Eni Faleomavaega

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, this bill is proposed by my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on Appropriations. Mr. Speaker, with all of the bills we have considered relating to the events of September 11 of last year, we would like to first say our thoughts and prayers continue to go out to those affected by the events of that awful day. While we as a Nation have attempted to go on with our lives, the tragedy and loss of that day will never be forgotten or taken out of our hearts and minds. The scope and severity of that terrible tragedy make it difficult to know how best to memorialize those who were lost, but the legislation of the gentleman from Pennsylvania focuses on memorializing the heroism of those aboard United Flight 93 and the tragedy of their loss. These are the events which mostly affected the families he represents, and we fully support this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I had the recent privilege of accompanying the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), another colleague from Pennsylvania, with eight other Members of Congress to visit Uzbekistan, where we do the majority of our major staging area for our troops in going and fighting the war in Afghanistan. What struck me, Mr. Speaker, was that one of the units there, an Air Force unit, had a slogan. They took this slogan from the last words that were given by one of the gentlemen on board this Flight 93, and it was simply this: ``Let's roll.'' This Air Force unit had adopted this slogan, ``Let's Roll,'' to honor the heroes of Flight 93. For all I know, Mr. Speaker, many of us in this body, Members and staff, may not be here if it had not been for the heroic acts of those passengers willing to sacrifice their lives so that we and the many of us here might live. I hope we will never forget that. We want to continue working with all our colleagues regarding appropriate reactions to the events of September 11. It is our hope that over time we may gain the wisdom and perspective to devise a memorial or series of memorials that will tell the story of these attacks; of the people who are lost, their families, and our resulting efforts to end the threat of terrorism in such a way that future generations will never forget these events. Better yet, Mr. Speaker, perhaps such a memorial could in some small way reduce the chance that any future generation will have to endure such a tragedy. I want to say for the Record, Mr. Speaker, that I commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania, as the dean of the great State of Pennsylvania's delegation, and will support him in whatever way he sees fit on how we might best honor those heroes of United Flight 93. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), the primary sponsor of this proposed bill.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I yield to the gentlewoman from Wyoming.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I do not have additional speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I would like to offer my commendation to the gentlewoman from Wyoming whom I have had the privilege of working closely with on a couple of pieces of legislation on national parks. Mr. Speaker, this bill was introduced by the gentleman from California (Mr. Radanovich), the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3401 directs the Forest Service to convey approximately a 27.10-acre administrative site on the Stanislaus National Forest in California to the Clovis Unified School District, or CUSD. The parcel contains the Five Mile Regional Learning Center, which since 1989 has been operating under a special use permit by the school district as a conservation education center. The learning center serves approximately 14,000 students and is in need of significant repair. While the Clovis Unified School District is willing to put up $5 million toward capital improvement, it could only secure funding for district-owned properties. The bill also mandates that the Secretary negotiate a special use permit for approximately 100 acres for the school district to use in its educational programs. The school district currently has a special use permit covering 120 acres. The bill includes a reversionary clause as well. Mr. Speaker, the administration values this land at approximately $1 to $2 million. Although we generally do not support the conveyance of Federal lands for little or no consideration, this conveyance is to a school district to foster environmental education. The Clovis Unified School District is also willing to make capital improvements or investment of some $5 million and requires title to do so, when the Forest Service is apparently unable to maintain the property. I would like to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Radanovich), the chairman of the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands, for working with us on this side of the aisle, the minority, to address concerns with the reversionary clause and clarifying that were the land to revert to the United States, the learning center would be liable for any hazardous substances present on the property since 1989. Again, Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentlewoman for her management of this bill.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, again, I thank my good friend from Alaska for his management of this proposed legislation. Mr. Speaker, the legislation before us today is sponsored by the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen), the honorable chairman of our Committee on Resources. The bill would remove from wilderness designation some 31 acres of land in one section and would add 31 acres to another portion of the Mount Naomi Wilderness Area. I understand the legislation was requested by the city of Logan, Utah, to facilitate the development of the 90- mile nonmotorized Bonneville Shoreline Trail used by pedestrians and cyclists. The proposed trail crosses the Mount Naomi wilderness area where mountain biking is not allowed. The Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health held a hearing concerning this legislation. There was no opposition to it. It is my understanding also, Mr. Speaker, that the administration also supports this legislation. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

