[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 80 (Tuesday, June 8, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H3774-H3780]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EDUCATION LAND GRANT ACT
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 189 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 189
Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this
resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule
XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of
the bill (H.R. 150) to amend the Act popularly known as the
Recreation and Public Purposes Act to authorize disposal of
certain public lands or national forest lands to local
education agencies for use for elementary or secondary
schools, including public charter schools, and for other
purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed
with. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall
not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the
chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on
Resources. After general debate the bill shall be considered
for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in
order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of
amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the
nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on
Resources now printed in the bill. The committee amendment in
the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read.
During consideration of the bill for amendment, the chairman
of the Committee of the Whole may accord priority in
recognition on the basis of whether the Member offering an
amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of the
Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 8
of rule XVIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as
read. The chairman of the Committee of the Whole may: (1)
postpone until a time during further consideration in the
Committee of the Whole a request for a recorded vote on any
amendment; and (2) reduce to five minutes the minimum time
for electronic voting on any postponed question that follows
another electronic vote without intervening business,
provided that the minimum time for electronic voting on the
first in any series of question shall be 15 minutes. At the
conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the
Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with
such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may
demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted
in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee
amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous
question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and
amendments thereto to final passage without intervening
motion except one motion to recommit with or without
instructions.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Shaw). The gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Sessions) is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter),
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose
of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 189 is an open rule providing 1 hour of general
debate, divided equally between the chairman and ranking minority
member of the Committee on Resources. The rule makes in order the
Committee on Resources' amendment in the nature of a substitute as an
original bill for the purpose of amendment, which shall be considered
as read.
Members who have preprinted their amendments in the record prior to
their consideration may be given priority in recognition to offering
their amendments if otherwise consistent with House rules.
The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone votes during
consideration of the bill and reduce voting time to 5 minutes on a
postponed question if the vote follows a 15-minute vote.
Finally, the rule provides for one motion to recommit, with or
without instructions.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 150, the Education Land Grant Act, is the product
of tireless efforts of my colleague, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Hayworth). The gentleman is looking for innovative ways to provide
educational resources for State and local governments.
Like many western States, Arizona has scarce non-Federal resources
within the National Forest land system, making it very expensive and
cost-prohibitive for school districts to buy land
[[Page H3775]]
needed to expand or build the necessary school facilities.
The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth) recognized this clearly
when he had to fight to convey 30 acres of Forest Service land to the
Alpine School District for the purpose of building new school
facilities during the 104th Congress. The Education Land Grant Act
would codify this process for all Forest Service land. This legislation
authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to convey Forest Service lands
for educational purposes, as long as the school is publicly funded, the
conveyance serves the public interest, and the land is not
environmentally sensitive or needed for the purpose of the National
Forest System.
{time} 1115
This process mirrors the Recreation and Public Purposes Act, which
allows Congress to sell or lease Bureau of Land Management land to
State and local governments, and qualified nonprofit organizations for
public purposes.
I am proud of the work my colleague, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Hayworth) has done.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support for the rule and the underlying
legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
(Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend
her remarks.)
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, today we return to the Education Land
Grant Act, which was scheduled for consideration a few weeks ago but
postponed until today. The bill was reported on a voice vote from the
Committee on Resources. It is a relatively straightforward bill and
enjoys bipartisan support.
Although I know there are Members who have objections which will be
raised in the ensuing debate, it will be ably handled on our side by my
good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller).
Mr. Speaker, this is a request for an open rule on a bill which could
easily be handled on the suspension calendar, and an open rule which
was granted only after the Democrat efforts to bring forward the
juvenile justice bill were defeated on a party line vote.
Mr. Speaker, this weekend I had the privilege to attend my
granddaughter's high school graduation and to hear her give a
commencement address welcoming her classmates to the last day of their
childhood and the first day of the rest of their lives.
She stated:
We have come to an intersection with no signs, our past
beeping loudly at us and a foggy road ahead. Some of us are
struggling wildly to go into reverse, which in life is
utterly impossible. We are hesitantly facing our future, an
unnerving task for we know not what the future holds. But
take comfort, the beauty of the future lies not in its
planning, but in its spontaneous creation.
