“We are going to hear a lot of heated rhetoric today about fire policy.

“My Republican colleagues will make impassioned speeches about the need to pass their legislation and protect communities. President Bush has implored Congress to act and has professed his strong concern for preventing wildfires. And without question, Democrats and Republicans agree that this is a critically important issue to many western communities.

“But there is a big difference between talking about preventing wildfires and really helping communities who are at risk. The President today held an event at the White House again professing his concern - but he has not supported a real solution to the problem.

“There is a world of difference between the wildfire legislation put forth by my colleagues on the Republicans side of the aisle and the alternative bill that Democrats have proposed.

“One thing is clear - the Republican bill offers continued gridlock, not protection for communities. The bill they have put forward will not be accepted by the U.S. Senate. It is that simple. Their bill will be added to the heap of radical Republican legislation that moves out of the House only be ignored by cooler heads in the other body.

“Legislation has to clear the other body before becoming law and the McInnis-Walden bill doesn’t have a chance of doing that.

“The Democratic bill, on the other hand, is not controversial and provides a solution to the problem of wildfires in the west.

“Why won’t the McInnis bill become law?

“First, the McInnis-Walden bill will not become law because it includes unprecedented language directing the judicial branch of government to act. This provision is opposed not only by many noteworthy environmental groups concerned about is impact on the environment, but it is also opposed by groups who see it as a first step toward weakening citizens’ rights in the judicial process for all kinds of issues. That is why the NAACP, MALDEF and others have spoken out against this provision.

“Second, the McInnis-Walden bill will not become law because by lessening the requirements to study alternatives, their bill erodes the National Environmental Policy Act. The other body will not accept that. And neither should this body.

“You know, when it comes to enacting policy that would really help communities at risk of wildfire, westerners know the difference between smoke and fire. The McInnis-Walden bill is all smoke.

“Once again, leaders in the House care more about the media politics of passing a bill just to say they passed a bill, regardless of the fact that it will never be enacted into law and will never help one single homeowner in the west.

“Is Congress serious about reducing the threat of wildfires to western homeowners? I know that I am, and I know my colleagues who are supporting our Democratic substitute are serious about that. We are offering today a solution to the threat of wildfire.

“The Democratic Substitute provides direct aid to local communities in the west to help them treat private lands at risk of wildfire. The Republican bill does not provide direct aid to local communities.

“The Democratic Substitute is non-controversial - it allows expedited treatment of federal lands that pose a risk of wildfire to local communities without trampling on key environmental and judicial protections. The Republican bill will lead to more gridlock and distrust and less wildfire protection because of its controversial provisions regarding due process.

“The Democratic substitute will create new jobs quickly. The Republican bill will not.

“The Democratic substitute targets federal resources to the local communities most at risk of wildfire. The Republican bill, on the other hand, allows for expedited logging projects on lands that may not pose any threat of wildfire to local communities.

“When it comes to protecting local communities from wildfire, there is a world of difference between the Republican bill and the Democratic substitute. I urge my colleagues to vote for a solution, not a cynical ploy, and support the Democratic substitute.”