[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 16]
[Senate]
[Pages 22316-22322]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                                  2004

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to the consideration of H.R. 2691, which the clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 2691) making appropriations for the Department 
     of the Interior and related agencies for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 2004, and for other purposes.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.


                           Amendment No. 1724

  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I call up a substitute amendment which is 
at the desk. This amendment is the text of S. 1391.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Montana [Mr. Burns] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 1724.

  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of 
Amendments.'')
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I am pleased to bring before the Senate the 
Interior and related agencies appropriations bill for fiscal year 2004. 
In dollar terms, this is a modest bill compared to many of the 
appropriations bills we tackle in this body. It totals about $19.6 
billion in discretionary budget authority. But in terms of its direct 
impact on the lives and livelihoods of the people and communities 
throughout this country, it is a critical bill, and it is of particular 
importance to the Western States, such as my State of Montana, where 
the Department of the Interior and the Forest Service either own or 
manage in trust vast acres of land.
  These are lands where my constituents live. This is where they graze 
livestock, where they mine, where they hike, hunt, fish, and timber. 
What we

[[Page 22317]]

do in this bill affects all of those activities.
  It is not just a public lands bill. It is also a bill that provides 
education, health care, and other core services for the Native 
Americans of America.
  It supports energy research and development that fosters economic 
growth, strengthens our national security posture, and improves the 
quality of our environment. And it supports the treasured cultural 
institutions, such as the Smithsonian and the National Endowment for 
the Humanities--institutions that help tell the story of America and 
that remind us who we are as a people.
  As I suspect is the case with many of my colleagues who have chaired 
appropriations subcommittees, the more I learn about the agencies 
funded in this bill, the harder it gets to make tough choices that have 
to be made, particularly in the current fiscal climate.
  The President's fiscal year 2004 budget request for the Interior bill 
was $19.56 billion in discretionary budget authority, a modest increase 
over the comparable level for fiscal year 2003.
  While the budget request included increases for several activities 
that have considerable merit, it also proposed severe reductions in a 
number of critical programs that have broad support within the Senate. 
With an allocation that is effectively the same as the President's 
request, we had to make some tough choices.
  That said, with the help of Senator Dorgan, my good friend and 
neighbor from North Dakota, we have been able to fashion a responsible 
bill that does a number of very positive things.
  The bill provides increases for the core operating programs of the 
land management agencies, including $72 million for our National Park 
System and $31 million for the Fish and Wildlife Service. The funds 
provided for the park system include $20 million over the budget 
request to increase the base operating budgets of individual parks.
  The bill also increases funding for Bureau of Land Management 
operations by $27 million and adds $34 million to the President's 
request for Forest Service activities.
  From the Land and Water Conservation Fund, the bill appropriates $511 
million. This includes $222 million for Federal land acquisition, an 
increase of $35 million over the budget request and more than double 
the House total of $100 million. As is always the case, there was great 
interest in increasing funding for the land, water, and conservation 
programs, but I think the amount provided is reasonable given the 
constraints of the subcommittee allocation and the many other demands 
on this bill.
  The Interior bill also supports several grant programs. I won't go 
through all the numbers, but among the highlights is a $30 million 
increase over the budget request for payments in lieu of taxes; a $15 
million increase for State wildlife grants; and an increase of $9 
million for the Historic Preservation Fund. The bill also restores a 
proposed $16 million cut in the Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Fund.
  Let me explain PILT, payment in lieu of taxes. This is the money that 
goes directly to the counties to support their activities where a large 
