SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 1 TOP OF DOC71-123 DTP
HEARING ON H.R. 107, H.R. 400, AND H.R. 452
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC LANDS
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
March 8, 2001
Serial No. 107-2
Page 2 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOCPrinted for the use of the Committee on Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/house
Committee address: http://resourcescommittee.house.gov
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250
Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah, Chairman
NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia, Ranking Democrat Member
Don Young, Alaska,
W.J. ''Billy'' Tauzin, Louisiana
Jim Saxton, New Jersey
Elton Gallegly, California
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee
Joel Hefley, Colorado
Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland
Ken Calvert, California
Scott McInnis, Colorado
Page 3 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOCRichard W. Pombo, California
Barbara Cubin, Wyoming
George Radanovich, California
Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Carolina
Mac Thornberry, Texas
Chris Cannon, Utah
John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania
Bob Schaffer, Colorado
Jim Gibbons, Nevada
Mark E. Souder, Indiana
Greg Walden, Oregon
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho
Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado
C.L. ''Butch'' Otter, Idaho
Tom Osborne, Nebraska
Jeff Flake, Arizona
Dennis R. Rehberg, Montana
Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts
Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American Samoa
Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
Page 4 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOCFrank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
Calvin M. Dooley, California
Robert A. Underwood, Guam
Adam Smith, Washington
Donna M. Christensen, Virgin Islands
Ron Kind, Wisconsin
Jay Inslee, Washington
Grace F. Napolitano, California
Tom Udall, New Mexico
Mark Udall, Colorado
Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
James P. McGovern, Massachusetts
Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Hilda L. Solis, California
Brad Carson, Oklahoma
Betty McCollum, Minnesota
Allen D. Freemyer, Chief of Staff
Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel
Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk
James H. Zoia, Democrat Staff Director
Jeff Petrich, Democrat Chief Counsel
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC LANDS
Page 5 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado, Chairman
DONNA M. CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands Ranking Democrat Member
Elton Gallegly, California
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee
Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland
George Radanovich, California
Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Carolina,
Mac Thornberry, Texas
Chris Cannon, Utah
Bob Schaffer, Colorado
Jim Gibbons, Nevada
Mark E. Souder, Indiana
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho
Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado
Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American Samoa
Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
Tom Udall, New Mexico
Mark Udall, Colorado
Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
James P. McGovern, Massachusetts
Page 6 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOCAnibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Hilda L. Solis, California
Betty McCollum, Minnesota
C O N T E N T S
Hearing held on March 8, 2001
Statement of Members:
Christensen, Hon. Donna M., a Delegate in Congress from the Virgin Islands
Hansen, Hon. James V., a Representative in Congress from the State of Utah
Prepared statement on H.R. 452
Hastert, Speaker J. Dennis, a Representative in Congress from the State of Illinois, Prepared statement on H.R. 400
Hefley, Hon. Joel, a Representative in Congress from the State of Colorado
Prepared statement on H.R. 107, H.R. 400, and H.R. 452
Kildee, Dale E., a Representative in Congress from the State of Michigan
Norton, Hon. Eleanor Holmes, a Delegate in Congress from the District of Columbia
Prepared statement on H.R. 452
Page 7 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOCLetter submitted for the record
Rahall, Hon. Nick J., II, a Representative in Congress from the State of West Virginia
Statement of Witnesses:
Brody, Carolyn, Member, Commission of Fine Arts, Washington, DC
Prepared statement on H.R. 452
Craig, Dr. Bruce, Director, National Coordinating Committee for the Promotion of History, Washington, DC
Prepared statement on H.R. 107
Dishner, Jimmy, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Installations), The Pentagon, Arlington, VA
Prepared statement on H.R. 107
Norquist, Grover, Chairman, Ronald Reagan Legacy Foundation, Washington, DC
Prepared statement on H.R. 452
Powers, Francis Gary, Jr., Founder, Cold War Museum, Fairfax, VA
Prepared statement on H.R. 107
Ring, Richard G., Associate Director, Park Operations and Education, National Park Service, Department of the Interior, Washington, DC
Page 8 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOCPrepared statement on H.R. 107
Prepared statement on H.R. 400
Prepared statement on H.R. 452
Responses to questions submitted for the record
Wymbs, Norm, Chairman, Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home Foundation, Del Ray, FL
Prepared statement on H.R.400
Additional materials supplied:
Text of H.R. 107
Text of H.R. 400
Text of H.R. 452
Map of Commemorative Works Area 1 on National Mall in Washington, DC
List of Area 1 Memorials submitted for the record
HEARING ON H.R. 107, TO REQUIRE THAT THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR CONDUCT A STUDY TO IDENTIFY SITES AND RESOURCES, TO RECOMMEND ALTERNATIVES FOR COMMEMORATING AND INTERPRETING THE COLD WAR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES;
H.R. 400, TO AUTHORIZE THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR TO ESTABLISH A RONALD REAGAN BOYHOOD HOME NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES; AND
H.R. 452, TO AUTHORIZE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A MEMORIAL TO FORMER PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN WITHIN THE AREA OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA REFERRED TO IN THE COMMEMORATIVE WORKS ACT AS ''AREA 1'', TO PROVIDE FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF SUCH MEMORIAL, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Page 9 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOCThursday, March 8, 2001
House of Representatives
Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands
Committee on Resources
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:14 a.m. in Room 1334 Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Joel Hefley [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Mr. HEFLEY. This is my first time to chair this Committee as Chairman of the Committee. I have chaired it in my esteemed colleague from Utah's absence from time to time but this is my first time to chair it and I think I would be remiss if I did not point out the fact that I sat for many years on this Committee under the tutelage of Bruce Vento.
Now Bruce, as you know, we lost last year. He could be very partisan at times. He was very liberal, very different philosophically from me, but if you wanted to challenge Bruce on a public lands issue you had better pack your lunch and come prepared.
And Bruce was a gentleman. If you had a good idea and you were in the minority, in those days it was the practice that any minority good idea would be stolen by someone in the majority. I mean that is just the way things were done. Bruce, if you had a good idea and you were in the minority, he would cosponsor that idea with you.
And I learned a great deal about public lands issues from Bruce Vento and I wonder if at the start of this hearing if we might just take a moment of silence in remembrance of Bruce and his contribution to this Congress and to the United States of America.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOEL HEFLEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO
Page 10 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Good morning everyone and welcome to the hearing today. The Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands will come to order.
I would like to congratulate and welcome my colleague, the Delegate from the Virgin Islands, Ms. Christensen, as the new ranking member of the Committee and I look forward to working with her.
The Subcommittee staff and I will do everything we can to see that this Committee is run in a fair, evenhanded manner and hopefully it isI started to say bipartisan but as nonpartisan a way as possible. Most of the issues we deal with are not or should not be partisan issues in here and some of them will be but mostly they should not be. We will try to operate in as congenial a fashion as possible.
I would also like to point out that the name of the Subcommittee has changed. The Subcommittee name now includes recreation in its title and with good reason. Chairman Hansen and I, along with many other members of the Committee, believe that for the last eight years our nation's premier park system and vast public lands have become more synonymous with unnecessary restrictions on access and a predominant bias toward preservation, rather than the opportunities for recreation and family enjoyment.
Today, and for the foreseeable future, the Subcommittee will add a new focus on recreation and multiple use on our publics lands.
Concerning today's hearing, the Subcommittee will consider three important bills: H.R. 400 sponsored by Speaker Hastert that would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to establish the Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home National Historic Site in Dixon, Illinois; H.R. 452 sponsored by Chairman Hansen that would authorize the establishment of a memorial to former President Ronald Reagan on the National Mall; and H.R. 107 sponsored by me that would require the Secretary of Interior to conduct a study to identify sites and resources for commemorating and interpreting the Cold War.
Page 11 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC I especially look forward to hearing the witnesses' comments on the proposed memorial for former President Reagan. I suspect that this will be an unusual hearing as the new Administration has come out in opposition to not only my bill and Chairman Hansen's bill but to Speaker Hastert's bill, as well.
[The prepared statement of Speaker Hastert follows:]
STATEMENT OF SPEAKER J. DENNIS HASTERT (IL14), ON H.R. 400
Chairman Hefley, Ranking Member Christensen:
Thank you for inviting me to testify before you today in support of H.R. 400 which would establish the Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home National Historic Site in Dixon, Illinois. As you are well aware, this bill would allow the Secretary of the Interior to acquire the Reagan boyhood home from the Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home Foundation to ensure that this important historical structure is protected and maintained in perpetuity.
At this time, I would like to take a moment to recognize Norm and Harriet Wymbswithout their selfless dedicationand the dedication of the folks of Dixon, Illinoisto preserving the legacy of Ronald Reagan, we would not be here today. We all owe them a debt of gratitude.
Ronald Reagan occupies a special place in the heart of all of us from Northern Illinois. We take great pride in the record of our native son. As our 40th President, Ronald Reagan steered this country through some very difficult times. I am sure many of us here today can recall the atmosphere in America when he took office in 1981. We were mired in recession, in the midst of a cold war with the Soviet Union, and there was a real sense that America had seen its better days. By the time Reagan left office, we were in the middle of unprecedented economic growth, peace and freedom were on the rise in every corner of the globe, and we had experienced a re-birth of the American spirit. Reagan's belief in limited government, lower taxes, and individual freedom had transformed American politics and re-ignited our spirit of optimism.
Page 12 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Many of us believe that Reagan's success as President stems in no small part from his upbringing in Illinois. And, while his path to greatness took him to many places, I believe what he learned growing up in Illinois never left him.
Although born in Tampico, Illinois, Reagan has always considered Dixon his hometown. In Reagan's youth, as it is today, Dixon represents a traditional, rural, Midwestern town. In Dixon, Reagan attended school, played football, worked as a lifeguard, and developed the values that would shape his future life in politics. In fact, many of the images of Reagan in his youth, which we are all familiar with, were taken in Dixon and the surrounding area.
The history of Ronald Reagan's life in Dixon is typical of most raised in small Midwestern towns. Reagan's parents, Nelle and Jack, instilled in him a sense of fair play, duty to others, and a respect for hard work. They taught young Ronald that religious or racial prejudice is wrong. And, Jack and Nelle were determined that their children would have every opportunity to excel and saw to it that the Reagan children obtained a college education. These are ideals we must share and pass on to future generations of young Americans.
Ronald was thirteen when he entered Dixon's Northside High School. At Northside,''Dutch'' Reagan played football and basketball, ran track, and acted in school plays. Athletic achievement and theatrical performances in school plays increased his popularity at Northside. In his senior year, Reagan was elected student body president. As was the custom of the time, yearbooks generally included mottoes written by the student to describe attributes or perspective outlooks. Ronald Reagan's reads: ''life is just one grand sweet song, so start the music'' Ambitious, full of life, and ready to take on the world, Reagan graduated from Northside High School in 1928.
Page 13 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
After High School, Reagan was admitted to Eureka College on a partial football scholarship-he lettered in football all 4 years. Reagan washed dishes at his fraternity house and at the girls dormitory on campus for spending money. Reagan worked as a lifeguard and swimming coach in the summer months as well. As a freshman, Ronald Reagan was already a proven leader-he organized and led a student strike in protest of the decision by college administrators to reduce the array of courses offered. The demonstration resulted in the resignation of the college president and a return to the old curriculum. While at Eureka he also made it possible for his older brother Neil, who was then working at a cement plant, to go to college by getting him a job, a partial scholarship, and a deal deferring his tuition until after graduation.
