Ralph Regula

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Unfortunately, the Parks Service has a backlog. As I mentioned earlier, the Senate allocation is higher than the House number. Were the Senate to fund this project, and if other high priority needs for construction are met, then I would certainly give a lot of consideration to supporting increased funding for this project. It is a very important piece of work, and I am very strongly in favor of taking care of it. This is one of our Nation's great cherished monuments.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I understand the gentleman's concerns and I share them. Let me assure him that the committee strongly supports this construction work. As the gentleman knows, this committee has provided more than $40 million over the past several years to take care of the critical maintenance needs of Independence Hall.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to address the gentleman from Pennsylvania's concerns about this important work. And I might add also that if the gentleman saw the chart of backlogged maintenance, this is a classic example of how we have neglected to maintain an extremely valuable resource of this Nation.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Utah [Mr. Hansen], a distinguished member of the Committee on Resources. (Mr. HANSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Washington [Mr. Nethercutt], a very distinguished and productive member of our subcommittee.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, along with what the gentleman said, another point is, here is a 2 by 4. Seven years ago it was 22 cents a foot. Today it is 44 cents a foot. What does that translate into? Two thousand dollars to $3,000 more for a frame house, and that means that young people will have an additional burden when they want to seek that first home, because the forest cut has been so reduced. This saw foot comes out, a lot of it, from our national forests.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I think it is appropriate at this time, I want to read a statement from Secretary Glickman; the Forest Service is in his jurisdiction. It fits in with what the gentleman is saying. A letter from the Secretary to me today says: However, the $41.5 million reduction the amendment proposes goes too far in eliminating important construction and reconstruction efforts that provide public safety and environmental benefits.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, we have had a spirited debate on the rule. I think for those that are watching from the gallery it has to be quite evident, and those that are watching on C-SPAN, that this is a democracy, that each person who is a Member here representing 600,000 people has an opportunity to be heard and present a point of view. But, after we have had these discussions, we go forward. I hope that as we take this bill forward that each Member will look at it on its merits, determine as we deal with the amendments what is in the best interests of the 260 million people we represent. This truly is a quality-of-life bill because much of what we do in this bill touches the lives of Americans, and I want to say at the outset I hope that in our dealing with this legislation that it will have the same great spirit of cooperation that I have had with the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Yates] over the years that we have served on this committee. He has been a partner, as I was to him in the years we have worked together, and he has been a great individual to work with, and, most importantly, to call my friend. And while occasionally we would have a difference, in every instance what we did reflected what we felt was in the best interests of this Nation. This bill represents important accomplishments on a lot of common objectives. Much of what is in here, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Yates] and I have supported not only this year but in years past, and I think on balance, over the years, we have developed legislation that has been productive for this Nation. The bill totals $13.1 billion. It is a few million dollars less than last year. But essentially it goes forward with the programs that are important to the people and that is to enhance the quality of life in these United States. The bill provides significant funding for all the agencies under our jurisdiction, but I think basically we have tried to accomplish a couple of critical objectives. One is to meet a backlog in maintenance. We have had the Secretary of the Interior and Agriculture and the directors of the land management agencies and many others, testify about the enormous backlog of problems that need to be addressed in our parks, in our forests, in our fish and wildlife facilities, in the Bureau of Land Management. Here we see a chart that outlines the enormous maintenance needs. I think it is very important that we make every effort to address that in legislation, and we have done so, and we have done this as a team effort, both with myself and the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Yates]. This includes things like the Smithsonian, $250 million that needs to be spent there for maintenance; the Fish and Wildlife Service, $536 million, and my colleagues can see all the different agencies. But we have done it in a fiscally sound and an environmentally responsible way. Much of this maintenance is important to the protection of the environment