[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 134 (Wednesday, September 25, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11260-S11265]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    THE PRESIDIO OMNIBUS PARKS BILL

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, today I am proud to announce that we 
have an opportunity to pass the most wide ranging national parks and 
public land legislation in decades; that is, the Presidio omnibus parks 
bill.
  This report encompasses 2 years, or thereabouts, of various attempts 
by Members on both sides to pass bills that affect this area of our 
national heritage. We had hearings. We had intense negotiations. I 
think the bills contained in the package really meet our Nation's 
environmental needs. It is good news for the national parks, and good 
news for land and resource conservation.
  This package has over 700 pages. At last count there were 126 bills 
included. They range from the San Francisco Presidio to the Tallgrass 
Prairie National Preserve, Sterling Forest protection, Snowbasin land 
exchange, Black Patriot Memorial extension, Nicodemus National Historic 
Site, Japanese-American Patriotism Memorial, numerous Civil War sites, 
Oak Creek Wilderness Scenic Recreation Area, the New Bedford whaling 
parks, and the Women's Rights National Heritage Park. It is estimated 
that there are about 37 States that are going to be affected by this 
package.

  It is quite reasonable, Madam President, to ask the Senator from 
Alaska, well, why do we have to have this in a big package? Why did we 
not move on this over the last 2 years? I will tell you. As chairman of 
the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, we have held hearings on 
these bills. So has the House. But on our side we have had holds on 
every single bill at one time or another in this package. The way it 
works around here, as we all know, is some Members feel if they want to 
get their bill through and they see others moving, they put what we 
call holds on things. We have had holds, and there is no use pointing 
the finger at each other because that is not going to get this package 
passed.
  I do want to explain because some of the media cannot seem to 
understand why we have this enormous package. It is simply because of 
the way this place works. And when a Member wants to proceed with a 
bill out of our committee and we have voted it out and we cannot bring 
it up, it is because there is a hold on that bill. So we are down to 
the end of the 104th Congress. The name of the game is to try to 
address this package and recognize that we have withdrawn from the 
package the contentious portions that were identified potentially as 
veto material. These included some bills that the Senator from Alaska 
supported and felt very strongly about. One was the Tongass 15-year 
extension which would have prolonged the life of our only manufacturing 
plant, our only pulp mill, our only year-around manufacturing plant 
that wanted to convert from an old technology to a new technology by 
investing some $150 million to $200 million, but in order to do that 
they had to have an extension of the contract with the Forest Service 
to have an adequate timber supply to amortize that investment.
  Members say, why is Alaska different? Why do you have to have a 
contractual commitment? The reasons are simple. We have no other source 
of supply than the U.S. Government through the U.S. Forest Service 
because we do not have private timber which is exported out of the 
State. The Forest Service timber, Government timber is prohibited from 
export, and as a consequence nobody is going to make that kind of 
investment without an extension of the contract. And their current 
contract expires in the year 2004. But the administration found that 
unacceptable and advised us that they would proceed with a veto if it 
were in the package. So the Senator from Alaska withdrew that.
  Boundary Waters Canoe Area, which is an issue that some Members feel

[[Page S11261]]

very strongly about in Minnesota, was also noted by the administration 
that if it were in there, they would initiate a veto. Other issues that 
were contentious that were threatened for veto included Utah 
Wilderness, and that issue is somewhat academic because of the action 
taken by the President in invoking the antiquities; grazing issue, 
which many Members in the West felt very strongly about. So they are 
not in the package. We have taken them out--grazing, Utah wilderness, 
Tongass, Boundary Waters Canoe Area.
  Now we are left with a situation where it is very late in the 
Congress. This legislation is crucial in California not just to the 
Presidio but to an area that I feel very strongly about, and that is 
the cleanup of the San Francisco Bay area. I know how strongly the 
California delegation feels about that. If the administration wants to 
find an excuse to veto this, obviously they can do it. But they are 
contemplating, if you will, a veto message per correspondence with the 
White House, and I ask unanimous consent that a letter from the 
Executive Office of the President be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

