Greg Walden

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Concurrent Resolution 434. This legislation commends the heroic men and women who fought fires during this 2000 wildfire season. It was the worst fire season in 50 years. Mr. Speaker, this legislation also mourns the tragic loss of 16 firefighters who lost their lives while protecting others. The 2000 wildfire season in the United States was the largest and most severe in the last 50 years and consisted of more than 85,000 wildfires. More than 7 million acres of public lands and adjacent State and private lands were subjected to these wildfires. More than 30,000 professional and volunteer fire fighters risked their lives to participate in fighting and controlling these wildfires. In spite of the rugged terrain and the intense speed and the size of the year 2000 wildfires, the fire-fighter crews managed to limit property losses to just 852 structures. It could have been so much worse. Mr. Speaker, if not for these fire fighters, the loss of lives and property could have been far more extensive than it was. So let this United States House of Representatives honor those fire fighters who tragically lost their lives and those who stood on the lines to protect others by passing House Concurrent Resolution 434 today.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in reluctant opposition to this bill. I am a staunch supporter of numerous provisions in this legislation, and have a solid voting record in support of many of these provisions in past measures. However, because language was tucked into this bill at the last minute that would overturn Oregon's assisted suicide law, I have no choice but to vote against it. I gave people my word that I would not come back to Congress and vote to overturn what they have twice voted for. And as much as I strongly support the tax relief and health care language in this legislation, I cannot swallow the poison pill provision that would overturn Oregon's law. Where I come from, a person's word still means something and I intend to keep mine. This legislation contains solid small business tax reductions, pension reform, and help for rural communities for health care improvements. I enthusiastically support these items and was fully prepared to vote for them. As a small business owner, and having served five years on a community hospital board, I understand the problems facing our communities and believe these provisions would be of great benefit to them. But to vote for them would mean I would also vote in a way that was against what I had promised. That's something I just cannot and will not do. The provision to overturn Oregon's law only came to light shortly before the House began debating this bill. It was a complete and unwelcome surprise. And it has no business being tacked onto an otherwise sound piece of tax reform and Medicare enhancement legislation.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong support of S. 2425, the Bend Feed Canal Pipeline Project Act of 2000. This bill was sponsored in the Senate by my good friend, Senator Smith of Oregon, and I sponsored the companion legislation in the House. S. 2425 would authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to participate in the planning, design, and construction of the Bend Feed Canal Pipeline Project in Oregon. The Bend Feed Canal is built on pumice and other porous volcanic rock. Because of the porous rock, over 20 cubic feet per second of water is lost over the length of the Bend Feed Canal. This loss causes the Tumalo Irrigation District (District) to use all available water, and in drought years even that is not enough to supply the needs of its irrigators. The existing Bend Feed Canal has several segments currently piped. This creates a dangerous situation as a person falling into an open section of the canal will soon find themselves approaching a piped section which would mean almost certain death. Although the beginning of each piped section has a trash rack, with the urbanization of Bend and the development around the Bend Feed Canal, the risk to small children is great. This legislation will allow the District to replace six segments of open canal with pipeline. In addition to the water conservation benefits, once the project is complete the District will have increased system reliability and the customers in the area will have fewer safety concerns. This is a very important step for a once largely rural community that is experiencing rapid growth. The Bend Feed Canal Pipeline Project Act of 2000 is supported by the Tumalo Irrigation District and the Oregon Water Resources Congress. The District would pay 50% of the costs of the project. The total cost of the project is expected to be approximately $4 million. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support S. 2425. It is a good bill for the irrigators and it is good bill for the Bend community.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer my strong support for S. 2882, the Klamath Basin Water Supply Enhancement Act of 2000. This bill was sponsored in the Senate by Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon, and I sponsored the companion bill on the House side with my good friend Wally Herger of California. I would like to thank Chairman Young of the Resources Committee and Chairman Doolittle of the Water and Power Subcommittee for helping bring this bill to the floor. The Klamath Project in Oregon and California was one of the earliest federal reclamation projects. The Secretary of the Interior authorized development of the project on May 15, 1905, under provisions of the Reclamation Act of 1902. The project irrigates over 200,000 acres of farmland in south-central Oregon and north-central California. The two main sources of water