in this Nation. For example, in the Everglades we have fully funded the administration's request for the restoration of the Everglades. This is something that is important to all people, and certainly it is a team effort because the State of Florida is making a very strenuous effort. They have financially the help in bringing the Everglades back to what they have been in the past, to be a very important part of our Nation's ecosystem, a very important part of our Nation's environment. We have continued and enhanced the recreation fee demonstration for the land management agencies. This started 2 years ago. Prior to that time, fees that were collected in the Park Service, the forests, the Fish and Wildlife Service, went to the Treasury and consequently there was no incentive to do so. Last year, with the support of this body, we gave authority to the various agencies to collect fees, but the important difference was they got to keep them, and this has been a very successful program. We have had support not only from the agencies, but the public. They like the idea that if they pay a few dollars to enter a park, that the money is going to stay there and not be sent to the U.S. Treasury. The program is working out very well. This year we have added a new change, and that is that fees that were under the old program, collected prior to the inception of the new program, still went to the Treasury. We changed that. So now a hundred percent of what is collected at the agencies like the parks and forests and so on will be kept in that service. Eighty percent will stay right where it is collected, and I think this will help a great deal. For example, in the national parks it is estimated that in 3 years it will amount to $400 million. Now we have encouraged the agencies in the language of the bill to use this money to address some of the maintenance problems that I have outlined here. We began last year an emphasis on forest health because that is important; the suppression of disease, forest fuel reduction, vegetation management, wildlife habitat and watershed improvements. The testimony in our committee was clearly in support of the enhancement of the forest health program, a couple hundred million acres, a vast resource and asset of this Nation, and we have addressed that problem in many ways throughout this bill. Fire management has been given priority. We see it on our televisions, the forest fires, and of course to avoid this problem we have to manage the forests carefully. We have required the Forest Service to operate under a multiple-use mandate. That means forestlands are available for grazing, for mineral exploration. The multiple-use mandate covers, as I mentioned, grazing, mineral exploration. It is an interesting thing that this bill is $13 billion, but the activities that are funded in this bill generate $9 billion in receipts. So we only have a net cost of $4 billion, and those are resources that belong to all the people that are being developed in the mineral exploration, offshore oil, many different sources that are part of producing $9 billion for the Treasury of the United States and for the people. I visited the Angeles National Forest just outside of Los Angeles, and to see families out there, who are in part of a city of something like 20 million people, have an opportunity to recreate outdoors. The kids can see a deer, can see other forms of wildlife, perhaps drop a line in the creek and fish. One of the beauties of the national forests is that they are available for the multiple use, and if my colleagues go to a place like Angeles National Forest, right on the edge of this city, they will realize how important this is. And this is true all across the country; Allegheny National Forest in Pennsylvania and many others that are available for people to use. Now we are going to have an amendment to cut the Forest Service road program. We will talk more about that at the time, but let me say to Members that are listening or watching this, do not be too quick to commit on that. I think there are some very compelling reasons to not vote for this cutting amendment because it goes to our ability to rebuild and maintain existing roads. It is a very important environmental use of these funds. We have been very careful in the way that we have allocated resources to the Forest Service, and the dollars that are there are important for particularly the recreation user. Something like 77 percent of the roads are used for recreation. And when individuals and families go out on these roads, we need to ensure that they are safe, that they are comfortable, that they can get access to the facilities. There are 18,000 different recreational facilities in the national forest, and people need access to those facilities. The bill provides for the construction of very limited new timber roads, less than 2 miles to be exact, not very much. Ninety-five percent of the appropriated construction dollars for roads go for safety, for environmental improvements to existing roads and to close roads. We obliterate, wipe out, more roads than would be built. We are trying to make the roads that are there usable to the public for the many multipurposes. I would point out that the forests have tripled the visitor days of the Park Service, three times as much, because people can participate on a wide variety of activities on forest lands. The forests are a family recreation facility, so a steelworker in Johnstown, PA, can load up the