         Executive Office of the President, Office of Management 
           and Budget,
                               Washington, DC, September 20, 1996.
     Hon. Frank H. Murkowski,
     Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. 
         Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Murkowski: I am responding to your September 
     16th request for the Administration's view on the proposed 
     conference report on H.R. 1296, the Omnibus Parks 
     legislation. The Administration received this legislation 
     late Tuesday night, September 17th, and is carefully 
     reviewing this massive proposal, which now incorporates over 
     100 free-standing bills and spans over 500 pages of 
     legislative language.
       We strongly support legislation to improve the management 
     of the Presidio in San Francisco, use Federal funds to help 
     acquire the Sterling Forest in the New York/New Jersey 
     Highlands Region, and establish the Tallgrass Prairie 
     National Preserve in Kansas. These are measures that would 
     protect nationally significant natural resources, have been 
     the subject of thorough public review, and enjoy broad, 
     bipartisan support.
       Your letter, however, indicates that the conference report 
     will contain a number of wholly unacceptable provisions--ones 
     which erode protection of nationally significant natural 
     resource areas, override existing legal requirements, and 
     prevent responsible management of federal lands. Your letter 
     indicates, for example, that the report includes a mandated 
     extension of the Ketchikan Pulp Company (KPC) contract in the 
     Tongass National Forest (AK) and a requirement to allow 
     motorized use in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness 
     (MN). Department of Agriculture officials have repeatedly 
     indicated that the Secretary would recommend veto of a bill 
     that would mandate an extension of the KPC contract. 
     Similarly, actions such as opening up three portages at the 
     Boundary Waters Wilderness areas to motorized use would be 
     cause for a veto of this bill.
       On July 26th, the President urged the Congress to refrain 
     from including controversial measures during the conference 
     on H.R. 1296. Unfortunately, it appears that many of these 
     objectionable provisions remain.
       We are committed to working with the Congress on 
     legislation that protects our Nation's natural resources. As 
     soon as the Administration completes its review, we can work 
     together to eliminate controversial items and discuss other 
     provisions that could move forward in a bipartisan way.
           Sincerely,
                                               Franklin D. Raines,
                                                         Director.

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. They cite specifically what their veto threat covers, 
and we have eliminated those, Madam President. Now I am told some 
Members on the other side are going to insist that the bill be read. 
That is fine--700 pages. It is going to take 10 hours. Talk about delay 
tactics. What is the objective of that? I do not know. They say they 
have not read the bill. We ought to go back to the Members because this 
stuff has been hanging around for 2\1/2\ years. We have had hearings on 
it. We have had discussions. The Members who are motivated from the 37 
States know what is in the bill. We are talking about further delay 
which is not necessary. We should act now. It is late in the game. If 
we do not act now, we are going to lose.
  Let me tell you what the parliamentary procedure is. I hope this will 
come up today. It should come up now. We have the time. But if a Member 
moves to recommit the package, the whole package is dead. It is over. 
It will not happen.
  What we have done in this bill, we have created new parks, 
established five new parks: Shenandoah Valley National Battlefield in 
Virginia to protect the Civil War battlefields; Tallgrass Prairie 
Natural Preserve in Kansas to protect one of the last remaining 
unplowed sections of tallgrass prairie in the country; Nicodemus 
National Historic site to protect the town established as a community 
for freed black slaves after the Civil War; New Bedford National 
Historical Park to honor the whaling industry--not just in 
Massachusetts because the whaling industry started in Massachusetts and 
where did they whale? They whaled in Alaska, my State. They went around 
Pt. Barrow, and that is where they whaled. You go to Pt. Barrow today 
and you can see the remnants of the contribution of the New Bedford 
whalers. So this is a joint effort; Boston Harbor Islands to protect 
unique islands in the Boston Harbor.
  There is better protection of existing national parks. It provides 
for boundary modifications, expansion of 20 parks around the country 
from a 1,000 percent increase in size at the Richmond National 
Battlefield in Virginia to minor boundary adjustments in Zion National 
Park in Utah. It protects existing national parks. The legislation 
provides protection for important historical events and persons by 
expanding the boundary to further protect the Manzanar National 
Historic Site in California, adjusting boundaries at Independence Hall, 
improved management of the route taken by voting rights marchers from 
Selma to Montgomery as a national historic trail, and reauthorizing 
funding for the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
  We established new memorials. This legislation provides for the 
construction of memorials on The Mall in Washington, DC, the Martin 
Luther King, Jr., Black Revolutionary War Patriots, and the Japanese 
American Patriots. We protect rivers from coast to coast. The bill 
protects important rivers, from the Columbia in Washington to the St. 
Vrain in Colorado and the Lamprey in New Hampshire. And we protect 
hallowed ground, where the blood of American soldiers was shed in 
battle. The bill protects important battlefields from Yorktown, where 
Americans won independence, through the Civil War battlefields in 
Virginia, Mississippi, Louisiana and Georgia, and establishes the 
American Battlefield Protection Program.
  Madam President, it authorizes funding to begin restoration of the 
San Francisco Bay. This bill authorizes $450 million over 3 years to 
provide restoration for that jewel of the west coast.
  This bill is not just about expanding the role of the Federal 
Government. It also contains significant reforms of existing programs 
and policies, and makes unneeded Federal lands available for use by 
other levels of government. We have a reduction of unneeded Federal 
lands. The legislation transfers unreserved BLM land in the State of 
Wyoming for schools, removes inappropriate limitations from developed 
lands across the coast of North Dakota, corrects a 90-year-old survey 
of public lands in Idaho, provides lands to the Taos Pueblo tribe in 
New Mexico.
  The administrative reforms of the national parks are addressed. The 
bill includes a number of provisions to improve the management of the 
National Park Service, from encouraging private sector involvement to 
improving the housing of park rangers, which is sorely needed; Senate 
confirmation for the park director; the elimination of unnecessary 
congressional reporting requirements, and numerous other authorities to 
increase the leverage of Federal funds.
  Recreation Fee Policy Program: The bill provides for the complete 
overhaul of the current recreation fee policies, which will provide 
improved funding for the parks and forests by establishing a permanent 
program to permit agencies to retain recreation fees without 
appropriations.
  The environmental agenda: We have tried to address it within my 
committee, and the legislation provides two key provisions which 
represent the vision of how we intend to better protect the environment 
without the heavy hand of the Federal Government.
  One of those issues is the significant development of the Presidio 
trust. I

