Niki Tsongas

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. H.R. 2880 is a simple piece of legislation that has broad bipartisan support. The bill will accomplish two primary goals: to redesignate the Martin Luther King, Junior, National Historic Site in Atlanta, Georgia, as a National Historical Park, and to adjust the boundary of the park to include the Prince Hall Masonic Temple. These actions will enhance the ability of the National Park Service and the community to tell the very important story of Dr. King. The site, which is the final resting place of the great civil rights leader, continues to connect visitors with the historical and contemporary struggles for civil rights in this country. These stories are as relevant today as they were half a century ago. This legislation will provide the site with the proper acknowledgment that it deserves. I want to thank Congressman Lewis, who remains an important civil rights leader, for bringing this important bill forward. I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis).

Ms. TSONGAS. I yield the gentlewoman an additional 2 minutes.

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

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this bill simply extends the authorization of the Gullah/Geechee Cultural Heritage Corridor Commission from 10 to 15 years. Congress designated the Gullah/Geechee Heritage Corridor in 2006 to promote and interpret the story of African Americans known as Gullah/ Geechee who settled along the coast of North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. The enabling legislation for the corridor, while providing a 15-year authority for technical and financial assistance, only gave the identified local coordinating entity a 10-year authorization. This bill matches up the two authorities so the Commission can continue its work. I want to thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn) for bringing this issue to our attention and all of his work on behalf of the Gullah/Geechee Heritage Corridor. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), my distinguished colleague.

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

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this bill authorizes the construction of a Wall of Remembrance at the Korean War Veterans Memorial on the National Mall. Similar to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, the Wall will list the names of the U.S. military personnel killed in action during the Korean war, along with the number of servicemen and -women wounded in action, listed as missing in action, and those who were listed as prisoners of war. Construction of the current Korean War Veterans Memorial was finished in 1992, and it is considered a complete work of civic art. However, the Korean war veterans' community has identified the addition of a Wall of Remembrance as a priority, and they have advocated for legislation to authorize its construction for years. Their hard work and dedication has led to this bill before us today, which is currently cosponsored by 291 Members of the House. The National Park Service, the agency responsible for the management of the current memorial, has expressed concern with the idea of adding a new feature in an area of the National Mall known as the Reserve, where Congress has prohibited the construction of new memorials. As this bill moves forward, I encourage the sponsors to work with the National Park Service and other relevant stakeholders to make sure that the new feature complements the current memorial. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), a distinguished veteran of the Korean war.

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

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 812 will take an important step in fulfilling our fiduciary responsibility to Indian tribes by modernizing the Indian trust asset management system. The Indian Trust Asset Reform Act will streamline the bureaucratic process that has often been a hindrance to successful trust management, while also rightfully giving tribes the options to manage their own assets. Through the trust asset demonstration project created in the bill, tribes can, at their own election, develop asset management plans with the Secretary of the Interior in order to better manage and develop their lands and natural resources. As has been shown time and time again, tribal governments are the ones best suited to make decisions for their own people and their own communities. Additionally, while the Office of the Special Trustee, or OST, has implemented positive reforms since its creation in 1994, the time has come to transition to a more modern, efficient, and accountable system for the management of Indian trust resources. To that end, H.R. 812 would consolidate the functions of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the OST into one office within the Department of the Interior, headed by a new undersecretary of Indian Affairs. Mr. Speaker, we fully support H.R. 812, and I urge its swift adoption. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Heck).

