Rob Bishop

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, the date October 21, 1976, is the date that may go down in history, maybe in infamy, because it was the date in which the Federal Government changed its attitudes toward public lands. The State of Utah enabling act said that lands would be given to the Federal Government until such time as they shall dispose of that land. In fact, the BLM was established 70 years ago to facilitate that. But in 1976, we changed our attitude towards Federal land, and it is not insignificant that that was the same year we established PILT, the payment in lieu of taxes program. It was in some ways to prohibit the double whammy that goes on in many Western counties, specifically rural counties who no longer can develop their land for a tax base but still must provide the benefits that urban counties and eastern counties still provide. Since our attitude is to keep the land, to mandate the use of the land, mandate the services that have to be required, it is in essence nothing more than the government's saying we have rent that is due to this land that needs to go to those particular counties, and if we as a Federal Government do not pay that rent who are being hurt by it? In Kane County in my State only 4 percent of the land is private, and yet that county wanted to continue on with the hospital so the people in Kanab did not have to drive 70 miles to the nearest hospital so they created a special service district. The PILT funds help run that hospital for Kane County. Daggett County has only 2 percent of its land that is not Federally owned, and the 730 people of Daggett County in my State have to provide for 2.5 million people who come from my colleagues' States and their districts in there, that have to provide services and access for that, and because the population is so low, the funding source that we have within this bill even does not allow them to get the full force of the PILT money that we are actually allowing to them. Emery County in my State has only 7 percent of its land privately owned, and yet a travelogue that was published said Black Box in Emery County was a wonderful place to go rafting. Indeed, it is not. It is a dangerous place with deep water, the water going wall to wall. Two years ago, within a 6-month period of time, two people coming back from the East who decided to go tubing down that river in Emery County died, which meant that the sheriff's posse in Emery County had to go a half a mile into wilderness study area land, rappel down a dangerous cliff and risk their lives to bring those bodies back, and they had to fully fund the cost of all that program. That County of Emery, if they simply allowed greenbelt laws for the tax structure of that land, the cheapest type of property taxes we have, would generate $900,000 if we fully funded PILT. The appropriation we have in here will give them $300,000, even though they are still required to have the same kind of services as if the money was fully funded of that. It is interesting to note that the 10 States with the slowest growth in their education funding all have 50 percent or more of their land owned by the Federal Government. Who are we hurting when this government is not fully paying the rent that is due? We are hurting the elderly, we are hurting the people who need medical aid, we are hurting kids in the West. This is what this particular program is doing. I support this amendment with a heavy heart because indeed the Smithsonian is something I admire. I belong to it, I give to it, but what we did is we allowed them to find alternate sources to come up with some of their revenue. We have not allowed the counties in the West, especially rural counties, alternate forms of coming up with the revenue that they desperately need. PILT is essential for us to pay the rent that is due, and I am hopeful that if we would actually approve this amendment we would allow them to go into conference committee where they could do right by the Smithsonian but also do right by the counties that need that PILT funding. We are underfunding our rural counties, we are underfunding our western counties, and all it is is the rent that they are due, and we should have the courage to stand up and pay for that.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Today, a special service will be held at the National Peace Officers Memorial to honor those whose devotion resulted in the ultimate expression of Christ-like love: They sacrificed their lives for others. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to one who gave his life in the service of others. Jeremiah Kirk Johnson, who died in a tragic traffic accident while on duty for the Emery County Sheriff's Department, exemplifies the life of service which I wish to honor. A devoted husband and father, he spent every spare moment around his children because of his great love for them. At the time of his death, he had been promoted to deputy sheriff in Emery County, and was instrumental in helping to set up the drug court which had the effect of getting drug offenders off the street. He was a giant of a man, yet gentle. Jeremiah will be missed a lot. He cannot be replaced, but his example can be honored. He was a model U.S. citizen. He devoted his life to service of our country, and he will be forever remembered as a hero, a son, a husband, and a father.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I had the opportunity of sitting on a stand with Jim Hansen in Tuelo speaking at a political event. When I informed him that if he spoke well of me today in Utah I would speak well of him today here in Washington, he told me these type of events simply turn into a funeral for the living. So with apologies to Shakespeare, I wish to join that group and praise Jim Hansen, not bury him yet. This designation for the State of Utah, I think, is extremely deserving because of the unique character that Jim Hansen has and what he has meant for the history of politics in Utah, and especially in the first district. No Utahn has served longer in the House of Representatives than Jim Hansen, with 11 terms. He is the only Utah Congressman that has ever actually served as chairman of a full committee, and you can count on one hand the number of subcommittee chairmen we have. My colleague, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Cannon), and Jim Hansen are the only two who have ever served as subcommittee chairmen from my State. In the State of Utah, since Congressman Hansen's retirement, he has had a highway in Davis County named for him, the Migratory Bird Refuge visitor's center in my hometown named for him, and now this Federal building. But I think it most fitting that the one element that has been named for Jim Hansen that he appreciates the most is the duck blind at the Bear River Bird Refuge which was especially built and dedicated