family on his 2 weeks' vacation, go to Allegheny National Forest, know when he follows a road that the bridge is going to be safe, that the road is going to be safe, that his camper is not going to go over the side of the hill and that he is going to enjoy that experience, as 87 million other Americans are doing each year. Mr. Chairman, I hope Members will look at this amendment with caution and carefully consider these points. We have over 121,000 miles of hiking trails in the national forests. Money in the roads budget also maintains those trails so people are safe, so people can enjoy them. Again, I would urge all Members to look carefully before they take away this ability to carefully manage our forests, to provide the recreation user, the people of this Nation, a good experience, before we do something that will inhibit people's ability to use this land, which belongs to all 260 million Americans. Much of the roads budget is for maintenance. We want to ensure that these roads are safe, and things like guardrails are just one example. We recognize that there is a greater interest in maintaining the forest for recreation purposes. Ten years ago, in fact, less than that, in 1990, in this bill, we provided for over 11 billion board feet of timber harvest. The bill today is a little over 3 billion board feet. We have had a reduction of 66 percent, from 11 to 3.8 billion, because we are trying to balance the timber program and other multipurpose uses of these lands. I would also point out, because of the practices, and they started under the leadership of the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Yates] of maintaining forest health, that we are growing each year in the national forest 17 billion board feet. So we have a net gain of 14 billion. We are growing 14 billion more board feet than we are cutting. I think that is good management. That is what we have tried to do. Mr. Chairman, I want to talk a little bit about energy, because right now energy prices are relatively low. I was in Europe not long ago, and when we see prices there of $4 or $5 a gallon, we really appreciate what it is in the United States to be able to pull up to a pump and get gasoline for maybe $1.20 a gallon. But we need to be diligent and vigilant in continuing energy research and in continuing to manage our energy resources wisely. Energy, as I mentioned in the debate on the rule, is vital to a nation. Just think about it. Clothing is just one example. A lot of it comes out of a barrel of oil, but that is a small item. Think about how our industries are impacted. I remember some of the Members were here in the late 1970's when we had petroleum shortages, and how jobs were lost, how schools had to close down. We do not want that to happen again. Therefore, it is important that we manage our energy resources carefully. We fund the research. We do not do this carelessly. Our energy research programs require matching funds from the private sector. If we are going to have a technological development program, we want the private sector to contribute their fair share, because that means that they believe in what we are doing. As a result of this research, we are getting new energy sources. I think, looking down the road, this becomes very important for this Nation. For us to have the kind of growth that will get that deficit down to zero, we have to have available a lot of energy. That means that we need to continue the R&D in our programs. We have an enormous supply of coal. I know there will be some who oppose and we have rescinded, in this bill, $100 million of clean coal money, but we also keep what is required to fulfill our contractual obligations to those who have committed to participate on a 50-50 matching basis, or even a greater private share. The average has been 60 private, 40 public to develop clean coal technology. What does it mean? It means that this technology will be sold not only in the United States but all around the world. We hear a lot about China these days. China today is burning more coal than the United States, and we burn a lot in this country. The electricity that lights this Chamber is coming from a pound of coal or a ton of coal, but in spite of the amount that we use, China is using more coal today than we are. Therefore, as we develop the clean coal technology we can sell this to China, because they are developing also an environmental movement. Likewise I would point out that we have an interest in this, because if they do not develop and use this kind of technology, those emissions are going into the atmosphere and will have an impact on all of us. I think what we are trying to do in this bill, to encourage research in alternate fuels, and the use of coal in a clean burning way, and the Department of Energy tells us that by 2010 we will have technologies that will allow us to burn coal that emits 10 times less sulfur and nitrogen than is allowed under the current law, that is twice as efficient as conventional power plants, and emits less than half as much carbon dioxide. For example, this bill provides for research into low emission boilers. What does that mean? It means that the boilers that will be developed, and this is all in partnership with the private sector, will be far more efficient than the ones we use today in our utility industry. That means we can burn the coal in a clean way, and at the same time have a high degree of efficiency. The programs leverage a lot of support from the