Senator Burr Calls on Senate to Allow LWCF Reauthorization Vote

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) urged the Senate to allow a vote on the permanent reauthorization of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), and pledged to continue bringing the issue up for consideration.

“I’ve tried since the beginning of this Congress to bring this legislation up,” Senator Burr said in a floor speech. “I’ve only asked for an up or down vote at a 60 vote threshold. I’m not trying to short the process in the United States Senate by one vote. I’m not trying to piggyback and hide behind something. I just want the members of the United State Senate to actually have an opportunity to debate this, and to have a vote.”

The LWCF is America’s most successful conservation program, and is funded at no expense to taxpayers. An amendment with bipartisan support was introduced this week to reauthorize the LWCF before it expires on September 30, 2018, and Senator Burr has previously introduced S. 896 to permanently reauthorize the popular program.


WATCH: Senator Burr Speaks on the LWCF on Senate Floor

Excerpt from Senator Burr’s speech:

“Here’s the only promise I can make to my colleagues today: you’re going to have an opportunity to vote on this time, and time, and time again.

“As long as the Senate goes into session, if we intend to move legislation, you will have an opportunity to vote on Land and Water Fund Conservation reauthorization. When this floor opens, I will come down here. And I will not encumber the appropriations chairman in every case; I’ll probably pull every chairman into this.

“… Because sometimes we get [more] hung up on the power of one person in this institution than we do about the importance of what it is we’re doing. Well, if that’s what we’re doing to do, I’ll come down as one person, and I’ll ask unanimous consent that we consider the reauthorization.

“And I’m sure that somebody will stand up and object - they always do. But they’re objecting to what the American people want us to do. They’re objecting to a program that has a proven track record of success, and requires zero, not a dime of taxpayer money.

“If there is ever a thing that we have presented to the American people that we should be applauded on, and that doesn’t happen often, this is one of them. But because we’ve chosen convenience over debate, because we’re trying to fit this in a real small box, let me suggest to my colleagues [that] we’re making a foolish mistake for long-term in this institution.

“This is an institution that was created for this moment. It was an institution that was created so we could come to this floor and we could debate.”