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

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

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

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I first want to thank the gentlewoman for being the primary sponsor of this proposed legislation. The Federal Lands Policy Management Act requires those seeking a right-of-away across Forest Service or BLM land to pay a fee based on the fair market value of that right-of-way. Despite this requirement, however, investigations conducted by the Department of the Interior's Inspector General and the General Accounting Office have provided ample evidence that the right-of-way fees currently being charged by the agencies are far below fair market value. Mr. Speaker, States, local governments, and private individuals all charge significantly more than the Federal Government for the rights- of-way across lands they own. In particular, the Inspector General report estimated that the fees charged by the BLM were as much as $50 million below fair market value. This undercharging means that large corporations who stand to make vast profits on the use of public lands are not being required to pay the American people a fair rate of return for that privilege. As a result, Mr. Speaker, we share the desire of the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Mrs. Cubin) to correct this problem. While we had some concerns regarding the multiple appraisal approach contained in the bill as introduced, in working with the gentlewoman from Wyoming we feel we have agreed on an approach that will address this problem more effectively. Mr. Speaker, as amended, H.R. 3258 will require the agencies to review their existing fee schedules, and the land valuations which underlie them, to ensure that they represent current values. In addition, this measure will ensure that, once these new fees have been promulgated, they will be adjusted annually for inflation. This approach, Mr. Speaker, may not be perfect, but it certainly is an improvement over the status quo and should move us closer to a system that adequately compensates the taxpayers for the use of their lands. I would like to once again thank the gentlewoman from Wyoming for her willingness to work with us on this side of the aisle, and I urge the adoption of this proposed bill.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. I certainly want to commend our distinguished chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, as well as the gentlewoman from Texas, for their management of this legislation. I support the proposed resolution. How ironic, Mr. Speaker, that we find here in this hallowed Chamber only two paintings of two distinguished individuals that have had some bearing in terms of what we are discussing, the revolution and the leadership of George Washington. If I am correct, Mr. Speaker, I believe the other painting that we see here in the gallery is the Marquis de Lafayette, and I think it bears an understanding of how distinguished this Frenchman was by demonstrating his leadership, his courage, and his commitment to our freedoms as a former colony of the British empire. I think we have to have a sense of perspective too in terms of the fact that the French and the British were fighting over the colonial abilities of themselves in terms of what we were to do, and I wonder, sometimes, if maybe the French government really had a love or a greater hatred for the British than they did for the colonialists. But I do want to honor the Marquis de Lafayette and all that my good friend, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goode) had spoken about in terms of his history and his commitment to democracy. I just wish that perhaps in these days, the Marquis de Lafayette would come and help me with the fact that the French government had conducted 200 nuclear testings in the South Pacific that has drastically affected the environment in this region of the world. I wonder that despite the fact that 60 percent of the French people were even against nuclear testing, for which President Chirac has simply broken the moratorium and given greater pain and feelings of misunderstanding of the people of the Pacific. Yes, I do honor the Marquis de Lafayette for what he has done for our Nation, and for that I want to again thank the gentlewoman from Texas for giving me this opportunity to pay tribute to this gentleman, and I support the resolution.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I certainly would like to commend the distinguished gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) not only as a former chairman of our Committee on Resources but now as chairman of the distinguished Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. I am pleased to rise in support of H.R. 3048, in support of the legislation introduced by my good friend, the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young). Mr. Speaker, this legislation is intended to resolve a longstanding dispute over ownership of lands at the junction of the Russian and Kenai Rivers in Alaska. It accomplishes that goal by ratifying an agreement negotiated between the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated, or CIRI. CIRI is one of the regional corporations formed under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 to manage lands and financial assets for its Alaska Native shareholders. Asserting claims under