private sector. I want to mention a little bit about the Bureau of Indian Affairs. I know this does not have a wide range of interest, but the Bureau of Indian Affairs is vitally important to the over 2 million American Indians. We have a responsibility, a treaty responsibility and a responsibility as a nation that cares, to do what is right by the native Americans. We increase the tribal priority allocation by $76 million over last year. Why is that important? Because this promotes and encourages local control. We are trying to encourage the Indian tribes to become self-sufficient, to develop their own economy, to provide ways in which they help themselves in education, in jobs, and become part of the American dream. So we say to the tribes who manage their own affairs, we are going to give you more money to make your own priority judgments as to what is important to the people that you represent. We have had the debate on the NEA. I do not think we need to talk anymore about that. I would just say to all Members, this is a good bill. We have been very fair in what we have done on projects. We had 2,000 requests from all of the Members, from literally, I suppose, almost every Member, 2,000 different items that were requested by our colleagues to be put in the bill. We have done a lot of these. We have done as many as we could. We have done them on a totally nonpartisan basis. I did not count, but I suspect if we added up the administration's requests plus the requests from our friends in the minority, we have funded more of those than we have on the majority side. We valued projects on their merits and not as to the source of the request. We wanted to make sure that we did what was fair and what was good for this Nation, what was good for the people; trails, for example, in the Continental Divide out in the Western part of the country, and I could go on and on in pointing out some of the very constructive projects that have been funded in this bill that will, again, as I mentioned earlier, enhance the quality of life of the people of this Nation. I hope all Members will take some time to study the bill and understand what we have tried to achieve. We have tried to achieve better management, we have tried to achieve things that will be good for this Nation that make a lot of sense in terms of expending taxpayer dollars. For the record I would like to note two technical corrections to the report as follows: on page 67 and page 74 of the committee report-- House Report 105-163, insert the word ``International'' before ``Arid Lands Consortium'' and on page 37 of the committee report--House Report 105-163, the committee bill funding level in the table for ``cultural programs'' should be $18,699,000 and the language on page 38 of the report for ``Cultural programs'' should say ``The Committee has provided an additional $135,000 for uncontrollable expenses.'' Mr. Chairman, I include for the Record a table detailing the various accounts. The table referred to is as follows: [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH10JY97.000 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH10JY97.001 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH10JY97.002 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH10JY97.003 Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I hope all of my colleagues will vote for the rule. This will allow us to debate a bill of great significance. I think sometimes it ought to be called the enhanced quality of life bill rather than the Interior bill, because everything that we do in this bill literally enhances the quality of life for our people. It is the future. For example, the greatest single source of recreation in this Nation, and it cuts across all spectrums of society, is the national forests, the parks, the fish and wildlife refuges, the BLM lands. These resources are not only a source of recreation, but also a source of education, because many schools take their young people to fish and wildlife facilities, to the national forests, as part of an education process. So that enhances the quality of life for all 260 million Americans. Likewise, this bill deals with our energy future. Just this past week I talked to a young lady in my family, who is 14\1/2\. She cannot wait to get her driver's license. She is looking forward to getting out into the workaday world sometime and owning an automobile. We need to be concerned about energy, because energy means jobs, energy means growth in our economy, energy means a quality of life that people can get in their automobile and travel at a reasonable cost. We are blessed in this Nation with relatively cheap energy. We heard a lot about the tax bill in the recent debate. Of course, energy is very much a part of that, because the key to a balanced budget is growth, growth in the economy. To have growth you have to have energy at a modest cost. It is vital. We spent not only lives but a lot of money in Desert Storm to protect energy sources. This bill supports a lot of research to provide the technologies to assist with meeting our goals of an improved environment and a growing economy as we look forward to the future into the next century. It truly is a bridge to a better quality of life in the century ahead. It also deals with other things. One of the subjects that is under discussion is the National Endowment for the Arts. Mr. Speaker, I would not begin to denigrate the NEA. I think they have done some excellent work. We had a