The Depression hit Dixon, Illinois especially hard. The Reagan's were forced to sublet their home and live in one room. Jack and Nelle's next door neighbor at times cooked for them, and handed meals through the window. The Depression had an enormous impact on Reagan-he often recalled the uncertainty of the times by re-telling the story of his father expecting a bonus check and instead being fired on Christmas Eve 1931. The trying times of the Great Depression touched the lives of every American and the Reagans were no exception. The charitable kindness received and practiced by the Reagan's helped them to survive and thrive when hard times came.
After college, Ronald Reagan borrowed his father's beat up Oldsmobile and set out on a 1-day swing of nearby small-town radio stations. Reagan was offered five dollars and round trip bus fare to broadcast a University of Iowa football game. He did so well that the station manager gave him a raise to ten dollars for the remaining games. Early in 1933 World of Chiropractic radio (WOC), a subsidiary of WHO radio in Des Moines, hired Dutch as a full time announcer for $100 a montha lot of money at the time. He had enough money to help his parents and send $10 a month spending money to his brother Nell while he finished college at Eureka. At first, Reagan's oratory was neither polished, nor very professional but he learned to rehearse and sound spontaneous. As we all know, Reagan's weakness became one of his trademark virtues. In the future, Reagan's speeches gave hope to millions around the world who suffered under the oppression of Communism.
Page 14 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
From his job at a small radio station in Iowa, Reagan went on to serve in the Army during World War II, become a movie star, president of the Screen Actors Guild, a traveling spokesman for General Electric, Governor of the State of California, and, ultimately, President of the United States. Wherever he went, however, lie carried the lessons lie learned growing up in Dixon, Illinois, with him.
I believe that, as a Nation, we must preserve and protect places of historical interest for future generations. The affection we, as a Nation, have for the 40''' President of the United States is demonstrated by the fact that so many important things now bear his name-from the airport which serves the Nation's Capital and a Federal building, to the Navy's newest aircraft carrier.
In my mind, however, there is another important piece of Reagan's life that deserves preservation. I believe that Reagan's life in Dixon, Illinois, is critical to understanding the man and the presidency. But don't take my word for it. Take the word of the tens of thousands of visitors who tour his boyhood home every year.
Mr. Chairman, I am proud to represent President Reagan's boyhood home of Dixon, Illinois, in Congress and I am proud to sponsor legislation that will ensure that the opportunity to experience the place where he was raised will be available to all Americans for years to come. I look forward to working with you, and Ranking Member Christensen, to make this a reality as soon as possible.
Page 15 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HEFLEY. I want to thank our panel of witnesses, especially Speaker Hastert and Chairman Hansen, for being here today to testify on these bills.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hefley follows:]
STATEMENT OF HON. JOEL HEFLEY, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC LANDS
Good morning everyone and welcome to the hearing today. The Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands will come to order. I would like to congratulate and welcome my colleague, the Delegate from the Virgin Islands, Ms. Christensen, as the new Ranking Member of the Subcommittee. The Subcommittee staff and I look forward to working with all of you in what I hope will be a very productive, bipartisan, and congenial session for this Subcommittee.
I would also like to point out that the name of the Subcommittee has changed. The Subcommittee name now includes Recreation in its title and with good reason. Chairman Hansen and I along with many other Members of the Committee believe that for the last 8 years our Nation's premier park system and vast public lands have become more synonymous with unnecessary restrictions on access and a predominate bias toward preservation, rather than with opportunities for recreation and family enjoyment. Today, and for the foreseeable future, the Subcommittee will add a new focus on recreation and multiple use on our public lands.
Concerning today's hearing, the Subcommittee will consider three important bills: H.R. 400, sponsored by Speaker Hastert, that would authorize the Secretary of Interior to establish the Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home National Historic Site in Dixon, Illinois; H.R. 452, sponsored by Chairman Hansen, that would authorize the establishment of a memorial to former President Reagan on the National Mall; and H.R. 107, sponsored by me, that would require the Secretary of Interior to conduct a study to identify sites and resources for commemorating and interpreting the cold war. I especially look forward to hearing the witnesses comments on the proposed memorial for former President Ronald Reagan. [I suspect this will be an unusual hearing as the new Administration has come out in opposition to not only my bill and Chairman Hansen's bill, but Speaker Hastert's as well.]
Page 16 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I want to thank our panel of witnesses, especially Speaker Hastert and Chairman Hansen, for being here today to testify on these bills. I now turn the time over to the Ranking Member, Ms. Christensen.
Mr. HEFLEY. I wonder if the gentlelady, Mrs. Christensen, would suspend her comments just a moment in deference to Chairman Hansen, who is going to have to leave and would like to give his comments on his bill. I would ask unanimous consent that we do that, get that out of the way before we go vote. Would that be all right?
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Fine with me. Thank you.
Mr. HEFLEY. All right, Chairman Hansen, we turn it over to you.
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES V. HANSEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF UTAH
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the ranking member for her courtesy. I have another meeting to get to but if I could just quickly give an opening statement on H.R. 452, which establishes a presidential memorial for one of the most influential men of the 20th century.
As one of our most notable Presidents, Ronald Wilson Reagan initiated policies, such as peace through strength that helped win the Cold War, contained the economic stagnation of the early '80's by cutting taxes and increasing funding for the national defense and helped to restore the United States as a leader on the world front. In doing so, President Reagan restored America's faith in itself and our system of government. In short, he restored pride in our nation.
Page 17 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Specifically, this bill creates and then directs the Ronald Reagan Memorial Commission to cooperate with the Secretary of the Interior and the National Capital Memorial Commission to identify and then recommend to Congress an appropriate site for the construction of a memorial honoring the former President Ronald Reagan. The bill specifies that the memorial site be situated in Area 1 as identified in the Commemorative Works Act and that it be placed between the Lincoln Memorial and the U.S. Capitol Building. The Ronald Reagan Memorial Commission would also select the memorial design and raise the necessary funds to complete the memorial.
Furthermore, the commission will have the responsibility to raise the necessary funds from the private sector for the design, construction and maintenance of the memorial and to issue a report to Congress and the President on its activities every 6 months from its first meeting, along with a final report on its findings.
Mr. Chairman, at this time I want to address some of the criticism regarding my legislation. First, the 25-year waiting period established by the CWA is more of an arbitrary time period than representing a particular formula. Quite frankly, it could be five or 50 years. There really is no right time period. I believe that Mr. Reagan is a very special case. Because of the nature of his battle with Alzheimer's disease, sadly it means Mr. Reagan's public life is and has been coming to an end since he left office in 1989.
Secondly, the National Mall has come to represent so much in terms of who we are as a people. It represents our struggles, our achievements and our appreciation for those Americans who led our country in time of crisis. I find it hard to believe that a memorial to President Reagan so negatively impacts the integrity of the beauty of the National Mall.
According to the National Park Service, there are 1,791 acres in Area 1. This includes 608 acres covered by the Potomac River and the Tidal Basin, 344 acres occupied by Federal buildings and museums and 315 acres occupied by existing or planned memorials. That leaves approximately 525 acres of open space. I think if everyone would keep their perspective on this issue another memorial is certainly not going to destroy the vistas of the Mall. In fact, I believe most Americans walking the National Mall to better understand our history would not object to a memorial honoring one of the most influential and historical figures of the 20th century.
Page 18 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Mr. Chairman, H.R. 452 is similar to the bill that former Resource Chairman Don Young introduced last Congress. If you recall, that bill was favorably reported by the Resource Committee.
Mr. Chairman, this bill honors a great American who deserves a national tribute in a place of prominence and recognition on the National Mall alongside the other great leaders of our nation's history.
And with that, thank you so very much for allowing me to do that.
Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you, Chairman Hansen. Rest assured this Committee will take care of your bill in due time.
Mr. HANSEN. That is what I am worried about.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Hansen follows:]
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES V. HANSEN, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES, ON H.R. 452
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
H.R. 452 establishes a Presidential memorial for one of the most influential men of the 20th Century. As one of our most notable Presidents, Ronald Wilson Reagan initiated policies such as peace through strength that helped win the cold war, tamed the economic stagnation of the early 1980's by cutting taxes and increasing funding for the national defense, and helped to restore the United States as leader on the world front. In doing so, President Reagan restored America's faith in itself and our system of government. In short, he restored pride to our Nation.
Page 19 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Specifically, this bill creates and then directs the Ronald Reagan Memorial Commission to cooperate with the Secretary of the Interior and the National Capitol Memorial Commission to identify, and then recommend to Congress, an appropriate site for the construction of a memorial honoring former President Ronald Reagan. The bill specifies that the memorial site be situated in Area 1'' as identified in the Commemorative Works Act, and that it be placed between the Lincoln Memorial and the U.S. Capitol Building. The Ronald Reagan Memorial Commission would also select the memorial design and raise the necessary funds to complete the memorial.
Furthermore, the Commission will have the responsibility to raise the necessary funds from the private sector for the design, construction, and maintenance of the memorial, and to issue a report to Congress and the President on its activities every 6 months from its first meeting, along with a final report on its findings.
Mr. Chairman, at this time, I wanted to address some of the criticism regarding my legislation. First, the 25 year waiting period established by the CWA is more of an arbitrary time period than representing a particular formula. Quite frankly, it could be five or 50 years. There really is no right time period. I believe that Mr. Reagan's is a very special case. Because of the nature of his battle with Alzheimer's disease, sadly it means Mr. Reagan's public life is, and has been coming to an end since he left office in 1989.
Second, the National Mall has come to represent so much in terms of who we are as a people. It represents our struggles, our achievements, and our appreciation for those American's who led our country in times of crisis. I find it hard to believe that a memorial to President Reagan will so negatively impact the integrity or the beauty of the National Mall.
Page 20 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
According to the National Park Service, there are 1,791 acres in Area 1. This includes 608 acres covered by the Potomac River and the Tidal Basin, 344 acres occupied by Federal buildings and museums, and 315 acres occupied by existing or planned memorials. That leaves approximately 524 acres of open space. I think if everyone would keep their perspective on this issue, another memorial is certainly not going to destroy the vistas of the Mall. In fact, I believe most Americans walking the National Mall to better understand our history would not object to a memorial honoring one of the most influential and historical figures of the 20th Century.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 452 is similar to the bill that former Resources Chairman Don Young introduced last Congress. If you recall, that bill was favorably reported by the Resources Committee.
Mr. Chairman, this bill honors a great American who deserves a national tribute in a place of prominence and recognition on the National Mall along side the other great leaders in our Nation's history.
Mr. HEFLEY. The Committee stands in recess while we vote and we will be back as quickly as we can and we will pick up with Mrs. Christensen's statement.
Mr. HEFLEY. The Committee will come back to order and we will go now to Mrs. Christensen.
Page 21 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
STATEMENT OF HON. DONNA CHRISTENSEN, A DELEGATE IN CONGRESS FROM THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure to be here today at the first meeting of the renamed National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands Subcommittee of this Congress.
On behalf of the Democratic members of the Subcommittee, let me congratulate you on your new role as Subcommittee Chairman and we look forward to working with you to address the many issues that will come before this Subcommittee during the 107th Congress.
Today, whether by accident or design, it appears there is a theme to our hearing. Former President Reagan played a significant role in the latter stages of the Cold War and all three measures we will consider today deal with this theme.
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Our first bill, H.R. 107, of which you are the sponsor, Mr. Chairman, directs the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study regarding the sites and resources associated with the Cold War. The tension between the United States and the former Soviet Union that marked the Cold War era had a significant impact on U.S. policy both at home and abroad. As such it is an important element of our recent history.
[The text of H.R. 107 follows:]
Page 22 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Our second bill today, H.R. 400, would require the Secretary to purchase a facility in Speaker Hastert's district in Dixon, Illinois known as the Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home complex and designated as a new national historic site. Apparently former President Reagan lived in this home for a brief period in the mid-1920's. The complex gained some recent attention with an Associated Press story identifying the home as a site of a life-sized portrait of the former President done in jelly beans.
