[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 26, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2847-S2848]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 PRESIDIO PROPERTIES ADMINISTRATION ACT

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I just want to express some conflicting 
feelings here this morning about the bill we are about to go to. I know 
the Senator from Alaska understands this because we have been talking 
and working together on the Presidio for quite some time.
  The Presidio legislation that is about to be before us--if it simply 
was the Presidio and other environmental issues that were not 
controversial, this would be one of my happiest days since I came to 
the Senate, because, for me, the Presidio bill is so close to my heart. 
Mr. President, I represented, for many years, the congressional 
district in which the Presidio sits. Years ago, Congressman Phil 
Burton, looking at the Presidio, said, ``If the gates ever close, we 
would not want to lose this extraordinary resource.'' Back in the early 
1980's--actually, I stand corrected, in 1972, Congressman Burton's 
legislation creating the Golden Gate Recreation Area and the Presidio 
was passed. The law provided that the Presidio would become a national 
park when it was no longer needed by the Army.
  In 1988, when the Base Closure Commission recommended the closure, 
the law kicked in and triggered this incredible new park called the 
Presidio for the people of this country.
  So why do I say that I am faced with such a terrible conflict here? 
It is because, rather than just voting this Presidio legislation up or 
down--which, by the way, we can do in 10 seconds because everybody 
agrees it is so important; it sets up a trust, and that would enable us 
to use the buildings on the park to create revenue to keep the park in 
good shape and to keep it safe and beautiful--we have this tangled up 
in the Utah wilderness conflict.
  I suppose there are those who say, well, that is just the way it is 
done. Well, I simply do not buy that. If we really want to make 
progress here, if we really want to cut through the gridlock, what 
better chance do we have than to pull out this Utah wilderness bill--
which is so controversial that it deserves its own separate attention--
and pass these other environmental measures that are so important to 
the people of the country? We could do that in a minute.
  I want to give you my feelings as to how much work has gone into this 
Presidio legislation. I already told you that the vision was 
established in the 1970's, and in the 1980's when the Presidio was 
closed, we all realized at that moment that it would become a glorious 
park. We also knew that funds were not there to keep it in the pristine 
condition. We figured out a way, with Congresswoman Pelosi's 
leadership, and Senator Feinstein and I working with many others, we 
introduced the bill that would set up a trust. Everyone agrees that it 
is a wonderful idea.
  I want to compliment Senator Murkowski for coming out to the Presidio 
on more than one occasion to meet with the people. Senator Campbell has 
been a key person working on this. Senator Chafee went out to visit the 
Presidio. Perhaps, for me, the most rewarding thing happened when 
Senator Dole went out and, in fact, agreed this was the way to go.
  So we did something here that we did not think was possible. We 
reached across party lines and we agreed on an approach for the 
Presidio that both Democrats and Republicans could support. Did it have 
everything that this Senator wanted? No. Did it have everything that 
the Senator from Alaska wanted? No. Clearly, we would have written it a 
little bit differently. But we worked together and we got a wonderful 
bill.
  It is hard for me to imagine why it now has to get caught up in this 
tangle with the Utah wilderness bill, other than the fact that there 
are those who are pushing that bill and feel the only way they can pass 
it is to get it on the Presidio train.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair advises the Senator from California 
that the 5-minute limit has been exceeded.
  Mrs. BOXER. I ask unanimous consent for another 3 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. BOXER. So we have a national historic landmark. Five hundred 
buildings are on the National Register of Historic Buildings. We need 
to make sure that these buildings do not deteriorate and make sure we 
get the revenues to support the Presidio. Today, what are we faced 
with? The best of bills and the worst of bills--in one bill. It is like 
the Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde approach here. We take a wonderful piece of 
legislation, the Presidio trust bill, and everyone supports it from 
both parties, the whole spectrum, and it gets hooked to this Utah 
wilderness.
  I hope, Mr. President, a couple of things will occur today in the 
time that we have. No. 1, I hope we take the Utah wilderness bill out 
of this omnibus bill. It deserves its own debate. Right now, 3.3 
million acres of that Utah wilderness are basically under protection. 
If this bill passes, half of those acres are going to lose protection. 
How can we even call it a Utah wilderness bill? Clearly, it puts the

[[Page S2848]]

Senators from California in a very, very difficult position.
  So I hope we can move this Presidio on its own. Senator Dole and 
Senator Daschle both agree--they both cosponsor this bill--that it 
could be moved in a moment by a unanimous-consent request. Let us not 
load it down with a bill that has serious, serious problems.
  I hope we can get to the point where this is truly a celebration for 
the people of California, that we can have our bill, have it stand 
alone, and take up the controversial matters independently.
  I thank you very much, Mr. President. I yield the floor at this time.
  Mr. KENNEDY addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the Senator from 
Massachusetts.

                          ____________________