in his name. Because he was always in touch with the common man, he understood that element and he had a great love for the outdoors. Even though the wilderness debate rages on in this country, it is still Jim Hansen who is the only one who has actually created a wilderness area in the State of Utah. Born during post-World War II Salt Lake City into a family not awash in earthly wealth, he graduated from a high school class that also produced two U.S. Senators from Utah, a fact that should not denigrate the academic standards of that particular high school. He then joined the Navy, served in the Korean conflict, and as a young man moved up to Farmington, Utah. As an insurance man, he decided to join the Farmington City Council to try to fix their water system, where he served for 12 years, then moved on to the State legislature for 8 years, and then Congress for 22 years. During the first term Jim Hansen served in the Utah House of Representatives, I was an intern; and Jim Hansen actually happened to be the representative in my family's district. My first term in the Utah House of Representatives Jim Hansen was the Speaker, and he set the standard of excellence that I tried to emulate when I became Speaker several years later. When he retired from this position in Congress, I once again followed in his footsteps. I feel like he has cast a long shadow. He has big shoes to fill. Whatever cliche you want to use about Jim Hansen, the bottom line is he did a good job for his constituents, and he did a good job for the State of Utah. He was known for his integrity, twice serving as chairman of the Committee on Standards and Official Conduct. He was known for his common sense and for his frugality. The building in Ogden, which will be named for him, is a place where he served for 22 years. I have followed him, so my office is in the same spot that his office was, and I and my staff are going to be proud that we are now serving in the Jim Hansen Federal Building in Ogden, Utah.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, it is still an honor to stand in this body and speak to those Members of the House who are assembled. Historians and politicians, political scientists, play parlor games, one of which is to rank the Presidents from best to worst. In that group almost always Washington, Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln are put as the top three; usually Lincoln is listed as number one. They are able to do that because of the 20/20 hindsight of history, because of the dogged tenacity which prohibited him from taking a shattered country that was mired in what some people have called the ``19th century Vietnam'' and extracting themselves from the war even though he would have received critical acclaim from liberals at that time. That same tenacity that we respect today was the element of criticism that was intense and unfair to him while he lived. The New York riot that took place in 1863, lasting 4 days, killing 105 people, when even the New York Times put three Gatling guns on the roof and in their windows to protect them, was blamed on him. Horace Greeley in 1864 of Lincoln wrote, ``Our bleeding, bankrupt and almost dying country longs for peace.'' The Democratic platform that same year said that after ``four years of failure to restore the Union by the experiment of war, we demand immediate efforts for cessation of hostilities.'' A leading newspaper wrote that there is a ``cowardly imbecile at the head of the government.'' And a Congressman said, ``I am heartsick at the mismanagement of the Army and disgust with our government is universal, probably even amongst some of our European friends.'' Sound familiar? I am sure, because those same feeble criticisms have been thrown at the U.S. policy in Iraq. Lincoln was great, just no one told his critics that he was. But that same mold of critics tells us the Iraqi policy has failed. Unfortunately, no one has told the Iraqis of that fate. They still recognize that they have more power generated now than they ever had in their country. Two-thirds of all the water projects have been restored. There is a 6,000 percent increase in health funding in the country. All the hospitals, all the colleges, all the technical schools are now open again. Five-and-a-half million students go to school every day without having to say, ``Long live Saddam Hussein'' every morning. Seventy percent of the Iraqis see their future as better and brighter with a spirit, a new form of government and new policemen and soldiers who are enlisting every day. The impact has been significant in that particular area. This is an area of the world where some people, of which the Baathist Party in Iraq is an example, have viewed the Byzantine Empire as the time when everything was right and the Mideast was the center of the world; and that, today, is an aberration. And many of those people have tried to find in the history of the 20th century quick-fix solutions to change that and rewrite the world as they see it. Before World War II, and the Baathist Party is an example of this, they attempted Fascism while they supported the Axis powers until they realized that was not the access that they needed. They flirted briefly with Communism in the 1950s before they found that was not an access that was needed. They tried the Pan-Arabism of Nasser in the 1950s and 1960s and they found that was not the access. And, today, many of these elements have used terror as, hopefully, the access to right the world. If this country is ever going to have a future, it must ensure that terrorism is never viewed as a successful policy by any state or any subgroup of a state to try and change the world. Historians have praised Lincoln for the same qualities that his contemporary critics blamed him for. Historians, I am convinced, will pass praise on America's policies in Iraq which have ended a dictatorship of 30 years, mired in blood and horror and terror that destabilized his region with the ultimate goal of destabilizing the entire world. It is right what we have done to try to restore the balance in the world.