[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 72 (Tuesday, May 18, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5485-S5487]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. THURMOND:
  S. 1064. A bill to provide for the location of the National Museum of 
the United States Army; to the Committee on Armed Services.


       national museum of the united states army site act of 1999

  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, it is not an exaggeration to say that 
Washington, DC possesses one of the highest concentrations of museums, 
art galleries, research institutions, monuments, and memorials to be 
found anywhere in the world. This is a city where we chronicle our 
history, honor our heroes, and introduce people from around the world 
to the ``American experience''.
  Each year millions of people travel to Washington to visit the many 
attractions that are located within the capital city. Some of the most 
popular destinations for visitors are the many excellent museums and 
galleries, located where individuals are able to gain a knowledge and 
perspective about the United States that they may not have possessed 
before their trip to Washington.
  Sadly, one aspect of American history which is not told very well is 
that of the United States Army. While many of the museums in the 
Capital area address military history in general terms, the region 
lacks a museum dedicated solely to the purpose of telling the story of 
our Army. This absence is a discredit to those interested in American 
history as the story of our Army is the story of our Nation, and quite 
obviously the reverse is true. It is also a discredit to the millions 
who have served as soldiers, theirs is a story well worth telling to 
others.
  The United States is a Nation born of battle, as a matter of fact, 
the Army is older than our country. The Army was formed in 1775, while 
the United States was formed in 1776. At every critical juncture of the 
history of the United States, we find the brave soldiers of the Army. 
Whether it was earning our freedom from a colonial power; the mapping 
expedition of Lewis & Clark; the westward expansion of the nation; the 
Civil War, where the Army fought to maintain the unity of the young 
nation; the World Wars where we battled to preserve global peace; the 
Cold War where the Army stood vigilant against the expansionist desires 
of communist countries; in the Persian Gulf chasing a petty dictator 
and bully out of Kuwait; spearheading humanitarian relief efforts in 
any number of countries; or enforcing a fragile peace in Bosnia, the 
soldiers of our Army were there, doing their duty. Certainly this is a 
story worthy of chronicling through a museum, and the time has come to 
build such a facility.
  What I propose is not new. Over the past two decades, many sites have 
been suggested and most are unsatisfactory because they have 
unrealistic development requirements, because their locations are 
unsuitable for such an esteemed building, or they lacked an appropriate 
Army setting. Since 1983, the process of choosing a site for the Army 
Museum has been a long and cumbersome undertaking. A site selection 
committee was organized and it developed a list of seventeen criteria 
which any candidate site is required to possess before it was to be 
selected as home to the Army Museum. Among other requirements, these 
criteria required such things as: an area permitting movement of large 
vehicles for exhibits and tractor trailer trucks for shipments; 
commanding an aesthetically pleasing vista; positive impact on the 
environment; closeness to public transportation; closeness to a 
Washington Tourmobile route; convenience to Fort Myer for support by 
the 3d Infantry--The Old Guard; accessibility by private automobile; 
adequate parking for 150 staff and official visitors; adequate parking 
for a portion of the 1,000,000 visitors-a-year that will not use public 
transportation; food service for staff and visitors; an area that is 
low in crime and is safe for staff and visitors; suitable space--at 
least 300,000 square feet--for construction; a low water table; good 
drainage; no history of flooding; and, suitability for subterranean 
construction.
  Since 1984, more than 60 sites have been studied, yet only a handful 
have been worthy of any serious consideration.
  The most prominent recent site suggestions have included Carlisle, 
Pennsylvania, the Washington Navy Yard, the ``Marriott property'' in 
northern-Virginia, and Fort Belvoir, Virginia. Three of these sites 
clearly have characteristics which are directly contrary to the 
established criteria for site selection. The extraordinary distance of 
Carlisle from Washington speaks for itself. The ``Marriott property'' 
was carefully studied numerous times, and though it was the Army's 
first choice, it was always determined that the site was too small and 
that the cost of the

[[Page S5486]]

property too high. The suggestion that the Army locate its museum in 
Washington's Navy Yard is also directly contrary to prerequisites for 
site selection. The Washington Navy Yard is situated in a difficult to 
get to part of the District, on the Anacostia River, as well as on a 
precarious 50-year flood plain. Because this area floods so often, a 
``Washington Navy Yard Army Museum''--I will repeat this awkward 
location--a ``Washington Navy Yard Army Museum'', might well suffer the 
embarrassment of being closed due to flooding. Furthermore, the Navy 
Yard is simply too small to allow the construction of a facility that 
can chronicle the more than 225-year history of the Army. From even 
before the first blueprint is drawn, architects and historians trying 
to create a museum that will be recognized as a world-class facility 
for the study of the American Army and military history will be limited 
by the lack of space available at the Navy Yard. Secondly, the Navy 
Yard is situated in a part of the District of Columbia well off the 
circuit that visitors travel when they come to Washington. The Navy 
Yard abuts a residential district with narrow streets which means it 
will be confusing for people to drive there, streets will be congested 
with traffic, and there will be a lack of parking for cars and tour 
buses. Additionally, the Navy Yard has become less military in 
character and more of a patchwork home to various government offices. 
To locate the Army Museum in an old Navy yard, which sometimes may be 
under water, would send a clear signal to visitors that choosing a home 
to their history was nothing more than an afterthought. Finally, it 
is simply not appropriate to have a museum chronicling the history of 
the Army at a Navy facility. The Army museum belongs on an Army 
installation.