symphony group that went out to the schools in my district. If Members watched the concert on the Mall on July 4 when they ran the tag lines, we noticed there was support by the NEA. I think it was a great thing. PBS said it is the most watched program they have. I could go on with others. But likewise I would point out that perhaps the most graphic piece of artwork in this city is at the Holocaust Museum, what is called Remember the Children. There are the little plates, ceramics, that have incorporated the artwork of children from all across this Nation as to what the Holocaust means to them. That was done without an NEA grant. Let me mention also, if we take the passageway from here to the Cannon Building, we see the artwork from schools across the country. Many of us participate in that arts program. There is no NEA grant, they did it without an NEA grant. What do we do in this bill? We provide that $80 million, that is $100 million that we have provided over each of the last 2 years minus the administrative costs, because we are going to send it back to the communities. We are going to send it back to the State arts agencies. The arts agencies in my State get a budget from the legislature that they increase every year. Why? Because they have had a very successful administration. They actually get three times as much from the Ohio Arts Agency than they do from here. We want to give them some additional help, because they are out there on the ground. Last, it provides for sending money back to the schools, back to the children, where we really teach arts education, where we really teach an appreciation of the cultural heritage of this Nation.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Appropriations may have until midnight Tuesday, July 1, 1997, to file a privileged report on a bill making appropriations for the Department of the Interior and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1998, and for other purposes.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, we are pleased to welcome today Reverend Kummernuss from the Zion Lutheran Church in the 16th District of Ohio, who gave the invocation, a very thoughtful one, I thought. And this is a little bit special because Reverend Kummernuss' son, Matthew, is one of our outstanding pages this session. We are pleased that we could have Reverend Kummernuss here today to join in our opening and also to give him an opportunity to see where his son has spent his past several months. If we have any errands that we need run, just summon him. Since Reverend Kummernuss has the privileges of the floor today, he also has the privilege of asking Matt to do his errands. We are happy that Reverend Kummernuss joined us for today's invocation.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, on September 12, 1996, a former employee of the National Park Service, Theodore R. (Tedd) McCann passed away. Tedd's passing is mourned by his many friends and family, but his legacy lives on and is reflected in many of our Nation's National Parks across the country. Tedd was a park planner, but he was also a poet and an artist. His park plans were touched with his gift of words and his vision. One park that Tedd helped plan and that Congress subsequently established in 1974, is the Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area in northeast Ohio. He began studying the area in 1971. When Tedd was first given the assignment, he was skeptical. The Cuyahoga River was, after all, the river that caught fire in 1969 and was an icon for environmental pollution. Yet later, in Tedd's report back to Interior Secretary Rogers C.B. Morton, he called it ``a green shrouded miracle.'' He saw in the Cuyahoga Valley the potential of being what it has become today, a great urban national park that now serves over 3 million people a year who hike its trails and marvel at its scenery and enjoy its rich history. Tedd also had dreams for a much larger area, one that would extend further down the Ohio & Erie Canal and serve even more people throughout the region. But good things often need to start with smaller steps and he recognized that fact. Fortunately, at the end of the 104th Congress we were able to take that next big step, and establish the Ohio & Erie Canal Heritage Corridor which encompasses the Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area but extends north and south from Cleveland to Zoar Ohio and will truly create a ribbon of wilderness in urbanized northeast Ohio. The heritage corridor is a relatively new concept, which allows for more flexibility in how the area is managed and provides for increased local participation. It is a concept which I believe Tedd would be proud of and the Ohio and Erie Canal Heritage Area will further enhance the ``green-shrouded miracle'' he so aptly described more than 2 decades ago. But Tedd's legacy extends beyond northeast Ohio as he had a hand in many other parks across the country. Because of that and especially for the legacy he left us in Ohio I want to share some of the details of his life. Tedd was born on May 29, 1929, in Jeannette, PA to Lawrence Vernon McCann and Lois Mumma McCann. His family later moved to Pontiac, MI. At the age of 18, Tedd caught a train and went to Chicago to study art. He joined the Air force during the Korean War and was stationed at Langley Air Force Base in Hampton, VA. He later attended the Corcoran Art School in Washington, D.C. and received a degree in art history and painting from