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I wish to present a situation to the body that is somewhat unique which we in the West will be talking about in greater detail and more frequently as time goes on. I feel competent in being able to address this issue, because before I joined this august body I spent 16 years in the Utah legislature as Speaker at the end; but all 16 years I was a member of the Public Education Finance Committee, or Appropriations Committee. I also, as I have frequently mentioned on this floor, served for 28 years as a high school teacher before I joined this group. Even though I recognize that money does not equal education excellence and we can do many things to improve our education system without money, at some time, we still have to build schools, and teachers at some time still have to eat. So I wish to present before the body three factual phenomena of which my colleagues may not be aware. First of all, the fastest growth in the student population happens to be in the States of the Mountain and Pacific time zones. Twelve of the 15 fastest growing States are in the West. In the West we have an average growth in our student population of 7 percent, where in the East, the average growth is a negative 2.6 percent. Ten of the 13 States with the highest teacher-student ratio are also in the West. And as the map that I am looking at right now shows, as far as growth in expenditures per pupil, 12 of the 15 slowest-growth States also happen to be in the West. The amount of money increased to public education for funding of students in the East was 57 percent. In the States of the West, it was half of that, at only a 27 percent rate. Now, the question we should ask is, Why are these red States in here that are all encompassed in the West, why are they growing so slowly? It is not because we are not taxing our people. Indeed, the tax rate for both local and State governments in the West is actually higher than what it is in the East. It is not because we are not trying to present our portion of the budget for education. In my State of Utah, 42 percent of the budget goes to public education. If we add higher education, then it is up to almost 65 percent of the budget. The reason for it is very simple, and it deals with this particular chart. What it means is that land and property tax driven by land propel local governments and school funding, and also income brought from property propels local government and school funding. The bottom line is, as we look at this map, the West land is taken from and controlled by the Federal Government. The blue areas within each of these States represent the portion of that State which is controlled by the Federal Government; and thus, the land is taken off the property tax rolls. The State of Maine has a whopping .8 percent controlled by the Federal Government. New York has .3 percent. The large State of Texas, and it was smart when it became a State because they kept their own debt, but they also control their own land, only 1.5 percent is controlled by the Federal Government. But of the States in the West, every one of them has at least 25 percent of their land controlled by the Federal Government, and the States with over half of their land controlled by the Federal Government are, once again, all found in the West. The States of California and Arizona, Wyoming have 40 percent of their land controlled by the Federal Government. Oregon is 50 percent. Idaho and Alaska are 62 percent. My State is 65 percent, and 83 percent of Nevada is owned and controlled by the Federal Government and off the tax rolls. On average, 52 percent of the West is owned by the Federal Government compared to only 4 percent of the East. Now, the bottom line for that means we simply do not have the resources to fund our education system accurately and we are falling behind other States, and it is an unfortunate concept. There are several different ways in which that happens. When these States were entered into the Union, there was an enabling act which provided for this unfairness to be rectified. That has yet to take place, as the Federal Government has changed its policies towards land, and we are now talking about an amount of land that has a value of close to $14 trillion. Secondly, no property tax can be generated from those lands. If we average the acreage at merely $500 per acre and compare that with the tax rate that this land could have generated, these Western States should have been generating $4 billion, which could be used to fund education in the West. Now, the Federal Government recognizes that because we have a program called PILT, Payment in Lieu of Taxes, in which the Federal Government will compensate Western States. The problem is, what happened in the year 2001, this land should have generated $4.2 billion. The Federal Government compensated these States to the tune of $165 million in the PILT program, and all of this money is going to governments that were local and, once again, not to education. The bottom line, Mr. Speaker, as we will be talking about at some time in the future is students in the West should be afforded an equal, an equal education opportunity, and they are not. This land is controlled by all of us, and we are saying all of us should be paying for the benefit, because students in the West are still being disproportionately affected unfairly.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart).

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I have a good friend that bought a brand-new Mustang, and he loves that car wonderfully; but every once in a while parts of it will break, and he has to fix it. He tries to improve it every once in a while, not with changing its looks or its purpose. But without servicing that automobile, today it would be simply a rusting hulk. Its glory days evaporated. In fact, quite frankly, it would not run. That car was built the same year Congress established Medicare. And with Medicare as well, if we did no servicing, if we did not slightly fix those few things that are broken, Medicare today would not run. We are not changing its looks or its purpose. Indeed, people today who are satisfied with Medicare as it is may keep the program as it is. In fact, incentives were put in the bill that we passed on Medicare to ensure just that. But we actually did try to improve the program in its prescription drug component to meet the needs of the most vulnerable of our senior citizens. Let us face it, if you are over 65 today, it is almost impossible to buy a private health care policy dealing simply with prescription drugs. The most vulnerable segment of our seniors whose income is being dangerously compromised by prescription drug needs has grown over the past decade by 600 percent. In fact, every year almost a 60 percent increase of those personal economies are being endangered simply by prescription drug needs. This Congress serviced the program for that portion that was not working to make it run better, and they did so free of government price controls, free of government mandates, free of government rationing at the same time. Let us face it, in the 1960s our effort in health care was basically reactive. We were paying for hospital costs. Today, health care is preventative. Efforts use prescription drug to keep people out of hospitals, hopefully decreasing the overall health care spending that we have. Our medical needs will change. Our desires will also change, and we need to change to meet those particular needs in the government programs. Sometimes you can tell something about an individual by the company he or she keeps. Those who complain