Mr. Speaker, I was just like thousands of other parents and
grandparents who attended the graduation ceremonies over the past few
weeks. There we were, watching our kids, our grandkids, the kid next
door who only last week it seems was learning to ride without training
wheels, and is now about to claim his or her future.
Sadly, so many, far, far too many children in recent years have gone
through that rite of passage forever tinged by violence inside their
school walls. In some instances, the classes following these children
will have learned not only the fire drill but the evacuation drill, in
case a classmate has a gun.
A columnist in my hometown paper, the Democrat and Chronicle in
Rochester, New York, observed that we have had so many school shootings
that we can now rank them in order of the carnage which was created. It
is so sad I can hardly speak to it, but in homes across this country,
families are being forced to have exactly that discussion.
Mr. Speaker, if Members do not believe the threat is real, ask the
mere child who came to me recently wondering how to find a bulletproof
vest.
Mr. Speaker, let us not get complacent on the issues of gun violence
and juvenile justice. Let us not let another graduation day pass
without action by this House to reduce violence and to help our
troubled children.
Mr. Speaker, that is still a debate which this House needs, which I
encourage the leadership to allow, and which America wants. Instead of
or at least in addition to the debate on the Education Land Grant Act,
let us have a constructive and bipartisan debate on our response to the
growing crisis of school violence.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, continuing debate on H.R. 150, I yield
such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen),
the chairman of the Subcommittee on Public Lands and National Parks.
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from Texas,
for yielding time to me.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule for H.R. 150. H.R. 150 is
an important piece of legislation that will help schoolchildren in
rural communities throughout this country.
The Education Land Grant Act will allow publicly-funded education
entities to acquire Forest Service land at nominal cost for school
facilities. This will help many of the cash-strapped communities that
are hemmed in by government land to provide an education for their
children.
Mr. Speaker, this is an important bill that will help the Nation's
children. I would like to thank the minority for working with us to
fine-tune this legislation, and I look forward to the discussion on
H.R. 150 on the floor. I support the rule, and hope that my colleagues
will do likewise.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Gibbons).
Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and the
underlying legislation, H.R. 150. I want to thank the gentleman from
Texas for yielding time to me to speak on this bill, and I want to
congratulate the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth) for his vision
and forthrightness and commitment in bringing this bill before the
floor.
Mr. Speaker, I represent the Second Congressional District of Nevada.
It has numerous communities that are land-locked by the Federal
government, Federal land, including Forest Service lands. We have
several rural communities that have very little private land from which
to expand or build new schools.
For example, let me take one of the counties which I represent. It
has an area of approximately 10,000 square miles. That is bigger than
the State of Maine. It has 98 percent of that land being owned,
operated, and managed by the Federal government. That leaves 2 percent
of 10,000 square miles to pay for education, for the infrastructure,
highways, for police and fire services, and all of the other county and
local community needs. They are not able to reach out and improve their
economic and financial base without H.R. 150.
Let me say that that 2 percent is not enough to support many of these
counties. What we are asking for here is 80 acres at a maximum, that is
80 acres for this one county out of 10,000 square miles; 80 acres, not
a lot. Without this legislation, there is no chance for these people to
build new schools, to expand their community for their children, and to
improve the future for their children.
H.R. 150 is a commonsense proposal to enhance the education of our
children, not just in Nevada, not just in Arizona, but across America,
as well.
I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 150, the rule and the underlying
bill. Again, I want to congratulate the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Hayworth).
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth).
Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Sessions), a member of the Committee on Rules, for yielding
time to me.
I also thank my colleague, the gentlewoman from New York (Ms.
Slaughter) for her remarks, such as they pertain to this particular
piece of legislation.
Mr. Speaker, today we have the opportunity to come together as
Americans, not as Democrats or as Republicans but as Americans, to pass
an important piece of legislation that will make it easier for
economically-challenged communities to provide educational facilities
for our children.
[[Page H3776]]
The title of this bill says it all: The Education Land Grant Act.
This act would allow school districts around the country to apply for
conveyances of small tracts of Forest Service land at nominal cost to
build, renovate, or expand their educational facilities.