George Washington University. He was a graphics designer for the Bureau of Reclamation from 1957 to 1960, and later headed his own house restoration business. In 1963, Tedd joined the National Park Service as art director. He helped put together a graphics and cartography unit in the publications office; it received a gold medal from the First Federal Design Assembly as the best in government. Many of the maps and brochures he designed are still in use. In 1967 Park Service Director George Hartzog set up the Office of Urban Affairs, and Tedd worked on initial plans for the then-proposed Wolf Trap Park, VA; Georgetown Waterfront and Fort Lincoln, Washington, DC; Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore; Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area; and Jefferson National Expansion Memorial, St. Louis, MO. In 1968 in the wake of the riots in Washington, DC, he and designer Russell Wright conceived of and developed the ``Summer in the Parks'' program, which provided cultural and recreation activities in parks throughout the region and became the model for similar programs throughout the Nation. Tedd's park planning days began in 1969, when he served on the planning team that came up with the plan and legislation to establish the Gateway National Recreation Area in New York/New Jersey. He subsequently served as head of planning for other new urban national parks, including the Golden Gate National Recreation Area in San Francisco and of course, the Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area between Akron and Cleveland, OH. He also did the early studies of the Lowell National Historic Park, MA; Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area, Atlanta; Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, near Los Angeles; and Ellis Island and Statue of Liberty, NY. He conducted a study of President Roosevelt's summer home in Warm Springs, GA and a study of the Rockefeller estate in Pocantico Hills, NY. He also led a study of potential African-American historic sites throughout the country, several of which including the Maggie Walker home in Richmond, VA, Congress subsequently included in the National Park System. As his last project before retiring in 1984, he served on the management planning team for the Women's Rights National Historical Park, Seneca Falls, NY. Tedd lived with his wife Loretta Neumann in Washington, DC. Tedd was one of the founders of Plan Takoma, a neighborhood organization for which he helped develop a comprehensive plan for the area surrounding the proposed Metrorail station. He was also active in Neighbors Inc. He was one of the founders in the late 1970s of the Takoma Park Folk Festival, and for many years was a member of its coordinating committee. He was for many years treasurer of the Committee of 100 on the Federal City and Takoma Park Horticultural Club. Tedd's first marriage was to Marilyn Hudson, with whom he had three children: Christopher, Carol Lynn, and Clair (Behrens). He has one grandson, Charles Behrens. He also has a sister, Patricia (Rososky), and brother, Lawrence. Just over a week ago, I participated in a ceremony to mark the reopening and completion of the renovation of the historic ``Boston Store'' in the Cuyahoga Valley. It was a great day and all of us who were present including John Seiberling, the author of the legislation creating the Cuyahoga Valley noted how bi-partisan the creation and continued operation of the park has been. The ``green-shrouded miracle'' Tedd knew would one day be a park has brought much joy to millions in our region of the country and his vision has left an indelible mark throughout the country.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, it is truly a bill with magic in it because of the magic of our national treasures and what it does for the lives of people, the magic of going to a national park, the magic of taking your children to the national zoo where they will for the first time be given an opportunity to see the wildlife that is part of our ecological heritage. Truly it is magic, and we have tried to protect those treasures in this bill. We have given the parks $70 million more for operations. We have provided more money for maintenance in the bill. We have provided for the Indians because they are part of the magic, too. They were the original people in this Nation. We have treaty obligations to our Native Americans for education and health. We enjoy much of what is part of our national heritage with the Native Americans. We have increased by $123 million the dollars that they will receive. We have put in money for fire suppression, for the hurricane damage, for terrorism. One of the less than magic parts of the bill is that we have to recognize on reality in terms of terrorism. But overall, and I think this is a little bit of magic in this, we are appropriating $1.3 billion less than we appropriated for the same bill in 1995. This in spite of inflation, in spite of new responsibilities we have $1.3 billion in savings. And that is a little bit of magic for our children because that means they will have less to pay in terms of debts and deficits. So I think it is a good bill with some innovative initiatives. We are putting money in a habitat conservation program in California that I think will be a model for the Nation. In this program they look at the economic as well as the ecological values and they work it out so that we can do both. And that is the magic of more jobs while at the same time preserving the quality of life. A provision for fees, also 4 million in a clean streams initiative. This is a good bill.