amount of Federal land is found--BLM land, anyway.
  As I mentioned previously, the Interior bill is a vitally important 
bill for Native American communities. It increases funding for the 
Indian Health Service by $88 million over the enacted level, for a 
total of $2.9 billion.
  It includes $574 million for Indian education programs which fully 
funds the budget request for Indian school replacement. It also 
provides an increase of $6 million for tribal community colleges. This 
is a subject that is of particular interest to both Senator Dorgan and 
me and one we may discuss further as we progress with this legislation.
  The bill also provides $243 million for the Office of Special Trustee 
to continue the administration efforts to improve the management of 
Indian trust assets. This is an increase of $95 million over the 
enacted level.
  While I strongly believe Congress must support trust reform, let 
there be no mistake that reform is coming at a very significant cost in 
terms of money, personnel, and management focus. Vital concerns in 
Indian country are being shortchanged because trust reform and related 
litigation are draining both funds and morale.
  We would all like there to be a simple solution, but there just isn't 
one. Settling the case may ultimately be the answer, but at this stage, 
the plaintiffs and the administration do not appear ready to have 
productive negotiations. Even if we settle on any past damages, the 
question remains as to how we manage Indian trust assets in the future. 
This bill continues to support the Department's reform efforts to the 
greatest extent possible.
  I will continue to work closely with the Department, with the 
authorizing committees, and with Indian country to advance the reform 
effort so we can get ourselves out from under this immense cloud.
  The Interior bill also supports an important piece of our Nation's 
energy portfolio, including research on fossil energy and energy 
efficiency, the operation of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. This bill 
provides $1.67 billion for Department of Energy programs, including 
$862 million for energy conservation and $594 million for fossil energy 
research and development.
  Among the cultural programs supported by this bill, the Smithsonian 
will receive an additional $10 million to prepare for the opening of 
two new museums, the Air and Space Museum extension near Dulles 
Airport, and the National Museum of the American Indian on The Mall. 
The National Endowment of the Arts will get $117 million and the 
National Endowment for the Humanities will get $142 million. This is an 
increase of $15 million for the NEH, for an American history 
initiative.
  This has been something the new Member of this body, Senator 
Alexander from Tennessee, has worked on very hard ever since his 
arrival in the Senate and something he and I have discussed many times. 
I know Senator Alexander and his staff have been meeting with 
administration officials and the authorizing committees to discuss ways 
of aligning the administration's American history proposal with his 
own.
  It is my understanding those discussions are going well.
  Certainly we should all be pulling in the same direction on an issue 
such as this. I am excited about this initiative, and I want to applaud 
our good friend from Tennessee for his hard work.
  Finally, I want to talk about funding of wildland fire management. 
This is a subject we find ourselves discussing again and again. The 
reason is this: The current system we have for the fire suppression 
budgeting is broken. Again and again we find ourselves in a situation 
where both the Forest Service and the Department of Interior are forced 
to borrow massive amounts of money from other budget accounts to fight 
the fires. Those accounts are inside their own agencies.
  This is a reasonable mechanism when the amounts being borrowed are 
relatively modest, when the borrowing occurs only during particularly 
bad fire years, and when sufficient surplus carryover funds are readily 
available. But the borrowing has become routine and the amounts 
involved are massive. We no longer have large carryover amounts in 
other accounts. This carryover has disappeared in many accounts with 
the decline of the timber program and the revenues it produced.
  Last year, we borrowed heavily from a number of Forest Service and 
Interior accounts, causing both agencies to stop conducting certain 
activities until those amounts were repaid or replaced. In the end, 
however, we only repaid about 60 cents of every dollar borrowed, which 
is the amount proposed by the administration in its supplemental 
request.
  As a result of this shortfall, a large number of congressionally 
approved projects have either been cancelled or reduced in scope. This 
year we find ourselves in the same situation. Prior to the recess, my 
colleagues may recall I was very upset that the House sent us a 
supplemental appropriations bill that