  As an interesting footnote, the April 27, 1999 issue of the 
Washington Post carried an article about the search for a new location 
to house the headquarters for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms 
and reported that a site on New York Avenue seemed to be the first 
choice. It mentioned that another site in the District had previously 
been considered as the new home of the BATF, that of the Southeast 
Federal Center, ``. . . a huge development envisioned for the Anacostia 
River waterfront south of Capitol Hill, next to the Washington Navy 
Yard.'' Not surprisingly, the article also reported that BATF had 
resisted that option because it was considered--and I quote--``. . .too 
remote''. If the Navy Yard is too remote a site for the BATF, how is it 
any more convenient for the Army Museum or those hundreds of thousands 
of people who will visit it every year?
  In 1991, the Deputy Secretary of Defense directed that the site 
searches include the Mount Vernon Corridor as a possible location for 
the Army Museum. Fort Belvoir quickly became a very attractive 
location. Fort Belvoir offers a 48-acre site; it is only five minutes 
from Interstate 95, which is traveled by more than 300 million vehicles 
each year; it is only three minutes from the Fairfax County Parkway; it 
is served by Metro Bus; and Richmond Highway is next to the main gate 
of Fort Belvoir.
  Beyond its ideal location, Fort Belvoir is also a winner 
historically. It is on a portion of General George Washington's 
properties when he was Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army. It 
is located on the historical heritage trail of the Mount Vernon Estate, 
Woodlawn Plantation, Pohick Church, and Gunston Hall. Situating the 
Army Museum at Fort Belvoir is a natural tie to a long established 
military and historic installation that has already been approved by 
the National Capital Planning Commission to be used for community 
activities, which includes museums, as a part of the Fort Belvoir 
Master Plan. The Fort Belvoir site meets all 17 criteria originally 
established by the Army. With the Marine Corps planning to build its 
heritage center at nearby Quantico, these two facilities would most 
certainly complement each other.
  Indeed, the planned Marine Corps museum is an excellent example of a 
carefully contemplated facility that not only will capture the rich 
history of that service, but make the complex an attractive tourist 
destination. The Marines' heritage complex will be 460,000 square feet 
and will include a museum, a welcome center, an IMAX theater, a 
conference center, and a hotel. Clearly, the Marine Corps has come-up 
with a winning equation for a facility that will tell the story of that 
service and the Army should be allowed to do the same. Placing the Army 
Museum at the Navy Yard will not only inhibit efforts to present the 
history of the Army, but it will also force the establishment of a 
museum that is inferior and not all that it can be. Finally, co-
locating the Army and Marine museums in the same geographic area would 
create a military history ``zone'', so to speak, and greatly increase 
the number of visitors that will take time to stop at both museums to 
learn more about our armed services and the valuable contributions they 
have made to the nation.
  Mr. President, we have been trying to find a suitable site for the 
Army Museum since 1983. While I find it hard to believe that it should 
take 16-years to identify a suitable site, I am willing to concede that 
we should spare no effort in making certain that we find the perfect 
place to locate the Army Museum. I fear that citizens would hesitate 
visiting the Navy Yard if designated as the home for the Army Museum. 
Simply put, Fort Belvoir enjoys every advantage over the Navy Yard, the 
Marriott property, Carlisle Barracks, or any other site, as a place to 
build the Army Museum.
  The bill I am introducing today names Fort Belvoir as the site for 
the Army Museum. Fort Belvoir is the best location in the Washington 
area to host the Army Museum. Army veterans want to remember and show 
their contribution to history in an Army setting and culture in which 
they themselves once served. Fort Belvoir is the perfect place to do 
this and it qualifies on every criterion established in 1983 by the 
Army's Site Selection Committee. Fort Belvoir is Army and should host 
Army history. Therefore, I ask that my colleagues support this bill and 
bring the 16-year search for a home for the Army Museum to a close by 
selecting a worthy home for one of this nation's greatest institutions.
  Mr. President, Thomas Jefferson wrote to John Adams in 1817, ``A 
morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always 
valuable.'' I am pleased to see that the National U.S. Army Museum is a 
task for this Congress at the beginning of a new century, at a time 
when all Americans are proud of their nation's accomplishments and 
those who made it all possible. I am absolutely concerned that all our 
veterans are honored and honored appropriately. Every year, Army 
veterans bring their families to Washington and are disappointed that 
no museum exists as a tribute to their service and sacrifice. Time is 
running out for many Army veterans, especially those of World War II. I 
urge my colleagues to review this important piece of legislation and 
support its passage. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
text of this bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1064

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``National Museum of the 
     United States Army Site Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The Nation does not have adequate knowledge edge of the 
     role of the Army in the development and protection of the 
     United States.
       (2) The Army, the oldest United States military service, 
     lacks a primary museum with public exhibition space and is in 
     dire need of a permanent facility to house and display its 
     historical artifacts.
       (3) Such a museum would serve to enhance the preservation, 
     study, and interpretation of Army historical artifacts.
       (4) Many Army artifacts of historical significance and 
     national interest which are currently unavailable for public 
     display would be exhibited in such a museum.
       (5) While the Smithsonian Institution would be able to 
     assist the Army in developing programs of presentations 
     relating to the mission, values, and heritage of the Army, 
     such a museum would be more appropriate institution for such 
     programs.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to provide for a permanent site for a museum to serve 
     as the National Museum of the United States Army;

[[Page S5487]]

       (2) to ensure the preservation, maintenance, and 
     interpretation of the artifacts and history collected by such 
     museum;
       (3) to enhance the knowledge of the American people to the 
     role of the Army in United States history; and
       (4) to provide a facility for the public display of the 
     artifacts and history of the Army.

     SEC. 3. LOCATION OF NATIONAL MUSEUM OF THE UNITED STATES 
                   ARMY.

       The Secretary of the Army shall provide for the location of 
     the National Museum of the United States Army at Fort 
     Belvoir, Virginia.
                                 ______