[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 146 (Tuesday, September 19, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1801]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[[Page E1801]]


                NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM REFORM ACT OF 1995

                                 ______


                               speech of

                         HON. E. CLAY SHAW, JR.

                               of florida

                    in the house of representatives

                       Monday, September 18, 1995

  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my support for H.R. 260, 
the National Park System Reform Act of 1995. First, I would like to 
clear up any misconceptions about the nature of this bill. H.R. 260 
does not close a single park. As a strong supporter of the preservation 
of native resources, I would never support a bill that threatened our 
national parks.
  In the last 10 years, the National Park Service budget has more than 
doubled, increasing by more than 30 percent above the rate of 
inflation. Despite these substantial increases, the National Park 
Service claims that their agency is suffering huge funding shortages. 
In the past, when similar proposed budget cuts have been recommended, 
the NPS has responded by threatening to close highly visible areas. In 
the NPS budget request for fiscal year 1996 only 48 percent of the $1.5 
billion requested goes directly to fund park operations. In the 
remaining 52 percent of the budget, the administration has requested 
funding for projects such as $1 million to repair the White House 
sidewalks. Clearly, NPS funding could afford to be cut in many areas 
with little or no effect on parks. In fact, the National Park Service 
has already submitted a report to Congress recommending specific 
programs that could be cut to meet the budget reductions, without 
closing parks.
  Many ask why the National Park Service doesn't just increase its park 
entrance fees. Currently, the NPS collects fees at only one-third of 
the areas it administers, resulting in the failure of the NPS to 
collect $60 million annually.
  H.R. 260 is similar in scope to a bill which passed the House by a 
vote of 421 to 0 last Congress. It requires the NPS to develop the 
first plan in the history of the agency to define the mission of the 
agency. In addition, it requires that the NPS review the existing 368 
areas managed by the agency--excluding the 54 national parks--to 
determine if all of them should continue to be managed by the NPS.
  I quote directly from the bill, ``Nothing in this Act shall be 
construed as modifying or terminating any unit of the National Park 
System without a subsequent Act of Congress.'' This bill is not 
designed to save money but to ensure that our park system continues to 
be the best in the world.

                          ____________________