[[Page S11262]]

have been out to the Presidio on several occasions. I know how the 
Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation, which brought about the 
tremendous and successful renovation of Pennsylvania Avenue here in 
Washington, DC, has worked for the benefit and the beautification of 
this city. The Presidio, a former military installation at the foot of 
the Golden Gate, has been managed by the park service. But, clearly, 
the park service does not have the expertise or the knowledge to 
develop that area in compatibility with its unique recreational 
attractiveness and the traditional association of what that military 
facility was.
  As a consequence, we have created a Presidio trust. Instead of the 
$1.2 billion proposal at one time that was advocated by some for the 
Federal Government to manage the Presidio, San Francisco, in 
perpetuity, what we have here is a bipartisan approach. We talked about 
it this morning in a press conference with the two Senators from 
California. It turns the real estate management aspects of the Presidio 
over to a private volunteer nonprofit trust--again, similar to the 
Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation.
  I have met with the volunteers in San Francisco that have worked to 
put this concept together. I am satisfied that they have the vision and 
the expertise and the capability to make this work. It will reduce the 
burden of the Federal Government's role. It will still provide a 
presence for the National Park Service, and it will add dramatically to 
the full utilization, with the right balance, by the people on the 
ground who have the best interests of the Presidio and San Francisco at 
heart.