Certainly any site which plays a significant role in the life of a U.S. President and which retains historically significant resources relating to that period is deserving of consideration for addition to our National Park System. In this instance, however, it is unclear what role this property played in former President Reagan's life; nor is much known about its current condition and the condition of the resources located at this site. It is our understanding that no resource study of the home has been completed, as would normally be the case and the bill fails to authorize one.
Thanks to legislation you authored and we in the minority supported, Mr. Chairman, current law directs that a resource study should be done before any new unit is added to the National Park System. In this instance such a study would provide critical information regarding this facility. We look forward to learning more about this particular site from the witnesses before us this morning.
Page 23 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[ The text of H.R. 400 follows:]
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Our third bill, H.R. 452 introduced by Chairman Hansen, would authorize a memorial to former President Reagan on the National Mall here in Washington, D.C. President Reagan's term in office was significant and a significant period in American history and there are many who believe that he deserves a memorial on our National Mall. As the Committee is well aware, however, H.R. 452 violates several critical provisions of the Commemorative Works Act or CWA authored by our former colleague Bruce Vento and others and signed into law by President Reagan himself. In our view, the CWA framework, including the 25-year waiting period, has served the Mall, the public and those memorialized on the Mall very well. The fact that H.R. 452 would exempt this proposed memorial from the sound public policy requirements which apply to all other proposed additions to our National Mall is troubling.
Page 24 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Furthermore, we are puzzled by the apparent haste to place this memorial on the Mall, given that significant honors have already been bestowed on our 40th President. The second largest Federal building in the country, as well as National Airport are named in his honor. In addition, just this past Sunday the $4 billion aircraft carrier RONALD REAGAN was christened, the first carrier ever named for a living President. There is little chance that the American public will forget Ronald Reagan even if the statutory waiting period for a memorial to him on the Mall is respected.
[The text of H.R. 452 follows:]
Page 25 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[Map of Commemorative Works Area 1 submitted for the record follows:]
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, we join you in welcoming our witnesses to the hearing. We look forward to their input on the measures before the Subcommittee today and it is a special pleasure to welcome our colleague from the District, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, to the Subcommittee this morning.
Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you.
Any other opening statements? None on this side?
Mr. DUNCAN. I have no opening statement, Mr. Chairman. I just want to congratulate you and Mrs. Christensen on your new positions. I also say that I agree with your philosophy as expressed in your opening statement and I know you will provide great leadership for this Subcommittee.
Page 26 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you very much.
STATEMENT OF HON. NICK J. RAHALL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
Mr. RAHALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I likewise congratulate you as the new Chairman and Mrs. Christensen as the new ranking member of the Subcommittee and associate myself, Mr. Chairman, with your words in commemoration of our late colleague, Bruce Vento, made during the beginning of today's hearing.
There are a number of concerns already expressed by the ranking member, that I have as well, with the pending legislation, H.R. 452. To be perfectly clear, these concerns have nothing to do with Ronald Reagan. For that matter, this bill could be about putting a monument on the Mall to one of America's most loved characters, Mickey Mouse. Or it could be about a monument to Bill Clinton or any other individual that does not meet the statutory requirements; my concerns would be the same.
The Mall is indeed America's front yard. It is a very special place to Americans and for that reason there are stringent procedures governing whether additional monuments will be located in the area, there is a vetting process, if you will, that has to be followed before such monuments are put on the Mall. These procedures to which I refer and which have already been referred to by others on the Committee, are embodied in the Commemorative Works Act of 1986, so ably and effectively ushered through the Congress by our late colleague Bruce Vento and signed into law, as it so happens, signed into law by President Ronald Reagan.
So I guess I feel a sense of bemusement today, perhaps amusement. The pending legislation seeks to run roughshod over this important statute to achieve the goal of forcing a memorial to Ronald Reagan onto the Mall. For instance, the 1986 law prohibits memorials on the Mall until after the 25th anniversary of the honoree's death. The purpose of that provision is to allow for enough time to allow a person to be judged within the proper historical perspective, not the emotions of the moment, and that simply is not what is being done here. On the other hand, now that I think about it, it perhaps is applicable as there are those who hold that President Reagan's policies in many respects were fatal to the country.
Page 27 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC But simply put, a memorial to one of our greatest Presidents, FDR, for example, was only recently constructed on the Mall. Veterans of World War II have had to wait 55 years and we are only now moving forward with a memorial to their great achievements. So why should the process be any different for Ronald Reagan, regardless of how one views his contributions to our nation? There is a vetting process in place. Our veterans have had to go through that process before they can have their monument on the Mall. The FDR Memorial went through that process and now why throw that process out the window?
Another bill that is the subject of today's hearing would establish a Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home. Now that is certainly less objectionable. Certainly Congress has the right to determine whether it is in the public interest to designate national historic sites and in this regard there are many such designations relating to former Presidents, such as the Truman National Historic Site in Independence, Missouri or the Garfield National Historic Park in Mentor, Ohio.
So I would urge the supporters of the Reagan memorial bill to perhaps do some self-reflection and find some other means of displaying their additional, and well placed admiration for this former President. After all, as the ranking member has already said, we do have an airport, and we have a Federal building named after Ronald Reagan here in the nation's capital. And certainly the Mall is no place with which to play politics. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you, Mr. Rahall.
STATEMENT OF HON. DALE KILDEE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN
Mr. KILDEE. Just briefly, I look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman. You and I have been friends since you first arrived in Congress and you have never needed to attend a conference on civility; you came here with civility and I look forward to working with you.
Page 28 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC I want to associate myself with your remarks on my classmate and seatmate, Bruce Vento.
Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you very much. Let us proceed with our first panel. I do not believe that the Speaker is going to be able to get back over here. There are some activities occurring on the Floor we did not expect. But we do have our delegate from Washington, D.C., the Honorable Eleanor Holmes Norton. If you would join us? Welcome this morning and we will turn the time over to you.
STATEMENT OF HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, A DELEGATE IN CONGRESS FROM THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Ms. NORTON. I appreciate the opportunity to make a few comments on the proposed memorial. I want to be clear that I do not appear this morning as a representative of my party. I am here as a fourth generation Washingtonian and as the member who represents the people of the nation's capital who for 200 years have been the keepers of the history of this city and the guardians of its precious monuments. Official Washington comes and goes and the framers meant there to be permanent residents here so that the continuity of history would not be lost.
We particularly value the L'Enfant plan and all that the Congress and the National Capital Planning Commission have done to respect that plan. That plan assures that the nation's capital will remain what the founders intended and that is a planned city, making the city one of the great capitals in the world and one of the few truly planned cities.
I want also to be clear that I have no quarrel and indeed very much appreciate the desire of Chairman Hansen to have a memorial for a President that is much beloved by many Americans on the Mall and in this city. Indeed Representative Hansen and I have worked together on a number of local projects affecting the capital city and he has always shown great respect for me and for the city and has always worked very amicably with me. I have a real fondness for the Chairman of this Committee.
Page 29 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC I do not come simply to ask you to respect the Commemorative Works Act. I also ask you to allow me to work with you to find an alternative site and to remind you that the 25-year waiting period applies only to the Mall and that there are many, many sites that are off the Mall that might be even more attractive.
There are a number of reasons why the Commemorative Works Act require special treatment for the Mall. Before the 25-year waiting period was enacted the Mall was in danger of being quite overwhelmed with memorials. As we speak, this small centrally located patch of land would already be filled with memorials if the rules were not observed.
The problem continues such that the National Capital Planning Commission has submitted a bill for a no-build area on the Mall itself and the reason for that is that while prior generations were restrained, had a special feeling for the Mall and were restrained, almost self-restrained, in coming forward to ask for memorials, our generation is gobbling up all the space on the Mall, a space meant for eternity. In one generation the Mall has become no longer a green space but already a series of memorials.
The Senate passed the bill for a no-build area reserving space so that if there is a great American 200 years from now you will not find what you are now finding in some authoritarian countries. They have to tear down memorials in order to build memorials because of overbuilding. We are trying to avoid that.
I have no reason to doubt that a memorial to President Reagan would not be prejudiced if the proponents waited out the 25-year time frame and I want to submit to you a compelling precedent.
In 1987 proponents came forward to ask for a memorial for one of the great martyrs of American history, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The Democrats controlled the House then and the Senate and during all the 8 years afterwards that proponents of a King memorial came forward with great emotion to ask that an exception be made for this slain hero of American history but though the House was controlled by the Democrats, at no time was this bill passed until the 25th year had been reached.
Page 30 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC I want to serve notice to all in my party who see the House now almost controlled by Democrats and could become controlled by Democrats, who see 50/50 in the Senate and who see this precedent, I want to serve notice that I will lead the fight against any from my own party who say that if the Republicans can come forward, there's no reason why the Democrats should not.
The Mall must have our respect. It must have the respect of history and for future generations. What will they think of us when they look around and say that within a period of 30 years those folks used it all up. They thought their wars and their Presidents and their history were all there would ever be to American history.
This memorial is proposed out of love and out of respect for former President Reagan. He was one of the most loved Presidents and is already among the most memorialized. We should be careful to respect Ronald Reagan's considerable legacy by demonstrating confidence in the durability of his contributions, that they deserve respect for the rule of law that he showed and modesty, one of his notable characteristics, suggesting that like our greatest Presidents, Ronald Reagan would want to wait his time. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Norton follows:]
Mr. HEFLEY. Ms. Norton, I think this Committee should give special deference to people whose district the Federal Government is trying to place something and so we very much appreciate your comments today.
I think you might in the future accompany your comments with simply a picture of the Gettysburg battlefield, which has been overmemorialized until the first time I went there I was very disappointed to see how many memorials were there. So I think your argument that we need to be very, very careful about how many memorials we have on the Mall is well placed.
Page 31 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC I have no questions. Mrs. Christensen?
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. I have no questions, either. I think the testimony was not only very sensitive and insightful, as usual; it was very complete. No questions. Thanks.
Mr. HEFLEY. Does anyone have questions?
Thank you very much.
Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. HEFLEY. Let us go to panel number two: Mr. Richard Ring, associate director of Park Operations and Education, the National Park Service; Ms. Carolyn Brody, member of the Commission of Fine Arts for Washington; and Mr. Jimmy Dishner, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Installations.
Jimmy, I have to say you and I have faced each other across these ways many times but not in this setting, so we are delighted to have you here today.
We will be on the 5-minute rule. Your statements without objection will be placed in their entirety in the record but if you could hold your comments to five minutes and then we will have questions.
So do you have an order you would like to go in? If not, we will start with you.
STATEMENT OF RICHARD G. RING, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, PARK OPERATIONS AND EDUCATION, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, WASHINGTON, D.C.; ACCOMPANIED BY SALLY BLUMENTHAL, DEPUTY REGIONAL DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
Mr. RING. Mr. Chairman, my name is Dick Ring and I am the Associate Director for Operations and Education of the National Park Service. I am pleased to appear before you for the first time. This is my first hearing in this position. I spent the last eight and a half years as the Superintendent of Everglades National Park working on the ecosystem restoration efforts there.
Page 32 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC I am here to speak to you on all three bills this morning. I appreciate the opportunity to present the Department of the Interior's position. I will summarize the testimony on each of the bills.
On H.R. 107, while we believe that it is wholly appropriate for the National Park Service to undertake a study of this nature, the Administration recommends that the Committee defer action on H.R. 107 until they have been able to begin making progress on the President's initiative to eliminate the National Park Service's deferred maintenance backlog within five years. In most cases we would be seeking a temporary moratorium on new park unit designations or authorization of new studies so that we can focus on our existing resources, on taking care of what we now own.