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

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This bill adjusts the boundary of the Kennesaw Mountain National Battlefield Park in Georgia to include two historically significant structures, the Wallace House and Kolb's Farm, and to assist in the preservation of the story of the Atlanta Campaign. Between June 19 and July 2, 1864, a series of battles occurred here between Union and Confederate forces. The loss of Kennesaw Mountain removed one of the last major geographic obstacles protecting Atlanta, which eventually fell to the Union Army in September of 1864. The bill will allow for the donation of approximately 8 acres to Kennesaw National Battlefield Park, a unit of the National Park Service. I want to thank my colleague from Georgia, Representative Barry Loudermilk, for continuing to support the preservation of the history of this great country. The Civil War was a significant event in the history of this country and remains relevant as we grapple with civil rights discussions today. The preservation of these sites reinforces Congress' dedication to equality and enables the National Park Service to interpret and tell our national story. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This bill amends the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area Improvement Act to extend the authorization of a waiver for certain commercial traffic on U.S. Route 209, a federally owned highway that runs through the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. When Congress decided to restrict commercial traffic on the portion of the highway that runs through the recreation area, the law included an exemption for certain vehicles that belong to nearby businesses and municipal governments. This bill provides a 5-year extension of that exemption in order to facilitate continued access for local residents. It is supported by the National Park Service, and I urge my colleagues to support its adoption. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Ms. TSONGAS

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Frankel), my colleague.

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. H.R. 2130, the Red River Private Property Protection Act, sponsored by Representative Thornberry of Texas, aims to resolve a series of property disputes along a 116-mile stretch of the Red River, which forms a portion of the boundary between Texas and Oklahoma. While this legislation may seem like an issue with only local or regional interests, it speaks to broader policy issues on our Nation's public lands, lands which belong to all Americans. I am sympathetic to the concerns of Mr. Thornberry and his constituents. Landowners in the area, some of whom have lived there for generations, deserve clarification on the amount of land owned by the Federal Government and the location of the boundary between Texas and Oklahoma. However, as written, I am concerned that this legislation undermines the authority of the Federal Government, and potentially jeopardizes longstanding mineral revenue distribution agreements with the State of Oklahoma and certain Native American tribes. Federal interest in land along the Red River goes back to the Louisiana Purchase. More than 200 years later, after several treaties and compacts, there is still confusion about the amount of land owned by the Federal Government and the location of the boundary between Texas and Oklahoma. The majority rightly cites a 1926 Supreme Court case that established the gradient boundary method as the means of determining the boundary between the two States, Texas and Oklahoma. Under this decision, which has been adhered to for nearly a century, the boundary of Oklahoma extends to the center of the river, and the Texas boundary extends to the ordinary high water mark on the south bank. All the land in between was retained in Federal ownership. The Supreme Court ruling established the boundary between the States, but it did not change the ownership status of any land, and the Federal Government has had a continual interest in land along the Red River. To complicate matters even further, the area has a long history of oil and gas development and includes several tribal interests. The Bureau of Land Management, the Federal Government's ``Surveyor of Record,'' is in the process of updating its management plan for the area, which includes surveying all of the land in question, in order to determine the extent of the remaining Federal interest and clarify ownership claims. There are many overlapping claims, missing and unreliable records, and even competing claims from both Texas and Oklahoma over the same pieces of property, so the BLM is poring through county GIS data to sort out who owns what and where. This survey is not a land grab by the Federal Government. It is a long, but necessary, process that BLM must work through to validate ownership claims. In fact, BLM wants to limit Federal interest in the region. But it has to be allowed to survey the area first. There are an estimated 30,000 acres of Federal land in the affected area, 23,000 of which are potentially overlaid by private deeds. Without the survey, the agency will have no legal way to give a clear title to land claimed by a private interest or determine what Federal land is suitable for sale. Unfortunately, H.R. 2130 halts the survey process, nullifies all previous BLM surveys, and transfers survey authority to the Texas General Land Office. The bill also requires the Secretary of the Interior to forfeit any right, title, and interest to land in the affected area. Taking away BLM's survey authority and putting the Texas General Land Office in control of the survey would effectively make a large portion of the estimated Federal landholdings disappear. The result is unfair to American taxpayers, who deserve fair compensation for their assets. H.R. 2130 could also jeopardize a longstanding agreement between the Federal Government and the Kiowa, Apache, and Comanche tribes. These tribes receive 62.5 percent of any royalty generated for oil and gas development along this section of the Red River. If part of this land no longer belongs to the Federal Government, this important source of revenue relied on by the tribes could also vanish. Yesterday, the Natural Resources Committee received a letter from the Kiowa-Comanche Intertribal Land Use Committee that outlined serious concerns with the bill, as introduced. We were unable to hear about these concerns until now, because we have not had a hearing on this bill in this Congress. Representative Cole has offered an amendment to address the concerns of these tribes. His amendment will ensure that the mineral and surface interests held by tribes are not diminished by this bill. The Cole amendment makes significant improvements to the bill, and I am glad the Rules Committee made it in order. Adoption of the Cole amendment, however, does not address all of our concerns or remove our fundamental opposition to the bill. I want to reiterate, we would all like to see the property dispute resolved in a way that benefits all parties and provides much-needed clarification for local landowners and tribes. However, instead of ceding Federal authority to a State, Congress should allow BLM to complete its work. I urge my colleagues to reject H.R. 2130. Before I reserve my time, I want to note that, as we approach the end of the year, there are critical issues that we have yet to address. Funding the Federal Government, extending tax breaks and, yes, addressing the scourge of gun violence in this country are just a few that deserve our urgent attention, instead of debating this bill, which the President will likely veto. For example, Representative King's bill, H.R. 1076, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act is a bipartisan and commonsense bill that would make our communities safer. Since 2004, for 11 years now, more than 2,000 FBI-identified suspected terrorists have legally purchased weapons in the United States. This is an alarming figure. That is why I am a cosponsor of Republican Congressman Peter King's bill, which would prevent people who are linked to terrorist activities from buying a gun, a commonsense bill that has support from both Republicans and Democrats, and would protect our communities. It is pretty simple. If the Federal Government doesn't allow you to board an airplane, it shouldn't allow you to buy a gun. I have joined my colleagues in filing a discharge petition to force a vote on this bill after House Republicans have repeatedly voted to prevent the House from even debating Congressman King's bill. We should be doing everything we can to keep deadly weapons out of the hands of suspected terrorists. It is just common sense to allow a vote on this. I urge the Republican leadership to allow on vote on this bill. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin). (Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham), my colleague.