  This is a bill for all Americans, and that is why it is so 
attractive, and that is why it is so necessary we move at this time. 
The bill authorizes, as well, a land exchange in Utah. The significance 
of this is the Olympics, which are going to take place in Utah in the 
year 2002. This would provide a very simple exchange that would make 
the downhill event for the 2002 Olympics a reality, which will permit 
thousands, hundreds of thousands of persons around the world to enjoy 
it.
  So, what we have here, as a consequence of action taken last night, 
where my conferees agreed to sign off on the package and send it over 
to the House of Representatives, and the House stayed in until midnight 
last night to accommodate their procedure and sign off on the bill, and 
now it is over here, the package. So, Mr. President, it is fair to say 
that now is the time to take it up.
  I have been advised there had been some concern on the other side. I 
have yet to be privy to what that concern might be. But, again, we have 
been waiting 2 years for this material to get this far. If we pass it, 
it will go over to the House, and I am satisfied the House will move it 
because we have taken the contentious portions out of it. I do not know 
what more we can responsibly do, what more and greater obligation I 
have as chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee to try 
to move this, because I know how much it means to each Senator with 
regard to various parts and portions of the 126 parts that are in this 
bill. And I am sorry that we were not able to be responsive, as we 
reported these bills out of committee individually. But, again, I want 
to make reference to the way this place works, when Members put holds 
on every bill and we cannot move them on the floor to passage. We are 
left with this dilemma, which is the 126-bill package.
  Some people say, why do we have to have it this way? I am sorry we 
have to have it this way, but it is this way now or nothing, because 
there is simply no other alternative and there is no more time left.
  The leadership has indicated we are winding this session up. The end 
of the fiscal year is coming. It is now or never for the Presidio 
package, because if it is held up, those people who are holding it up 
have to bear the responsibility for annihilating, killing the largest 
single environmental package of parks bills that have come before the 
Congress in this session and, I am told, for the last decade.
  I am pretty reasonable. I have been around here for a while. I have 
tried to accommodate everybody. I have taken my licks on this one. I 
have lost, in my State, my only year-round industry because I could not 
get enough support for a 15-year extension of the Ketchikan Pulp Mill, 
so they could put in a $200 million investment. That is my sacrifice. 
That probably means more to me than any other single thing. But the 
obligation I have to move this package is real as well. So, at the 
dictate of the administration, we have stricken the Tongass out of it.
  Some might ask, do you have any fallback? Yes, I suspect there is a 
fallback. Perhaps the Record should note what it is, because without 
getting too technical, what we asked for was a 15-year extension of a 
contract that was going to expire in the year 2004. The administration 
said they would veto the bill if that was in.
  What we have proposed in this package, I will be very direct with the 
President, is not to pursue the 15-year contract which would mandate 15 
years beyond the year 2004, but to simply take the remaining years on 
that contract, which are 8 years, and simply transfer that from pulp 
utilization to our two operating sawmills. That is all we have left in 
Alaska of any significance.
  In brief, the contract for the remainder of the term through the year 
2004, for the next 8 years, would simply be transferred over from pulp 
utilization to sawmill utilization.
  The 15-year extension, as a consequence of the Presidential veto 
threat, has been withdrawn. I understand that that has been 
satisfactory to those who have objected. Of course, the Utah wilderness 
has been withdrawn. Grazing has been withdrawn. The boundary waters 
canoe area, which was also under Presidential veto threat, has been 
withdrawn.
  To those who are scrutinizing this, I wish them well, but that is the 
package, that is what we are left with. It is now or never, and we 
better do it now because we simply don't have time, and we will walk 
out of here in the next few days leaving behind us a truly monumental 
bill with monumental implications.
  I might add, the Senator from New Jersey and I have had differences 
of opinion relative to his role in the bill. I am not going to prolong 
those differences other than to say Sterling Forest is it. He is a 
winner. He can leave the U.S. Senate bringing home something that is 
very meaningful to New Jersey and New York.
  I could go on into the history of the process over the last 2 years, 
but I don't know that that would serve any purpose at this time. I 
could lament the dissatisfaction of my friends from some of the States 
whose issues we simply had to take out of here in the spirit of 
compromise relative to trying to get the job done and get a package out 
that is meaningful, but I hope that those who are listening and 
reflecting now recognize that they, too, have an obligation. That 
obligation is either to come forth and support this package now, this 
compromise package that is so important, that is so significant, that 
is so meaningful, or accept the responsibility of killing a package 
that has been over 2\1/2\ years--one Senator reminded me that his 
particular interest in the bill had been in this over 4 years.
  So I encourage my colleagues to look through the title portion and 
recognize the items that are of interest to their State, whether it 
covers rivers and trails, historic areas, civil rights issues, Civil 
and Revolutionary War sites, fee generations for their own parks, 
recommended administration management provisions, boundary adjustments, 
the Presidio, certainly the California bay environmental enhancement, 
and recognize that it is now or never. We can get it done now and go 
out of session with the most meaningful bipartisan legislative package 
that has come before the U.S. Senate, or we can grouse around, object, 
send it back for reconsideration and leave with nothing done.
  But I want the Record to note, as chairman of my committee, I have 
discharged, along with my conferees and our committee, both Democrats 
and Republicans, our obligation. We have held the hearings, we reported 
it out, we moved on it last night through a conference process. The 
House signed off on it. It is over here now. I do not want to be 
presumptuous in being critical, but I don't know what we are waiting 
for, Mr. President. We are ready to go. We can get this done now. The 
Senator from Alaska is ready to bring it to

[[Page S11263]]

the body. I have discussed it with the leadership. I am awaiting word.
  So the rest is up to you, I say to my distinguished colleagues, 
whether this package is meaningful enough to recognize, just like every 
package, that sure, there are some things in there somebody doesn't 
like. But you try to put together 126 bills and have to put it in a 
package like this because there is no other way that you are allowed to 
bring them up individually because Members put holds on them.
  I implore the media that is going to scrutinize this to recognize the 
reality. The poison pills, so to speak, have been taken out. I am not 
going to reflect on the fact there are an awful lot of westerners who 
are unhappy because their concerns are not met in this package. That is 
going to be for the next session. That is going to be for, perhaps, the 
election. But we have to do what we have to do, and right now, the 
thing to do is to move this bill out because the poison pills are out.
  I ask unanimous consent that my letter and Representative Don Young's 
letter to the President asking for a position on those items that he 
would veto be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                         U.S. Senate, Committee on


