Tax Extenders

Floor Speech

TAX EXTENDERS -- (Senate - September 18, 2008)

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, there is extraordinary economic hurt in much of rural America this evening, and that is especially the case in my part of our country in rural Oregon. We are going to have a chance to do something about that with the tax extenders legislation. I come to the floor today to urge its passage.

A number of colleagues have been wondering about the folks in green shirts who are out and about on Capitol Hill this week. These are some of the country's best people committed to making this country a better place, and they are here because they come from communities where the Federal Government owns much of the land and the Federal Government, regrettably, has been talking about breaking its commitment to these communities.

About 100 years ago, the Federal Government entered into an agreement with these communities. In effect, the Federal Government said: When the National Forest System is created, so it benefits people across the country--in Minnesota, in New York, in Florida, and all across the land--because we are going to have property owned by the Federal Government, we will assist those communities with funds for schools and essential services.

That worked for a number of years when the timber cut was fairly high and we were able to get the funds those communities needed for essential services. However, when the laws began to change in the 1990s and timber cut went down, all of a sudden those communities were hard-pressed to keep the schools open in my part of the country and to make sure there was essential law enforcement service--on the beat fighting methamphetamines and providing key services on our Federal lands. So in 2000, I authored a law with our friend and colleague, Senator Craig, and brought those communities money for schools, money for essential services, but regrettably, that money has run out. As the revenues and benefits that we receive from our national forests change with the times, Congress simply can't walk away from its responsibility to provide funding to rural counties.

Now, because of the good work particularly of Chairman Baucus and Senator Grassley, there will be an opportunity to renew our commitment to these rural communities and to do it in a way that is going to allow these communities, after a few additional years, to get into additional opportunities for economic growth and creating good-paying jobs for their citizens. For example, I have said that if we pass this legislation--and it authorizes $3.8 billion in desperately needed funds for rural schools and essential services--we are going to use those 4 years so that at the end of that period, our rural communities can be involved in a number of other economic development activities that will allow their communities to prosper. For example, we know that in our part of the country--and this has been true in much of the land where there is great risk of fire--there is a need to thin some of these forests. In our part of the country, it is second growth. It may be different in the Midwest and Minnesota and other parts of the land.

But the point is, they are working together--people in the forest product sector, environmental leaders, scientists, and others--they are coming together and over the next 4 years will act in a fashion that will allow us to say that, on our watch, by making sure we acted today so these communities could survive, we used this period so that they could get into additional opportunities that would allow their communities to prosper and provide good-paying jobs for their people.

Right now, pink slips have been sent out to county workers, teachers, and others, and without the action that has been achieved in the extenders legislation on a bipartisan basis, led by Chairman Baucus and Senator Grassley, without their work becoming law, it is my view that the very fabric of rural communities in our part of the country and over much of the United States will be torn asunder.

A number of colleagues have worked hard on this legislation, and that is because this 100-year commitment we have had with rural America has always been bipartisan. The fact is, Americans who enjoy the National Forest System don't come to the forest and get asked whether they are Democrats or Republicans. It has been something that has been beneficial to our Nation, and in return, we said that our rural communities would be given the funds they need for essential services. The fact is, in much of the country where there is not Federal land, where there is not land in Federal ownership, they sell private property, they tax private property, they generate revenue, and they pay for essential services. That is what is different about my home State where the Federal Government owns much of the land. We haven't been able to do that.

I see my friend and colleague on the floor, Senator Craig. We worked together to update our commitment to rural America back in 2000. We put in place, for example, resource advisory councils--and Senator Craig remembers this well--that brought together people in the forest product sector and environmental leaders. Several of them said: What you were able to do with Senator Craig has people working together in the natural resources field who never worked together before.

So this has been a program that has worked. We have tried to extend it on a multiyear basis. I offered legislation previously with Senator Craig. We got 74 votes. An overwhelming majority of the Senate supported this legislation. Yet we were not able to get it enacted into law.

Mr. CRAIG. Madam President, would the Senator yield?

Mr. WYDEN. I am happy to yield.

Mr. CRAIG. Madam President, I thank the Senator from Oregon, Mr. Wyden, for the work he has continually done on behalf of timber-dependent school districts and this uniqueness that Western States have that have these large portfolios of public land and have grown increasingly dependent upon the action taken by the Federal Government and the reaction in the States and the impact on the economy of local communities. When he and I stood together and worked out Wyden-Craig, Craig-Wyden and worked with our timber-dependent school districts and got it funded, we solved a very big problem.

The advisory committees the Senator speaks to were in themselves a phenomenon in the sense that after 2,300 decisions by those groups to do activities on public lands, and not one of them objected to by an interest group or a suit filed to stop them, Senator Wyden and I grew convinced that we could work together to resolve our public land issues when we put determination and resource behind them, and that is what we did.

I thank Senator Wyden very much for staying with this. It is my understanding that in the tax extenders package we will consider this coming week, we will see a reauthorization of Wyden-Craig that will get this work done, send a message back to our school districts and our counties that we are here to help, to assist, and to stabilize the very dire economic conditions those school districts and counties are experiencing. I thank Senator Wyden for sticking to it and with it because it is that kind of resolve that may solve this substantial problem.

I thank the Senator for yielding.

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I don't want to turn this into a bouquet-tossing contest, but the fact is that Senator Craig and I have been partners in this for some time. We believed we had a good model when we moved to pass it during the Clinton years in 2000. It has exceeded our expectations in terms of bringing people together and helping these rural communities survive.

I simply say to colleagues that as part of this tax extenders package, by extending the program now through 2011, the legislation would give rural communities the certainty they need to plan for the future and get them off this roller coaster of disaster one day, hope the next, that has been the pattern of the last few years.

There are a lot of exciting things going on in the rural West. My friend from Idaho and I, as we sat on the Forestry Subcommittee, have heard the exciting developments, for example, in projects to thin and restore the Nation's forests, have heard about the good work that is being done in terms of biomass, taking essentially woody waste and turning it into a source of clean fuel. We have been working together to make sure the Federal Government gets the right definition of biomass so that we can allow these programs to go forward. Carbon sequestration would be a third opportunity that we know will be a sensible step because it will help improve the climate and create economic revenue.

So as Senator Craig and I sat and listened to this testimony all of these many hours about thinning and biomass and carbon sequestration, it became clear to us that as long as our rural communities weren't denied the funds they needed to keep going, which is what we are talking about today, they could use these next 4 years to get into some very exciting and promising fields in the years ahead.

Madam President, I am very pleased that my friend from Idaho has come to the floor, and I know I have exceeded my time for morning business. I simply say to my colleagues that I hope they will pass the extenders package. The funds involved are for secure rural schools, and it is critically needed now so they can use this time to make sure young people, law enforcement, and other essential needs are addressed.

With that, I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source