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. We all know the words to the song, I am proud to be an American, that Lee Greenwood's sings so eloquently. Today, I am proud to be a Member of this body and proud to be an American. We have put aside our differences, our partisan parties. We worked with the White House, we developed a team effort to do something good for America. I speak to in our case the heritage corridor. Young men and women, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, 4-H Club kids, college kids will be able to walk a canal corridor 87 miles, long that is rich in history. Ohio was built by the canals. They will learn the story of yesterday's turnpikes. They will learn the story of the ecological development of our State because they will follow a river, they will follow the towpath of the canal. What a wonderful opportunity this will be for young people to appreciate their heritage as young citizens of Ohio. It will happen because of what is being done today in this body and being done on a bipartisan basis with everybody being on the team. I am grateful to all who had a part in shaping this legislation, and I hope that it gets very strong support by all the Members. A great gift today for Americans in so many different ways.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I move to reconsider the vote. motion to table offered by mr. hansen

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. REGULA. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I just want to echo the comments of my colleagues. I have served with Jim on the Committee on Appropriations. What I appreciate about his approach is that it is very businesslike. He takes the challenge of stretching a dollar to give the people of this Nation responsible government. Jim is the epitome of what a good legislator should be. Certainly his record in the Committee on Appropriations stands as a challenge to all of us to manage the Nation's affairs well on behalf of the people we represent. I along with my colleagues wish him well in his new ventures.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation. Each year on the Interior appropriations bill we spend millions and millions of dollars on memorials that are visited by people. How far better to spend the money on a living memorial where young leaders, potential leaders, will have an opportunity to learn and share insights with President Bush and First Lady Barbara Bush who have both served this Nation so well. George Bush stands for all that is good in America: A patriot, military service for his country with valor, a man of compassion and courage. As a matter of fact, as a young Congressman, he had the courage to vote for fair housing when it was not popular. I urge every one of my colleagues to vote for this bill.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, the Associated Press on July 30 of this year quoted Secretary of the Interior Babbitt as follows: There are a lot of people, like Congressman Bunn, who want to shut down the national park system, dissolve the national forest lands, and convey away all the public land. I just want to say for the record that the gentleman from Oregon, Congressman Bunn, serves with me on the subcommittee on appropriations responsible for funding national parks, for funding national forests, and for funding Federal public lands. The facts are as follows: Congressman Bunn has supported, as a member of this subcommittee, increased funding for all of these functions: parks, forests, and public lands. At no time has he suggested that we close parks or that we dissolve national forest lands into private ownership, or that we convey away the public lands owned by the people of this Nation. Statements such as the one made by Secretary Babbitt do a great disservice to truth and facts. Congressman Bunn deserves an apology.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. I thank the gentleman for his comments. He is absolutely right. The parks belong to all the people to be enjoyed by all of the people. We are taking care of them. There is no excuse for them not to be open I might mention that we put additional funding in on the maintenance. We recognize, as the gentleman pointed out, that we have neglected maintenance in the parks, and we have beefed up the funding for the maintenance programs as well as the operations. So I want to say to the public: Do not be afraid. The parks will be open if they are managed well for all of America to enjoy.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, a special issue of the Wilderness Society's magazine is devoted to Problems and Prospects in the National Parks. The cover of Newsweek reads: ``Can We Save Our Parks?'' A report to the director of the National Park Service, National Parks for the 21st Century: The Vail Agenda, concludes that the agency is ``beset by controversy, concern, weakened morale, and declining effectiveness.'' The national and local media have been replete with these horror stories in recent months, but these particular stories were written in 1983, 1986 and 1991 respectively. In short, the problems currently facing the National Park System did not begin the day a Republican majority took over Congress, as some would like to believe. Unfortunately as the election grows closer, the rhetoric surrounding the