We also want to make sure that when completing previously authorized studies, we closely examine the costs of acquiring, restoring, and operating a new unit of the National Park System.
With regard to H.R. 400, which would authorize the Secretary of Interior to establish the Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home and National Historic Site in Dixon, Illinois, in 1998 the Congress passed Public Law 105-391, the National Park Omnibus Management Act, which requires congressional authorization of areas to be studied for potential new units of the National Park System. The law also designates the criteria to be followed by the National Park Service in determining whether to recommend an area as a unit of the National Park System.
We recognize the importance of the boyhood home of President Ronald Reagan and therefore appreciate the goal of H.R. 400. We suggest however that the Committee ensure that the intent of Congress as expressed in Public Law 105-391 is carried out by amending the bill to authorize a study of the site to determine whether it conforms with the criteria of that law. Such a review will ensure that the continued expansion of the National Park System does not increase the backlog of deferred maintenance needs, among other things. We would be pleased to work with the Committee on further consideration of the bill.
Page 33 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC And finally, Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak to H.R. 452, to authorize the establishment of a memorial for former President Ronald Reagan within the area referred to as Commemorative Works Area 1 and provide for the design and construction of the memorial.
While the department wholeheartedly supports recognizing former President Reagan's significant contributions to the history of the United States, we believe that it is important that the establishment of a memorial follow the well established process for authorizing memorials that is contained in the Commemorative Works Act of 1986. Following this process will provide the best opportunity for soliciting public input and resolving any concerns regarding the location or nature of the memorial. We therefore recommend that Congress defer action on H.R. 452 until we have an opportunity to examine options that are consistent with the Commemorative Works Act.
That concludes the summary of my statement on the three bills and I would be pleased to take any questions. I would also like to introduce Sally Blumenthal, who is the Deputy Regional Director of the National Capital Region for Land Use and Land Use Coordination and ask her to join me at the table to assist with any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Ring on H.R. 107 follows:]
STATEMENT OF RICHARD G. RING ON H.R. 107
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the Department of the Interior's views on H.R. 107. This bill would require that the Secretary of the Interior conduct a study to identify sites and resources associated with the cold war and to recommend alternatives for commemorating and interpreting that period of our nation's history.
Page 34 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
While we believe that it is wholly appropriate for the National Park Service to undertake a study of this nature, the Administration recommends that the Committee defer action on H.R. 107 until we are able to begin making progress on the President's Initiative to eliminate the National Park Service (NPS) deferred maintenance backlog within five years. We are generally seeking a temporary moratorium on new park unit designations or authorization of new studies so that we can focus existing resources on taking care of what we now own. We also want to make sure that, when completing previously authorized studies, we closely examine the costs of acquiring, restoring, and operating a potential new park unit.
H.R. 107 would require the Secretary of the Interior to prepare a National Historic Landmark theme study to identify sites and resources in the United States that are significant to the cold war. The bill specifically provides that the study consider the inventory of cold war resources that has been compiled by the Department of Defense and other historical studies and research on various types of military resources. H.R. 107 requires the study to include recommendations for commemorating these resources and for establishing cooperative arrangements with other entities.
In addition to authorizing the theme study, H.R. 107 would require the Secretary to prepare and publish an interpretive handbook on the cold war and to disseminate information gathered through the study in other ways. The bill would also require the Secretary to establish a cold war Advisory Committee to consult on the study. H.R. 107 authorizes appropriations of $200,000 for these activities.
The National Historic Landmarks program was established by the Act of August 21, 1935, commonly known as the Historic Sites Act (16 U.S.C. 461 et. seq.) and is implemented according to 36 CFR Part 65. The program's mission is to identify those places that best illustrate the themes, events, or persons that are nationally significant to the history of the United States and that retain a high degree of integrity. Potential national historic landmarks are often identified through ''theme studies'' such as the one that would be authorized by H.R. 107.
Page 35 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
For example, last year the National Park Service completed and transmitted to Congress a National Historic Landmark theme study on the history of racial desegregation of public schools, which was authorized by Public Law 105356, the Act that established the Little Rock Central High School National Historic Site. Federal, state, and local officials across the country are now using this study to identify and evaluate the significance of numerous properties. So far, properties in nine states and the District of Columbia have been recommended for consideration as national historic landmarks. Currently the National Park Service is conducting several other theme studies, including one related to the history of the labor movement, another on the earliest inhabitants of North America, and another on sites associated with Japanese Americans.
At the moment, the history of the cold war has some presence in the National Park System and on the two lists of historic sites maintained by the National Park Service. The National Park System includes one unit related to the cold war, the Minuteman Missile National Historic Site in South Dakota, which Congress established two years ago to preserve and interpret the role of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles in our nation's defense system.
Out of 2,329 designated national historic landmarks, five recognize civilian or military aspects of cold war history, and out of more than 72,000 listings on the National Register of Historic Places, 17 (including the five landmarks) are related to the cold war. The relatively small number of recognized sites is due in large part to the fact that the cold war has only recently been viewed as history. With or without a theme study, these numbers would likely increase over time, and the Department of Defense could take steps on its own to identify these sites.
Page 36 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In addition to our general concern that a new study is not appropriate at this time, we have a technical concern with Section 3, which provides for the establishment of an advisory committee to consult with on the study. In our view, such a committee is unnecessary and, because of the legal requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), would add greatly to the cost of a study and time required to complete it.
National Historic Landmark program regulations already require consultation with Federal, state, and local governments; national and statewide associations; and a variety of other interested parties. Through partnering with a national historical organization, using a peer-review process, and consulting with appropriate subject experts as well as the general public, the National Park Service would ensure that the broadest historical perspectives are represented in any study it undertakes.
In addition, we have been informed by the Department of Justice that the provisions of the bill that would require the Secretary of the Interior to make recommendations to Congress concerning Federal protection for cold war sites appear to violate the Recommendations Clause of the Constitution, which reserves to the President the power to decide whether it is necessary or expedient for the executive branch to make legislative policy recommendations to the Congress. At such time when further consideration of the bill is appropriate, the Administration will be pleased to provide language to remedy the bill's constitutional defects.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. I would be pleased to answer any questions you or other members of the Subcommittee may have.
Page 37 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[The prepared statement of Mr. Ring on H.R.400 follows:]
STATEMENT OF RICHARD G. RING ON H.R. 400
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify on H.R. 400, a bill to authorize the Secretary to establish the Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home National Historic Site in Dixon, Illinois. The Department supports the effort to honor the boyhood home of former President Reagan.
H.R. 400 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to establish the Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home National Historic Site in Dixon, Illinois. It also would require the Secretary to enter into a cooperative agreement with the Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home Foundation for the purpose of operating, maintaining, and using the Historic Site.
In 1998, Congress passed Public Law 105391, the National Parks Omnibus Management Act of 1998, which requires congressional authorization of areas to be studied for potential new units of the National Park System. The law also designates the criteria to be followed by the National Park Service in determining whether to recommend an area as a unit of the National Park System. We recognize the importance of the boyhood home of President Ronald Reagan and therefore appreciate the goals of H.R. 400. We suggest, however, that the Committee ensure that the intent of Congress, as expressed in Public Law 105391, is carried out by amending the bill to authorize a study of the site to determine whether it conforms to the criteria of Public Law 105391. Such a review will ensure that the continued expansion of the National Park System does not increase the backlog of deferred maintenance needs.
Page 38 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
With respect to historical sites, the studies do not only look at whether the event or person associated with the site was historically significant. They also look at the integrity of the buildings, and other factors, such as whether there are other sites that might more appropriately tell the story associated with a particular site.
The National Park system consists of many previous residences of former Presidents. However, there are also many residences of former Presidents that are not part of the system. A study would look at whether the Federal Government is the most appropriate entity to manage the site. Some sites are managed by other entities, such as state governments and private foundations. Conducting a professional study also allows Congress to be sure it is protecting an area that meets the criteria of the National Park System.
A study also would look at the management structure contemplated by the bill. As written, the bill calls for the site to be managed through a partnership between the Reagan Boyhood Home Foundation and the National Park Service. If this is the best management structure for the park unit, it should be endorsed by a study.
Finally, a study will enable the Park Service and the Congress to identify the costs in acquiring, restoring, and operating a potential site. Such a review is important if we are to gain control of the deferred maintenance backlog and eliminate it within five years, as the President's Initiative seeks to do. In most cases, we are seeking a temporary moratorium on new park unit designations or new studies on potential designations, so that we can focus existing resources on taking care of what we now own. In this case, however, we recognize the potential significance of this site and would support an authorization of a new study.
Page 39 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We would be pleased to work with the committee on further consideration of this bill. This concludes my testimony. I would be happy to answer any of your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Ring on H.R. 452 follows:]
STATEMENT OF RICHARD G. RING ON H.R. 452
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the Department of the Interior's views on H.R. 452, to authorize the establishment of a memorial to former President Ronald Reagan within the area referred to in the Commemorative Works Act as Area I and to provide for the design and construction of the memorial.
While the Department wholeheartedly supports recognizing former President Ronald Reagan's significant contributions to the history of the United States, we believe that it is important that the establishment of a memorial follow the well-established process for authorizing memorials that is contained in the Commemorative Works Act of 1986. Following this process will provide the best opportunity for soliciting public input and resolving any concerns regarding the location or nature of the memorial. We therefore recommend that Congress defer action on H.R. 452 until we have an opportunity to examine options that are consistent with the Commemorative Works Act.
H.R. 452 would establish the Ronald Reagan Memorial Commission to plan for a memorial to former President Reagan on the Mall, somewhere between the Capitol and the Lincoln Memorial. The Commission, which would consist of the Chairman of the National Capital Memorial Commission, a member appointed by the Speaker of the House, and a member appointed by the Majority Leader of the Senate, would receive assistance from the National Capital Memorial Commission and the Secretary of the Interior, including staff from the Department who would be detailed to the Commission.
Page 40 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The Commission would be required to recommend to Congress a location and final design for the memorial no later than February 6, 2003. This panel would also be responsible for raising funds from the private sector for the design, construction and maintenance of the memorial. Three sections of the Commemorative Works Act would be waived by this bill.
The Commemorative Works Act of 1986, which guides the process for establishing monuments in the Nation's Capital, was enacted during the Reagan Administration following what some characterized as monumental chaos over the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, which was dedicated in 1982. At that time, Congress was frustrated by the lack of guidelines for the subject matter, siting, and design of memorials, and the lack of a public process. Congress and the Department worked together to study the process, delineate responsibilities and define procedures. Through passage of the Commemorative Works Act, Congress established the process that, today, ensures memorials in the Capital are erected on the most appropriate sites in the Federal City and are of a caliber in design that is worthy of their historically significant subjects.
The Commemorative Works Act envisions a two-step legislative process for establishing a memorial in Area I: first, enactment of legislation that authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to plan for a memorial without naming a specific site; and if, through that process, the Secretary recommends siting the memorial in Area I, enactment of a second piece of legislation that authorizes construction of the memorial. The idea of the two-step process was to protect the Mall the heart of the commemorative landscape of the Nation's Capital by ensuring that a decision to construct a new memorial there would not be made until the Executive branch had conducted an orderly, deliberate process on siting and design. However, H.R. 452, the initial bill for the Reagan memorial, would require this memorial to be sited on the Mall. The Department supports the process established in the Commemorative Works Act. We believe it is appropriate to apply a similar process to the selection of a site for a Ronald Reagan memorial and for design of the memorial.
Page 41 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Under the process established by the Commemorative Works Act, the National Capital Planning Commission, as the planning entity for all Federal projects in the Nation's Capital, and the Commission of Fine Arts, as an advisor on public improvements, location, and execution of public sculptures, play critical roles in the site selection and design processes. We believe that the expertise offered and the approvals required by those entities as well as the process for gaining approval of the Secretary of the Interior or the Administrator of the General Services Administration, as provided for in the Commemorative Works Act, has resulted in one of the most beautiful cities in the world.