[[Page 22318]]

did not include the fire funds requested by the administration. Those 
funds were desperately needed in August when my State of Montana was 
suffering from dozens of significant fires. The presence of smoke was 
almost constant during the time I spent in Montana over the recess. In 
fact, two airports had to be closed for a period of time because of 
smoke.
  In a way, I am glad we did not act then. I say this because the $289 
million that is under discussion in the legislative branch 
appropriations bill is totally inadequate. I would not want anybody to 
believe that this amount begins to take care of our problem. The 
Department of Interior has already borrowed $130 million from other 
accounts to fight fires this summer. It expects to borrow $30 million 
more before the end of the fiscal year. The Forest Service has already 
borrowed--and get this figure--$595 million and is contemplating 
another $100 million transferred to get us through this fiscal year. 
Roughly speaking, we will borrow $850 million from other accounts 
before the end of the fiscal year.
  Simply providing the $289 million in the pending administration 
request does not do the trick. These funds, for the most part, have 
already been spent.
  There are not options at this point. We need to repay those accounts 
soon and we need to repay them in full. Sixty cents on the dollar this 
time around would be devastating to a wide variety of programs. They 
range from endangered species monitoring to facilities construction, 
from acquisition to processing even the simplest forms of grazing 
permits. It would amount to a de facto rescission of funds that this 
Congress voted to appropriate when it approved the 2003 bill.
  My colleagues will hear more from me later on this issue, and I will 
likely have an amendment to offer at some point, but for now I want to 
use this opportunity to tell my colleagues this is not just a problem 
for those States where there has been fire. It is a problem for every 
State in this country, because the funds are effectively borrowed from 
every State, including the projects and programs that were funded at a 
specific request of Members in this body. So I call on the 
administration to send up another supplemental request, one that fully 
reflects the amounts that will be spent on fire suppression this fiscal 
year.
  I thank my friend, Senator Dorgan, and his staff. They have been 
great to work with. Of course, we come from almost the same part of the 
country--in fact, we are neighbors--so it was very easy for neighbors 
to get together and to roll up our sleeves and put this bill together. 
His input has been very valuable. We have tried to fashion a bill that 
reflects the priorities of the Senate as a whole. I think this bill 
does just that.
  So I urge my colleagues who have amendments to get them to me or to 
my staff as quickly as possible so we can deal with them and get this 
bill to conference. I caution, however, that we have allocated the 
entire amount of the subcommittee's allocation. Any amendment that 
provides additional funds will have to be fully offset, and I think I 
can speak for Senator Dorgan in saying we will take a dim view of 
amendments that propose to use across-the-board reductions or 
unspecified administrative savings as offsets.
  I ask the support of this Senate for this bill. I would hope we can 
have this bill done by tomorrow, and move on and get this bill into 
conference. I urge my colleagues to support it.
  If I can get the attention of my good friend from North Dakota, I 
look forward to working with him on this issue and I appreciate his 
good help and his input on this bill.
  I yield the floor to my good friend from North Dakota.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, first let me thank Senator Burns. Senator 
Burns is the chairman of this appropriations subcommittee. I have been 
very pleased to work with him. I think his leadership and his work on 
this subcommittee is exemplary.
  This is my first year on this subcommittee. I moved to this position 
from another subcommittee and so it is the first year I have had the 
opportunity to work with Senator Burns, but we have had an excellent 
working relationship.
  This is a very large appropriations subcommittee bill, and I shall 
not repeat that which Senator Burns has already described in any great 
detail, but I do want to make some points. I will go through a couple 
of the items.
  Senator Burns mentioned this bill deals with the BLM, Bureau of Land 
Management, and the funding for their programs, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, 
the National Park Service, and a number of smaller agencies as well. 
There is the Office of Surface Mining, Minerals Management Service, the 
U.S. Geological Survey, the Bureau of Indian Affairs--I am going to 
speak a little bit about that in a couple of minutes--and then the 
larger departmental offices down at the Interior Department that 
includes the Forest Service, which is a very large agency, the 
Department of Energy--a portion of the Department of Energy funding is 
in this--the Indian Health Service, Smithsonian, National Gallery of 
Art, Kennedy Center, National Endowment for the Humanities, National 
Endowment for the Arts, and more.
  As you can see, these are very important public functions for which 
we provide funding. I think we have done as good a job as is possible 
to do, given the restraint on financing many of these functions. I 
think Senator Burns would probably agree there are a number of issues 
that are presented in this appropriations bill for which we would like 
to provide additional funding but could not. But that is the process 
these days, trying to find ways to stretch limited resources over 
unlimited wants that are expressed to the committee.
  Let me mention a couple of issues specifically. First of all, payment 
in lieu of taxes. My colleague, Senator Burns, mentioned that. For 
those who do not understand this issue, it is called P-I-L-T. Payment 
in lieu of taxes is a payment the Federal Government makes on land it 
owns that otherwise would have borne a property tax but, because it is 
in Federal hands, does not pay a property tax. So payment in lieu of 
taxes is the payment the Federal Government makes to these counties 
that makes up what they should have collected in property taxes had 
that land been in private hands.
  As you know, in most cases property around this country has to bear a 
responsibility to help raise the funds for our school systems. Yet if 
you have a substantial amount of Federal land, it doesn't pay property 
taxes and therefore you don't have the revenue coming off that land to 
support the school system and other governmental functions. That is 
what the payment in lieu of taxes is about.
  I am pleased Senator Burns and I were able to increase that amount 
this year. It is very important. The administration had suggested that 
it be decreased a bit. We have actually appropriated, in this bill, $30 
million above that which the administration requested. I think that is 
something important to highlight.
  I want to spend a couple of minutes talking about Indian issues 
because, while that is not the largest part of this bill, it is a very 
important set of issues. I want to talk a bit about it and then I want 
to talk about grazing permits and a couple of other smaller items.
  Let me talk about the Indian issues for a very specific reason. We 
have trust responsibility in this Government for Indian education, 
among other things. That trust responsibility is not something we have 
been able to shed. That is a responsibility we have. It is a 
responsibility we must meet. I believe we have, on Indian reservations 
in this country, bona fide crises in health care, education, and 
housing. This bill deals with two of those--education and health care.
  Let me talk about how it deals with education first of all. The 
administration request on Indian education suggested that we zero out 
funding for the United Tribes Technical College in North Dakota and 
also the Crown