the loudest about changes made to Medicare usually are the status, those who like mandates, the one-size- fits-all government-knows-best approach to the world. Those who are the most supportive are those who truly believe that choice is good and options ennoble the spirit of America. There are areas of health care today where the price and the cost is actually decreasing, but always in areas where choice is maximum and options are there, and no third party is limiting those options. As part of our health care change in Medicare, we have provided for health savings accounts, allowing for individuals to put pretax dollars into an account that would grow with tax-free interest that would belong with them, would go with them from job to job. Afterwards, when the needs were greatest, there would be an element of money that was there so that truly Americans could finally individualize their needs, make their own priorities without being filtered through a third party, and invite into the American system the opportunity for options that are no longer there in the health care field. We are not finished with Medicare. It was not the final bill. As our lives change, our life experiences and expectations change; and the government needs to meet to change also, to meet those changing needs. What this bill did is provide an opportunity to fix an area that needed servicing, not to change the program but to simply make that program better. We move to have more opportunities to have greater flexibility in the system. It is part of a long struggle that will continue on, a struggle to make medical care cheaper in the future, a struggle that will try and make it so that we can work to make modern market-based medicine a reality for all Americans. That is the option that was given to us. We did not change its looks or its purpose. We simply did some servicing to make it run better.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to congratulate Dr. Frank Guliuzza III, a resident of Ogden, Utah, and a professor of political science at Weber State University, on his reception of the CASE (Council for Advancement and Support of Education) Award for Teacher of the Year. I am pleased that the CASE organization recognized the caliber of Dr. Guliuzza as a professor and as a citizen. Dr. Guliuzza has an impressive record: he has published two books (American Government, American Ideals and Over the Wall: Protecting Religious Expression in the Public Square) and three more will be completed by 2005. He has served as the Chairman of the Department of Political Science and Philosophy at Weber State University since 2002 and has taught courses including Constitutional Law, The Modern Presidency, and Constitutional Rights and Liberties. Earlier this year, Dr. Guliuzza was presented with Weber State University's most prestigious faculty honor: the John S. Hinckley Fellow award for excellence in teaching, service, and scholarship. Dr. Guliuzza is an asset to his university and community. He founded the Weber State university mock trial team in 1996 and, under his direction, Weber State has earned several top-ten finishes at national tournaments. Dr. Guliuzza ran for the United States Senate in 2000 and has served as a Chair of the Weber County Republican Party and Vice Chair of the Utah Republican Party. A licensed minister, Dr. Guliuzza has served in ecclesiastical positions at Calvary Baptist Church in Ogden, First Baptist Church in Brigham City, and Mountain View Baptist Church in Layton. He has served his fellow men at the most basic and important level. Dr. Guliuzza and his wife of 21 years, the former Kathy Spaulding, are the foster parents of two children, Matthew Williamson and Timothy Stoddard. Despite all of these awards, accomplishments and interests, Frank's true passion lies with teaching. As a former high school history teacher, I understand this purpose. And he is an excellent teacher, in the truest sense of the word. As Dr. Guliuzza said, ``One need not be prominent to be a great woman or man.'' Frank is a great teacher, one who guides his students, who enlightens, shapes and challenges them. He is also a great American, and I am pleased to recognize him on this occasion.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I thank my two colleagues, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Matheson), for introducing this resolution and the dean of our delegation (Mr. Cannon), for working with the majority leadership for the timing and the scheduling of this particular resolution. I do not intend to pretend that I was a close personal friend of the Stocktons, but I did have several occasions to be with them, usually on public occasions. The one that I remember the clearest was sharing the owner's box at the opening game of the new triple A baseball stadium that we have in Salt Lake City. At that time, Mr. Stockton was there with his wife and his young family. One of the reporters from the Salt Lake paper came up and begged for a picture of the entire family to use on the society page for the beginning of this baseball season. John Stockton refused. He refused to have a picture of his family, his wife and his little kids there, because he did not want to expose his family to the kind of publicity that goes along with professional sports and professional athletes. I was impressed with that. The second thing about that entire evening that I was impressed with, that even though I thought it was a wonderful baseball game, as all baseball games are, even though it was fascinating, when it hit a certain time, even though there were still three innings to go, he insisted on leaving because it was bedtime for his three kids, and the most important thing for him was not his public persona, but that his family had a commitment. I was impressed with that. It is difficult or unusual at any time to have any kind of honor for John Stockton without mentioning Karl Malone along with it, but in this case I think we will have to wait until Mr. Malone retires until that honor continues on, and then we will probably have to share that with most of the California delegation at the same time. But on the retirement of John Stockton, I am proud of him because he established those old-fashioned values of hard work and commitment to family ahead of himself, a commitment to others ahead of himself, which is why he is the all-time assist leader. And it shows the personality that this gentleman has, and what he has done as a symbol and also as somebody we can emulate in the State of Utah. We appreciate his efforts on behalf of the Utah Jazz, especially what he has done as a symbol of a sports figure who does everything right, and his commitment to bringing standards of personal integrity to the world of athletics. I appreciate this opportunity to just voice my support of this particular resolution for a fine gentleman.

