[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 5 (Monday, January 31, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: January 31, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
          STATEMENTS OF INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. BUMPERS:
  S. 1810. A bill to require the Secretary of the Interior and the 
Secretary of Agriculture to charge fair market value for permits issued 
on public lands and national forests for communication uses, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.


          public lands and national forest permits act of 1994

 Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, as many of my colleagues know, I 
have been a strong advocate of the United States receiving a fair 
return for the use of its public lands and resources. Whether it is the 
extraction of hard rock minerals, the grazing of livestock, or the 
leasing of oil and gas, I have continually sought to ensure that those 
who extract or utilize these and other resources found on the public 
lands, pay a fair price for that privilege. The American taxpayer 
deserves nothing less. Today, Mr. President, I am introducing 
legislation to address yet another instance where the taxpayers are not 
getting a fair shake.
  The Federal Land Policy and Management Act [FLPMA] requires that both 
the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management [BLM] receive fair 
market value from those who would utilize portions of our national 
forests or public lands for various purposes. While that is the law of 
the land, the intent of the law is not always being carried out. For 
example, fees collected from those who use portions of the Federal 
lands for the installation of communication facilities to transmit 
radio, television, cellular telephone, and other signals are far less 
than fair market value. The Forest Service estimates that currently, it 
receives 15 percent of fair market value for communication facilities 
on our national forests. The BLM also receives significantly less than 
fair market value for the use of its lands for these purposes.
  In the Los Angeles Basin, for example, a television station pays the 
Forest Service $8,149 per year in rent for a site that has been 
appraised to be worth nearly $75,000. In another instance, a New Mexico 
broadcaster that pays the Government $1,042 in annual rental fees 
actually receives $63,000 from tenants that use the facility each year. 
This practice is outrageous and must be eliminated.
  Although the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management have 
recently attempted to increase the fees they charge for the use of 
their land for communications sites, they have been prohibited from 
doing so for the past 4 years by language included in the 
appropriations bill for the Interior and related agencies prohibiting 
the implementation of higher fees for these sites. In fiscal year 1992, 
the Interior appropriation bill also included a provision which created 
an advisory committee which was to establish criteria and provide 
estimates of the fees the Federal Government should receive for these 
sites based on fair market value. Although the advisory committee has 
issued its final report, the fee schedule in proposed recommended fees 
that were still far below fair market value. Both the BLM and the 
Forest Service have stated that the advisory committee fee 
recommendations are inadequate and would deprive the taxpayers of 
millions of dollars in revenues. In addition, the fiscal year 1994 
Budget Reconciliation Act placed on moratorium on any fee increases for 
communications sites in excess of 10 percent over the previous year's 
level until the end of this fiscal year.
  Mr. President, it is time to stop these moratoriums and revise these 
fee schedules so that they reflect fair market value. It is time we 
comply with the legal requirements of FLPMA and it is time we stop 
treating the American taxpayer as a second-class citizen.
  Today, I am introducing legislation that will eliminate all these 
limitations and moratoria, and require that any permit for a 
communication site located on public lands issued after October 1, 
1994, be issued only upon the payment of fair market value. This 
legislation simply guarantees that we still comply with existing law 
and that the public receives a fair return for the use of its lands.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be placed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1810

       Be it enacted in the Senate and House of Representatives in 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. COMMUNICATION PERMITS.

       (a) In General.--No permit, lease, or authorization for the 
     use of any area of the public lands or National Forests for 
     communication uses, including but not limited to radio and 
     television broadcast, mobile radio, cellular telephone, or 
     microwave relay facilities, shall remain in force and effect 
     after October 1, 1994 unless, by such date and by October 1 
     of each year thereafter, the holder of such permit, lease, or 
     authorization pays to the Secretary of the Interior or the 
     Secretary of Agriculture, as appropriate, an amount equal to 
     the fair market value, as determined by such Secretary, of 
     the right to use and occupy such area for such communication 
     uses.
       (b) Definition.--For the purposes of this Act, the term 
     ``public lands'' shall have the same meaning as defined in 
     section 103(e) of the Federal Land Policy Management Act of 
     1976 (43 U.S.C. 1702 (e)).
                                 ______

      By Mr. DORGAN:
  S. 1811. A bill to require new television sets to have built-in 
circuitry to allow viewers to block the display of programs rated 
violent; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.