[[Page 22319]]

Point Technical College in New Mexico. Both of them are vocational/
technical schools that are wonderful opportunities for Indian men and 
women, children, to learn and to get a college education. I am pleased 
that Senator Burns and I were able to restore funding to both of those 
important institutions.
  In addition to that, we are restoring some funding that is much 
needed for the 28 tribally controlled community colleges in our 
country. These are tribal colleges that have been remarkably 
successful. Once again, there was a requested cut. We are actually 
increasing funding over last year. Senator Burns and I have talked 
about trying to do more. We hope to be able to do that as we work 
through this process on the floor of the Senate.
  I thought it would be useful, instead of speaking in the abstract, to 
read a letter from someone because I have visited many tribal colleges. 
I said there is a bona fide crisis in education, health care, and 
housing on our reservations. If one doesn't believe that, I encourage 
you to visit and then ask yourself whether that is what we want to 
confine Indian children to, or the adults who live on those 
reservations, with respect to access to health care, access to good 
education, and more.
  Let me read a letter from a woman who wrote to me some while ago 
describing the value of tribal colleges in her life. I think it is an 
instructive letter. As I said, I have visited many tribal colleges and 
this letter says it very well. She says:

       I grew up poor and considered backward by non-Indians. My 
     home was a two-room log house in a place called the ``bush'' 
     on North Dakota's Turtle Mountain Indian Reservation. I 
     stuttered. I was painfully shy. My clothes were hand-me-
     downs. I was like thousands of other Indian kids growing up 
     on reservations across America.
       When I went to elementary school I felt so alone and 
     different. I couldn't speak up for myself. My teachers had no 
     appreciation for Indian culture. I'll never forget that it 
     was the lighter-skinned children who were treated better. 
     They were usually from families that were better off than 
     mine. My teachers called me savage. Even as a young child I 
     wondered . . . What does it take to be noticed and looked 
     upon the way these other children are?
       By the time I reached 7th grade I realized that if my life 
     was going to change for the better, I was going to have to do 
     it. Nobody else could do it for me. That's when the dream 
     began. I thought of ways to change things for the better--not 
     only for myself but for my people. I dreamed of growing up to 
     be a teacher in a school where every child was treated as 
     sacred and viewed positively, even if they were poor and 
     dirty. I didn't want any child to be made to feel like I did. 
     But I didn't know how hard it would be to reach the 
     realization of my dream. I almost didn't make it.
       By the time I was 17 I had dropped out of school, moved to 
     California, and had a child. I thought my life was over. But 
     when I moved back to the reservation I made a discovery that 
     literally put my life back together. My sisters were 
     attending Turtle Mountain College, which had just been 
     started on my reservation. I thought that was something I 
     could do, too, so I enrolled. In those days, we didn't even 
     have a campus. There was no building. Some classes met at a 
     local alcohol rehabilitation center in an old hospital 
     building that had been condemned. But to me, It didn't 
     matter. I was just amazed I could go to college. It was life-
     changing.
       My college friends and professors were like family. For the 
     fist time in my life I learned about the language, history 
     and culture of my people in a formal education setting. I 
     felt honor and pride begin to well up inside me. This was so 
     unlike my prior school experience where I was told my 
     language and culture were shameful and that Indians weren't 
     equal to others. Attending a tribal college caused me to 
     reach into my inner self to become what I was meant to be--to 
     fight for my rights and not remain a victim of circumstance 
     or of anybody. In fact, I loved college so much that I 
     couldn't stop! I had a dream to fulfill . . . or perhaps some 
     would call it an obsession. This pushed me on to complete my 
     studies at Turtle Mountain College and to ultimately earn a 
     Doctorate in Education Administration from the University of 
     North Dakota.
       I've worked in education ever since, from Head Start 
     teacher's aide to college professor. Now I'm realizing my 
     dream of helping Indian children succeed. I am the Office of 
     Indian Education Programs' superintendent working with nine 
     schools, three reservations, and I oversee two educational 
     contracts with two tribal colleges. My life would not have 
     turned out this way were it not for the tribal college on my 
     reservation.
       My situation is not unique and others feel this way as 
     well. Since 1974, when Turtle Mountain College was chartered 
     by the Turtle Mountain tribe, around 300 students have gone 
     on to earn higher degrees. We now have educators, attorneys, 
     doctors and others who have returned to the reservation. 
     They--I should say, we--are giving back to the community. 
     Instead of asking people to have pity on us because of what 
     happened in our past, we are taking our future into our own 
     hands. Instead of looking for someone else to solve our 
     problems, we are doing it.
       There's only one thing tribal colleges need. With more 
     funding, the colleges can do ever more than they've already 
     achieved. We will take people off the welfare rolls and end 
     the economic depression on reservations. Tribal colleges have 
     already been successful with much less than any other 
     institutions of higher education have received. That is why I 
     hope you will continue to support the American Indian College 
     Fund.
       I'm an old timer. The College Fund didn't exist when I was 
     a student. I remember seeing ads for the United Negro College 
     Fund and wishing that such a fund existed for Indian people. 
     We now have our own Fund that is spreading the message about 
     tribal colleges and providing scholarships. I'm so pleased. I 
     believe the Creator meant for this to be. But so much more 
     must be done. There still isn't enough scholarship money 
     available to carry students full time. That is my new dream . 
     . . to see the day when Indian students can receive four-year 
     scholarships so they don't have to go through the extremely 
     difficult struggle many now experience to get their 
     education.
       I hope you'll keep giving, keep supporting the College 
     Fund, so that some day this dream becomes reality. I know it 
     can happen because if my dream for my future came true, 
     anything is possible. Thank you.