the authority of section 14(h)(1) of the settlement act, CIRI sought title to 2,000 acres of public lands at the conflux of the two rivers. This area was considered by CIRI to qualify as a historic site under the settlement act. But it also is one of the most popular recreational fishing areas in Alaska. Both the Forest Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service opposed outright the conveyance to CIRI of these lands from the Chugach National Forest and the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. As an alternative to prolonged and uncertain litigation, the three parties reached an agreement on July of 2001 which seeks to fairly balance and accommodate CIRI's interests in the cultural history and archeological assets as well as the public interest in the recreational and fish and wildlife resources of this area. Under the agreement, the Forest Service will convey to CIRI fee title to two parcels of land totaling only 62 acres. The Fish and Wildlife Service will also convey to CIRI the archeological and cultural resources from some 502 acres to the Kenai Refuge lands. In addition, CIRI will develop a visitors center and other facilities on the 42-acre parcel. The bill provides for an appropriation of $13.8 million to support that endeavor to showcase the native history of this region. Mr. Speaker, in return for those assets and financial assistance, CIRI agrees to relinquish its section 14(h)(1) claims allowing the majority of the lands at issue to remain in public ownership as part of the national forest and national wildlife refuge. The right of public access to continue fishing in the Kenai and Russian Rivers and to make use of the campgrounds is also maintained. Finally, the agreement authorizes, but does not require, an exchange of additional lands between CIRI and the Fish and Wildlife Service. Any such exchange would be of equal value and affect no more than 3,000 acres of the Kenai Refuge boundaries. While such preauthorization of the exchange that could affect refuge wilderness boundaries is unusual and not unprecedented, in this case we have been assured by the Fish and Wildlife Service that any agreed-to exchange of lands would clearly be in the best interest of the Kenai Refuge and the public. It is our understanding that if the Service desires to acquire lands from the CIRI which would have higher value for implementing the Kenai Peninsula Brown Bear Conservation Strategy than would any lands conveyed from the refuge to CIRI in exchange, we expect the service will consult with the committee in the development of any exchange using this authority and have added language to the bill concerning the public process and submission for any proposed exchange to the committee prior to final approval. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the gentleman from Alaska for bringing this bill before us today. I also applaud CRI, the Forest Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service for their work on the agreement. This is a consensus-based and creative solution to a complex land management problem. I urge the passage of this legislation, and on behalf of the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall), the ranking member of this party on this side of the aisle and the members of the committee, I urge my colleagues to support passage of this legislation.

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

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Chairman, I am in support of the proposed interior appropriations, and I am including my statement in the Record and also a letter from deputy assistant Secretary David Cohen. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from California, Congressman Darrell Issa, has introduced two amendments to reduce considerably funding for my district of American Samoa. It is my understanding that there has been an exchange of communications between the Gentleman and the Governor of American Samoa. Specifically the gentleman's constituent has had an employment contract dispute with the American Samoa Government, and this matter has been ongoing for almost two years now. Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding the gentleman has withdrawn his amendments, and that he will insert a statement for the record. I do appreciate the fact that the gentleman has decided not to introduce his amendments, but I would also like submit this statement to express my concerns on the proposed amendments. I can appreciate the gentleman's concerns for his constituent, and I commend the gentleman for his efforts to look after the needs of his constituent. And every member should follow his good example. Mr. Chairman, my concern for these two amendments is that the gentleman's constituent has not sought judicial adjudication for whatever rights he felt were not fulfilled by the American Samoa Government. To punish every man, woman, and child in my district by reducing critically needed funding as the gentleman's amendments proposed--is just simply unfair and not right. This matter was never brought to the attention of the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, as well as the Full Appropriations Committee. And the matter certainly has been reviewed by the appropriate authorizing committees. Mr. Chairman, we have the courts to deal with contractual disputes between individuals and government entities. Our High Court in my district is the proper forum for my colleague's constituent to pursue his rights under the employment contract he agreed to with the American Samoa Government. I submit the American Samoa Government does have budgetary and fiscal problems, but so does our federal government, the state of California and all other states and other territorial governments. But this is not an issue about fiscal management or mismanagement. It is an issue about making sure the constitutional rights of my colleague's constituent are protected. And I submit the constituent always was afforded an opportunity to take the matter to court, but he did not. And for this basic reason, my colleague's amendments are not in order and should not be approved by this body. U.S. Department of the Interior,