We also support the provisions of the Commemorative Works Act that enable us to gain a historical perspective on memorial subjects before a memorial is designed. The Act prohibits the authorization of a memorial to an event, individual, or group before the 25th anniversary of the event or the death of the individual or the death of the last surviving member of the group. The premise behind the 25-year stipulation is that succeeding generations can often provide a more objective viewpoint when evaluating the most appropriate way to honor people of historical significance or historical events. Notable among the many bills introduced in Congress since the formulation of standards set by the Commemorative Works Act were several to memorialize Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The first such bill, introduced in 1987, exempted this 25-year period, and the legislation lapsed. Although successive measures were introduced for the next 8 years, Congress intentionally withheld action on a memorial for Dr. King until the 104th Congress, 25 years after the tragic occurrence of his death. Former President Reagan is a man who follows the rules, and we believe that he is better honored by following the processes set forth in the Commemorative Works Act, which he signed into law as President.
Page 42 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC In addition, the Commemorative Works Act provides the American people with the opportunity to be involved in decisions about how historical events and persons will be honored in the Nation's Capital by providing for public involvement in the siting and design of the memorials. H.R. 452 does not contain provisions for any such public involvement in the Ronald Reagan memorial, and it specifically exempts the three-member Commission from the public involvement processes required by the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
By requiring a recommendation to Congress on siting and design of the memorial by February 6, 2003, H.R. 452 also places a far more difficult deadline on the Ronald Reagan Memorial Commission than under the Commemorative Works Act, which provides 7 years to reach a decision on siting and design of a memorial. The average amount of time for site selection and design process for a major Capital memorial is 46 years after authorizing legislation is enacted.
Moreover, we have been informed by the Department of Justice that section 3(a)(2) of H.R. 452 raises certain constitutional concerns and appears to be inconsistent with other provisions of the bill. At such time when further consideration of the bill is appropriate, the Administration will be pleased to provide language to remedy the bill's constitutional defects.
In addition to our concerns that, under H.R. 452, the Ronald Reagan memorial would not have the advantage of going through the well-thought-out process established by the Commemorative Works Act, we also are concerned about the requirement that the Ronald Reagan Memorial Commission raise all of the necessary funds from private sector sources to design, construct, and maintain the memorial. Other Presidential memorials, such as the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials, the Washington Monument, the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, and the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial, have all been constructed and maintained at least partly with Federal funds.
Page 43 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. I would be pleased to answer any questions you or other members of the Subcommittee may have.
[Responses to questions submitted for the record follow:]
Mr. HEFLEY. Mrs. Brody?
STATEMENT OF CAROLYN BRODY, MEMBER, COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS, WASHINGTON, D.C.
Ms. BRODY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Commission of Fine Arts has submitted its written testimony. What I would like to do here is to highlight our major areas of concern on H.R. 452 and then speak briefly about several specific provisions of the legislation.
The Commission of Fine Arts is charged by Congress with the responsibility to review and approve the site and design of memorials proposed for the nation's capital and it is one of our most serious responsibilities. In our work we are guided by another act of Congress, the Commemorative Works Act enacted in 1986 precisely to establish a structure and process to govern decisions about the siting and design of memorials. This Act mandates not only that expertise in planning, design and architecture is brought to bear but equally important, that there is a full participation in deliberation.
The bill before you today, H.R. 452, contains three exemptions to the Commemorative Works Act which are of great concern to the Commission of Fine Arts. The bill mandates the site location in Area 1, which is also known as the monumental core. As you have heard, it is the area that is most sensitive to the location of memorials. We share the concern of many about the continuing pressure to erect memorials on the Mall.
Page 44 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC The Commemorative Works Act, in fact, mandates a two-step legislative process for any Area 1 memorial and allows an Area 1 location only if the subject is of preeminent historical and lasting significance to the nation. This bill does not follow the two-step legislative process.
The second exemption of concern to us relates to the Commemorative Works Act provision that allows commemorative work to be authorized only after the 25th anniversary of the event or the death of the individual. This moratorium has ensured that the passage of time confirms the lasting and historical significance of the event or individual and it is this provision in the face of an increasing number of memorial requests that helps to ensure that the reason for the memorial does stand the test of time.
The standard, as you have heard, was most recently put to a test in the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial when Congress, after several entreaties in various Congresses, held to the 25th anniversary.
The third exemption in H.R. 452 of concern to us relates to process. Congress has put into place through the Commemorative Works Act a process for approving the site and design of memorials. The Commission of Fine Arts, along with the National Capital Planning Commission, play key roles in this approval process. We are specifically required to approve the design and the site. This is a process which has been thoughtfully laid out by Congress and has proven a most effective way to guide memorializations. H.R. 452 removes the Commission of Fine Arts and NCPC from this approval process.
I would like to just quickly call your attention to several specific provisions in the proposed legislation which have also raised concerns with us. Section 4 establishes the Ronald Reagan Memorial Commission to be comprised of only three members. It charges them with enormous amounts of workraising funds and selecting a designthat even with a strong staff would be especially onerous. The commission is required to produce a report on the site and design selection by February 2003, which is an extremely abbreviated time frame, as we have all seen, given our experience with other memorials, and probably unlikely to be achieved.
Page 45 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC And lastly, Section 4(a) goes on to exempt the commission from the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which means that it would allow deliberations out of the public eye if the commission so chooses. We have learned that in the end, open sessions and full public participation are important to any memorialization process and given President Reagan's extraordinarily public appeal, it seems especially at odds to exclude the public in this memorialization.
I would like to conclude finally by saying that Congress has taken great care in giving life to the Commemorative Works Act to guide the memorialization process. The Commission of Fine Arts feels privileged to have the responsibility that Congress has placed in us and it is our strongest recommendation to restore to H.R. 452 the provisions of the Commemorative Works Act and its participating agencies in this worthy endeavor to honor President Reagan. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Brody follows:]
STATEMENT OF CAROLYN BRODY, MEMBER, COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS, WASHINGTON, D.C.
Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you, Ms. Brody.
STATEMENT OF JIMMY DISHNER, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE (INSTALLATIONS), THE PENTAGON, ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA
Mr. DISHNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. May I start off by saying congratulations to you on this Chairmanship.
Page 46 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you.
Mr. DISHNER. It was an honor for the Air Force and for me personally to testify many years before you in the House Armed Services Committee and we look forward to working with you on anything in the Resource, National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands, Mr. Chairman.
As far as H.R. 107, the Air Force would defer to the Administration's position as articulated by the Department of Interior. I would like to share with you, however, some of the things that the Air Force has done starting in late 1989, 1990, 1991 through the Legacy program, which was funded to begin to look at those Cold War structures, events, memorializations of things that mean so much to all of us, a majority of which have been created from the Cold War for 11 years. Here we are talking about history in the short period of 11 years, but we should be and we should be looking at those things because, as you and I worked on the other Committee, the maintenance of those needs to be done on a timely basis; otherwise the significance would lose their value quite rapidly.
We have done over 100, 103 I believe the number is, of what we call Legacy studies, starting in 1991. These Legacy studies looked at a variety of Cold War relics and Cold War buildings, airfields, pave paws up in the dew line, Alice White. Those terms I know are familiar to you, Mr. Chairman. And those studies were completed, looked at. Some were discarded as not being of significance, of not actually adding to the story that we think America would want to have told to our great-grandchildren and their great-grandchildren as to what was this period of time that our nation went through.
The Air Force has currently 12 national historical landmarks already. Some, and I will just mention a few of themHuffman Field, which is that dirt strip out at Wright Patterson, very, very significant in the Cold War, to Hickham in Hawaii, to Hanger 9 at Brooks Air Force Base, which is a wonderful facility. Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, which is obviously being used even as we speak today. And Wheeler Field over in Hawaii.
Page 47 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
One of the other ones that we looked at that may be closer to you, Mr. Chairman, is we also looked at the Cheyenne Mountain Air Force Station in Colorado, a very significant structure. It is still in use today. It is not a Cold War relic; it is a Cold War-constructed facility, 1961 if you recall, and was done with great speed and great expertise and engineering expertise. We have looked at that and have done the first step in determination of eligibility of that building for the National Register of Historic Places, as it should be. It is the only one that we know of in America and we think if another nation has one of those that we do not know about, we still think that Cheyenne probably has a leg up on it because of the capability.
Of late, one of the things that we have done in trying to add to those Cold War legacies and how we could designate facilities to be honored as such, just in the past 30 days we have transferred $5 million that was appropriated by the Air Force to the Department of Interior for the maintenance of the DO-9 and DO-9 launch control facilities near Ellsworth, the missile launch facilities. Very significant. Those are not all needed now but at least one of those should be kept for historical purposes and I think it is well that we do one of those.
There are a number of studies that we have done, Mr. Chairman, some of which I think you are familiar with, or members of the Committee are familiar with. Coming in from the Cold, Military Heritage in the Cold Warthis was done back in 1991, a good start on looking at things like that, a study that the Air Force, by the way, helped do this but it was a Department of Defense effort. And the Air Force is now doing Cold War Assessments, a Legacy project, and that is September 2000, still under draft. And I just show you these that the Air Force, again as I mentioned earlier, did not want too much water to flow under the bridge before we started capturing some of these facilities and the need that maybe one of those as illustrative of all of them should be designated for Cold War.
Page 48 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
And in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, other than the comment I made on H.R. 107, I notice in the Committee set-up of that, that I would think, since although the Secretary of the Air Force has mentioned would be conferred with, that it would be to the benefit, I think, if, in fact, the Committee is established, to have someone that knows the military historyit could be a retired military person or something of that natureI think it would add to that to have that connectivity and the symbiotic relationship with the Department of Defense.
And again, sir, it is our pleasure to be here today and I stand ready to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Dishner follows:]
STATEMENT OF MR. JIMMY G. DISHNER, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE (INSTALLATIONS)
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, good morning. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the Air Force's perspectives on house bill (H.R.) 107, introduced by Congressman Hefley, concerning the proposal for the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study to identify sites and resources, to recommend alternatives for commemorating and interpreting the Cold War, and for other purposes.
For the purposes of my testimony today we have used the years 1946 to 1989 when the Berlin Wall came down as the Cold War period. During the period of 1946 to 1989 the Air Force constructed approximately 145,000 facilities at our active, guard, and reserve installations worldwide. The Cold War has only recently been recognized in a historic context. Indeed, current architectural references do not list Cold War along with such styles as classic revival, Jeffersonian, and the Chicago School. As a licensed professional engineer with some forty years of service to the Air Force helping to build many of these facilities, I can tell you that some are truly engineering marvels such as Cheyenne Mountain Air Force Station, Colorado, where construction began in 1961. However, not all Cold War associated facilities were key to the Air Force mission during the Cold War nor are of historic significance. Therefore, the Air Force feels that there should be care in evaluating for eligibility properties of the Cold War era. Some facilities, such as early warning defense radar systems, air defense, and strategic missile facilities, truly were mission essential. Numerous examples of many of these facilities can be found at installations throughout the United States and are also documented in specific state or service efforts. For example, in 1988 the Air Force completed a study of the White Alice Communications System. When the former Alaskan Air Command scheduled the White Alice sites for demolition, the Air Force determined that they might be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Consequently, the Air Force and the Alaska State Historic Preservation Officer signed an agreement to produce a historic overview of the system, an inventory of the 19 White Alice sites, a statement of significance of the system, a map locating the sites and a biography of non-classified material relating to the system. Most sites were demolished after this documentation was complete.