  Let me describe to you the signature. The signature is: ``Loretta De 
Long, Ed.D.''
  This is a woman from North Dakota who has done wonderful things in 
the field of education. She describes the circumstance that allowed her 
to get this education, the presence of a tribal college that gave her 
hope and opportunity. We need to fund them and we are not funding them 
adequately. The per-pupil burden that exists on tribal colleges and the 
reimbursement we provide to meet that burden is not equal at all to 
that which we do for public community colleges. In fact, it is 
somewhere very close to half. I have the numbers here. The support per 
student for public community colleges is $8,900 and the public support 
for tribal colleges is just under $4,000.
  One final point. I know this is not a major part of this bill, but I 
have spent a lot of time working on tribal college issues. I just want 
to tell you one other story about going to a tribal college graduation. 
When I spoke at the graduation, I asked who was the oldest graduate. 
And they said: That's her over there. And I went over to say hello.
  This was a woman who was in her early forties. Here is her story.
  I asked her: ``What is your story? `` She was a janitor. She was 
cleaning the hallways and the toilets of the community college. She had 
four children, her husband had left her, and she was working at low 
wages cleaning the hallways and the bathrooms of the community college. 
She thought to herself: I would like to be a graduate of this college. 
Somehow, by the grace of God, through Pell grants, or through all of 
the support we offer to give people opportunity, the day I was there 
this woman was not cleaning the hallways or cleaning the bathrooms of 
this college, she was graduating, wearing a cap and gown, and wearing a 
smile--something no one will ever take from her because she did it 
herself with the help of what we put together to provide opportunity to 
people.
  But, once again, it enriches people's lives. Education is the way up 
the steps, up out of poverty.
  I spoke about tribal colleges just because I care a lot about them. 
These in many instances are places in our country that look like Third 
World parts of the globe. Yet they exist in this country with people 
terribly disadvantaged. It is the route of progress. Education provides 
the opportunity for these people who want opportunity, those who live 
on Indian reservations. This woman is an example of that, and there are 
so many others. I have a whole list of them here which I could talk 
about today.
  My hope is that in the time we are on the floor of the Senate, 
Senator Burns and I can continue to work on this issue, and we intend 
to do that.

[[Page 22320]]