Currently only school districts near Bureau of Land Management land
can apply for conveyances under the Recreation and Public Purposes Act,
or R&PPA. Modeled after the R&PPA, my legislation simply adds Forest
Service lands to this equation.
Mr. Speaker, the idea for this legislation grew out of work I was
honored to do in the 104th Congress during my first term here
representing the Sixth Congressional District of Arizona. At that time
the Alpine School District in eastern Arizona was in desperate need of
new school facilities. This district lies within Apache County in the
eastern part of the State, near our border with New Mexico.
Eighty-five percent of Apache County, Arizona, is federally-
controlled land. That limited what could be raised in property taxes,
so the school district was dependent on proceeds from timber
harvesting. However, due to lawsuits, logging had been halted.
Consequently, the timber receipts that had gone toward funding the
schools all but dried up.
The Alpine School District faced a dilemma. It could not afford both
the cost of land, estimated to be $225,000, and the cost of new school
facilities. So I introduced legislation which was signed into law that
conveyed 30 acres of Forest Service land to the Alpine School District
so that the people there could use that land for the construction of
new school facilities.
Construction of those facilities proceeds, and I am pleased to report
that when the children of Alpine return to school this fall, the
facilities will be completed.
The legislation we consider today sets up a national mechanism for
school districts to apply to the Secretary of Agriculture for Forest
Service land without having to come to Congress to draw up a specific
bill for a special remedy, as the people of Alpine did.
However, the Education Land Grant Act authorizes the Secretary of
Agriculture to convey Forest Service land only if certain specific
conditions are met:
First, the entity seeking the conveyance must use the land for a
public or publicly-funded elementary or secondary school.
Second, the conveyance must serve the public interest.
Third, the land cannot, cannot be environmentally sensitive or needed
for purposes of the National Forest system.
Finally, the total acreage to be conveyed will be limited to the
amount reasonably necessary for the proposed use, but not to exceed 80
acres.
It also provides that conveyances under this legislation shall be
made for a nominal cost using guidelines established under the R&PPA
for approximately $10 an acre. The bill would provide expedited review
of applications by requiring the Secretary of Agriculture to
acknowledge the receipt of an application within 14 days.
A final determination about whether to convey the land must be made
within 120 days unless the Secretary of Agriculture submits a written
notice to the applicant explaining the delay.
Passage of this bill will be a boon for rural areas throughout our
Nation, but especially in the West and in the South, where there is a
large amount of federally-controlled land.
For example, Gila County, Arizona, a county in my district which is
approximately the size of the State of Connecticut, only finds 3
percent of its land mass privately owned. In other words, 97 percent of
Gila County, Arizona, is under the control, the ownership, if you will,
of some governmental entity.
That is why in the West private land, when we can find it, like in
Gila County, only 3 percent, is extremely expensive. Not only that, but
the West also confronts the problem and the challenge of rapidly
growing populations. In fact, Arizona, Utah, and Nevada are the three
fastest growing States in the Nation. This means there will be more
demand to build school facilities but less land to do it on.
The Education Land Grant Act is one of the ways we can alleviate some
of the West's growing pains and at the same time help our children
receive the education they need and deserve.
Mr. Speaker, my colleagues on both sides of the aisle have
continually talked about the importance of education and the future of
our children. H.R. 150 is a commonsense proposal on which we can all
agree because it will allow economically-strapped school districts
throughout the United States to put the money where it counts, in the
classroom, helping teachers teach, helping children learn. This is a
goal I believe we all support, Mr. Speaker.
I hope this House will strongly support the rule and this bipartisan,
commonsense legislation.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, I
yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on
the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
{time} 1130
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sessions). Pursuant to House Resolution
189 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the
bill, H.R. 150.
{time} 1130
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 150) to amend the Act popularly known as the Recreation and
Public Purposes Act to authorize disposal of certain public lands or
national forest lands to local education agencies for use for
elementary or secondary schools, including public charter schools, and
for other purposes, with Mr. Shaw in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having
been read the first time.
Under the rule, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) and the
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) each will control 30
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen).
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 150, the Education
Land Grant Act. H.R. 150 is a good piece of legislation that will help
school children in rural communities throughout the country. I commend
the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth) for his hard work on this
bill.