Mr. BISHOP OF UTAH

Mr. BISHOP OF UTAH. Mr. Speaker, often times we do things that are popular in America, but wrong. Today, we are going to do something that is popular with the majority of Americans, but very right. H.R. 760 does not overturn the Roe v. Wade ruling, but it eliminates a heinous process that was never intended to be protected in the original judgment. When the Supreme Court bypassed the legislative process to make abortions legal 30 years ago, the legislative voice opposing abortion, was never heard. Thus the ruling laid the foundation for the outrage and protest we have today. The people were not allowed to be heard through their elected Representatives. Many judges who today uphold the Roe v. Wade ruling today, oppose the procedure by which it became reality. By approving the conference report on the partial-birth abortion ban today, we will be enacting legislation the correct way. Both Chambers of Congress will have debated and spoken on this bill, and now the President will have the same opportunity. The partial-birth abortion ban will be a good law, a righteous law, and it will be enacted the right way. I support this legislation because it protects the most important minority in America: those who cannot speak for themselves. I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 278) to make certain adjustments to the boundaries of the Mount Naomi Wilderness Area, and for other purposes.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mount Naomi is located in the Wasatch-Cache National Forest in Utah and borders the eastern boundary of the city of Logan in my State. At over 44,000 acres, it is clearly one of the largest wilderness areas in the State of Utah and was designated in the Wilderness Act of 1984. Unfortunately, mysteriously, some utility poles have grown up in this wilderness area. In reality, when it was created, by an oversight of Congress it encompassed an area which has utility corridors, both water and electricity. In addition to that utility corridor, there is a section of the Bonneville Shoreline Trail system that runs through this wilderness area. This is a trail system that connects northern and southern Utah. It is extremely popular with bikers, hikers, equestrian traffic; and it is the only section of that trail system which actually happens to be in a wilderness area. Seeing that problem, maintaining that utility corridor as well as maintaining that trail system in a wilderness area, the Forest Service and the local community have found a solution, which is in this particular bill. By taking 31 acres, which is the smallest footprint possible, on the western side of this wilderness area, which abuts the city of Logan, and transferring that out of the wilderness area and then finding on the eastern side of the wilderness area a section by the Forest Service 31 other acres which fits the contour of Mount Naomi and also has all the characteristics that are required for a wilderness area, we have been able to make an exchange which will allow the city of Logan to maintain their utility corridor, the State to maintain their trail system and also maintain the same acreage of wilderness in the State of Utah. This has passed this particular House before. I hope to do it a second time and then solve this problem for the city of Logan as well as for the Forest Service, which has the support of the Forest Service and the local community and all other entities that I am aware that have an interest in this particular area. It is a good piece of legislation. I definitely thank my colleagues on the committee for expediting its consideration, and I urge adoption of Senate bill 278. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, the Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation were driven and slaughtered by their own government in 1863. They are not a federally recognized tribe and are scattered throughout Northern Utah and Southern Idaho. The following article depicts their sorrows and triumphs over the last 140 years. It details how recently they were able to acquire the land where the 1863 massacre occurred. This site will serve as a reminder for time immemorial of the sacrifice and hardship endured by this people since those fateful days of 1863. I respectfully submit it to the Congressional Record on behalf of the Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation and the American West Heritage Center, the sole repository of their artifacts and history. [From the Salt Lake Tribune, Mar. 25, 2003] Shoshones Finally Get Massacre Land (By Kristen Moulten) Preston, Idaho.--The Northwestern Shoshones have been invisible among Utah's Indian tribes, almost an afterthought on any list. But that era is over, according to Forrest Cuch, Utah's head of American Indian affairs and one of a dozen speakers at a ceremony Monday celebrating a new chapter for the tribe. The Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation at last took ownership of land in southern Idaho along the Bear River where hundreds of their ancestors were slaughtered by U.S. soldiers in 1863. ``All my life I've watched the Shoshone suffer in this area,'' Cuch told the 75 Shoshones and 125 of their friends gathered at the massacre site Monday two miles west of Preston. ``It's your turn to be first now. You've been last for so long.'' Tribal Chairwoman Gwen Davis of Brigham City agreed. ``We've waited many years for this day to happen,'' she said. ``Our dreams have become reality today.'' The tribe plans a small interpretive center to tell the story of the massacre. A larger interpretive center is planned farther south near Logan. The American West Heritage Center at Wellsville is raising $30 million for a center that will have a multimedia re-creation of the massacre and tell the tribe's story in full. The tribe's library and cultural artifacts also will be kept at the heritage center, said Bruce Parry, executive director of the tribe. Back on Jan. 29, 1863, the Shoshones were in their winter camp at the northern end of Cache Valley in Idaho when soldiers under the command of Col. Patrick Connor attacked. The first hour was a battle between the soldiers and Shoshone braves, but it soon turned into a massacre. Men, women and children were shot and clubbed to death; tepees and food supplies were torched. Between 250 and 380 Shoshones were killed, while a few dozen hid in brush and under the riverbanks. Mormon pioneers had asked the soldiers to intercede because Shoshones--who had lost their game and other food sources to pioneer and wagon train encroachment--had become an irritant, depending on the pioneers for food. Shoshone braves also were suspected of raiding supply wagons en route to Montana gold- mining camps. In a benedictory prayer at the end of Monday's ceremony, Elder Monte Brough of the LDS Church's First Quorum of the Seventy alluded to the role played by early Mormons in inciting the massacre. ``There is a history of persecution and discrimination here, and we ask that this can be a token gesture to remedy that . . . a token of those things that are solidly in the past.'' Brough prayed that all who visit the site will consider it sacred ground. Paul Campbell, chairman of the Franklin (Idaho) County Commission, said he learned just recently that his great- great grandfather had watched the massacre from a bluff above the river. Many Preston area residents are ignorant of the massacre, he said. Early historic markers labeled the Shoshone women and children ``combatants.'' The 26 acres turned over to the tribe Monday have been grazed for decades and have a crumbling homestead in one corner. Campbell said the shift to tribal ownership should get the Idaho congressional delegation's attention and help win the place designation as a national historic site. The land was purchased this past weekend by the Trust for Public Land, a national land-conservation organization. The $55,000 purchase price for two parcels comprising the 26 acres was raised from the Flamekeeper Foundation (formerly the William F. and Anna Smith Foundation) of Salt Lake City; Katherine and Zeke Dumke Jr.; historian Brigham Madsen and several anonymous donors. The American West Heritage Center helped with fund raising. ``This is a story that must be heard, not just locally, but regionally and nationally,'' said Alina Bokde, a New Mexico- based project manager for the trust. The organization has a program to help tribes regain ancestral lands. Allie Hansen of Preston was jubilant Monday. The history buff has shown the massacre site and told the story to thousands of visitors for two decades and successfully lobbied the National Park Service to get it listed on the National Historic Register in 1990. When one gets immersed in a historical subject, it starts to seem like a fairy tale, she said. ``This makes reality out of it.''

