montana, and one in North Dakota.
And now, this week, the Senate will vote on a new Resolution of Disapproval under the Congressional Review Act.
This time for northeastern Wyoming.
While none of those first three have been signed by the President yet, I stand here today – as we prepare to vote on this new Congressional Resolution of Disapproval – to reiterate the message I shared weeks ago.
We cannot, and we should not, manage our public lands through Congressional Review Act Resolutions.
First, there are real consequences of reversing decades old Resource Management Plans.
And those consequences could be devastating: to communities, to businesses, to jobs, and to our public lands.
Until this year, Congress had never used a Congressional Resolution of Disapproval to change or overturn a land use plan.
That’s because no administration ever considered land use plans to be, quote-un-quote, “rules”.
Let me say that again: No administration, Republican or Democratic, since the Congressional Review Act was passed in 1996, has ever treated land use plans as “rules”.
Here's what that means: No land use plan has been submitted to Congress, as is required for rules.
So what does that mean? Because the Congressional Review Act prohibits rules from going into effect until 60 days after they’re submitted to Congress...
...and no administration has ever submitted a land use plan to Congress, ever...
...then, if these plans are rules, every land use plan after 1996 never went into effect.
If they never went into effect, then all of the leases and permits and rights-of-way that were issued under them may not be legally valid, throwing us effectively into chaos on our public lands.
We’re talking about every grazing permit, every energy right-of-way, recreational permit, timber sale, or – yes – oil and gas lease – issued under a plan finalized after 1996.
All of them are now open to litigation.
Every. Single. One.
And the actual impacts on real Americans could be devastating.
For the country, it means potential chaos and uncertainty about what areas are protected on our public lands.
The damage will be irreparable – to the landscape, to our American birthright in these public lands, and to the communities that depend on these places to make a living.
Secondly, we know that CRAs cut the public out of land use planning.
This vote and all the votes like it sweep away years and years of public input and conversations, both about the public lands on a particular landscape and public lands nationally.
To put it bluntly, Senate Republicans found a way to rewrite the rules of the game because they didn’t like its outcome.
And every vote they take to do it is insulting to the public.
Resource Management Plans are meant to include communities in the process of deciding how to use our public lands – not exclude them.
Does that mean everyone agrees with what is in these plans? No. Of course not.
I know I don’t necessarily agree with every piece of every Resource Management Plan I’ve read.
But there’s a process to address that. It takes work. It takes conversations. It takes advocacy.
But that process cannot and should not be replaced by one that involves Senators in Washington, D.C. deciding that they know better.
From coming together to decide where to prioritize recreation and where to protect wild game habitat, to identifying what lands should be used for grazing or which cultural sites should be protected, Resource Management Plans take time because they incorporate input from the folks who own our public lands – Americans across this country.
And when these plans are amended, that takes time, too.
Resource Management Plans aren’t meant to be “one and done”.
They are meant to evolve.
And here’s how that works when it’s done the right way:
First, the public gets a say about what in the plan needs updating.
Based on those comments, the Bureau of Land Management drafts a plan that includes alternatives.
Those alternatives capture the range of public comments – making space for all of the voices that have weighed in to the process so far.
Voices calling for more energy development.
Voices calling for more conservation.
Voices identifying important areas for recreation, for the benefit of locals and businesses alike.
Once that draft is completed, the public gets another chance to engage.
In person and with written comments, the public gets to say what they think the agency got right, and what should be considered moving forward.
And based on that, BLM prepares a final product.
And when BLM releases that final product, the public has ANOTHER chance to engage.
This time through a formal protest period, where individuals can register their objections.
Throughout the entire process, the BLM meets with public land users, with tribes, with community members, with the leaders and elected officials in these communities.
The common theme here is clear:
When it’s done right, the public shapes how public lands are managed.
That is not the process being proposed here on the Senate floor.
It isn’t one that invites the American public in.
It’s one that shuts them out.
And by undoing Resource Management Plans through Congressional Resolutions of Disapproval, Congress is telling Tribal communities that their opinions don’t matter about their ancestral lands.
They’re telling hunters that their opinions don’t matter about the lands they just happen to use to fill their families' freezers.
They’re telling hikers that their opinions don’t matter about the routes they know like the back of their hand.
Telling local communities that the way their land is used is no longer of importance.
Telling all of us that our voices do not matter when it comes to the very lands that make up our American birthright.
When we vote for CRAs as a way to manage our public lands, we vote against including communities in the process.
We shut them out from the decision-making process, when we should be inviting them in.
And third, today’s vote doesn’t account for the hundreds of millions of dollars per day that are generated for local economies by public land recreation and recreators.
Recreation on public lands is an economic powerhouse.
The recreation industry generates $128 billion in economic activity from public land every single year.
It drives $6 billion in federal tax revenue.
It creates jobs.
From the Bureau of Land Management land alone, recreation supports 76,000 jobs and contributes more than $12 billion, billion with a b, in economic output.
These numbers are big, and they matter.
They matter to the outfitters. They matter to the small businesses. They matter to local communities.
They tell the story of just how valuable these lands are to Americans.
Valuable both as a birthright and in dollars-and-cents.
And that rings true in Wyoming, where the plan we’re voting on today is located.
For example, in 2023, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, outdoor recreation contributed $2.2 billion to Wyoming’s economy.
That’s over four percent of Wyoming’s GDP – the fifth highest rate in the nation.
And the industry supported almost 16,000 jobs that same year.
That’s over five percent of the state’s total employment.
Now, imagine that all of that is put at risk through Congressional actions that leave no room for public comment to voice your concerns.
There's no planning process.
Just unilateral decisions made in Washington, D.C.
So instead of amending the plan and allowing for more public voices to be heard, more communities to weigh-in, as we’ve done for decades before—they just decide to override the whole process.
Box the public out.
Well, you don’t have to imagine it.
Because that’s what we’re doing right now.
And you deserve to know.
No land management plan is perfect
All of them need to be reviewed, updated, and improved.
But we have a process for that and it includes listening to our constituents -- letting them drive the decisions.
CRAs don’t do that. They are a blunt instrument.
They do the opposite – shutting out the public and rigging a process to guarantee an outcome of Senate Republicans’ choosing.
So I stand here today and urge all of you to vote against this CRA.
Public lands belong in public lands, they belong to all of us.
And that means that every single person deserves a chance to provide input on how they’re managed.
So I urge my colleagues to vote no on this resolution of disapproval.
###