mr. speaker , i yield myself the balance of my time . 
mr. speaker , i would again urge my colleagues to , first of all , vote `` no '' on the rule , and i would also urge them to vote `` no '' on the underlying bill . 
i appreciate the work that the gentleman from california ( chairman pombo ) and others have put into this bill , but the bottom line is that the underlying bill eliminates habitat protections ; it abandons the commitment to recovery of endangered species ; it repeals protection against hazardous pesticides ; it politicizes scientific decision-making ; it eliminates the vital check-and-balance of consultation ; it requires the fish and wildlife service to allow unfettered habitat destruction ; it would require taxpayers to pay developers , oil and gas companies and other industries , for complying with the law ; and it is an entitlement . 
i know the chairman has kind of objected to that characterization , but that is not my characterization . 
it is what cbo has concluded . 
it is what our colleague from illinois ( mr. kirk ) xz4002220 who testified yesterday on behalf of the republican study committee and the republican tuesday group said last night in the committee on rules , that this bill creates an expensive new federal entitlement program . 
mr. speaker , the endangered species act has done a great deal to protect endangered species . 
everybody agrees that there needs to be adjustments . 
everybody agrees that we can come together and make those necessary adjustments . 
but what we object to is that the underlying bill guts the endangered species act . 
it is a bad bill ; it is bad policy . 
i would urge my colleagues to vote `` no '' on the rule and the bill . 
mr. speaker , i yield back the balance of my time . 