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Chairman, I want to associate myself in support of the Kildee-Hayworth amendment. I do have the utmost respect for my friend, the gentleman from Virginia, and his efforts, never questioning his integrity nor his sincerity about the proposed amendment. But Mr. Chairman, I submit, the Pacific Island cultures and the First Americans have been studied to death. We have had enough studies already: 11 Federal studies on health and economic needs of Native Americans; four Federal studies on economic development; nine Federal studies on educational needs of the First Americans; nine Federal studies of housing for First Americans; four Federal studies on infrastructure development; nine Federal studies on the effectiveness of the current programs that we are giving to the First Americans; 12 Federal studies on crime control in Indian reservations; six Federal studies on influence on non-Native American private investors dealing with Indian gaming; three Federal studies on influence of organized crime, supposedly. I want to submit, Mr. Chairman, the Indian gaming industry is controlled by the Federal Government under the auspices of the Congress. That is not the case with State gaming operations, and that makes a distinction here. There is no organized crime involvement in this effort. I submit, Mr. Chairman, we do not need this proposed amendment.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Chairman, I stand to object to the proposed provision in the appropriations for 2003, the Interior appropriations bill, and I express my strong support to the amendment offered by our authorizing committee, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth), and this is in reference to the establishment of a commission with reference to needs of Native Americans. Mr. Chairman, I will not question Members' motives and wanting to give assistance to Native American Indians, but this provision goes too far. The provision will limit billions of dollars of claims against the Federal Government for mismanaging Indian trust funds by limiting the accounting from 1985 forward. Further, the provisions will presume the balances as of 1985 were correct, even though the government admits that money has been mismanaged for decades. The provision would overturn a central provision of the American Indian Trust Management Reform Act, legislation enacted in 1994 requiring the Secretary of the Interior to provide a full accounting. We have already expended over $20 million plus even trying to get an auditing report from the Department of Interior which they have failed to do. We owe the Native Americans. It is their money. We were the trustees, and we failed in that responsibility. I urge Members to support this proposed amendment that will be given at a later point by the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth).

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 3389, the National Sea Grant College Amendments Act of 2002, and I certainly want to thank the chairman of the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest), and the ranking minority member, the gentleman from Guam (Mr. Underwood), for their support and initiative in bringing this legislation for consideration at this time. I also want to thank the chairman of our Committee on Resources, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen), and our ranking member, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall), for their support and endorsement of this legislation. Mr. Chairman, I introduced H.R. 1071, a bill which would increase authorization for the National Sea Grant Program, last year. Our chairman, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest), was kind enough to hold a hearing on the matter, and subsequently introduced H.R. 3389 as an alternative to my legislation. I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of H.R. 3389 and am also pleased to support the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 3389. This amendment reflects a compromise between the Committee on Resources and the Committee on Science. This amendment also includes provisions from the Senate companion bill, Senate bill 2428. The amendment maintains funding increases for core programs and research regarding zebra muscles, oyster diseases, et cetera, and $90 million to $100 million annually from fiscal year 2004 through 2008. I am particularly pleased that this amendment also includes a provision which directs the Secretary of Commerce to report annually to the Committee on Resources and the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives and to the Committee on Commerce, Science, Transportation of the Senate on efforts made by colleges, universities, institutions, associations, and alliances in the United States territories and freely associated States to develop the expertise necessary to be designated as sea grant institutions or colleges. This provision also directs the Secretary of Commerce to report the administrative, technical, and financial assistance provided by the Secretary to those entities. Mr. Chairman, I want to particularly thank the ranking member of our Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans, the gentleman from Guam (Mr. Underwood), for his leadership and his outstanding service not only to his people but certainly to this institution. Although he intends to run for another office, I will say personally that I will sorely miss him, and I really wish him all the best in his future endeavors. I have worked for some time with the gentleman from Guam in bringing attention to the