[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 118 (Monday, July 23, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H8191-H8193]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STAR-SPANGLED BANNER NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL ACT
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 1388) to amend the National Trails System Act to designate
the Star-Spangled Banner Trail in the States of Maryland and Virginia
and the District of Columbia as a National Historic Trail, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 1388
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 ``Star-Spangled Banner
National Historic Trail Act''.
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF TRAIL.
Section 5(a) of the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C.
1244(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(__) Star-spangled banner national historic trail.--
``(A) In general.--The Star-Spangled Banner National
Historic Trail, a trail consisting of water and overland
routes totaling approximately 290 miles, extending from
Tangier Island, Virginia, through southern Maryland, the
District of Columbia, and northern Virginia, in the
Chesapeake Bay, Patuxent River, Potomac River, and north to
the Patapsco River, and Baltimore, Maryland, commemorating
the Chesapeake Campaign of the War of 1812 (including the
British invasion of Washington, District of Columbia, and its
associated feints, and the Battle of Baltimore in summer
1814), as generally depicted on the map titled `Star-Spangled
Banner National Historic Trail', numbered T02/80,000, and
dated June 2007.
``(B) Map.--The map referred to in subparagraph (A) shall
be maintained on file and available for public inspection in
the appropriate offices of the National Park Service.
``(C) Administration.--Subject to subparagraph (E)(ii), the
trail shall be administered by the Secretary of the Interior.
``(D) Land acquisition.--No land or interest in land
outside the exterior boundaries of any federally administered
area may be acquired by the United States for the trail
except with the consent of the owner of the land or interest
in land.
``(E) Public participation.--The Secretary of the Interior
shall--
``(i) encourage communities, owners of land along the
trail, and volunteer trail groups to participate in the
planning, development, and maintenance of the trail; and
``(ii) consult with other affected landowners and Federal,
State, and local agencies in the administration of the trail.
``(F) Interpretation and assistance.--Subject to the
availability of appropriations, the Secretary of the Interior
may provide, to State and local governments and nonprofit
organizations, interpretive programs and services and
technical assistance for use in--
``(i) carrying out preservation and development of the
trail; and
``(ii) providing education relating to the War of 1812
along the trail.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) and the gentlewoman from Washington (Mrs.
McMorris Rodgers) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
General Leave
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Arizona?
There was no objection.
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1388 would designate the Star-Spangled Banner Trail
in Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia as a National
Historic Trail to commemorate the events of the Chesapeake campaign
during the War of 1812. The bill was introduced by my colleague on the
Natural Resources Committee, Mr. Sarbanes of Maryland, who is a valued
member of our National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Subcommittee.
The Star-Spangled Banner National Historic Trail designated by H.R.
1388 would follow the historic routes used by British and American
troops during the war. The National Park Service supports this
designation, as do an impressive array of State and local governments
and numerous private organizations.
Mr. Speaker, as the bicentennial of the War of 1812 approaches, this
historic trail will help Americans retrace some of the crucial events
of a war that fashioned our Nation's character. Mr. Sarbanes has done
great work on this measure, and I urge my colleagues to support the
bipartisan legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
We cannot support H.R. 1388 for a number of reasons. To start, a more
apt description of this bill is the ``Trail With No Beginning or End.''
It sprawls over a 200-mile radius, has countless possible routes, and
isn't even continuous. How can the public possibly support a trail when
the National Park Service doesn't even know where the trail is? The
American people deserve transparency in the legislation we create.
More importantly, if this legislation were to become law along with
Chairman Rahall's Energy Policy Reform and Revitalization Act, the
outcome would be devastating to people living within 100 miles of this
Chamber. Section 103 of that bill, which could be debated on the floor
next week, prevents desperately needed energy corridors from being
designated within 1 mile of historic areas such as this proposed
Federal trail. Edison Electric Institute, whose members represent 67
percent of all electric customers nationwide, recently submitted a
statement to the Natural Resources Committee. It states: ``New and
arbitrary siting restrictions established by section 103 of H.R. 2337 .
. . could have negative impacts far beyond the effects envisioned by
many proponents of such designations.'' It clearly lays out the
ramifications of the majority's unsound energy policy coupled with
Federal designations such as this proposed trail.
At this point, I will include this statement in the Congressional
Record.
[[Page H8192]]
Statement of the Edison Electric Institute With Respect To Legislation
To Designate Several New National Heritage Areas
The Edison Electric Institute (EEl) appreciates the
opportunity to provide comments with respect to proposed
legislation to designate additional National Heritage Areas
for inclusion in the record of the July 12 hearing. EEI
appreciates the importance of such designations for
encouraging tourism and expanding opportunities for Americans
to learn about and experience the richness of American
history. In making such designations, we believe it is
important for Congress to assure that these designations do
not become an automatic impediment to the siting of
infrastructure necessary to provide essential services that
are critical to American consumers and a productive and
competitive American economy. Towards that end, EEI would be
pleased to work with the Committee to develop language that
would address the concern.
EEI is the association of U.S. shareholder-owned electric
companies. Our members serve 92% of the ultimate customers in
the shareholder-owned segment of the industry and represent
approximately 67% of all electric utility customers
nationwide. As such, EEI's member companies are charged with
assuring that Americans continue to receive reliable,
reasonably-priced electricity. Fulfilling this responsibility
requires a robust electricity transmission grid. Yet, recent
long term reliability assessments of the grid by the North
American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) and the
August 2006 congestion study by the Department of Energy
(DOE) confirm that additional transmission capacity is
necessary. Our growing economy, expanding population,
increasing use of efficient electric technologies, and demand
for renewable and clean coal generation resources require
expansion of the transmission grid.