for the project are Upper Klamath Lake and the Klamath River, as well as Clear Lake Reservoir, Gerber Reservoir, and Lost River, which are located in a closed basin. The total drainage area is approximately 5,700 square miles. The Klamath River is subject to an interstate compact between the States of Oregon and California. There are also several wildlife refuges in the basin that are an important part of the western flyway. There are suckers in Upper Klamath Lake on the Endangered Species List that require the lake to be maintained at certain levels throughout the summer. There are also salmon in the Klamath River for which federal agencies are seeking additional flow. It is my understanding that there will be significant additional flow requirements next year. S. 2882, as amended by the Senate, would authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to conduct feasibility studies to determine what steps can be taken to meet the growing water needs in the Klamath River Basin (Basin) of Oregon and California. The outcome of these studies will help to determine the future water use of the residents and wildlife that surround this area. It will simply evaluate the feasibility of increasing the storage capacity, and/or the yield of the Klamath Project facilities while improving water quality, consistent with the protection of fish and wildlife. It is important to note that there were severe shortages of water in the Basin this year. However, this was not a drought year. The shortages are symptoms of a much larger problem in the Basin. If a solution is not found soon, a drought could have devastating effects on farmers in the area and on the wildlife that depends upon certain flow levels. S. 2882 is an extremely important bill to people of the Klamath Basin. I support this measure and urge its immediate passage.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 151) to make a correction in the enrollment of the bill, H.R. 2348, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that in the engrossment of the bill (H.R. 5308) to amend laws relating to the lands of the citizens of the Muscogee (Creek), Seminole, Cherokee, Chickasaw and Choctaw Nations, historically referred to as the Five Civilized Tribes, and for other purposes, the Clerk be authorized to make the following correction that I have placed at the desk.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when proceedings resume on the unfinished business of the motion to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 964) to provide for equitable compensation for the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, and for other purposes, as amended, that the amendment be deemed to include the corrections that I have placed at the desk.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert) and the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Udall) for their help in this legislation. Certainly my colleague from Oregon, Senator Wyden, who with Senator Smith and I, have teamed up on this legislation to make it a bipartisan effort to transfer this land, allow it to be transferred, to surplus property over to the City of Bend who will have the first right of refusal on the Bend Pine Nursery. The city in turn will turn this wonderful open space, an extraordinary piece of land, into something for all time for parks and ball fields for children and for families. So it is an excellent conveyance. It follows all the rules and all the laws of the Federal Government, and in addition it is a bonus for the taxpayers because the Deschutes National Forest now pays something on the order of $750,000 a year in leases for their current buildings; and a new headquarters will be built out of the proceeds of these funds so the taxpayers will save this lease payment every year. So it is a win for the taxpayers. It is a win for the children and families of Bend, and it is certainly a win for the Federal Government.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I would like to share with my colleagues two letters I received concerning the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Act of 2000 (H.R. 4828) that was debated on the House Floor on October 4, 2000. House Resolution 4828 was supported by the entire Oregon congressional delegation and is the product of a long and hard-fought battle to ensure that there was an Oregon solution to an Oregon issue. I submit the following letters into the Congressional Record. The Wilderness Society's Wilderness Support Center Dear Congressman Walden: Although this bill does not contain everything we wanted, we believe that this is a responsible resolution of a very important issue. This bill will grant lasting protection for the wildlands, wildlife, and waters of the magnificent Steens Mountain region. We support its passage today. Bart Koehler, Director.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from California for yielding me the time. Madam Speaker, this is, indeed, another example of getting things done, getting things done for fish, getting things done for farmers in the Northwest. As my colleagues know, our salmon runs face tremendous challenges there, the wild salmon runs do, and our farmers are under incredible pressure. This is one of those bills that is a win-win for both sides, because we are going to be installing fish screens that will help divert the salmon around these irrigation projects and help them on their way out to sea. We are going to help our farmers improve their water flows and protect their way of life as well. H.R. 1444 is to encourage irrigators to protect the Northwest endangered fish species. The bill aims to decrease fish mortality rates by constructing fish screens to prevent the juvenile salmon from swimming into water diversion projects. There is