unique and singular needs of the U.S. territories and the freely associated states. For most Pacific Islanders, the ocean is our farm, Mr. Chairman, and we are in dire need of administrative, technical, and financial assistance to develop sea grant affiliations within the region. I would also like to note that the University of Hawaii's Sea Grant Program has been instrumental over the years in assisting Pacific Island communities in developing sea grant extension activities. And I would like to personally thank Dr. Gordon Grau, the director of the Hawaii Sea Grant Program, for his commitment to our remote communities. I also want to thank my colleagues, the gentlewoman from the State of Hawaii (Mrs. Mink) and the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie), for their support of this program and legislation. Mr. Chairman, despite the bipartisan support, current funding for the National Sea Grant Program is only about 7 percent of the equivalent Federal funding of the Land Grant College Program. Land Grant receives approximately $900 million in Federal funding per year. Sea Grant receives approximately $62 million. And yet approximately 54 percent of our Nation's population lives along the coastlines. I believe this is a fact that bears repeating. Nearly 54 percent of our Nation's population lives along the coasts, but we devote only pennies to marine research. In 1994, the National Research Council review pointed out that Sea Grant has been virtually the only source of funding in the United States for marine policy research. Yet, on average, there are fewer than seven extension agents per coastal State. In many cases, there is only one extension agent serving a major urban area. For example, in Los Angeles, there is only one extension agent serving 14 million people. In New York City, there is only one serving 12 million people. Sea Grant funds, on an average, are less than $2 million per State program. Many geographic regions are not represented, including the western Pacific, which alone has a huge economic exclusive zone. Some States, like Mississippi and Alabama, share funding with others eligible States like Pennsylvania and Vermont, which have no institutional sea grant programs. Although this authorization continues to fall short of Land Grant funding, Mr. Chairman, I do believe it is a movement in the right direction, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. I thank both the chairman of the Committee on Science and our ranking member of the Committee on Science as well as our Committee on Resources.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, today marks the 30th anniversary of the passing of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in federally assisted education programs or activities. Since its passing, Title IX has been crucial in setting a standard of equal education opportunities. Women and girls today, tend to be better educated and enjoy many opportunities that far surpass those of previous generations. In the past 30 years, the growing trend has been for most to equate Title IX with women in athletics. Women and girls' participation in sports has increased. By 2001 nearly 2.8 million girls participated in athletics, an increase of more than 847 percent from 1971. While the achievements of female athletes is impressive, the effects of the legislation have reached well beyond that of sports. We have steadily seen an increase in women's enrollment in school, accessibility to funding for school, and women in fields of study generally dominated by their male counterparts. In 1971, only 18% of young women completed four or more years of college. By 2006, women are projected to earn 55% of all bachelor's degrees. Similarly, women have made significant progress in graduate and professional fields. In 1994, women earned 43% of all law school degrees, compared with 7% in 1972. And in 1999, women earned nearly 50% of all medical degrees; in 1972, only 9% of medical degrees were earned by women. As a result of Title IX, women have the opportunity to grow and excel in areas once reserved only for men; creating a more prosperous and fruitful nation. Today we must celebrate the advancements women have made over the last 30 years as well as recognize that there is still more work to be done. Disparities in salaries continue to exist between men and women. We continue to see less women in administrative positions, hard sciences and we need to create additional opportunities for more women to enter the non-traditional fields of science and math. Today we celebrate Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972's pivotal role in expanding women's educational opportunities and applaud the progress women have made over the last 30 years. In recognizing and celebrating Title IX's importance in today's society, we are ensuring that equal educational opportunities continue to be afforded to women and women's roles in society continue to be strengthened and appreciated. I would also like to take this opportunity to recognize the women of American Samoa, who continue to excel because of Title IX. Growing numbers of Samoan women are furthering their education, both in American Samoa and in the United States. Many return home to contribute to the island community, while others remain in the U.S. as teachers, lawyers, professors, doctors and judges. Malo lava taumafai ia outou tama'ita'I Samoa i le la outou sogasoga ma le finafinau I le su'eina o le poto. E fia momoli atili ai le Fa'afetai tele I le porokolame o le Title IX mo le avanoa ua faia lea mo tama'ita'i Samoa.