  I will speak just for a moment about Indian health care. The fact is, 
if you visit Indian reservations and take a look at the amount of money 
spent on Indian health care, you will decide that there is something 
fundamentally wrong. This is about young children and others who do not 
have adequate health care. Go and find a reservation with 5,000 people 
living on it with one dentist working out of a trailer house and ask 
yourself: What kind of care for those people exists with respect to 
dentistry? Go to a reservation, for example, and take a look at the 
funding through the Indian Health Service and through the BIA, 
especially with respect to protecting Indian children against sexual 
abuse.
  I had a hearing on that in Bismarck, ND. A woman came to the hearing 
to testify. On this Indian reservation, she was in charge of the social 
services and trying to protect these children. She said to me: I have a 
stack of files on my floor a foot and a half high. These are files of 
allegations of child sexual abuse and abuse of children. They have not 
even been investigated. Why? Because there is no money to investigate 
them. She said: Even when I just have to find a way for somebody to 
come and take a child to the biggest town 10 miles away, to the 
hospital off the reservation, I have to beg to try to borrow a car, to 
put a young kid in a car to take them to the hospital or the clinic.
  At that point, she broke down and began weeping, at a public hearing. 
She just couldn't continue. She said it is just too sad. The fact is we 
are not doing what we should do to protect these children.
  I have this story about some years ago learning of a young lady named 
Tamera Damirez. She was a 3-year-old. She was on an Indian reservation. 
She was a child from a very difficult set of circumstances. She was put 
into foster care by a woman who was handling 150 cases. You get a 
social worker handling 150 cases, and do you think that social worker 
is going to inspect the home where she assigns that child to foster 
care? She didn't. This young girl was sent to foster care at age 3. 
There was a drunken party at that foster care residence. Her nose was 
broken, her arm was broken, her hair was pulled out by the roots--at 
age 3. Why? Because there was not enough money to fund enough social 
workers to inspect the house where you were going to send a 3-year-old 
child.
  I fixed that problem. There is more money there now. There are more 
social workers there. They are inspecting where they are sending 
children. But this should not happen, and it is happening today across 
this country because we are not adequately funding Indian education and 
Indian health care by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
  Part of it is the bureaucracy of BIA, I might also say. I don't want 
to suggest that the BIA is an agency that functions very well in many 
circumstances. I have a lot of grievances with the BIA as well.
  My point is that we have spent a lot of money on a lot of aspects of 
this Government. None is quite so important to me as protecting 
children. I visit places in this country where I just shake my head and 
wonder why it is that these children are not a priority for this 
country. This bill is one bill where we have a responsibility to do 
more, and we need to keep working and fighting and funding ways to do 
more.
  Let me mention just a couple of other items as we proceed.
  Before I finish that piece of my discussion, I know I am taking one 
piece out of this large bill and talking about it some. It is because I 
feel so strongly about it. I know my colleague, Senator Burns, does as 
well. The dilemma and the disappointment is that we have limited 
amounts of money. We need more. We need more to address these issues 
with children, particularly on reservations, and address the issues of 
education and health care.
  Let me talk just for a moment about an issue in the Forest Service 
dealing with grazing permits for ranchers. We have a requirement as a 
result of a previous Federal law that says those who graze on public 
lands and have grazing permits with which to graze cattle on public 
lands, in order to get a renewal of the grazing permit when the permit 
reaches its end, have to have a NEPA--the National Environmental Policy 
Act--evaluation of that permit.
  It was easy enough, I suppose, for the previous administration and 
the previous Congress to say this should be done. But it has proven 
much more difficult for it to be done.
  The Forest Service has done precious little in moving forward on the 
NEPA evaluations of the grazing permits. Ranchers out there who are 
trying to make a living grazing cattle on public lands don't have the 
foggiest idea of whether at the end of this year they will get an 
extension of their existing grazing permit because the NEPA evaluation 
has not been done. That is not their fault. That is the Forest 
Service's fault. The Congress hasn't funded it. The Forest Service 
hasn't done it. As a result, the rancher is wondering whether they will 
get an extension of their permit.
  In recent years, we have extended it a year. This bill extends it a 
year. But at end of each year we are in the same situation.
  I believe we ought to do a couple of things: No. 1, we ought to say 
to the Forest Service: Do this. No. 2, we ought to fund it to get them 
to do it, and we ought to stop holding ranchers hostage on the 
completion of these duties.
  Until we decide to do that, it isn't going to be done this year 
because adequate funding does not exist to do what the law would 
require with respect to NEPA evaluations on grazing permits. I think we 
ought to do more than extensions of 1 year. We don't know exactly what 
it should be. We ought to be talking about that during the discussion 
of this bill.
  Frankly, we should not say to those ranch families out there who have 
cattle grazing on public lands: By the way, at end of each year you are 
going to be threatened with the loss of the permit. The law says the 
NEPA evaluation must be done, but we know it is not being done.
  Let us decide either it gets done and provide the resources to do 
that or at least have reasonable extensions so ranchers aren't held 
hostage at the end of each year by actions of an appropriations 
committee each year. Let us find a way to do that if we can. I hope we 
can talk about that as we move along.
  I will mention one other concern. I have not talked to my colleague 
from Montana about this. He talked about the We The People Project. I 
am a strong supporter of the National Endowment for the Humanities and 
the National Endowment for the Arts. I think both enrich our country. 
Both are programs that are excellent. Visit Europe and see what remains 
from the 15th century. It is not some fossilized, arthritic, calcified 
human being. It is their art. It is this wonderful art that enriches 
Europe and tells us something about the 12th century and the 15th 
century. So, too, are the arts important to our culture. I think these 
are very important--arts and humanities.
  But I must say that doing a new start of We The People--no one, in my 
judgment, would say that We The People--whatever that acronym attaches 
to; in this case, it attaches to the study of history--no one would say 
that is unimportant. It is very important. But we have added money 
previously to the Department of Education for this. To the extent we 
are going to do something new, I really would prefer that it be in the 
Department of Education, or some other device, rather than starting a 
new program in the National Endowment for the Humanities.
  I think history is critically important. The issue of how we are 
going to enhance the learning and the teaching of history is really a 
function of doing so in the classroom.
  I will not object to it being here this year, but the problem with 
all these things, once they stick, it is kind of like Velcro. It gets 
stuck in here and next year it will be here and it becomes a permanent 
program. I think this program belongs somewhere in an education piece 
of legislation. I understand $100 million was added in an amendment by 
Senator Byrd for that purpose and I prefer we do that.
  Those who are pushing for the enrichment of the education of history 
in our school system, absolutely, I fully