                                 Energy and Natural Resources,

                               Washington, DC, September 16, 1996.
     Hon. William J. Clinton,
     President of the United States, The White House, Washington, 
         DC.
       Dear Mr. President: We are about to conclude action on H.R. 
     1296, a bill to provide for the administration of certain 
     Presidio properties at minimal cost to the Federal taxpayer. 
     As you may know, a number of popular and also controversial 
     measures have become part of the conference discussion; 
     therefore, this bill is now known as the Omnibus Parks 
     legislation containing well over 100 specific legislative 
     provisions.
       Among the controversial issues discussed for inclusion in 
     this conference report are the Senate-passed grazing reform 
     legislation, S. 1459; reforms to the management of the 
     Boundary Waters Wilderness, S. 1738; Sterling Forest 
     Protection Act, S. 223; S. 884, the Utah Public Lands 
     Management Act; S. 1877, the Ketchikan Pulp Company contract 
     extension; and S. 1371, the Snow Basin Land Exchange, which 
     is necessary for the winter olympics.
       We are about to file a conference report on this omnibus 
     legislation, and it is important that we have your views. 
     Because of your Administration's long-standing opposition, we 
     are prepared to propose excluding the grazing reform 
     legislation, any Utah Wilderness proposals, and several other 
     controversial measures to which the Administration has 
     expressed opposition. Attached is a list of measures we 
     propose for inclusion in the conference report. Among these 
     measures, we feel the need to include two items which your 
     Administration has expressed opposition to in the past. One 
     is the extension of the Ketchikan Pulp Co. contract, S. 1877; 
     and the other is a proposed compromise on the Boundary Waters 
     Canoe Area which would allow motorization on three portages, 
     but nothing more.
       It is important that we have your views on this conference 
     report prior to close of business on Wednesday, September 18. 
     We are ready and prepared to discuss any of the measures 
     proposed for inclusion in this conference report at any time, 
     and our staffs are prepared to provide any additional 
     information you may need in your consideration of this 
     important legislation.
           Sincerely,
     Don Young,
       Chairman, House Committee on Resources.
     Frank H. Murkowski,
       Chairman.

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. I encourage those who are responsible for the movement 
of the process around here to reflect on my words.
  I compliment all those who have worked so hard to bring this package 
together, both in the minority and majority: Senator Johnston, Senator 
Bumpers, Senator Domenici, Senator Nickles. I also thank the California 
delegation for their tireless efforts to push this legislation. I thank 
those who have volunteered their time in San Francisco, as well as 
other areas of California, to push the merits of the creation of the 
trust in the Presidio package, and I thank the staff on both the 
minority side and majority side: Tom Williams, Gregg Renkes and many 
others, who worked night and day to put this package together; my 
colleague in the House, Representative Young, of course; my senior 
Senator, Senator Stevens, because oftentimes we, as Alaskans, are 
typified as those who want to run through the public domain with 
development schemes of one kind or another.
  We will take our lumps as we go along the road in trying to 
communicate the particular posture of our State, which is only 38 years 
old, and the realization that we are still trying to create land 
patterns in a State that is 80 percent owned by the Federal Government, 
at a time when the other States accomplished that 150-200 years ago. 
They developed their land patterns. They had private ownership within 
their State. We have public ownership in ours one-fifth the size of the 
United States.
  We are a storehouse of natural resources. What we try to communicate 
is that with science and technology we can do a better job of 
developing our resources. We look at our timber industry. We have the 
largest of all our national forests at 17 million acres. We set aside 
two-thirds of that forest in perpetuity, set aside 5 to 7 million acres 
of prime timberland. We are trying to maintain a timber industry in the 
largest of all our forests on about 1.7 million acres in perpetuity and 
a 100-year regrowth cycle. They cut more firewood in New York than we 
cut commercially in Alaska in the Nation's largest forest. They cut 
over 1 billion board feet for their commercial activities, yet there 
are those who want to close us down, terminate all timbering in our 
forests.
  The Sierra Club wants to terminate all timbering in the national 
forests. But what we are trying to do is maintain a viability based on 
renewability, do a better job. Our fisheries are at an all time high. 
We have had record runs 8 of the last 11 years. We have been doing it 
right. We think others could learn from us. It is a little like rowing 
uphill.
  You talk about oil and gas exploration. We know we can open up ANWR 
safely, given the opportunity. But we have become an environmental 
cause. We have over 60 environmental agencies that have established 
themselves in Anchorage, AK. The young attorneys come up and do their 
missionary work, because these organizations need a cause. The cause is 
far away. It is a ``good cause,'' idealistic. When we attempt to say, 
well, just a minute now, we have an opportunity and a right to come 
into the Union, develop our resources, manage them correctly; they, 
through extreme rhetoric, suggest that we are desecrating the country. 
The media picks up on it. And it is simply not true.
  So we feel a little sensitive when we are criticized with any 
development scenario. We could open up ANWR safely. We know it. We have 
the technology. We are selling American ingenuity short. The 
environmental community has in many cases established a fear mentality 
in the American public that somehow we cannot develop resources safely. 
It is evidenced in the debate around here on the grazing issue, on the 
timbering salvage issue, on oil and gas exploration, on mining--drive 
them offshore; bring them in from other countries; send those jobs 
overseas.
  The deficit balance of payment; what is it all about? Over a third of 
it is the cost of imported oil. What are we doing today? We are 51.4 
percent dependent on imported oil. In 1974, we were about 36 percent 
dependent. We took action. We created the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 
Now we are selling it off. The Department of Energy says by the year 
2000 we will be two-thirds, 66 percent, dependent on imported oil. What 
does that do with our leverage with the Mideast? The Mideast is in a 
crisis. One of these days, we are going to pay the price because we 
have increasingly become more dependent on imported oil.
  Well, I am using my time to vent my frustration, but what I want to 
communicate here is we have put aside some of our Alaskan issues 
relative to the merits of this bill, issues that we feel very strongly 
about, simply because this is a good bill. It is a compromise bill. And 
it is time, after 2\1/2\ years, or 4 years, depending on your point of 
view, or at least the 104th Congress, to move it now. If we do not move 
it now, it is not going to be moved this session.
  Those who have the responsibility for it not moving are going to have 
to stand up and be counted and explain to me and the other conferees 
specific reasons as to why, because, again, I would challenge the 
administration, and my colleagues, if you are looking for an excuse to 
veto it, yeah, you will find an excuse to veto it. But the poison pills 
have been taken out because

