mr. chairman , i rise to strike the required word . 
one of the greatest responsibilities of representing idaho in congress is convincing members who represent other states -- particularly those east of the mississippi river -- why some issues matter to us so much . 
high among those issues is our unique relationship with our biggest landlord . 
almost two-thirds of idaho is federally owned , and therefore exempt from local property taxes that pay for everything from our children 's schools to police and fire protection . 
picking up our uncle sam 's slack means in the west we each pay higher property taxes and our counties are forced to make tough choices about essential public services . 
counties in idaho were shorted $ 75.5 million from 1995 through 2004 alone . 
that burden is heaviest where it can least be borne , in more rural counties with relatively small tax bases . 
since almost all the land in the east is private , states there have no such concerns . 
many members of congress from the east , care little about how tax-exempt federal land hurts folks in idaho . 
they just do n't get it . 
i am extremely disappointed at the administration 's fy 06 pilt request of $ 200 million -- a $ 26.8 million reduction from the fy 05 payment . 
pilt was funded at $ 200 million back in 2001 and is clearly a step backward in a commitment to compensate counties for financial burdens imposed on them through an overwhelming federal presence . 
there 's no getting around the need for some of the basic services that property taxes provide on the local level , but there 's no excuse for having to pay extra for the `honor ' of having so much nontaxable federal land in our counties . 
the federal government has been a deadbeat landlord long enough . 
i am very concerned that over the past ten years , the pilt program has been funded at an annual average of $ 155 million , while over the same time period , federal land acquisition funding has averaged more than $ 347 million . 
why are we buying more land when we ca n't make good on the commitments for the land we already have ? 
i applaud chairman taylor for trying to address this problem and recognize the constraints he has to work within . 
mr. taylor i commend you for recognizing the importance of this program and for increasing pilt up to $ 230 million while at the same time reducing land acquisitions to roughly $ 40 million . 
however , i think we need to go further and zero out all land acquisitions until pilt is fully funded and the federal government can actually manage the land under its ownership . 
i would encourage everyone to vote for the cubin , rahall , udall , cannon amendment and give what is due to our rural communities . 