Page 49 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
As many members of this committee are aware, many military facilities are constructed using standardized designs and can be found on our installations worldwide. The Air Defense Command (ADC) mission was carried out at approximately fifty installations in the United States and Canada. An excellent example of this is the ADC's SemiAutomated Ground Environment (SAGE) building at the former K.I. Sawyer Air Force Base in Michigan. There is no evidence that the ADC activity at this SAGE facility contributed more to the Cold War effort than those activities performed at many other SAGE facilities throughout the country.
Application of the criteria of eligibility and consideration, as specified in the National Historic Preservation Act, without more detailed guidance from the National Park Service often results in inconsistent determinations of eligibility among State Historic Preservation Officers and disagreement by the Air Force with the determination. Additionally, there is a lack of an overall cohesive synthesis of all of the many studies that have been completed at the installation and major command levels within each service and among the various military services. The tension between what constitutes exceptional importance for properties less than 50 years old, including Cold War properties and those properties that may be of interest at the state and local level have proven problematic, and at times, conflicting. Studies such as the 1994 Coming in From the ColdReport of Military Heritage in the Cold War were completed through the DOD's Legacy Resource Management Program, an effort established by congress in November 1990 under Public Law 101511 to help conserve natural and cultural resources on DOD lands. The Air Force has in the past and continues to use Legacy Funding to address Cold War studies at our installations. Our major commands report that most of these studies are either underway or complete. We have also done specific focus studies such as the Searching the Sky Project, an excellent historic overview of the development of US Air Force Cold War defensive radar systems. However, issues such as classification of materials, proprietary information on systems still owned by the weapons manufacturers, and treaty compliance mandates regarding static displays also make proper Cold War determinations for significance difficult.
Page 50 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In our efforts to assess and catalogue our Cold War facilities we have found that different standards in the evaluation process may lead to some properties being incorrectly determined as eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Our view is that there are many methods of protecting resources. These include preparing comprehensive and oral histories, non- textual literary property such as maps, educational websites, videos, brochures, books, the preparation of Historic American Engineering Records and Historic American Building Records for proper recordation of facilities deemed significant to the Cold War mission.
The Air Force defers to the Department of the Interior for the Administrations position on H.R. 107, but recommends that, at such time when further consideration of the bill is more appropriate, this Committee consider adding a member to the Cold War Advisory Committee who is specifically trained in military history. We also recommend that the Department of the Interior, National Park Service, and the State Historic Preservation Officers work with the military services to come to establish standards of eligibility for Cold War era facilities, and recommend how many of each type of facility should be retained. In other words, we recommend that not every base be required to maintain a missile or bomber alert facility if others exist elsewhere. The focus should be on operational missions and equipment of unmistakable national importance and that has a direct, not merely temporal, Cold War relationship.
As I stated earlier in my testimony we constructed approximately 145,000 facilities during the Cold War. A potential determination of eligibility of even 10% of these facilities for Cold War significance would substantially increase our management and oversight responsibilities. Further, we recommend the Department of the Interior and the National Park Service work with the some 400 aerospace museums across the country. Many of these museums have Cold War era pictures, maps, artifacts, and aircraft such as Inert Atlas, Titan I & Titan II Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles, B36, B47 and early model B52 aircraft. Many of you may also be aware that the Air Force museum located on WrightPatterson Air Force Base Ohio, the oldest and the largest aviation museum in the world, is building a 32 million-dollar addition called the Cold War gallery to provide subject matter coverage of this important period in the history of our nation and the Air Force. This project will be built with private donations and not with military construction funds. We have also recently been in discussion with the National Trust for Historic Preservation to garner their input into public and private partnerships for historic properties including those that are determined to be of exceptional importance to the Cold War. Many of you may also be aware that the Smithsonian Air Museum Annex near Dulles Airport will also display many aircraft, space, and Cold War era artifacts.
Page 51 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We appreciate the tremendous support Congressman Hefley provides the Air Force, and look forward to working with members this Committee, and the leadership of the Department of the Interior.
Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. I stand ready to answer any questions you may have.
Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you, Jimmy. The Air Force, I think, has an excellent running start on what we want to do. We do not want to overlook and lose this part of our history.
I am not going to ask all the questions that I had for this panel because I want us to get to the next panel and finish up before I think we are going to have a series of votes but I do not want to discourage anyone from asking questions. We may submit questions to you to be returned to us in writing.
Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Ring, it is good to see you here and talk to you. The position in each of your statements is that basically we need to take care of the backlog first. We all know we are in transition in the new Administration.
Do you sense in the preparation of today's testimony that that is going to be a hard and fast position or is this kind of an initial position as we start into the new Administration?
Mr. RING. Sir, I think it is an initial position. There are a number of new people coming into the Administration and they are trying to get their hands around a wide range of topics and they are still very few. So I think they are trying to understand the nature and the relationship of these studies and these efforts in the context of what is a very important initiative for them, which is to deal with the backlog of the National Park System. So I think it is an initial position.
Page 52 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Mr. SOUDER. Because there is going to be a great deal of sympathy on our side to slowing down the process but not necessarily stopping the process and trying to figure out how we are going to do at least studies and advisory-type positions and I encourage you to take that message back, that a complete stoppage probably is not going to work; there needs to be some sort of an accommodation as to the processes we are going to go through, although I think that the Subcommittee Chairman and most people on our side of the aisle certainly feel a slower pace is a minimal goal. Thank you.
Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Rahall?
Mr. RAHALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to commend all of you on your testimony and thank you for your service to our country and your service in protecting our historical heritage and your dedication to the good stewardship of our public lands and monuments.
Just to follow up on the question just asked though, your testimony for the National Park Service was approved by Secretary Norton before being here today; is that correct?
Mr. RING. The testimony that I presented today was approved by the Department of Interior and the Office of Management and Budget.
Mr. RAHALL. And by the Secretary of Interior, Miss Norton, who is not going anywhere anytime soon, is she?
Mr. RING. No.
Mr. RAHALL. So you have said it is the initial position but I do appreciate the concerns that you have expressed, especially with the implementation of the current statute on the books and your desire to see that the historical perspective be maintained before establishing monuments just here and there on the Mall. So I do appreciate that, and the concerns you have expressed in opposition to H.R. 452.
Page 53 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Mr. RING. Thank you, sir.
Mr. RAHALL. Thank you.
Mr. HEFLEY. Any other questions? Yes.
Ms. SOLIS. I have one question, if I might. I appreciate the testimony that was given, also, and I would ask that if you could provide the Committee with information regarding the current monuments that are there in place in that area regarding the proposed H.R. 452 and we could kind of get a better assessment of what is actually there in that particular area. And I appreciate the fact that you are going to take an initial review and move a little slower on this.
I, too, have some concerns regarding breaking the mold, so to speak, and moving fast and not honoring what has been done traditionally. I cannot think of any other monument that has been put in place within a span of 25 years or less and I would ask you that question, if there has been any.
Mr. RING. We would be pleased to submit that for the record.
[The list of memorials in Area 1 submitted for the record follows:]
Ms. SOLIS. Thank you.
Mr. HEFLEY. Well, thank you very much. It was excellent testimony and certainly I think the Committee is sympathetic with the idea of taking care of the backlog and we will work with you on that and see if we cannot do that. At the same time we do need to establish some kind of a priority for things that once the backlog is taken care of, that we can begin to move on so maybe you can work with us on that, as well.
Mr. RING. We would be pleased to do so, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you very much.
Page 54 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Mr. HEFLEY. We will go to our third panel: Mr. Grover Norquist, Chairman, Ronald Reagan Legacy Foundation; Mr. Norm Wymbs, Chairman, Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home Foundation; Mr. Francis Gary Powers, Jr., Founder, Cold War Museum, Fairfax, Virginia; and Dr. Bruce Craig, Director, National Coordinating Committee for the Promotion of History, Washington, D.C.
Mr. Wymbs, did you come here from Florida to testify?
Mr. WYMBS. No, Mr. Chairman. We came from Dixon, which is almost as tough.
Mr. HEFLEY. Came from where?
Mr. WYMBS. From Dixon.
Mr. HEFLEY. Dixon, Illinois? Well, I am going to call on you first because in case we do get interrupted, these that are local, we could probably entice to come back again but you have come quite a distance so I want to, if I might, I will call on you first.
STATEMENT OF NORM WYMBS, CHAIRMAN, RONALD REAGAN BOYHOOD HOME FOUNDATION, DEL RAY, FL
Mr. WYMBS. I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman. I submitted a report which I presume you all have, the so-called initial remarks. I do not want to particularly elaborate on those. I was trying very much to impress you folks with the volunteer work that has been done in this community to preserve Ronald Reagan's boyhood home.
And just as a matter off the trackmaybe I am a little bit out of order here but the prior testimony from the Department of Interior made reference to something that concerned us at the Reagan Foundation apparently as much as it has concerned them so I think we are both on the same track.
Page 55 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC We have been in somewhat informal discussions with Mr. Hastert and others concerning this for over two years. It is not something that has just been suddenly brought forth. But during that time the foundation itself and those of us who are active in it expressed a great deal of concern about whether or not the Department of Interior would maintain or whichever department of the Federal Government took over the home would maintain it as well as we have maintained it.
Now I note that their concern is that they might be picking up a pig in a poke because it might require a great deal of maintenance that they would not have the funds for. I can assure them that they will find the maintenance of this project far in excess of many of the historic sites that we have seen that do come under the Federal jurisdiction. So our greatest concern was that they start out and that they maintain a very strong interest in keeping this property in the condition that we have kept it in up to this point.
Just as another point since one of your members raised a question earlier or did not raise a question but was quoting unfortunately from some news reports and news reports are notexcuse me, folksnot too accurate, there is no jelly bean portrait in this complex. The Federal Government will not be buying a bunch of Jelly Bellies. There was a Jelly Belly portrait made by the Goetz Candy Company. Mr. Kelly has been a strong supporter of many of the things we are doing.
That portrait has been placed in the Dixon Historic Center, which is another project of the Reagan Home Foundation considerably larger than the home itself and it will have memorials to many distinguished citizens of Dixon. It is dedicated to Ronald Reagan because that is where he attended the sixth and seventh grades and his brother attended there, as well. We will restore the classrooms and the other things there for another memorial to Ronald Reagan, which is only three blocks away from the home complex but we have put the Jelly Belly portrait in there, which will be part of the Reagan Historic Museum part of this entire set-up.
Page 56 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC All we wanted to do in expressing this is that concern that this be memorialized to Ronald Reagan. When some local citizens in the community decided to purchase this property right after the President was nominated for his first term by the Republican Party, they thought that this home should be saved and checked with the President after his election to find out whether he would consider helping out.
His immediate reaction, which was the same as the reaction from Neil Reagan, his older brother, was that they considered this particular house as their home in Dixon. And you have to know a little bit about Ronald Reagan's history prior to the time the family moved there in 1920. When they moved there in 1920 Jack Reagan for the first time in his life had his own business. He had found an angel that helped support him, a man that he had been working for some time, who put up the financing to build his own store. He opened a shoe store there. Dixon became then a permanent residence for the Reagan family.
Up to that point Ronald Reagan in his years in school and years in the family had never spent as much as one whole year in any single town in Illinois. The family moved quite frequently. When they got to Dixon and he was 10 years old at the time, that became the permanent home. That became his home from then on. This house was the first one they lived in and the one they had the strongest memories of.
Now Ronald Reagan and Neil Reagan both during the time we did this, during his two terms, spent a great deal of time with us, our historian, our architects, making sure that what we restored and turned into a memorial to his early life was exactly the way they recalled it. And it is absolutely historically the way it was when the Reagans lived there.
