[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 18]
[Senate]
[Pages 26419-26421]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



  DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                        2000--CONFERENCE REPORT

  Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
now proceed to the consideration of the conference report to accompany 
the Interior appropriations bill (H.R. 2466) making appropriations for 
the Department of the Interior and related agencies for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 2000, and for other purposes, and ask for its 
immediate consideration.
  The report will be stated.
  The clerk read as follows:

       The committee on conference on the disagreeing votes of the 
     two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill, H.R. 
     2466, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their 
     respective Houses this report, signed by all of the 
     conferees.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the Senate will proceed to 
the consideration of the conference report.
  (The conference report is printed in the House proceedings of the 
Record of October 20, 1999.)
  Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I further ask consent that the conference 
report be considered as read, the report be agreed to, with the motion 
to reconsider laid upon the table, and I ask consent that any 
statements be printed in the Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The conference report was agreed to.


                         Thomas Paine Memorial

  Mr. CRAIG. Madam President, seven years ago legislation was enacted, 
with my support, to create a memorial on the National Mall honoring 
Thomas Paine. A site has been selected and approved at 1776 
Constitution Ave. However, the memorial project needs to be 
reauthorized until 2003 in order to raise the necessary funding to 
complete construction. Today I want to spend a moment to recognize the 
great American patriot, Thomas Paine.
  Thomas Paine thrived on new ideas, was broad minded and progressive. 
Through brilliantly written persuasion, he advocated four concepts 
which have since become cornerstones of American society and 
governance: independence, representation, unity, and leadership. Thomas 
Paine was the first patriot to call for a ``Declaration of 
Independence'' and a ``Continental Charter'' which proposed the basic 
principles of our constitution: ``securing freedom and property . . . 
and above all things, the free exercise of religion.''

[[Page 26420]]

  Another cornerstone was laid when Paine had the foresight and courage 
to publicly advocate a representative, democratic/republican form of 
government for this country. He influenced George Washington and 
numerous other Revolution leaders as he stressed that government was a 
necessary evil which could only become safe when it was representative 
and altered by frequent elections. The function of government's role in 
society ought only be to regulate society and therefore be as simple as 
possible.
  Paine also introduced our status as a united, sovereign country with 
due regard for individual and states rights. He coined the phrases 
``Free and Independent States of America'' and ``United States of 
America.''
  The last cornerstone that Thomas Paine set for our country was the 
concept of a world leader fighting for human rights. Paine publicly 
denounced chattel slavery and was the first patriot to publish a 
defense of the rights of women in America. In his papers American 
Crisis I, Paine wrote:

       These are the times that try men's souls. . . . Tyranny, 
     like hell, is not easily conquered; . . . What we obtain too 
     cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives 
     every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price 
     upon its goods, and it would be strange indeed if so 
     celestial an article as freedom should not be highly rated.

  Paine has often been quoted by the leaders of this country on the 
great ideas of American independence, freedom and democracy--concepts 
which he was and still is unmatched in expressing. Without Paine's 
vision and initiative, our country would not be the republican world 
power that it is today.
  I am honored to have been able to help authorize his memorial seven 
years ago. I introduced S. 1681 to reauthorize the memorial until 2003 
and I am glad that language from S. 1681 has been included in this bill 
to let this important work continue. Americans will be remembering 
Thomas Paine for generations to come, because of what we are doing 
today.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, as chairman of the Energy and Natural 
Resources Committee, I rise today to congratulate Senator Gorton on his 
good work on the fiscal year 2000 Interior appropriations bill. I know 
the negotiations which led to this conference report were difficult but 
I believe Senator Gorton and the other Senate conferees did an 
excellent job under these trying circumstances. I hope that President 
Clinton recognizes this and signs this appropriations bill into law.
  Today, I want to highlight one particular program which has been the 
subject of recent focus both in the Congress and in the Clinton 
Administration--the Land and Water Conservation Fund. The LWCF Act 
authorizes the expenditure of monies from the LWCF for two purposes 
only: the acquisition of Federal land by the National Park Service, the 
Bureau of Land Management, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the 
United States Forest Service; and formula grants to states for park and 
recreation projects. The LWCF Act creates a balance--between the State 
and local communities and the Federal government; between urban and 
rural communities; between the western and eastern states--for the 
development of outdoor recreation resources.
  Unfortunately, over the last four years the balance between the state 
and Federal-sides of the LWCF has been eliminated. With the action of 
the Clinton Administration and the Congress to shut-down the state-side 
LWCF matching grant program in fiscal year 1996, the LWCF has become a 
Federal-only land acquisition program. As I have expressed before, I 
believe the loss of this balance is a tragic mistake and serves to 
increase the already significant pressure on the Federal government to 
meet the recreation demands of the American public.
  I have worked tirelessly over the last 3 years to restore the state-
side LWCF matching grant program. This year those efforts have reaped 
results. Interior conferees provided $20 million for the state-side 
matching grant program. While I wish more money could have been 
provided, with tough budget targets, it was not easy to find $20 
million in such a lean bill. It is a start.
  I also would like to thank Senator Gorton for ensuring that no 
limitations are placed on the expenditure of this money. It is 
important that States and local governments have the flexibility to 
determine how best to meet the recreation needs of their citizens.
  There may be a need for changes to the state-wide LWCF matching grant 
program. However, it is not appropriate to make these changes on an 
appropriations bill. The President's budget proposal sought to 
fundamentally restructure the state-side matching grant program 
authorized by the LWCF Act. The LWCF state-side program is a formula 
grant program which provides monies to States and local communities for 
the planning, acquisition, and development of parks and recreation 
facilities. The President proposed to replace this program with a 
competitive grant program to the States for the purchase of land and 
open space planning. This proposal would have changed the focus of the 
state-side program and undercut the Federalism inherent in the existing 
program. The Federal government should not dictate a one-size fits all 
mandate for the administration of this program.
  State-side LWCF matching grants, which address the highest priority 
needs of Americans for outdoor recreation, have helped finance well 
over 37,500 park and recreation projects throughout the United States. 
The state-side of the LWCF has played a vital role in providing 
recreational and educational opportunities to millions of Americans. 
The state-side program has worked because it has provided States and 
local communities--not the Federal government--with the flexibility to 
determine how best to meet the recreational needs of its residents. 
This $20 million will begin the process of saving this important 
program.
  The Interior conference report also provides more than $230 million 
for land acquisition by the four Federal land management agencies 
including $40 million for the acquisition of Baca Ranch in New Mexico. 
A few months ago the President announced an agreement to purchase this 
property for $101 million. I have not taken a position on the merits of 
the Baca Ranch acquisition but have an interest in this matter as 
chairman of the authorizing committee.
  No money can be appropriated from the Land and Water Conservation 
Fund for the acquisition of Federal land, including Baca Ranch, in the 
absence of an authorization. The Federal-side LWCF program provides 
monies for the Federal land management agencies to acquire lands 
otherwise authorized for acquisition. The LWCF Act does not provide an 
independent basis for Federal land acquisition. Rather, the LWCF Act 
establishes a funding mechanism for the acquisition of Federal lands 
which have been separately authorized. Section 7 of the statute 
specifies, with limited exceptions, that LWCF monies cannot be used for 
a Federal land purchase ``unless such acquisition is otherwise 
authorized by law.''
  The Interior conference report recognizes this limitation by making 
the acquisition of the Baca Ranch contingent on the enactment of 
authorizing legislation. No matter what the fate of the Interior 
appropriations bill this contingency must be included. It is bad public 
policy to disregard the terms of the LWCF Act and expend this 
significant amount of money for the purchase of additional Federal 
property absent a thorough, and open, public review. This review can be 
best done in the authorizing committee. I want to thank Senator Gorton, 
who sits on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, for recognizing 
the need for specific authorizing legislation and including this 
contingency.
  The Interior conference report also requires that the General 
Accounting Office review and report on the Baca Ranch appraisal. The 
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act 
requires an appraisal of the fair market value of private property the 
Federal government desires to acquire, whether through negotiations or 
condemnation. An appraisal has been done on the Baca Ranch. However, 
the appraisal was conducted not by the Federal government but rather 
the