The Education Land Grant Act was designated to alleviate the problem
that may help small Western communities. These towns are often hemmed
in by government-owned lands such as BLM land, Indian reservations,
national forests, State land, national monuments, national parks, et
cetera.
Since so much of this land base in these areas is nontaxable
government land, they often find it difficult to afford school
facilities. The little private land that does exist in these areas
tends to be very expensive. This often makes land acquisition for
school facilities cost-prohibitive.
Those communities that are fortunate enough to have a suitable parcel
of BLM land near their town can get land at a nominal cost for school
facilities through the Recreation and Public Purposes Act.
Unfortunately, those communities that are next to a suitable parcel of
forest land do not have this option because the Recreation and Public
Purposes Act does not apply to Forest Service lands.
H.R. 150 was designed to help these towns and cities surrounded by or
adjacent to Forest Service land. They would be able to buy parcels of
land for school facilities from the Forest Service at nominal cost.
This will allow many of these cash-strapped communities to build more
adequate education facilities for their children.
I would like to thank the minority for working closely with us on
this legislation. The legislation we have before us today is much
improved and something I believe we should all support.
I understand that the administration has some concerns with this
legislation. In particular, they object to the
[[Page H3777]]
concept of selling Forest Service lands at less than full market value.
While I understand their concerns, I think it is important to note who
it is that we are trying to help. We are talking about schoolchildren.
We are talking about giving school districts a little land to build an
elementary school or a playground for the children.
This is a good cause and a very good idea. H.R. 150 is simple
legislation that resolves a difficult problem for rural school
districts. I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 150.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such
time as I may consume.
(Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California asked and was given permission to
revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, as introduced, H.R.
150 had significant problems. The bill would have amended the
Recreation and Public Purposes Act to provide for the transfer of
national forest lands to local education entities for use as elementary
and secondary schools, including public charter schools.
At the Committee on Resources hearing on H.R. 150, the administration
testified in opposition to the bill. While they supported the objective
of making Federal lands available in certain circumstances for public
purposes, they testified that the legislation was burdensome.
One of the problems with the bill was that the Recreation and Public
Purposes Act was designed to apply to public lands only. H.R. 150 tried
to shoehorn national forest lands into that law and it was not a very
good fit. The problem was not only with using the Recreation and Public
Purposes Act, but also the fact that the bill sponsor was seeking
waivers or changes to the normal requirements of land conveyances.
We should not be setting different requirements for school lands than
applied to public lands used for hospitals or other public purposes.
Further, we had no definition of a public charter school and, as such,
we did not know what such use would entail.
During the Committee on Resources' consideration of H.R. 150, an
amendment in the nature of a substitute was adopted and made
substantial improvements to this legislation. As reported by the
Committee on Resources, the bill is now a freestanding measure that
provides discretionary authority to the Secretary of Agriculture to
make available certain national forest system lands at nominal cost to
qualifying entities for use as elementary and secondary schools and
related facilities.
The bill requires that in order to make such a conveyance, the
Secretary must determine that, one, the land will be used for the
intended purposes, two, that the conveyance will serve the public
interest, three, that the land to be conveyed is not otherwise needed
for the national forest system, and four, the total acreage to be
conveyed does not exceed the amount reasonably necessary for the
proposed use.
In any event, the conveyance is limited to 80 acres, and the mineral
rights are reserved to the United States. In addition, the committee
amendment includes the reverter clause that would be applicable if the
lands were to be used, without consent of the Secretary, for use other
than the use for which the lands were not conveyed.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 150, as amended by the Committee on Resources, is
a significant improvement from the bill as it was introduced. Although
the administration objects to the bill because the lands are authorized
to be conveyed for less than full cost, I do not think that what the
bill provides in this case is unreasonable, given the discretionary
nature of the bill and the public interests being served.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth), the author of this legislation,
and compliment the gentleman for doing such an excellent job on this
very necessary bill.
Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Utah (Mr.
Hansen) for yielding to me. I also thank the gentleman from California
(Mr. George Miller) because, as I have learned since coming to this
institution, good legislation is often a collaborative process.