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Colorado attempts to attack an Interior Department rule which allows memorandums of understanding on issues of roads which have been a source of contention and litigation since 1976. Utah is so far the only State to have taken advantage of this memorandum of understanding. Some people have said we are trying to change cow trails and foot paths in pristine wilderness into roads. These are pictures of the actual roads in which we are dealing in the State of Utah. These are not cow trails. These are the kinds of roads which we have. In the memo of understanding, it can only deal with a maintained, documented, continuously used road that is not in a national park, wilderness, wilderness study area, national refuge, et cetera, et cetera. The issue that was brought up by the gentleman from Oregon is one that was a misunderstanding. They objected to a 2477 that was supposedly on private property, but it was actually a county easement to which they were objecting. It had nothing to do with 2477 because 2477 roads cannot by definition be on private property. When I was Speaker of the House 10 years ago in the State of Utah, we started this process. I was fortunate enough to appropriate money so that every county could research their 2477 claims. Today, the State of Utah is ready to give documented history photo, hard evidence of continuous use on every single one of these roads. The State of Utah has put in work, effort, and money to end the contention of 30 years and provide a process study, my colleagues know what it is, a process study that just took 30 seconds off my time for me not to get the words out. The bottom line is the Taylor amendment allows this work to continue. So these roads which cross rural Utah and provide access to national parks and recreation, and jobs, and for emergency vehicles in rural Utah, will continue on. The Udall amendment, unintentionally or not, brings this to a screeching halt with the mere promise that the gentleman from Colorado can help us find a better methodology than the one we are presently going through right now. The Taylor amendment would allow us to study the rule to which the gentleman from Colorado objects while the work is still continuing on to see if this actually works for the benefit of a standard for every other State in this Nation, whereas the Udall amendment would frustrate the time and effort. Perhaps that is why the counties in Colorado and in the State of Utah are asking you, please, to support the Taylor perfecting amendment, because it allows us to continue on. If the Taylor amendment is defeated and the Udall amendment is passed, the only thing left for the counties in the State of Utah is to go to court and continue to waste taxpayer money on expensive litigation when we have a process, not perfect, but we are still working on it, a process in mind to go at these types of roads which are clearly roads, which can solve the problem in the future. We beg of you to let the process that we have started go to fruition. We can look at it. We can evaluate it. But to capriciously simply say the man-hours and the public input and the dollars have been in vain to this day is unfair to the State of Utah. The gentleman from North Carolina (Chairman Taylor) clearly understands that and has given us a process so that we can evaluate this rule and, at the same time, doing no harm to the State of Utah. I beg of my colleagues to help support this particular provision. It moves us forward towards solving a very contentious problem without having to go to the courts.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, it is my great pleasure to honor Major General Scott C. Bergren upon. his retirement after 33 years of dedicated service to the United States. His contributions to our Nation's security, his years of sacrifice on behalf of others, and his superior leadership have paved the way for excellence and innovation for generations to come. Scott Bergren was commissioned in 1970, and has had a distinguished career in the United States Air Force, including combat time in Southeast Asia as an F-4 Weapon Systems Operator, and command assignments at the squadron, group, wing, and now center levels. General Bergren's leadership has been, tested and thoroughly proven during his time as Commander of the Ogden Air Logistics Center. During a period when the Center has been heavily tasked for warfighter support, his superb application of financial, human, and materiel resources has delivered results far beyond expectations. Recently, General Bergren created an atmosphere at the base of total focus on winning the war on terrorism. As a result, Ogden ALC shipped over 8,500 tons of munitions to support deployed air operations, and our Nation's pilots were safer and more effective in mission performance. An emphasis on innovative approaches led to expedited aircraft modifications that gave aircrews the edge they needed for victory. General Bergren has led Ogden ALC to numerous awards in many areas including safety, environmental restoration, and efficiency. I, along with the great men and women of Team Hill, congratulate General Scott C. Bergren on reaching this significant milestone, and wish him and his wife, Pam, the very best as they transition to new challenges and opportunities.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation, headquartered in my hometown of Brigham City, Utah, and located throughout northern Utah and southern Idaho, and specifically to pay tribute to this tribe as it enters a new chapter in its history. For more than 1,500 years, the Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation has cared for much of the land that consumes my district as well as the districts of my colleagues in Idaho and Nevada. Last month, the Shoshones took ownership of a portion of the land along the Bear River in Idaho where as many as 380 of their ancestors were killed by the U.S. Cavalry on January 29, 1863. The Bear River Massacre, as it is called, was the worst slaughter of Native Americans west of the Mississippi, with an estimate of double the number of deaths of those at Wounded Knee. Now, for the first time in its history, 26 acres where so many Shoshones perished will be treated as the sacred burial ground that it is. In a solemn and very moving ceremony, the Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation was able to perform burial rites for the men, women and children who died on that site 140 years ago. Mr. Speaker, today I wish to honor those members of this tribe who gave their lives on that day in 1863. I also want to commend the efforts of the tribe, the American West Heritage Center, and the Trust for Public Lands for working together to bring closure to this issue. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation, headquartered in my hometown of Brigham City, Utah, and located throughout Northern Utah and Southern Idaho, and to pay tribute to this tribe as it celebrates a new chapter in its history. For more than 1,500 years, the Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation has cared for much of the land that makes up my district--and the districts of my colleagues from Idaho and Nevada. Last month, the Northwestern Shoshones took ownership of a portion of the land along the Bear River in Idaho where as many as 380 of their ancestors were killed by the U.S. Cavalry on January 29, 1863. The Bear River Massacre, as it is called, was the worst slaughter west of the Mississippi of Native Americans, with estimates of the dead nearly double those of Wounded Knee, South Dakota. Now, for the first time in its history, 26 acres where so many Shoshones perished will be treated as the sacred burial ground that it is. In a solemn and moving ceremony, the Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation was able to perform burial rites for the men, women, and children who died on that site over 140 years ago. Mr. Speaker, today I wish to honor those members of the tribe who gave their lives on that day in 1863. I want to commend the efforts of the tribe, the American West Heritage Center, and the Trust for Public Lands for working together to bring closure to this episode in our nation's history. Their goal is to obtain a total of 150 acres so that the Bear River Massacre site can be turned into a memorial. This story, along with the tribe's history and culture, will be preserved and shared with the public at the nearby American West Heritage Center in Wellsville, Utah, which is also located in my district. Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of our colleagues, I am also submitting an article for the Record from a Salt Lake newspaper, which details the history of this site. I commend the past and current Shoshone leadership for their vision and efforts. [From the Salt Lake Tribune, Feb. 4, 2003] This Hallowed Ground It never made any sense to call what happened at Idaho's Bear River 140 years ago a ``battle.'' When soldiers based in Salt Lake City went on a mad rampage and killed at least 250 men, women and children of the Northwestern Shoshone tribe on Jan. 29, 1863, it was a massacre. And it still makes no sense that the site of that blot on our shared history is not officially designated as a national historic site. Descendants of the Northwestern Shoshone see the historic significance of the place, and so does the National Park Service. But, while the site near Preston in southeastern Idaho drew a small crowd of devoted friends to mark Wednesday's anniversary of the horrible event, what happened there remains something that has been largely air-brushed, Stalin-like, from our official memory. The stumbling block, apparently, is that Idaho Sen. Larry Craig has for eight years been bottling up a resolution to create a $14 million Bear River National Historic Site and Visitors Center. Craig says the park service has more immediate needs and, given the constant scuffle within all federal agencies for adequate funding, it is true that not every idea for a new national historic site can be fulfilled. But the Bear River massacre is important enough that it needs to be burned into our collective memory. It was one of the earliest and one of the bloodiest encounters between Native Americans and European settlers in the Far West. Its memory has been kept alive by the tireless efforts of a few Shoshone, most notably Utah's Mae Timbimboo Parry, efforts that themselves deserve to be chronicled at an official historic site. As the United States gears up to mark the 200th anniversary of Lewis and Clark's Corps of Discovery, with proper notice given to their Shoshone guide Sacagawea, now would be the proper time to note this terribly sad bit of fallout from that courageous expedition. The extra amount of attention that will be focused on Lewis and Clark should be used to earn support from historians, Congress, foundations and the general public to properly mark the site of the Bear River Massacre and formally mourn those who died there. The place of the Bear River Massacre is a national historic site, whether we say so or not. We should say so.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. The gentleman from Georgia is absolutely correct. We did not get into this situation overnight. It took 40 years to find us in the predicament that we are in right now. We will not solve this problem overnight. This will be the first step of many. But I am positive if we base it on the good common principles of choice, of information, of competition, that indeed we will move forward in the near future to improving our system and, hopefully, moving to that panacea that we are all looking for.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Only if you make it easy on me.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, many years ago, when I was in high school, I got my first car. It was new and it was sleek and it was fun to drive, and more than anything I would like to have that car back today. There is only one problem with having that car back today. It is broken. It does not run. For it to do anything at all, it would require a major overhaul. That car is the same age as our Nation's Medicare system. And nostalgia for the good old days, which is why I want to have that car back, nostalgia may have warped some of our memories of what Medicare did or did not do or what it promised or did not promise to do; but nonetheless, our Medicare system today has the same problem. It is broken. It does not run. It needs some kind of major overhaul. Shortly after my election, Henry Kafton, who is a neighbor who used to live around the corner from me in Brigham City, talked to me about Medicare. And I asked him to put his thoughts down on paper. He wrote me a very simple two-page letter, and he delivered it to me the day after Christmas of last year. I still have that letter with me. In fact, I have it with me here this evening, because Henry suggested some good commonsense approaches to solving the problem with Medicare. However, in the third sentence of his letter, he put a perspective on the debate when he wrote, ``As much as we do not like to think of it, when you turn 65, in many ways you become a third class citizen.'' No American, Mr. Speaker, should ever have to feel less of a citizen because of their age. And, Mr. Speaker, I am happy to report the Republican leadership of this body will be presenting a bill to reform and modernize our Medicare which addresses many of the comments my good neighbor Henry talked about in his particular letter. This bill may not be a panacea for our system, but we should also not be arrogant or critical