[[Page 26421]]

seller. While I have no reason to doubt the validity of the appraisal, 
before Congress spends this significant amount of money to purchase the 
Baca Ranch, Congress owes it to the American taxpayer to ensure that 
the $101 million sale price represents the actual fair market value of 
the property. The General Accounting Office is the appropriate entity 
to conduct this review and report to the appropriators and the 
authorizers.
  As many of us remember from two years ago, the conditions imposed on 
the Baca Ranch purchase are consistent with the requirements the Senate 
imposed on the Headwaters Forest and New World Mine purchases. 
Unfortunately, these conditions were eliminated in conference and both 
acquisitions were authorized on the fiscal year 1998 Interior 
appropriations bill. That is wrong. Clearly by agreeing to placing 
these limitations on the Baca Ranch acquisition, the House has realized 
that authorizing, the Headwaters Forest and New World Mine acquisitions 
in the appropriations bill was bad public policy. It is the role of the 
authorizing committee--not the appropriators--to make sure that any 
addition to the Federal estate is warranted.
  There has been talk about the next step in the process. There are 
rumors that the President will not sign this conference report because 
he is disappointed that his Lands Legacy proposal was not totally 
funded. I hope that is not true but if it is I find this reasoning 
nonsensical. The Lands Legacy proposal is nothing but budget gimmicky. 
It seeks to charge against the $900 million LWCF ceiling the increased 
funding of a variety of programs not authorized to derived monies from 
the LWCF. These programs, which may or may not warrant increased 
Federal funding, already have independent authorizations. By engaging 
in this accounting game, the President artificially reduces the amounts 
available for programs authorized by the LWCF Act, including the state-
side matching grant program. If the President seeks to fund these 
programs from the LWCF, he needs to introduce appropriate authorizing 
legislation and work with the Energy and Natural Resources Committee to 
accomplish this goal.
  Finally--and most disturbing to me as chairman of the Energy and 
Natural Resources Committee--are indications that the Clinton 
Administration wants to permanently authorize the use of revenues from 
the Outer Continental Shelf for the Lands Legacy proposal in either the 
Interior appropriations bill or an omnibus appropriations bill. I 
support the use of OCS revenues as a permanent funding source for a 
variety of important conservation programs, in fact I introduced S. 25, 
the Conservation and Reinvestment Act of 1999, to accomplish this goal.
  However, no matter how strong my support is for this goal, providing 
this authorization on any appropriations bill is wrong. This 
proposition is extremely controversial. In the Energy and Natural 
Resources Committee, we have held hearing after hearing on S. 25 and 
other OCS revenue sharing proposals. Since completion of those 
hearings, committee members have struggled to reach a compromise. We 
have struggled because, while every committee member cares about the 
conservation of this nation's natural resources, we each have a 
different vision as to how best to conserve and protect these 
resources. But no matter how difficult this challenge, we will continue 
to strive to reach an agreement that is acceptable not only to the 
Energy and Natural Resources Committee but also to the Senate.
  What the Clinton administration is contemplating would be a unrivaled 
usurpation of the authorizing committees. If the most significant piece 
of conservation legislation introduced in the last 30 years is enacted 
on an appropriations bill without any public input or participation, 
all of us who are authorizers should turn in our gavels.

                          ____________________