national parks intensifies. This campaign of misinformation is not only counterproductive but unfair to the potential visiting public, our constituents, who in effect own these national treasures. The facts do not support the fear mongering. The National Parks need not close their doors this summer because of a lack of funds. In fact, this year's operating budget for the National Park Service increased and Congress initiated a new 3-year fee demonstration program which took effect earlier this year and allows participating parks to keep 80 percent of new fees collected. Why then is the Park Service crying wolf? For the second year in a row the National Park Service's operating budget will increase. In fiscal year 1997 under both the House and Senate passed budgets every National Park System unit will get an increase in their operating budget. Additional increases have also been recommended to address a critical and growing maintenance backlog in the system. These increases have been offset in part by slowing the growth in new facilities and acreage to help get the Park Service back on their feet and on a path to live within their means. Operational shortfalls and a backlog of unmet maintenance needs have been perennial problems for the parks. This situation has been exacerbated by the failure of previous Congresses to institute fee and concession reform and by the addition of new units and the expansion of existing sites. In the last decade alone, 36 units and 3.7 million acres were added to the National Park System by previous Congresses. In 1912 the fee for Yosemite National Park was $5 per vehicle. That same bargain rate is available at Yosemite today and at other crown jewels as well. Currently fees collected in the parks do not stay with the park, but rather they are returned to the Treasury. While permanent, comprehensive fee reform is still needed, this Congress has taken one important step by initiating a pilot program to expand and reform the fee collection program and allow the parks, not the Treasury, to be the beneficiary. We have given the Park Service a potentially invaluable tool to help themselves. It is now up to them to reap the full benefits. The problems of the National Park Service are complex and longstanding. As these problems did not develop over night, neither will the solutions be immediate. Politicizing the parks, however, only serves to heighten tensions and does nothing to solve the real problems. For those of us who truly care about the health and well- being of our National Park System our mission should not be about placing blame for the situation facing the National Parks, but about working together to find creative solutions to the problems. We have provided short-term funds and outlined a long-term strategy to accomplish the goals we all share, a National Park System which is truly the crown jewel of our Nation. While the Park Service faces challenges it also has many opportunities and tools at its disposal to meet them. Those of us who share the responsibility for shaping the future of the National Park Service--Congress, the administration, employees of the Park Service, and the parks' many outside partners-- must work together to ensure that its future is as distinguished as its past. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Kasich].

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I would commend the chairman and the ranking member. They have done an excellent job of working with some very important aspects of our Government responsibility. The matter of crime and rising use of drugs among young people has been recognized in the committee bill and in the increase of $1.6 billion for the Justice Department activities. Likewise antidrug programs, a serious problem, and we have tried to recognize that need by some additional initiatives on antidrug programs, including a $75 million increase for that type of program. Illegal aliens: We have increased the funding to speed up the deportation of illegal aliens that have been apprehended. It provides significant funding for grants to State and local governments. I think we should recognize that the States and local governments are often the incubators of good ideas. And so we try to give them a little more opportunity to be innovative in their programs so that we can develop ideas that work well for others. For example, in Ohio the attorney general has recently developed a new program that would identify and provide accelerated delinquency intervention services to high-risk youth who attend a middle school or junior high school. It is called Ohio's accelerated school based intervention solution. The subcommittee urges the Justice Department to carefully review this innovative early intervention approach when it disburses juvenile justice grants. That is just one example of trying to get to the problems with young people before they develop into much larger difficulties. As chairman of the Steel Caucus, I am pleased to note that we recognize the importance of promoting U.S. exports abroad and enforcing our U.S. trade laws. Therefore, we provided a modest $7 million increase for the International Trade Administration. That may provide the assistance that is needed in ensuring that we do not have dumping or countervailing and the enforcement of our antidumping and countervailing duties laws. Mr. Chairman, I certainly urge the support of the bill. I think it recognizes a lot of important policies and funds them adequately.