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I would like to address an issue that has been addressed in the course of our conversations. The majority continues to claim that the Federal Government does not and has never had any legal claim to the land between the river's median and the south bank, but that claim is inaccurate. This 116-mile stretch of the river originally came into Federal ownership under the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. Treaties between 1819 and 1838 established the south bank of the Red River as the southern border of the United States and the northern border of what is now the State of Texas. In 1867, the land north of the river became part of the Kiowa-Comanche-Apache Reservation, with the medial line of the river denoting the reservation's southern boundary. All land between the medial line and the southern bank of the Red River was retained--not acquired--by the Federal Government as public land. The land between the medial line and the south bank has never been owned by anyone other than the Federal Government. The Supreme Court decision in the 1920s never ceded ownership of the public land to either State but simply adopted a new methodology and terminology for determining where the southern bank of the Red River, still the border between Texas and Oklahoma, lies. Although litigation in the 1980s, resulting from natural changes in the river's location, attempted to settle private landowners' acreage disputes, these agreements had no effect on Federal land ownership. Likewise, while the Red River Compact changed the boundary between the States by switching from applying the gradient line measurement to using the vegetation line, that compact explicitly did not transfer any title or status of land held in the public domain to Texas, Oklahoma, or any private landowner. Any claim that any litigation or agreements over the past 90-plus years have somehow negated Federal ownership of these 30,000 acres simply is not true. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, just to address an issue that my colleague from Texas has brought up, the BLM is trying to resolve the very difference that he suggests and has instituted a survey and would like to continue that process in order to resolve the very issue that he is raising, but it is an issue that should be retained by the Federal Government through the BLM. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.