I would simply say in response to a couple of points raised by the
administration and the Forest Service, it is precisely because so many
rural communities find themselves enclosed by federally controlled land
are so economically strapped, so economically challenged, so
economically disadvantaged that we brought this legislation forward.
Fair market value in this case cannot apply, nor should it apply; and
this bill rectifies that at a nominal cost to allow these communities
to concentrate their resources where they are best utilized, in the
education of our children, by helping teachers teach, helping children
learn, and helping local communities within their discretion use this
as another tool to empower parents, to empower these varied
communities.
The irony of the Forest Service opposition I think speaks volumes,
sadly, of the fact that ofttimes there are two Americas. There is the
America that is the cause celebre of the news magazines, of the media
events, of the cries on our National Mall to remember the children, to
care for the children.
Mr. Chairman, folks from the Sixth District of Arizona in remote
communities, folks from rural America, do not often get the chance to
come to Washington and engage in a photo op. They do not often get the
chance to have officials from the administration come with hordes of
media to cover an hour in a schoolroom.
But, Mr. Chairman, do rural children not count as much as those in
the city? Do those who find their industry shut and their way of life
abandoned not have the same rights as those who are easily accessible
by the national media and so many opportune photo experiences? I say
yes.
Mr. Chairman, I believe Members on both sides of the aisle, rhetoric
notwithstanding, understand full well our responsibility to children,
whether they reside in a cosmopolitan place such as the Bay area of
California or a rural location such as Apache County, Arizona.
Mr. Chairman, I have often said that Mark Twain had it right. History
does not repeat itself, but it rhymes. With this new Education Land
Grant Act, we will reaffirm one of the greatest examples that has gone
before.
Another Republican member of the Committee on Ways and Means, Justin
Smith Morrill, in the 1860s brought similar legislation to the floor of
this body. Indeed, in the presidential campaign of 1860, it is often
obscured because of the terrible Civil War that followed, but a one-
term Member, former Member of this body, a man named Abraham Lincoln,
told Congressman Morrill that his land grant act would be one of the
pillars of the Lincoln administration.
What the Morrill land grant act did for institutions of higher
learning, granting back to our States federally controlled land for the
establishment of institutions of higher learning with concentration in
the agricultural and mechanical arts, what that act did to make higher
education available to all Americans is what we seek to do today with
this land grant act, for schools K through 12, for those who find
themselves embattled and at an economic disadvantage, without the
voices of the special interests in Washington, to step up and put them
on the cover of ``Time'' or ``Newsweek,'' or speak about the challenges
they face, to say to rural America, this Congress recognizes the needs
that you have.
Mr. Chairman, bipartisan passage of this legislation is essential
because the impact of this legislation will literally be ground
breaking because it will empower local districts. It will give them the
opportunity to have another tool at their disposal to educate their
children as they see fit.
That is why today I come to the floor of this House and I ask my
colleagues to join me, not as Democrats or as Republicans, but as
Americans, in offering this opportunity so that we can end the days
that existed before, so that individual Members of Congress do not have
to come with a bill exclusively designed for a school district in their
area and hope that it is attached like an ornament on a Christmas tree
to a larger piece of legislation and end up with a crazy quilt that
exists at the
[[Page H3778]]
discretion of this House and at the whims of the legislative winds that
may blow.
This legislation strikes a powerful blow on behalf of America's
children, and its impact will be far-reaching and have consequences
that the pundits may ignore and the spinmeisters may do their best to
sweep aside, but will not soon be forgotten in the classrooms of rural
America.
I ask my colleagues to join me in passage of this legislation.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such
time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, as I said before, we do not deny the bill has been, we
believe, substantially improved with the substitute, as proposed, to
the bill, as amended. We have no problem with this.
I would say I do not think this bill is going to solve the education
problems in this country. There is much for this Congress to do. While
we are happy to help pass this legislation, we wish that the majority
would get on with the rest of the agenda that the people in this
country want with respect to schools, and clearly part of that is to
protect our students and schools from violence. We wish that before the
break you had taken up the legislation dealing with background checks
at gun shows, child safety locks, and other measures to try to prevent
the easy access and irresponsible access of young people to guns that
have played out in the tragic incidents, oft too often, in this
country.