[[Page S11264]]

Representative Young and I and others working together went through a 
laborious process to identify those contentious issues that were veto 
bait. Again, for the benefit of those who do not recall, grazing is 
out, Utah wilderness is out, Tongass is out, the boundary water canoe 
area is out. And what we have left is a good package, 126 bills, 
everything from the Presidio to the New Bedford National Historic Park 
to honor the whaling industry.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the entire titles of 
those bills, including Sterling Forest and the land transfer for the 
Winter Olympics, the entire group be printed in the Record so each 
Member can recognize what is in the package.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

       Authorizes funding to Begin Restoration of the San 
     Francisco Bay--the bill authorizes $450 million over three 
     years to provide for restoration of the San Francisco Bay.
       The Bill is not just about expanding the role of the 
     Federal Government, it also contains significant reforms of 
     existing programs and policies, and makes unneeded Federal 
     lands available for use by other levels of government.
       Reduction of Unneeded Federal Lands--the legislation 
     transfers unreserved BLM lands to the State of Wyoming for 
     schools; removes inappropriate limitations from developed 
     lands along the coast of Florida; corrects a ninety year old 
     survey of public lands in Idaho; and provides lands to the 
     Taos Pueblo tribe in New Mexico.
       Administration Reform of the National Park Service--the 
     bill includes a number of provisions to improve the 
     management of the National Park Service from encouraging 
     private sector involvement in improving the housing of park 
     rangers, Senate confirmation for the Park Director, to 
     elimination of unnecessary Congressional reporting 
     requirements and several other authorities to increase the 
     leveraging of federal funds.
       Recreation Fee Policy Program--the bill provides for 
     complete overhaul of the current recreation fee policies 
     which will provide improved funding for parks and forests by 
     establishing a permanent program to permit agencies to retain 
     recreation fees without appropriations.
       New Republican Environmental Agenda--the legislation 
     provides two key provisions which represent the vision of how 
     Republicans intend to better protect the environment without 
     the heavy hand of the Federal government.
       1. Presidio Trust--instead of the $1.2 billion proposal 
     advocated by some for the federal government to manage the 
     Presidio of San Francisco in perpetuity, this bipartisan 
     approach turns the real estate management aspects of the 
     Presidio over to a private, non-profit trust similar to the 
     Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation.
       Enhancement of the National Park Foundation--the bill 
     enhances the ability of the existing National Park Foundation 
     to raise private sector funds to support National Parks.
       A bill for all Americans. This bill authorizes a land 
     exchange in Utah which will make the downhill event for the 
     2002 Olympics a reality and permit billions of persons around 
     the world to enjoy it.