a local share that has to be involved here. Participation in the program is voluntary, and a local share of 35 percent of the costs of the project is required. This is one of those pieces of legislation that is actually a helping hand from the Federal Government in a true partnership with the local irrigation districts. The Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service in consultation with the Army Corps and the Bureau of Reclamation will be responsible for administering the program. And the legislation is supported by many conservation recreation and water user groups, including the Oregon Water Resources Congress; Save Our Wild Salmon, a coalition of sport and fishing groups, fishing businesses and conservation organizations; along with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleagues Senator Smith and Senator Wyden and certainly the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) for his leadership in getting this legislation to this point, and the committee and the staff and the leadership for scheduling for a vote today. Madam Speaker, this will do good things for fish. This will do good things for farmers. I am delighted that, in the bipartisan spirit of this body, we are going to get in passed into law.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I thank both the chairman and the subcommittee chairman for their work in bringing this measure forward; and to my colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Peterson), I thank him for his tireless efforts in trying to seek Mr. Pope's release. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge support for H. Con. Res. 404 and make clear our message to the Russian Government. Edmund Pope must be released from prison, and he must be released immediately. Mr. Pope's deteriorating health simply will not wait for the Russian Government to accept what we in this country have long known: that Ed does not deserve his imprisonment and that the Russian Government cannot justify holding him one day longer. For 191 days, Ed Pope has been denied his freedom. For 191 days, he has been denied regular contact with his wife of 30 years and his children. And for 191 days, he has been denied access to basic medical care, despite grave threats to his health. In an age when the access to adequate shelter and medical care is correctly viewed as humanity at its most fundamental level, Ed has been forced to endure deprivations that are downright abysmal. The prison where Mr. Pope is being held is a grim reminder of a system of government that for too long has subordinated human rights. Ed Pope's harsh imprisonment illustrates Russia's continued hostility to the West, despite its repeated assurances that Russia wants to join the ranks of the world's civilized nations. I am dismayed by President Putin's squandering of an opportunity to demonstrate to the nations of the world that a new Russia has indeed risen from the ashes of the old Soviet Union, a nation that values human rights and the rule of international law. But until Mr. Pope is released and the judicial system in Russia improves, this transformation will be incomplete. If the question of Mr. Pope's guilt or innocence is to be debated, it must only be after he is allowed access to the medical care his condition demands. With the release of Ed Pope, President Putin can demonstrate that he is serious about eliminating the distrust and hesitation that has characterized U.S. and Russian relations for decades. Or he can continue to prolong Ed's unjust captivity and reinforce the negative image of Russia, that of a secretive, enigmatic state whose journey to first world status remains long. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for H.Con.Res. 404 and declare in no uncertain terms that the United States does not tolerate the treatment of its citizens in this manner.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I want to commend the gentleman from Virginia and the gentleman from Texas, as well as my colleagues from Oregon, in putting together this very important legislation that will help our school children and our counties who have been hurt tremendously by changes in Federal policy. Since 1908, rural counties adjacent to Forest Service and BLM forest lands have received Federal funds for schools and roads based on the revenue received from land management activities. Over the last decade, as a result of sharp declines in revenues from these Federal forest lands, many of these counties have been unable to fund essential programs for their kids and to take care of their road maintenance and infrastructure. Mr. Speaker, this legislation goes a long way toward resolving that problem and toward making the Federal Government a better neighbor and certainly a better partner in the health of our communities in rural America. I urge passage of this legislation.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I send my best wishes and congratulations to Republic of China President Chen Shui-bian and his people on the occasion of their 89th National Day. In recent years, Taiwan has prospered. It has one of the strongest economies in the world and its people enjoy unprecedented prosperity. Taiwan has solid schools, a good transportation system and sound health care. Furthermore, the people of Taiwan enjoy many political freedoms such as direct elections, a free press, and human rights. I commend Taiwan on their 89th National Day. Their people have every right to be proud on this momentous occasion.