[[Page 22321]]

support it. We have spent a lot of time talking about the maths and 
sciences, which I think is important. It is very appropriate to say we 
want kids coming out of our schools to have a great sense of the 
history of this wonderful country of ours. But I don't believe the 
place to do that in terms of nurturing that is in the National 
Endowment for the Humanities. I believe, as Senator Byrd has 
appropriately pushed, the right place to do it is over in the education 
legislation. I know we have colleagues who feel very strongly about 
that. I hope they can perhaps work with Senator Byrd and with us so 
next year we do not have to have this as another continuing and 
building program in the National Endowment for Humanities.
  Having said that, I know there are some who think, boy, this is a 
terrific expansion of National Endowment for the Humanities. I am 
someone who supports the National Endowment for the Humanities. I think 
it is important. But I also believe this particular piece that is now 
added to it is more appropriate with the Department of Education, if we 
are going to do this, and I believe we should do this initiative to 
enhance and stimulate the education of the history of this wonderful 
country in our school system.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, our staff and the staff of Senator 
Alexander and the Department of Education and the administration did 
get together. They are moving to an agreement. I agree maybe the 
Department of Education is where it should be and those funds be 
allocated to be used there.
  But what the Senator from Tennessee was trying to do was highlight 
something of national interest that is happening in North Dakota and 
Montana now. As I said, the Dakota territory and Montana was the heart 
and soul of the book that was written, ``Undaunted Courage.'' Now that 
we are approaching the 200th anniversary of the Louisiana Purchase and 
the trek of Lewis and Clark, there is a lot of interest in our part of 
the country. What was started in the humanities, the interest of Lewis 
and Clark, the interest of the Louisiana Purchase and the impact it had 
on this country, has been very positive for all of us out there and all 
of America.
  Some of the original 13 States got the idea that maybe this country 
is big enough right where it is. If you read another book, ``A 
Wilderness So Immense,'' you get an idea--this was before our 
Constitution was ratified--some of the events that went on in the 
history of the Louisiana Purchase. It is very interesting.
  That is why we are very supportive of history initiatives. We have 
young people coming out of our schools who do not have a sense of 
history. They do not know who they are, why they are, or how they got 
here. This initiative is very important.
  In regard to the Forest Service permit, it is fire suppression money 
that was taken from the accounts that would enable them to issue the 
permits and to complete the NEPA studies. We have to understand that 
and how important these funds are to be replaced in the accounts of the 
BLM and the Forest Service so this work can be completed. The Senator 
from North Dakota is exactly right. These do not have to be done on a 
yearly basis. There should be a longer term with monitoring. I like the 
10-year lease. That is the way it used to be. We find now everywhere we 
had grazing we did not have fires, which is something we should take a 
look at as far as fire prevention and fire suppression and the use of 
the land.
  The other day, I will even tell my good friend from North Dakota, I 
saw a truckload of sheep being unloaded in Missoula County, Montana. 
They were paying the sheep man to run his sheep on public lands for 
weed control, spotted nap weed, and of course earlier in the spring, we 
had the spurge problem. But I thought, what a novel idea. I wished I 
had thought of it.
  We will let that program go to the benefit of the land and also to 
the people who graze the land and make their living and are in the 
business of feeding and clothing.
  Those are the challenges we have ahead of us. This bill impacts a 
lot.
  I have a few clarifications of items in the committee report that I 
would like to have printed in the Record.
  I ask unanimous consent those corrections be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                   Clarifications of Committee Report