                         HIGHLIGHTS OF THE BILL

       This package is the biggest and most important parks and 
     public land package since 1978 (nearly 20 years).
       It provides for protection of some of the most important 
     natural and historical events and landscapes in the country 
     as follows:
       Creation of New Parks--Establishes five (5) new parks: the 
     Shenandoah Valley National Battlefield in Virginia to protect 
     important Civil War battlefields; Tallgrass Prairie National 
     Preserve in Kansas to protect one of the last remaining 
     unplowed stretches of tallgrass prairie in the country; 
     Nicodemus National Historic Site to protect a town 
     established as a community for freed Black slaves after the 
     Civil War; New Bedford National Historic Park to honor the 
     whaling industry in Alaska and Massachusetts; and Boston 
     Harbor Islands to protect a dozen unique islands in Boston 
     Harbor.
       Better Protection of Existing National Parks--provides for 
     boundary modifications and expansions of 20 parks around the 
     country from a 1,000 percent increase in size at Richmond 
     National Battlefield in Virginia to a minor boundary 
     adjustment at Zion National Park in Utah.
       Protection of Important Historic Sites--legislation 
     provides protection for very important historical events and 
     persons by expanding the boundary to further protect the 
     Manzanar national Historic Site in California; adjusting the 
     boundary at Independence Hall to improve management; 
     designating the route taken by voting rights marchers from 
     Selma to Montgomery as a National Historic Trail; and 
     reauthorizing funding for the Advisory Council on Historic 
     Preservation.
       Establishment of New Memorials--legislation provides for 
     the construction of memorials on the mall in Washington, DC 
     to Martin Luther King, Junior, Black Revolutionary War 
     Patriots and Japanese-American patriots.
       Protection of Rivers from Coast to Coast--the bill protects 
     important rivers from the Columbia River in Washington to the 
     St. Vrain in Colorado and the Lamprey in New Hampshire.
       Protects Hallowed Ground Where the Blood of American 
     Soldiers was Shed in Battle--the bill protects important 
     battlefields from Yorktown, where America won independence, 
     through the Civil War in Virginia, Mississippi, Louisiana, 
     and Georgia and establishes the American Battlefield 
     Protection Program.

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. That may save them from threatening to read 2,700 
pages of the bill.
  Mr. President, I have just been given a list of the States that are 
affected here, and if my colleagues will just give me a couple more 
minutes, I will conclude my remarks with this, because it is so 
important that each Member understand what is in this for his or her 
State.
  Alabama. Selma to Montgomery Historic Trail designation, historic 
black college funding.
  Alaska. Anaktuuk land exchange, Alaska Peninsula land exchange, 
Alaska PLT, unalaska historic site, Glacier Bay fee, unrecognized 
communities, Federal borough recognition, village land negotiation, 
conveyance to Gross brothers, regulation of Alaska fishing, University 
of Alaska.
  Arizona. Walnut Cameron exchange, Wupatiki boundary adjustment, 
Alpine School District conveyance, ski fees.
  Arkansas. Arkansas-Oklahoma land exchange, Carl Garner Federal lands 
clean-up.
  California. Pesidio, Elsmere Canyon protection, San Francisco Bay 
enhancement, Butte County conveyance, Modoc Forest boundary adjustment, 
Cleveland National Forest, conveyance, Lagomarsino visitor center, 
Tular conveyance, Mineral King, Merced irrigation district land 
exchange, Manzanar historic site exchange, AIDS memorial grove, timber 
sale exchange, Santa Cruz Poland acquisition, Stanislaus Forest 
management, Del Norte School conveyance, ski fees.
  Colorado. Cache La Poudre corridor designation, Rocky Mountain Park 
visitor center, Grand Lake Cemetery authorization, Yucca House boundary 
modification, Rockwell ranch, Black Canyon of the Gunnison, St. Vrain 
exchange, ski fees, Greeley, Colorado land exchange.
  Florida. Florida coastal barrier amendments.
  Georgia. Chickamauga-Chattanooga authorization increase, Fort 
Pulaski.
  Hawaii. Kaloko-Honokohau Advisory Commission extension.
  Idaho. Craters of the Moon boundary adjustment, waterman fossil beds 
boundary adjustment, Cuprum conveyance, Targhee exchange, ski fees.
  Illinois. Illinois and Michigan Canal, Calumet Ecological Park study.
  Kansas. Tallgrass prairie National Preserve authorization, Nicodemus 
Park establishment.
  Lousiana. Civil War center, Laura Hudson visitor center.
  Maryland. Lower Eastern Shore hedge study.
  Massachusetts. Boston Harbor Islands park establishment, Blackstone 
heritage area, Boston Public Library on Freedom Trail, New Bedford 
establishment.
  Michigan. Pictured Rocks boundary adjustment.
  Mississippi. Corinth visitor center historic black college funding, 
Natchez visitor center.
  Missouri. Ozark wild horses preservation.
  Montana. Lost Creek exchange, ski fees.
  New Hampshire. Lamprey River, ski fees.
  New Jersey. Sterling Forest, Great Falls historic district.
  New Mexico. Bisti/De-Na-Zin wilderness, Taos Pueblo conveyance, Rio 
Puerco project, Father Aull land transfer, ski fees.
  New York. Women's rights boundary adjustment, Sterling forest.
  Ohio. Dayton Aviation Commission.
  Oklahoma. Arkansas/Oklahoma land exchange.
  Oregon. Sumpter conveyance, Upper Klamath basin restoration, 
Deschutes basin restoration, Mount Hood corridor exchange, Coquille 
Forest establishment, Bull Run watershed protection, Oregon Islands 
wilderness, Umpaqua River exchange, ski fees.
  Pennyslvania. Delaware Water Gap fee, Independence Park boundary 
adjustment.