{time} 1145
We appreciate that this legislation may impact 40, 50, maybe 60, 70
districts that may have access to some lands, but there are millions of
students that are in schools that are crumbling, that are not ready for
the next century, that have not been wired, and we really think that
the Federal Government ought to participate in helping, whether it is
through the Tax Code or whether through loans or grants, to rebuilding
some of these crumbling schools in America that are both urban and
rural so that children can have a decent setting in which to learn and
in which knowledge can be conveyed and can be acquired by these
children.
So this is an interesting piece of legislation, but it falls far
short of what the country expects out of this Congress with respect to
the children's education in this Nation. And we would hope at some
point, since we are only working a couple of hours a week around here,
that we would find time to address that legislation and deal with the
issue of revitalizing the infrastructure of education in this country.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume
to concur with what the gentleman from Arizona said regarding this bill
before us. I do not think that people who come from the large
metropolitan areas or the large heavily populated States realize the
problems we have in some of rural America. Many States, and we can look
at a lot of the western States in particular and some in the south,
where there is a small community surrounded by government land. I come
from one of those communities myself where all of a sudden the Forest
Service or BLM land has you hemmed in and communities can do nothing.
They cannot touch it or do anything with it. Then, when they want to
expand for a playground or expand their school, they have to come up
against this bureaucracy of how do we do it.
Nothing is more difficult, Mr. Chairman, in America than trying to
figure out a way to get the Federal Government to trade, barter, or
somehow buy some Federal land. It goes through the biggest fudge
factory there is in America, and communities are lucky if they get it
done. It normally takes 11 years before they even look at it.
Therefore, this is an overdue piece of legislation.
At this particular time we have a President of the United States and
Vice President of the United States, and last Thursday the minority
leader of the Democratic side, talking about the need for education,
but we are not seeing too much happening around here. This is the first
time this term, in my mind, that we have seen something that
substantially helps schoolchildren.
I commend the gentleman from Arizona for taking it upon himself to do
it. I know he had some tough fights in committee to get it to this
point, but finally we will get something that will help these little
communities that are a forgotten part of America. Everyone thinks of
the New Yorks and the San Franciscos and the L.A.s, but they do not
think of the little Apache areas or Farmington, Utah, or some other
little place in Wyoming. Finally, we are doing something for those
folks. I commend the gentleman.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Chairman, I support H.R. 150, the Education Land
Grant Act, because it will help children in my district in Kern County,
California, to continue to attend their school situated on federally
owned land in the Los Padres National Forest. Passage of this bill will
finally give the U.S. Forest Service the authority to dedicate 10 acres
of land currently used by the Frazier Park Elementary School for
continuation of this school's operation.
Many schools in the rural West were built on land owned by the U.S.
Forest Service. There is often no other choice because the communities
are surrounded by government owned land--``land-locked''. However,
under current regulations, these schools are facing skyrocketing lease
prices from the Forest Service's new land value assessment methods.
Many schools are finding it almost impossible to remain open because of
being hit by the higher leases. Yet, it makes no sense for the federal
government to dedicate billions to general education while strangling
specific schools that operate on federal land.
Frazier Park Elementary is a good example of a rural school the bill
could aid. Imbedded within the Los Padres National Forest, the school
is now facing a financial crisis. Since 1975, the School has leased and
developed land from the Forest Service. Like many leaseholders, their
property has been reevaluated by the Forest Service, and the lease has
gone up by 1300% in one year from $1,290 per year to $17,750 per year.
Does it make sense to take education dollars from isolated, rural
schools to put into the coffers of a federal land agency? Local Forest
Service officials have repeatedly lamented that they had no authority
to dedicate the land to the school district. Passage of this bill will
finally give the Forest Service the authority and direction from
Congress to make such a dedication in the case of Frazier Park
Elementary School.
The Education Land Grant Act provides real and immediate assistance
to school districts like Frazier Park Elementary School that are asking
for our help. I urge my colleagues to stand and join me in voting for
this bill and provide a resounding answer that we do support education
for our children.
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute printed in the bill is considered as an original bill for
purposes of amendment and is considered as read.