It is quite a complex now. It covers approximately three-quarters of a square city block. We bought the home next door which the President used to refer to as ''Those are the rich folks next door.'' It is a house about twice the size of the Reagan home. We have turned that into a reception center and the office for the Reagan Foundation, as well. We had to build public facilities, of course, to take care of the normal requirements of public visitors. We bought a number of buildings around it. We razed one next door to the Reagan home to create a mini-park. This was where Ronald and Neil and their friends used to play football in the off-hours after school. It was a vacant lot then. We turned it back into a vacant lot but since that time we have placed a bronze statue of Ronald Reagan in the center and turned it into a mini-park.
Page 57 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC We also had to purchase a number of lots adjoining this property so we would have public parking. So it is a completely self-contained unit. It is not just the home; it is a complete complex and all of these buildings date back to the turn of the last century and just before. We figure that the Reagan home was built about 1890 or thereabouts. We have no accurate records on it.
We are pretty accurate though in that this building, plus the adjoining building, were what we used to refer to as mail order homes. In those days when you wanted to build a home of your own and you wanted to get it designed properly you bought it from mail order houses. Sears Roebuck used to be the largest provider of single family homes in the United States. These were mail order homes. They were made entirely of hardwood. They last forever. You cannot knock them down. The entire house is oak and other hardwoods. The homes were cut to size, the pieces were cut to size before the buyer got them. The order started out by telling them to get a shovel and start digging the basement and they went from there on. At the end they sent them a catalogue and said, ''Here's the kind of furniture you should put in.''
There are literally hundreds of thousands of these homes throughout the country today and this section that Ronald Reagan's home is in is a beautiful memorial in itself to that early turn of the century. The entire neighborhood has become a memorial to the turn of the century because the citizens of Dixon are so wrapped up and so in love with Ronald Reagan and his family and his history that they themselves, at their own expenses, have been restoring their own homes to where this is a truly historic landmark in itself and it is about one-quarter of the city of Dixon, Illinois.
So I would assure you folks on the panel, plus the Interior people, you are not going to be getting a pig in a poke here if they go ahead with this. They are going to get a high quality memorial and the one that Ronald Reagan declared was his home. And, just as an aside, Ronald Reagan at one point expressed an interest in having his museum and library in Dixon but the prevailing money folks in California convinced him otherwise.
Page 58 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC [The prepared statement of Mr. Wymbs follows:]
Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you very much. That is excellent testimony.
Just very briefly, you all have done an excellent job with this from everything I can learn. This is not in any danger of having a Walmart built on it or it being destroyed in some way if we took the time to go through the normal vetting process through the Park Service, is it?
Mr. WYMBS. No, there is no problem of it going away as long as those of us who are presently on the board, and we consider ourselves Dixonites, as well, because the city declared us honorary citizens when we got into this. But the board is, as a matter of policy, only Dixon residents. All the work of viewing and showing of the home is done by volunteers, as I pointed out in the opening letter.
We maintain it and we make sure that it is maintained. We do not let even a loose board on the porch go unattended because we are very hard-nosed about that sort of thing.
Our biggest concern is that there are a few of us that are getting a little bit older and we can never be too sure with a private foundation who might be coming later that might have different ideas on it. So we wanted to make sure that it was put in a place where you folks have a longer life span than we have and therefore it would be maintained for a longer period of time than we could. But as far as it deteriorating, you have no fear about that.
Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you very much.
STATEMENT OF GROVER NORQUIST, CHAIRMAN, RONALD REAGAN LEGACY FOUNDATION, WASHINGTON, DC
Page 59 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. NORQUIST. Thank you very much. I serve as Chairman of the Ronald Reagan Legacy project and our goal is to honor Reagan's legacy and his place in history specifically by naming things and building things in his honor in the United States. Our goal is to get something significant in each of the 50 states and something in each of the 3,067 counties in the United States. We were very active working with members of the House and Senate on the effort to name Reagan National Airport and I point out that the next major project will be in honor also of Senator Coverdell and his legislation to put Reagan on the $10 bill. We will be continuing Senator Coverdell's efforts in that direction.
I am delighted that there is a consensus in the United States that we should do something to honor President Reagan and the greatness of his presidency. Questions have been raised about should you build a memorial for a man or begin to build a memorial for a man who is still alive? And what about the traditional 25-year waiting period for parts of the Mall? And I think it is very important to address both of those questions.
As Congressman Hansen said, the difference with the case of President Reagan is given the nature of the disease he has, his public life is over. It is not as if he is going to do or say something that would change history's view of his role in history and therefore I think the question of doing something, naming things after him while he is still alive is not the question that it would be for a President who is wandering around doing and saying things that might change your view of what they had accomplished or who they were as people.
The question of waiting 25 years I think is a very important statement that we want to be very clear, that if we are going to put a memorial on the Mall that we do not do it hurriedly, and that is why I think we should have a very high test, a very strict test of who we honor and what we do and I would answer that Ronald Reagan meets that test. I think that in the 10 years since the end of the Cold War we have seen the greatness of his decision to embark and lead the United States in a policy of peace through strength. I think the people of Poland and East Germany would be very clear that they appreciate his leadership on that.
Page 60 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC This is unlikely to change. People talk about waiting a while. We are not going to want to go back to high taxes. We are not going to want to go back to inflation. People of East Germany are not going to want to go back to being under the Soviet empire and the peoples of the former Soviet empire do not want a Soviet empire returned, either.
So on each of those questions, and it is important also to think back to when Reagan came herethe double-digit inflation, the collapsing economy, the Soviet Union on the march in every continent in the world, the United States in self-doubtand Reagan was a Churchillian figure in that he stood up against the traditional establishment view of what was happening and he said, ''Guys, you have it wrong,'' just as Churchill did. And history has made it very clear that Churchill was right about the nature of National Socialism in Germany and history has shown that Ronald Reagan was right about the nature of the Soviet Union and the Socialist government there.
So he not only turned the country around and brought us through to victory but he did so under the criticism of some of the people who thought of themselves as the best and the brightest around, who have been wrong about history and we now know were wrong about what was going on.
If you look at the last 20 years we see it as the extension of what Reagan brought into this town. We are now talking about reforming Social Security, about building the strategic defense initiative, about continuing to reduce taxes, about continuing to follow the policy of peace through strength. I think history has shown that Ronald Reagan's greatness continues. I think the tribute to him on the Mall is very appropriate and I look forward to working with you to that end.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Norquist follows:]
STATEMENT OF GROVER G. NORQUIST, CHAIRMAN, RONALD REAGAN LEGACY PROJECT, CONCERNING H.R. 452
Page 61 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
MR. Chairman, and members of the committee and invited guests, my name is Grover Norquist and I am Chairman of the Ronald Reagan Legacy Project. The Ronald Reagan Legacy Project was formed in 1997 and is the most influential organization aimed at promoting the legacy of the 40th President. I am here this morning to testify in favor of H.R. 452, the Ronald Reagan Memorial Act of 2001.
The Act specifies that a committee be established to choose a location on the National Mall for a memorial to Ronald Reagan. He deserves this memorial on America's Mall because he represented America.
Reagan's upbringing represents a wide cross-section of American culture. He was a man born in a small Midwest town of humble background and later moved to Los Angeles to pursue an acting career. Aside from being President of the United States he also served as an entertainer, Union leader, corporate spokesman, Governor of California.
When Congress places a memorial on the National Mall in honor of Reagan it will recognize the will of the people who elected him overwhelmingly twice to the Presidency. In 1984, he earned the confidence of 3/5 of the electorate and was victorious in 49 of the 50 states in the general election a record unsurpassed in the history of American Presidential elections We can all be proud of Reagan's legacy. He worked in a bipartisan manner to enact his bold agenda of restoring accountability and common sense to Government which led to unprecedented economic expansion and opportunity for millions of Americans. Mr. Reagan's commitment to an active social policy agenda for the Nation's children helped lower crime and drug use in our neighborhoods.
Page 62 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC In addition to major domestic accomplishments Reagan authorized several National Security Decision Directives (NSDD) that helped end a truly evil empire. Too often Reagan is not given credit for his success in actively working toward the fall of the Soviet Union. Allow me to explain a few of them here.
NSDD 32 had the objective of supporting movement working to throw off communist rule and intensified Radio Free Europe and Voice of America as well as reducing Eastern Europe's reliance on the USSR.
NSDD 66 set policies aimed at: getting European allies to stop extending credit at better than market rates, blocking Soviet access to the high technologies of Western countries, and developing alternatives to Europe becoming dependent on the Soviet Union for natural gas.
NSDD 75 declared a policy of exacerbating Soviet economic problems by working to decrease its export revenues and forcing it to increase spending. In fact, we later learned that Gorbachev increased military spending to 45 percent of GDP on an economy that was already floundering.
NSDD 78 stated that the US would not accept the existing Soviet sphere of influence, but would work to roll it back, restricting technologies that might help its economy and exploiting its vulnerabilities.
All of these actions reversed Soviet expansion into countries such as Afghanistan, Angola and Mozambique and encouraged freedom publications in Poland and encouraged strikes in Poland which spread even into Siberia.
Page 63 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The National Security information concerning the fall of the Soviet Union was discussed in detail in the book Victory: The Reagan Administration's Secret Strategy that hastened the collapse of the Soviet Union by Peter Schweizer (1994: Atlantic Monthly Press).
Schweizer interviewed dozens of top-ranking Reagan White House and National Security officials for his book and concluded that Reagan's actions weren't luck but skillful policy which resulted in the end of Soviet Communism thus guaranteeing basic human rights for millions of persecuted people.
Recognizing Reagan with this memorial will also pay tribute to our armed forces. His commitment to our armed forces contributed to the restoration of pride in America, her values and those cherished by the free world, and prepared America to win the Gulf War.
So, when Congress passes this bill it will recognize Reagan's achievements of domestic prosperity and promoting international peace. Having outlined briefly his legacy, it is clear that it needs to be preserved because we can all be proud of his accomplishments.
It is our goal at the Reagan Legacy Project to preserve his legacy by encouraging Governors, state legislators and the general public to become involved in the process of naming at least one significant landmark or institution after Reagan in all 50 states and 3067 counties as well as in former communist countries.
Currently there are 45 dedications; 42 in the United States and 3 internationally.
Page 64 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We have most recently completed a campaign to have Governors and State Legislatures honor Reagan on his birthday. The campaign ended with 12 Governors and 28 State legislatures honoring the former President.
Nationally, we have also begun work on placing Ronald Reagan's portrait on the ten-dollar bill. In the states we have a variety projects such as in South Carolina where Reagan's portrait will be hung in the State House chamber and in South Dakota where the highway that leads to Mt. Rushmore will soon bear the name of the Gipper.
Clearly, America loved Ronald Reagan and the Congress should recognize the will of the people by passing this bill.
I thank the Chairman for recognizing me and I yield the floor to any questions.
THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF CURRENT DEDICATIONS IN HONOR OF PRESIDENT REAGAN
Grenada Salutes Ronald Reagan, Leader of Freedom (commemorative stamp collection), Grenada . Proceeds from sales go to the Ronald Reagan Scholarship Fund
Page 65 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Ronald Reagan Scholarship Fund, Grenada . The fund is used to send students from Grenada to the United States for study
Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site, Kwajalein Atoll [October, 2000]
IN THE UNITED STATES
Ronald Reagan Fundamental School , 3200 West 16th St., Yuma, AZ 85364
Reagan Center, Los Angeles, CA
Reagan Ranch Leadership Program . 812-B Anacapa Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101. Affiliated with the Young America's Foundation, current owners of Rancho del Cielo (formerly the Reagan's' ranch) near Santa Barbara
Ronald Reagan Federal Courthouse[February 1999]. 411 West 4th Street, Santa Ana, CA 92701
Page 66 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ronald Reagan Freeway, CA [December 7, 1994]. State Route 118 runs close to the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library. Formerly named the Simi Valley-San Fernando Valley Freeway
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum , 40 Presidential Drive Simi Valley, CA 93065
Ronald Reagan Professor, School of Public Policy (Pepperdine University), Malibu, CA 
Ronald Reagan Elementary School [1998, 10800 Rosslyn Lane Bakersfield, CA 93311
Ronald Reagan California Republican Center [renamed in 1996],
1903 S. Magnolia Blvd., Burbank, CA. 91506. Headquarters of the California State Republican Party. Its former name was simply ''California Republican Party Headquarters''
Ronald Reagan State Office Building,, 300 South Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90013.