       On page 28 of the Committee report, the table includes $3 
     million for ``Independence Square site rehabilitation''. The 
     $1.25 million provided in addition to the budget request is 
     for landscaping improvements to Independence Mall.
       On page 40 of the Committee report under ``Other Recurring 
     Programs'', the reference to the ``Dry Prairie Rural Water 
     System'' should have been to the ``Assiniboine and Sioux 
     Rural Water System.''
       On page 52 of the Committee report, the amount provided for 
     Forest Health Management is $82,073,000, as displayed in the 
     table on that page.

  Mr. BURNS. I remind Senators to get their amendments down here. We 
want to complete this bill by noon tomorrow so we can watch the rain. 
Those folks are worried about forest fires. I don't think anyone on the 
East Coast has to worry about that.
  Mr. DORGAN. I am tempted to talk about the intelligence of sheep and 
enjoying munching on leafy spurge, but I will not do that.
  My colleague describes the real serious problem with spurge and nap. 
We have known in North Dakota when you put sheep on the land, baby 
spurge and leafy spurge is gone and the sheep seem happy.
  Having said that, I go back to make a point on this issue of, we, the 
people. We have Lewis and Clark money to celebrate the bicentennial in 
a number of different places in legislation in several different 
appropriations bills. It was a wonderful expedition, perhaps the 
greatest expedition certainly in the history of this country, perhaps 
ever. The greater the education and the bigger the celebration of that, 
the better for our country and the better for our children to 
understand the richness of that history, as well.
  My only point is, as we think through this in the longer term, this 
money is in the bill and I would like to see if we can find a way with 
the administration to put it where I think it really belongs, and that 
is education.
  The other point I would make in terms of priorities, if we have $15, 
$20, $25 million here and there, we have urgent priorities, especially 
dealing with Indian health, that we need to find some additional 
resources for.
  I did not mention in my opening statement something my colleague from 
Montana mentioned, and that is the forest fire issue. Fire suppression 
money has been borrowed from every account. It is the wrong way to do 
business. What we should do--and we talked about this in the spring 
when we received the budget request; we traditionally get a budget 
request that does not ask for the money that all of us know will be 
necessary and then when the need comes for fire suppression money, they 
take it from virtually every corner and come back with a request for 
emergency funding.
  We ought to understand that forest fires are events that cause a lot 
of television cameras to record them, and cause a lot of angst for 
people who are in the way, but they happen every year. This isn't like 
some big typhoon some place that happens every 10 or 15 years. We know 
we are going to have forest fires every year. We know about what it is 
going to cost us if we have a moderate season of forest fires, or more 
forest fires than a moderate season, and we just as well ought to begin 
to plan for it. Both the administration and the Congress should; 
frankly, neither have.
  I fully support the comments made by my colleague from Montana. We 
need to find a way to come at this up front, in the spring of the year 
each year, to put in sufficient money. In some cases, it may not be 
enough, if we have an extraordinary season of massive forest fires, but 
in most cases we could put money in to cover the kind of year that we 
would have in most situations in this country. So I hope we can do 
that.
  Let me also say, we have some folks on this side of the aisle who 
will have

[[Page 22322]]

amendments. As my colleague has indicated, I would prefer if they would 
just bring them over and offer them. And let's deal with them quickly. 
We do have a little rain coming to the east coast. It would be nice to 
be able to finish this bill. The bill is going to be open for 
amendment, and I would ask colleagues to come over and work with us, 
offer the amendments, and let's work through them today.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 
1724, the pending substitute amendment, be agreed to and considered 
original text for the purpose of further amendment, provided that no 
points of order be waived by virtue of this agreement.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment (No. 1724) was agreed to.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I again say to my colleagues, we are going 
to try to finish this bill before this storm hits tonight. We are 
working now on a managers' package of known amendments, and if there 
are some unknown amendments, I suggest Senators come to the floor, 
submit their amendments, and let us deal with them. If not, we are 
going to move right along in completing this legislation.
  We understand the House is not going to be in tomorrow. So we do not 
want to be caught in that pickle. We want to complete action on this 
appropriations bill if we possibly can. I suggest my colleagues bring 
their amendments to the floor.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sununu). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________