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chairman, I just again want to thank my colleague, the gentleman from the fourth district for Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), for putting up with my persistence. I know there were times when I was probably a little more persistent than I needed to be, but we got here. We could not have done it without the gentleman's help, because obviously there are things that the gentleman feels very strongly about, as do others in the delegation and others in different communities, that had to be addressed, that had to be dealt with if we were going to be successful and be here today. I appreciate the gentleman's help and that of the other members of the delegation, important roles each of you played in working this through here at the final days or week and a half, hopefully, of this legislative session. To be at this point, I think it is truly unique and I think we have a partnership that can be used, and we have shown that the legislative process can work. I think Americans out there who probably do not have a clue about Steens Mountain have at least come to understand that you can make this process work if you allow everybody at the table to try and resolve the issues at hand; and so it is truly a delight to be here and to move this bill forward and to be in a position we are in right now. I thank each of you for your hard work, your dedication, your comments, and your support. Madam Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4828, the Steens Mountain Wilderness Act of 2000. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chairman, we have accomplished something unique with the drafting of this legislation. We have brought together people from very different walks of life. We have given them equal seats at the table of public policy, and we have crafted an Oregon-based solution that works for the ranchers and works for the environment. I want to start by telling my colleagues about the people who live in Harney County and who ranch on Steens Mountain. These are people whose ancestors were encouraged by the Federal Government to take the risk of expanding our Nation's frontier, to risk life and property to settle the Wild West. They were the homesteaders of the 1800s, people of undaunted courage who followed the trail to the West blazed by Lewis and Clark some 200 years ago. They moved to an area of Southeast Oregon later called Harney County, where cows outnumbered people and still do today. It is a county that is larger than most New England States, 143 miles long and 86.6 miles wide. There are no freeways here, no congestion, no gridlock except when they are moving cows to graze in another area. These are people whose closest neighbor is often miles and miles away. They are self-reliant people with soft hearts but rugged spirits. This is not the world of high-tech millionaires, BMWs, and the fast life. But it is a place where people look out for each other, take care of each other. It is a place where written contracts are not broken because usually written contracts are not needed, a man's word is all it takes, a handshake will do. They do not get much from Government other than a tax bill, and they sure do not ask for a lot in return. And for a century or more, they have tended the land and worked in cooperative partnership with the Federal Government to ensure that the environment is protected and their ranching way of life is allowed to continue. Steens Mountain is a checkerboard of private and public lands interrelated. In cities, fences are designed to divide neighbor from neighbor, but here there are few fences and quite often the neighbor is the Federal Government. It is a true partnership in a wide open space that has served the mountain and served the people well. Steens Mountain itself is as unique as the people who live on it and near it. Unlike most mountain ranges across America, Steens Mountain stands alone in the desert. Made of heavy lava, Steens Mountain is a huge, upthrust block twenty-three miles from its base on the west to its top. But when we get to that top, we are at nearly 10,000 feet; and it is a straight drop of nearly a mile to the playa below. Breathtaking? You bet it is. The explorers who settled here were not stupid. They picked the best lands on the mountain for their ranches. Harney County is arid, receiving just a few inches of rainfall a year. So the ranchers went for the water and the lush valleys, as any of us would have done. But today, in this legislation, they are offering to give back some of the best they have, to put it in wilderness for public benefit for a lifetime. This is a good deal for the taxpayers, and it works for the ranchers. Over the years, the ranchers and the Federal Government have worked together to improve the range lands, to improve the aspen groves, the watersheds and the fish habitat. It is a partnership that has served the environment well. Well, about a year ago, Steens Mountain was discovered by the administration and a new land rush was on. One, to save the Steens, to name it a national monument to encircle the ranchers and their home places with a new set of Federal laws and restrictions like a noose that could only get tighter and tighter until it would have choked out their way of life. Now, in some parts of the West the reaction might have been to simply go into denial. But here the ranchers and the people realized that the threat they faced was both real and unstoppable. Over Labor Day weekend a year ago, I met with the people most affected at a community dinner in Frenchglen. We faced the challenge together: Should we simply protest the idea of a monument, knowing it would come anyway, and trust the Federal Government to write the rules, or should we try to write legislation of our own, legislation that would have to accomplish the environmental goals of the administration without choking out a way of life on the mountain and the communities that surround it. Well, my colleagues, the legislation we are considering today