   the television violence reduction through parental empowerment act

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, last August, Representative Ed Markey and 
several colleagues introduced legislation in the other body that would 
empower parents to deal with violence on television. Specifically, it 
would require that television sets include a technical devise parents 
could use to block out television programs that are, in their judgment, 
too violent for their children. At the request of Representative 
Markey, I am introducing this legislation in the Senate today so that 
we can also consider this approach, commonly known as the V-chip bill, 
in the current debate over how we should address the problem of 
violence on television.
  My colleagues are familiar with the debate that has been taking 
place, not just in the Congress, but in the administration and within 
the television industry this year. While this issue certainly is not 
new, public outcry has intensified in the past year.
  Both the Senate Commerce Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee 
held hearings on this issue last year and a number of bills have been 
introduced in the Senate. I believe that Representative Markey's V-chip 
legislation is an important part of a legislative response to the 
problem of violence on television and I support it.
  Earlier this year I introduced the Television Violence Report Card 
Act which can work together with the V-chip concept. Both these 
approaches have a common goal: To empower parents and the public, 
rather than Government bureaucrats. My report card legislation would 
arm the public with information to enable them to send a message 
through the market place, directly to the industry. The V-chip approach 
gives parents technological empowerment to vote through their 
television sets. Both these bills would address television violence by 
giving the public more tools with which to register their own votes in 
the marketplace. As I have said on many other occasions, this is a much 
better way to address television violence, than is Government 
regulation.
  The V-chip bill requires that television sets be capable of blocking 
programs which are coded with a violence rating. The legislation also 
requires that television sets be equipped with blocking capability for 
time slots so that parents can block an individual program even if it 
does not carry a violence advisory.
  As I mentioned before, I believe that the V-chip approach that 
Representative Markey has been pushing is an essential part of the 
debate on television violence. I urge my colleagues to support this 
bill and in general work with us to advance a solution to television 
violence that enables the public and parents in particular to send a 
direct message to the industry. They, and not the Government nor the 
industry, should have the ultimate say in what should and should not be 
on television. The V-chip bill is a means to give consumers another 
tool.
  In recent weeks parts of the television industry have responded in a 
positive way to begin to address the issue of violence during times 
when children are watching.
  But we need to do more, and the V-chip proposal, as well as the 
television violence report cord, are two proposals that will make a 
difference.
                                 ______

      By Mr. BUMPERS:
  S.J. Res. 161. A joint resolution to designate April 1994, as ``Civil 
War History Month''; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


                        Civil War History Month

 Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, I introduce a joint resolution to 
designate April 1994 as ``Civil War History Month.''
  As many of my colleagues know, I have had a longstanding interest in 
and love of Civil War history. I believe the Civil War was the most 
momentous and defining event in the growth and development of our 
Nation. The suffering and turmoil of the conflict forever changed the 
shape and character of American society. As Shelby Foote, the noted 
Civil War historian, said about the War, ``any understanding of this 
nation has to be based on an understanding of the Civil War. It is very 
necessary if you're going to understand the American character in the 
twentieth century, to learn about this enormous catastrophe of the 
nineteenth century. It was the crossroads of our being and it was a 
hell of a crossroads.''
  Because I cherish our Nation's history, I believe we must make every 
effort to educate our citizens about it. Today, I am introducing a 
joint resolution that will help heighten our understanding and interest 
in the Civil War. I urge my colleagues to join me in this important 
effort.
  I ask unanimous consent that the joint resolution be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the joint resolution was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                      Senate Joint Resolution 161

       Whereas the period of American history known as ``The Civil 
     War'' is universally recognized as one of the most 
     significant landmark eras in our nation's heritage; and
       Whereas, the continuous growth of public awareness of and 
     interest in the Civil War period remains an integral part of 
     America's cultural heritage; and
       Whereas, the study, preservation, and interpretation of 
     literature and sites associated with this period is imbedded 
     in the educational and cultural heritage of our country; and
       Whereas, the beginning of the Civil War occurred in April 
     1861 with the firing on Fort Sumter in Charleston, South 
     Carolina, and the effective ending of The Civil War occurred 
     in April 1865 with the surrender of the Army of Northern 
     Virginia at Appomattox, Virginia, making April the most 
     important month of the year in Civil War History; and
       Whereas, the heritage of The Civil War deserves the 
     attention and respect of all individuals in the United 
     States: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That April 
     1994 is designated as ``Civil War History Month.'' The 
     President is authorized and requested to issue a proclamation 
     calling upon the people of the United States to observe the 
     month with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

                          ____________________