[[Page S11265]]

  Rhode Island. Blackstone heritage area expansion.
  South Carolina. Historic black colleges funding.
  Tennessee. Historic black colleges funding.
  Texas. Big Thicket exchange.
  Utah. Snowbasin exchange, Sand Hollow exchange, Zion Park exchange, 
ski fees.
  Virginia. Cumberland Gap boundary adjustment, Richmond Battlefield 
boundary adjustment, Shenandoah Valley Battlefield establishment, 
Shenandoah NP boundary adjustment, Colonial Parkway boundary 
adjustment.
  Washington. Vancouver Reserve establishment, Hanford Reach 
protection, ski fees.
  West Virginia. West Virginia Rivers.
  Wisconsin. Pictured Rocks boundary adjustment.
  Wyoming. Bighorn County conveyance, Douglas County conveyance, Ranch 
A conveyance, ski fees.
  Generic. RS. 2477, Black Revolutionary War Patriots Memorial, MLK 
Memorial, advisory council historic preservation, Revolutionary War & 
War 1812, Am. battlefield protection, ski fees, recreation fees, 
recreation lakes, National Park Foundation, NPS administrative reforms, 
BLM re-authorization, Japanese-American Patriot Memorial, REA right-of-
way.
  Finally, Mr. President, do not be misled. These bills will not pass, 
they will not pass as part of an appropriations bill. Some Members may 
be under the impression that you can just cherry pick this thing and 
their bills will pass as part of the final appropriations. Do not be 
misled. This is not going to happen. As chairman, I will not let it 
happen. I want to put those Members on notice if this conference bill 
fails, all the bills, all of them, are absolutely dead for this 
Congress.
  Finally, I want to recognize the work of Bill Lane, from San 
Francisco, a long-time acquaintance of mine, former publisher and still 
associated with Sunset Magazine, who has done so much groundwork on the 
Presidio effort. I know there are others that deserve recognition, but 
Bill Lane has been a stalwart, promoting the objective to get the job 
done, and get it done now, because if you do not, the Presidio will 
deteriorate to a point where it may be too late.
  I have gone on longer than the Senator from Alaska usually does, not 
preaching to my colleagues. I am imploring you to recognize this for 
what it is. We have all taken a hit. The poison pills have been taken 
out. If the administration wants to use this as an exchange, OK. Then 
it becomes, perhaps, a campaign issue.
  I hope we hear from the administration, their recognition that 
perhaps there is not everything they like in this, but there is so much 
in it, and it is so necessary we address these things now, and the 
recognition of the way this process works--that you cannot move the 
bills through individually because there are holds on them. You have to 
move them in a package. We can get this done now, for the good of the 
States affected, for the good of the Nation, and for the good of the 
House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. Mr. President, the time 
is now. The day is now. We should get on with it.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kempthorne). The Senator from Nebraska is 
recognized.
  Mr. EXON. The Senator from Nebraska understands we are in morning 
business, is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator may proceed as though we were in 
morning business.
  Mr. EXON. I ask that we continue morning business for the purpose of 
making remarks with regard to several retiring Members of the U.S. 
Senate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________