here on the floor of the House of Representatives is the end result. It is the result of hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of negotiation over the last year. It is one of the few examples where the threat of a unilaterally imposed national monument of more than a million acres has been replaced by legislation written by the people most affected. We will hear today much about the importance of this legislation in protecting and preserving Steens Mountain. And it does do that. But it does something just as important, if not more. It protects private property rights. It protects water rights. It enshrines in Federal law the spirit of cooperative management of the Federal lands that has been unique to this region. It is nearly half the size of the Federal monument. It is a solution in keeping with the great tradition and spirit that makes Oregon unique because we have with this legislation, in a small measure, rekindled the Oregon spirit of working together to protect our special place and our special way of life while we respect the rights of individuals and preserve the environment. Moreover, we have proven that even in the heat of an election year, people of different parties and philosophies can work together for the common good. We heard my colleague from Eugene talk about that. Rare is the time when this delegation representing many different parts of Oregon has gotten together on a piece of legislation this monumental. Every member of the Oregon delegation supports this bill. Every member of this delegation, House and Senate, has worked in good faith to fight for the principles they believe in that are important for our future as a State. The Governor of Oregon and the Secretary of the Interior, with whom I have obviously had disagreements over the years, support this bill and have worked in good faith to accomplish its goals. The Oregon Cattlemen's Association and the Sierra Club, both at the table, both support this legislation. The Wilderness Society and Oregon Trout support this bill. Is it as I would have written it if I alone could have written it? No. But neither is it as those who would eliminate ranching would have written it. It is indeed what legislating is all about. It is a compromise but a compromise that is far better than a national monument twice its size. It will allow a ranching lifestyle more than a century old to continue for generations to come, and it will protect and preserve the most fragile environment in southeastern Oregon. I have next to me here a picture of Big Indian. This is part of what we are trying to protect and preserve. This gorge that we see here rising probably 7,000 or 8,000 feet into the sky would be protected with the wilderness boundary for about as far as we could see on this picture. It is an extraordinary place. And there is one after another after another. We declare four wild and scenic rivers in this legislation. We set up a special redband trout reserve so that the stream where this special species is will be managed and enhanced for the protection of the redband trout. We create 174,000 acres of wilderness, 100,000 acres of which is cow free. And yet we preserve and protect the ranching way of life in this region. I want to close by specifically thanking and naming those people who have played such an important role in this legislation. After all, we spent more than a year working on it and clearly hundreds of hours, and we can spend a few minutes saying thanks to the people most involved. I want to start with my former legislative director, Lindsey Slater, who has probably put more time and effort into this than any of us and has been there throughout it all with new ideas about how to make it work. It ought to be named after him, but we probably cannot go there today; and Valerie West and David Blair and Sarah Bittlemen from the Senators' offices; and Amelia Jenkins, Chris, Michael, and Bill in the Members' offices; and Kevin Smith and Peter Green; and the Governor, Secretary Babbitt, along with Molly and Laurie and Roy, our legislative counsel who we have gone back to time and time again to say this is the final draft only to have to go back one more time and say, well, we found one other thing we needed to change; and to Allen Freemyer and Lisa and Liz, thank you for your help; and to the gentleman from Utah (Chairman Hansen) and to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) for their work. To Stacy Davies, to Fred Otley and to Charlie Otley, thank you. To all the people in Harney County, thank you for staying at the table, for working hard and fighting for what you all believe in. And to Bill Marlett and Andy Kerr, representing some of the toughest negotiators in Oregon's environmental community, thank you for giving us this opportunity, as well. So I thank the members of the delegation, our Senators, the Governor, and the Secretary for getting us to this point. Because, truly, it is a remarkable day. I thank the ranking member of the Committee on Resources, as well, both for his input and his understanding of the importance of this issue for our State and for our Nation. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute. Madam Chairman, I would just like to thank my colleague, the gentleman from Portland (Mr. Blumenauer), for his comments. I might take exception to his comment that the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) was ever cranky. I do not recall that. Well, maybe once, but I think we all were once. I would point out, too, that his comment about the high-tech millionaires is perhaps taken in a different context than I meant it, which is that this is not the center of industry in that respect. But he is very right in the sense that those who do have that wealth are eyeing this mountain because as people saw on this floor, the views from there are extraordinary, the pressures to sell off parcels on this mountain are only increasing; and there could be over 200 buildable lots on this mountain that even under Oregon's fairly restrictive land- use laws could be accessed, and you could have trophy homes built on. So indeed the investment we are making today is one for the future, to protect and preserve the best of this mountain and preserve the life- style. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my most profound opposition to H.R. 4892, the so-called Scouting for All Act, which would repeal the federal charter of the Boy Scouts of America. As an Eagle Scout, a member of the Scout Council, and a lifelong advocate of Scouting, I am both saddened and dismayed by this misguided attempt to bully one of the finest youth organizations in America. Since its inception in 1910, the Boy Scouts have instilled in tens of millions of young men the ideals of good citizenship, patriotism, and service to others. Perhaps no organization in our nation's history has done more to prepare America's youth for the challenges and responsibilities they will face as adults. I hope the irony of this legislation is not lost on my colleagues. In the name of tolerance, the author of this bill is attempting to harness the power of the federal government to change an organization simply because it does not share her views. This bill represents an incredibly arrogant attempt to impose the beliefs of a small minority on a private institution. And it seeks to demonize one of the most fundamentally decent groups in America. Mr. Speaker, the Scout Oath includes the pledge that a Scout will keep himself ``morally straight.'' Whether one believes homosexuality is inconsistent with that oath or not, the Boy Scouts of America are entitled to interpret their oath, as well as set their own criteria for membership, as they see fit. I would submit to my colleagues that denying them that right would demonstrate a supreme disrespect for the right of people to associate freely, which the Constitution guarantees. The problem with this legislation should be obvious to anyone who respects the right of Americans to organize themselves as they choose. The legislative power of this Congress should not be used as a tool to shape the policies of private organizations in ways that are pleasing to the political class. In an age when America's young people are fed a steady diet of violence and obscenity, it is absurd that Congress is targeting an institution as wholesome as the Boy Scouts. In an age when school shootings capture headlines and we busy ourselves combating teen drug use, it is shameful that some of my colleagues would assail an organization dedicated to such principled goals as the Boy Scouts. I urge my colleagues to reject this offensive legislation and send a clear message to the nation's Scouts that they have both the support and admiration of the United States Congress.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, S. 624 was introduced by Senator Burns and a companion bill, H.R. 1124, was introduced by the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Hill). The Fort Peck Reservation is located in northeastern Montana, and suffers from the same problem of inadequate quantity and quality of water supplies as do most areas in the High Plains. The adjacent communities have the same problems, and this legislation contemplates that the reservation water system would be sized to connect to a distribution system for the surrounding communities. All costs of the reservation system, including operations and maintenance, would be a Federal responsibility. The costs associated with the operation and maintenance of the system for the tribe shall be funded through annual appropriations to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Federal costs for the Dry Prairie system shall not exceed 76 percent, and the Federal government may not expend any Federal funds for operations, maintenance, or replacement costs for the Dry Prairie system. Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of the Senate bill, S. 624, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I stand as an Eagle Scout in opposition to this measure.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

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

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 755, the Guam War Restitution Act. H.R. 755 will establish a temporary commission to review an important matter for the people of Guam that has been unresolved since World War II. An American territory, Guam, was invaded and occupied by Japan during the Second World War, and the U.S. nationals of Guam suffered immensely because of their loyalty to the United States. Although there was an intention to provide restitution to the people of Guam for loss of life and property due to the war, post-war restitution acts by Congress inadvertently excluded the U.S. nationals of Guam. H.R. 755 would create a temporary Federal commission lasting no more than 10 months and costing no more than half a million dollars. The commission would estimate the amount appropriate to compensate the people of Guam for their deaths, permanent injury, forward labor, forced marches, and internment during World War II. The administration supports H.R. 755, and I ask my colleagues to vote in support of this very important piece of legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 755) to amend the Organic Act of Guam to provide restitution to the people of Guam who suffered atrocities such as personal injury, forced labor, forced marches, internment, and death during the occupation of Guam in World War II, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.