The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is
as follows:
H.R. 150
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 ``Education Land Grant Act''.
SEC. 2. CONVEYANCE OF NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LANDS FOR
EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES.
(a) Authority To Convey.--Upon application, the Secretary
of Agriculture may convey National Forest System lands for
use for educational purposes if the Secretary determines
that--
(1) the entity seeking the conveyance will use the conveyed
land for a public or publicly funded elementary or secondary
school, to provide grounds or facilities related to such a
school, or for both purposes;
(2) the conveyance will serve the public interest;
(3) the land to be conveyed is not otherwise needed for the
purposes of the National Forest System; and
(4) the total acreage to be conveyed does not exceed the
amount reasonably necessary for the proposed use.
(b) Acreage Limitation.--A conveyance under this section
may not exceed 80 acres. However, this limitation shall not
be construed to preclude an entity from submitting a
subsequent application under this section for an additional
land conveyance if the entity can demonstrate to the
Secretary a need for additional land.
(c) Costs and Mineral Rights.--A conveyance under this
section shall be for a nominal cost. The conveyance may not
include the transfer of mineral rights.
(d) Review of Applications.--When the Secretary receives an
application under this section, the Secretary shall--
(1) before the end of the 14-day period beginning on the
date of the receipt of the application, provide notice of
that receipt to the applicant; and
[[Page H3779]]
(2) before the end of the 120-day period beginning on that
date--
(A) make a final determination whether or not to convey
land pursuant to the application, and notify the applicant of
that determination; or
(B) submit written notice to the applicant containing the
reasons why a final determination has not been made.
(e) Reversionary Interest.--If at any time after lands are
conveyed pursuant to this section, the entity to whom the
lands were conveyed attempts to transfer title to or control
over the lands to another or the lands are devoted to a use
other than the use for which the lands were conveyed, without
the consent of the Secretary, title to the lands shall revert
to the United States.
The CHAIRMAN. During consideration of the bill for amendment, the
Chair may accord priority in recognition to a Member offering an
amendment that has been printed in the designated place in the
Congressional Record. Those amendments will be considered read.
The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone a demand for
a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to a minimum of 5
minutes the time for voting on any proposed question that immediately
follows another vote, provided the time for voting on the first
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
Are there any amendments to this bill?
If not, the question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
McHugh) having assumed the chair, Mr. Shaw, Chairman of the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that that
Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 150) to amend
the Act popularly known as the Recreation and Public Purposes Act to
authorize disposal of certain public lands or national forest lands to
local education agencies for use for elementary or secondary schools,
including public charter schools, and for other purposes, pursuant to
House Resolution 189, he reported the bill back to the House with an
amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
The question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 420,
nays 0, not voting 14, as follows:
[Roll No. 171]
YEAS--420
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Andrews
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldacci
Baldwin
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Barrett (WI)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Bryant
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Condit
Conyers
Cook
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crowley
Cubin
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Ewing
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Fowler
Frank (MA)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gejdenson
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill (IN)
Hill (MT)
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kasich
Kelly
Kennedy
Kildee
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kleczka
Klink
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
Kuykendall
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Lantos
Largent
Larson
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Metcalf
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Ose
Owens
Oxley
Packard
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pease
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Phelps
Pickering
Pitts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Reyes
Reynolds
Riley
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Salmon
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sanford
Sawyer
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaffer
Schakowsky
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simpson
Sisisky
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Souder
Spence
Spratt
Stabenow
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sununu
Sweeney
Talent
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Traficant
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Wexler
Weygand
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--14
Bliley
Boucher
Brown (CA)
Chenoweth
Crane
Kilpatrick
Kingston
Lee
McCollum
Pickett
Rush
Smith (MI)
Waters
Weldon (PA)
{time} 1213
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The title of the bill was amended so as to read:
``A bill to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to convey National
Forest System lands for use for educational purposes, and for other
purposes.''
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 171, I was
inadvertently detained in a meeting with AARP re Social Security. Had I
been present, I would have voted ''yes.''
Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 171, I was unavoidably absent
from the vote on H.R. 150. Had I been present, I would have voted
``yes.''
[[Page H3780]]
____________________