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4103, a bill which would direct the Secretary of the Interior to transfer certain lands in Natrona County, Wyoming to the Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. At the request of Congresswoman Barbara Cubin, our Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands held a field hearing in Casper, Wyoming on May 4, 2002 to ensure that the residents of Wyoming were given an opportunity to be heard on this matter. I attended this field hearing and I believe it is fair to say that the majority of those in attendance voiced their support for this initiative. Although the media has tried to project otherwise, I believe the record should also reflect that this is not a Utah initiative. The people of Wyoming, mostly members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, initiated this effort out of respect for the unique events which figure prominently and singularly in the faith of the LDS Church. It is my understanding that more than 6,000 residents of Wyoming have signed a petition supporting this bill and members of the Wyoming State Legislature have also expressed their support. During the May 4 field hearing, Kit Kimball of the U.S. Department of the Interior testified that the Department supports the goals of H.R. 4103. The Interior Department also made some constructive suggestions on how to improve the provisions of the bill and these matters have been seriously considered. Madam Speaker, I am an original cosponsor of H.R. 4103 and I also want the record to reflect that I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As you may be aware, the leaders of the LDS Church have expressed an interest to purchase Federal land known as Martin's Cove because of a tragedy that took place some 146 years ago. My understanding is that two handcart companies--the Willie and Martin companies--were composed of almost a thousand members of the LDS Church who immigrated from England and Holland. These people were not familiar with the harsh winters of the Midwest and were attempting to reach Salt Lake City, Utah by means of pulling specially made handcarts across the plains because most were poor and could not afford to purchase covered wagons and teams of oxen. In October of 1856, these immigrants were caught in an early winter storm without sufficient food and clothing. Despite heroic efforts by LSD Church members and leaders who sent teams from Salt Lake City to locate and assist the two companies, over 200 men, women and children died as a result of freezing temperatures and starvation. Many of those who perished near Martin's Cove were wrapped in blankets, placed in piles, and covered in snow because the ground was so frozen graves could not be dug. History now marks this event as one of the most tragic of 19th century westward expansion. From the perspective of any thoughtful person, Martin's Cove is sacred ground, or a burial place of historical and religious significance. Despite its recognized historical significance, the Federal Government has done little to facilitate public access to the site. It is my understanding that no access, highway notification, or facilities were available to the public until the LDS Church, in cooperation with the Sun family, purchased fee simple lands adjoining Martin's Cove in 1996. Since 1996, the investment, construction and operation of facilities necessary and essential to accommodate the public on fee simple lands near Martin's Cove has been provided by the LDS Church with trail development at the Cove provided by the BLM with the assistance of volunteers from the Church. It is unfortunate that some in the media have purposely chosen to malign the LDS Church because of its efforts to acquire Martin's Cove. I take issue with those who consistently refer to Martin's Cove as a National Historic Site. I believe those who continue to use this terminology are either misinformed or intentionally desire to mislead the public by suggesting that this bill would circumvent national policy or set historical precedent if the LDS Church acquired this land. The fact of the matter is there are only 118 National Historic Sites in the United States of America and Martin's Cove is not one of them. Martin's Cove is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. In contrast to National Historic Sites, there are more than 74,000 places listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Time and time again the Federal Government has conveyed lands listed on the National Register of Historic Places to private entities. The LDS Church is simply asking for fair and equitable consideration. A question has also been raised about setting a precedent for American Indians to purchase Federal lands for religious purposes. The fact is Congress already has passed several pieces of legislation which transferred Federal lands to certain Native American Indian tribes because of the significant and religious significance of those lands to the tribes. Congress has also previously authorized the sale of public land to the Wesleyan church in 1985. A similar sale of Federal land to the Catholic church was authorized in 1988. I might also add that Federal dollars were used to establish the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC, and rightfully so. This museum is a beautiful memorial to a people who have suffered cruelties beyond all comparison. I submit, Madam Speaker, it is not unprecedented for the LDS Church to seek to honor and give special recognition to those of its membership who suffered and died at Martin's Cove. Martin's Cove holds special meaning to the LDS Church and its members because of those who lost their lives as they sought to escape religious persecution, bigotry and intolerance. Despite good-faith efforts by both the BLM and the LDS Church to reach agreement on this matter through the transfer or exchange of lands, these options have apparently not been possible under the circumstances. We are now deliberating a third possible option, and that is a fee simple purchase of this land. I believe it is only appropriate that Congress support the sale of this land to the LDS Church and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.