enough to dismiss it out of hand, for it is attempting to adjust a program stuck in the 1960s mode of medical mismanagement for the past 40 years. I am encouraged that it will present a program that will have three important principles. First, there will be a prescription drug policy which will apply to the neediest of our citizens as well as those, especially those, who have catastrophic pressing needs. Secondly, it would be based on the concept of choice and competition. The Medicare+Choice program will always be open for bid. And President Bush has been very consistent from the beginning in his emphasis that any kind of medical program we have in this country must be based on the concept of choice and competition. And, number three, it will be providing information to our seniors so that they can make informed choices. I also have the opportunity of serving as a voluntary noncompensated board member of my local hospital. And though I am certainly not an expert in health care, my experience has taught me that all of those kinds of principles in developing a health care system has to be based on the idea of choice and information if it is going to be successful. I also realize that we have a different delivery system than when Medicare was first established. We have changed how we care for people and where the emphasis is. Doctors and hospitals have made that change. Our Medicare system has not kept up with that change and therefore must be reformed in major, major ways. Mr. Speaker, the Medicare plan that will be coming before this body will encapsulate those principles, and I am encouraged that it will include benefits for rural health care through the disproportionate share rates, and that physicians and hospitals as a goal will not endure reimbursement cuts. Mr. Speaker, there are 185,603 senior citizens in my State anxiously awaiting this Congress to enact Medicaid reform and Medicare reform and prescription drug access, including my good friend Mr. Kafton. In the last line of his letter he wrote, ``I realize there is probably not much that can be done about this due to politics.'' Well, I am confident that the leadership of this Congress will break the political logjam of the past and make that statement simply inaccurate. This will be the first step, the first step of many, to reform a Medicare delivery system and a medical delivery system for the seniors of our Nation, and I look forward to proceeding in that particular direction.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I stand today to honor a tremendous individual and important representative of all who have worked so hard to preserve historic sites across the State of Utah. Delone Bradford- Glover has devoted a remarkable amount of time, energy and heart to the noble cause of preserving the Golden Spike National Historic Site. I wish to commend her unselfish devotion and dedication. Delone began working with Bernice Gibbs Anderson over 50 years ago. Together they were the champions of the preservation of the Golden Spike. Delone was instrumental in assuring that the Last Spike Site at Promontory Summit received national recognition through its inclusion in the National Park System. Delone was President of the Golden Spike Association for more than 25 years. In that time Delone had the tremendous responsibility of planning every anniversary celebration and event, including recruiting re-enactment participants and ceremony guests, until retiring as active President two years ago. Specifically admirable was her work on the Centennial Celebration in 1969 when she lobbied for the anniversary celebration to take place and worked so hard to make it such a success. In 1994, Delone set out to save the Brigham City Depot and it was her work that encouraged the Union Pacific Railroad to deed that land to the Golden Spike Association on the 125th Anniversary year. I take great pleasure in honoring this amazing citizen for her service to the Golden Spike. Her selfless devotion has impacted and will continue to effect countless generations of those in her community and the State of Utah as a whole. I would like to thank Delone Bradford-Glover for truly being the ``Heart of the Golden Spike.''

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Mountain Crest High School's Advanced Placement American Government and Law class, in Hyrum Utah, for their achievement in the ``We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution'' competition. The class won their state competition in February and is currently preparing to participate on the National level soon. In order to compete, the students had to establish a base knowledge of the Constitution and the workings of our government. They then prepared speeches concerning different aspects of the Constitution, the amendments, and significant Supreme Court cases. The topics range from the founding ideals of the young nation, to the values and principles embodied in the Constitution, Civil Rights, and the evolution of our current republican democracy. In addition to acknowledging the hard work and dedication of these students, I would also like to recognize the work of their teacher Margaret Obray. She is an exemplary teacher who is devoted to educating all of her students. Together they represent Utah well. As I believe the Constitution is a divinely inspired document I feel it is important for all Americans to know and defend its principles. The ``We the People'' program is an excellent way to get students involved in the Constitution and compete with others from around the country. Again, congratulations to the students of Mountain Crest.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from the neighboring State of Arizona for his insight into what the people of that particular region actually feel and think about this area they know and love so well.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. It would be exactly right. It would make a major impact on the domestic future and stability of energy sources in America.

Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, we need obviously a comprehensive energy policy. Fortunately, we are going to have the opportunity very soon on this floor to vote on a common sense approach that provides balance by using local ideas and technology to provide for our energy needs as well as protect our environment. But the question I have, especially if you go back to the chart that you just placed down there on the ground which shows where the future is, if we turn our back on this comprehensive energy policy, if we do not provide this kind of balance, looking at how homes are being heated right now, what is the future for my kids? What is going to be their future as they go out and try to develop their own homes, if we do not do something with the comprehensive energy policy now?