As proposals to designate National Heritage Areas have
increased and the geographic areas proposed for inclusion in
the heritage areas have expanded to include hundreds of
square miles comprising major portions of states throughout
the country, EEI believes that it is important for Congress
to address the potential conflict between these designations
and the equally important responsibility to assure that the
most basic and critical infrastructure needs of localities,
regions and the nation can be met. Under the best of
circumstances, electric transmission and other infrastructure
facilities are extraordinarily difficult to site, can take
many years to complete, and necessarily involve a balancing
of interests. The length of time it takes to site the
facilities does not come without a cost. For example, already
some of our largest population centers are experiencing
significantly higher electricity costs because of a congested
electricity grid. Siting complications also affect the cost
of capital and overall project costs--costs that are
ultimately born by the electricity consumer.
Legislation proposing National Heritage Area designations
generally leave this potential conflict unaddressed or allow
the unelected private management boards of each heritage area
to decide what would be considered an adverse impact on the
heritage area. Thus we are concerned that heritage
designations could be used to block the siting of needed
infrastructure.
Of related concern, the House Committee on Natural
Resources recently reported H.R. 2337, ``The Energy Policy
Reform and Revitalization Act of 2007.'' Section 103 of that
bill would halt current federal agency reviews of areas
suitable for energy transmission corridors across federal
land, and it would establishing as a principle that rights-
of-way for energy facilities cannot be sited ``within one
mile of any [area] designated or otherwise identified by
State or Federal law or any applicable Federal or State land
use plan for recognition or protection of scenic, natural,
cultural, or historic resources. . . .'' The Secretaries of
Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, Defense, and Interior would be
required to complete and regularly update a study in which
these protected areas are identified and made off limits, and
use of that study is made mandatory when right-of-way
decisions are made.
EEI is deeply concerned that Section 103 will halt recent
progress underway to plan for new energy facilities that will
be needed to transmit electricity to American consumers where
that goal cannot be accomplished without crossing federal
land. We believe that planning for such facilities is the
best way to assure that the facilities can be accommodated in
a way that is compatible with the other significant values
for which federal land is managed.
Furthermore, because of the new and arbitrary siting
restrictions established by Section 103 of H.R. 2337, if it
were enacted into law, heritage area designations covering
large areas could have negative impacts far beyond the
effects envisioned by many proponents of such designations.
For example, there are regions of this country in which
currently proposed heritage area designations, in light of
Section 103, would make it impossible to import electricity
produced from renewable energy resources and clean coal
facilities to urban population centers where such power is in
demand. Yet, geographic, population, zoning, environmental,
and other constraints make it virtually impossible to locate
new generating facilities to meet local demand in these urban
areas.
EEI firmly believes that, given the projected
vulnerabilities in the nation's electricity grid that have
been identified for the next five to fifteen years, the
Congress should not--as it does in Section 103--be
establishing new and arbitrary barriers to the siting or
upgrading of transmission facilities.
Given the importance of electric transmission and other
infrastructure to serve our nation, while also recognizing
the value of National Heritage Area designations to local and
state economies and historic preservation, we strongly urge
the Subcommittee and Congress to resolve the potential for
conflict between the benefits of such designations and the
need for basic, critical infrastructure.
H.R. 1388, coupled with the Democrats' ``No Energy Policy'' bill, has
the effect of leaving millions of people across the United States in
the dark. I urge my colleagues to oppose the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1215
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield such time as he may
consume to the sponsor of the legislation, my colleague from the
Natural Resources Committee, Representative John Sarbanes.
Mr. SARBANES. I thank my colleague for yielding his time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to ask for my colleagues' support of the Star-
Spangled Banner National Historic Trail Act.
At the outset, I would like to thank Chairman Grijalva and Chairman
Rahall for their support of this bill all through the process.
This legislation is the product of thorough study and planning by
interested parties such as the Park Service; local jurisdictions in
Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia; and historians and
experts on the War of 1812.
There are too many to mention here, but over several years these
individuals have been dedicated advocates for creating the Star-
Spangled Banner Trail. This legislation represents the culmination of
their efforts and hard work.
With the bicentennial of the War of 1812 fast approaching us, now is
the time to pass the legislation and begin the process of implementing
the Star-Spangled Banner Trail, which will measurably enhance the
celebration of one of the seminal moments in American history.
The Star-Spangled Banner Trail, through the Park Service at the Fort
McHenry National Monument and Shrine, would commemorate the routes used
by the British and Americans during the 1812 Chesapeake Campaign of the
War of 1812.
The trail, which, in fact, is quite clearly demarcated, would begin
with the June 1814 battles between the British Navy and the American
Chesapeake Flotilla in St. Leonard's Creek in Calvert County, Maryland,
and end at Fort McHenry, where Francis Scott Key composed our national
anthem as he witnessed the Battle of Baltimore and the British met
their ultimate defeat. It would also mark the British invasion of
Washington, D.C., the burning of the Capitol and the White House, and
other battles in between.
Mr. Speaker, this legislation has special meaning for me because of
the time I spent growing up in Baltimore and the long relationship my
family has had with the centerpiece of the trail, Fort McHenry. On
countless occasions, I've enjoyed the fort's history, its vistas of the
Chesapeake Bay, and the surrounding wetlands. I highly recommend that
Members visit the site themselves.
Many refer to the War of 1812 as the ``second war of independence.''
When the war began, our fragile experiment in democracy was still in
its early stages, and the Nation found itself under attack from one of
the most powerful countries in the world. Many wondered whether a
democracy could hold together through the trials of war. The War of
1812 proved that it could, and set the stage for the spread of
democracy around the world.
I urge my colleagues to support the bill. And I yield my time back,
again, with many thanks to Chairman Grijalva for his strong support.
Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
[[Page H8193]]
Grijalva) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R.
1388, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________