Ronald Reagan Suite, , Century Plaza Hotel, 2025 Avenue of the Stars, Los Angeles, CA 90067. This suite, which occupies the entire 30th floor of the hotel, was often used by Ronald Reagan when he visited Los Angeles during his Presidency. Was formerly called the Plaza Suite
Page 67 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center [to open in 2004]
Ronald W. Reagan Educational Center, Fresno, CA
District of Columbia
Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center [named in 1995, dedicated May 5, 1998], 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20004
Ronald Reagan Chair in Public Policy (Heritage Foundation), Washington, D.C.
Ronald Wilson Reagan Communications Center (National Republican Congressional Committee), Washington, D.C.
Ronald Reagan Institute of Emergency Medicine , George Washington University Hospital, Washington, D.C. 20037. Located at the hospital where Ronald Reagan was taken immediately after the march 30, 1981 assassination attempt. Dedicated by Reagan at the tenth anniversary of the assassination attempt.,
Ronald Wilson Reagan Republican Center National Republican Senatorial Committee 425 Second Street, NE, Washington, D.C. 200024914
Page 68 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Ronald Reagan Avenue, Miami, FL. Formerly named Southwest Avenue,
Ronald Reagan Turnpike, FL . 1Formerly named Florida's Turnpike.Runs 312 miles, from north-central Florida to south of Miami
Ronald W. Reagan Post Office Building, 2305 Minton Road, West Melbourne, Florida [October 27, 2000]
Ronald Reagan Drive, Columbia County, Augusta, GA [December 1, 2000]
Ronald Reagan Parkway, Gwinett County Lawrenceville, GA
Reagan Physical Education Center , Eureka College 300 E. College Avenue Eureka, IL 61530 Originally dedicated in 1961 as ''The Reagan Center,'' in honor of both Ronald Reagan and his brother Neil.Constructed to house all of Eureka College's athletic facilities.Acquired its present name in 1970.
Reagan Drive, Eureka, IL , Runs along the southern edge of Eureka College, Reagan's alma mater
Ronald W. Reagan Exhibit , Eureka College Eureka, IL. 61520, A permanent exhibit covering Ronald Reagan's entire life
Page 69 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ronald W. Reagan Leadership Program Eureka College Eureka, IL. 61530 Established in 1982; began with students in the Fall of 1983.
Ronald & Nancy Reagan Research Center (Alzheimer's Association) , 919 N. Michigan Avenue Chicago, IL 60611
Ronald Reagan Birthplace , 111 S, Main Street Tampico, IL. 61283. Locally operated, includes a museum and a gift shop, which are located next door to the building in which Reagan was born
Reagan Park , Tampico, IL. Formerly Railroad Park
Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home , 816 S. Hennepin Ave., Dixon, IL. 61202 Ronald Reagan lived in this house during part of his teenage years (19241928).It is now locally operated as a Museum.
Ronald Reagan Bridge, Dixon, IL
Ronald Reagan Highway U.S. Highway 14; runs from Chicago north to the Wisconsin State line.
Ronald W. Reagan Middle School , 620 Division Street Dixon, IL. 61021 Formerly named Madison School
Page 70 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOCIowa
Ronald Reagan Historical Marker, Des Moines, IA [November 9, 1999]
The Reagan Hope Home Located on a ranch that is part of the Mississippi Sheriffs Boys and Girls Ranches
Ronald Reagan Boulevard, Warwick, NY
Ronald Reagan Highway Cincinnati, OH, Runs across the northern suburbs of Cincinnati.
Statue at the National Cowboy Hall of Fame, Oklahoma City, OK
Reagan Leadership Society , 389 MSC Student Finance Center Texas A&M University College Station, TX. 77843. A society dedicated to building student leadership for the Texas A&M campus and the community at large. Its student founder named the society in recognition of Reagan's ''ability to communicate, his ability to inspire confidence, and his kind personality.''
Page 71 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, Arlington, VA. . Formerly named Washington National Airport
USS Ronald Reagan nuclear aircraft carrier [to be completed by 2002].
Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you very much.
STATEMENT OF FRANCIS GARY POWERS, JR., FOUNDER, COLD WAR MUSEUM, FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA
Mr. POWERS. My name is Francis Gary Powers, Jr. from Fairfax, Virginia. I am the founder of the Cold War Museum. I am pleased to have this special opportunity today to testify before the Subcommittee. I would like to express my gratitude to Congressman Hefley for inviting me here and for sponsoring a bill so significant to our country.
This bill means much to me personally. As the son of a famous Cold War figure, I grew up with the Cold War. The Cold War Museum began for me as a way to honor my father but soon took on a much greater life and purpose. I am working toward a museum that will honor all the men and women who worked for democracy and freedom during the Cold War.
The museum is not about reviving old hatreds. Rather, it is about promoting lessons learned. It is about teaching democracy in the pursuit of world peace. The Cold War Museum will dedicate resources to commemorating those whose deeds and sacrifices furthered democracy but the museum strives for an international and objective understanding of the Cold War, one of the most intense periods of conflict and most dangerous years in human history.
Page 72 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC The purposes of the Cold War Museum are to preserve the artifacts important to that period, to interpret the Cold War through research and information-gathering, and to serve as the focal point for information and preservation activities related to the Cold War era. The museum's distinguished board of directors are experts in museum management, nonprofit management, and various aspects of Cold War history. We also have an advisory board which includes Sergei Khrushchev, Nikita Khrushchev's son, Eisenhower aide Ambassador Vernon Walters, and renowned photographic interpreter Dino Brugioni.
Recently the Cold War Museum developed a list of important Cold War sites, which is the focal point of your bill, with the eventual goal of recognizing a Cold War site in every state. I have included this list in our collateral material.
The museum does not have a permanent home but we do sponsor traveling exhibits that have been on display throughout the United States, including at the CIA in Virginia and internationally in Germany, Norway and Russia.
America has honored men and women from many wars who died for freedom but whatever the reason, there has been almost no recognition of the Cold War, an era that lasted almost 50 years, cost thousands of lives, trillions of dollars, changed the course of history and left America the only superpower in the world.
However, the Cold War is virtually unknown to the current generation. This is a great disservice to those who gave their lives during the Cold War.
James Billington, Librarian of Congress, said in a foreign policy speech, ''The Cold War was the central conflict of the second half of the 20th century, the longest and most unconventional war of the entire modern era and an unprecedented experience for Americans. We were faced for the first time in our history with an opponent who was both ideologically committed to overthrowing our system and was equipped to destroy us physically.''
Journalist Charles Krauthammer in an op-ed piece in the Washington Post entitled ''Build a Cold War Memorial'' had this to say. ''The Cold War did not have the dramatic intensity of World War II but it was just as real and just as dangerous. Though often clandestine and subtle, it ranged worldwide, cost many lives, evoked much heroism and lasted what seemed like forever. Considering the stakes, the scope and the suffering, this was a struggle that deserves commemoration.''
Page 73 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Although the Cold War periodically resurfaces in the news as is evident by the Hanssen spy case, many people really do not understand the background or the history. The Cold War Museum's website testifies to the public's need for information. Over the past 23 months 250,000 visitors have visited our website at Coldwar.org. Those who have tested their knowledge on our Cold War trivia and history quizzes help make the case for passage of H.R. 107. Ten percent of the respondents believe that John F. Kennedy was President of the United States when the Soviet Union was dissolved. The need for the passage of H.R. 107, the construction of a Cold War Museum and related educational programs, is clear.
Charles Krauthammer went on to say about a proposed Cold War Monument, ''It needn't be grandiose but it must have a small museum for instruction. A gallery of heroes: Truman, Marshall, Churchill, Reagan. A hall for the fallen: the secret agents who died anonymously. A tribute to allies and friends...and a gulag display so that our children will learn the nature of evil.''
Congressman Hefley, we would like to suggest that the Department of the Interior conduct a study to establish the value of a permanent Cold War Museum and Memorial as the central repository for Cold War artifacts and information. Our plans include the following: display Cold War photos, art work and artifacts, establish an endowed research chair at the Cold War Museum, collect biographies on key Cold War figures, record oral and written histories to capture the human side of the conflict, create an inventory of key technologies that resulted from the Cold War research and development, and finally, develop a comprehensive inventory of significant Cold War sites and resources that need to be preserved, such as military bases, homes of key figures, laboratories, test sites and historic places.
Congressman Hefley, we believe that it is vital to begin now to preserve these historic resources. Sites are being lost to developers and information gets lost every day.
I am proud to say that the Cold War Museum has recently become an affiliate of the Smithsonian Institution. They have agreed to conduct a feasibility study with us to determine what artifacts from the national collection can be used in our displays and exhibits. We have also received offers of support from a variety of sources, including the Holocaust Museum, Voice of America and the embassies of Hungary, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Slovakia.
Page 74 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC In the coming weeks and months Congress will consider a number of issues. H.R. 107 should certainly be included in this agenda to preserve American history and significant Cold War sites. We believe the interest and support of James Billington, Charles Krauthammer, the Smithsonian Institution, the Voice of America, the Holocaust Museum and various embassies and schools are obvious proof that this bill and the Cold War Museum would be of considerable value to our country.
Congressman Hefley, the directors of the Cold War Museum and I would like to express our strongest possible support for your bill. H.R. 107 will help educate future generations about the Cold War, honor Cold War veterans and preserve Cold War history. The mission and goals of the Cold War Museum further the objectives of H.R. 107. We hope to continue to be involved with helping you and the commission when it is established. Please feel free to call upon us at any time. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Powers follows:]
Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you, Mr. Powers. You have obviously done a lot of thinking and work on this and we appreciate your knowledge.
STATEMENT OF DR. BRUCE CRAIG, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL COORDINATING COMMITTEE FOR THE PROMOTION OF HISTORY
Mr. CRAIG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Bruce Craig. I am the Director of the National Coordinating Committee for the Promotion of History, which is a consortium of 59 historical or archival organizations. The NCC serves as the national advocacy office for the historical and archival professions. My educationI am a specialist in the Cold War and the history of espionage. As of today I consider myself also an expert on colds in general so please tolerate my husky voice.
Page 75 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC I am pleased to appear before the Subcommittee today in support of H.R. 107, your legislation, Mr. Congressman, to conduct a national landmark theme study to identify sites and resources that are related to the Cold War. We support the enactment of this legislation even as presently drafted. However, I would like to present for your consideration a couple of ideas that might actually strengthen the bill.
Certainly for much of the second half of the 20th century the contest between two nuclear superpowers, the former Soviet Union and the United States, has defined the character of global and domestic politics. The threat of mass destruction that carried with it the very real possibility of annihilation of not only the citizens of both nations but nearly everyone else on earth also left a permanent mark on American life and politics.
In international politics, the contest between the superpowers shaped American foreign policy worldwide. In the realm of domestic politics, it was the culture of the Cold War that completely transformed aspects of American life.
Clearly, there is a need to identify, to document and to preserve sites and resources that illustrate Cold War history. There already are some Cold War-related sites that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. There are also some sites that are established as national historic landmarks. For example, the Westminster College Gymnasium in Fulton, Missouri where Winston Churchill delivered his famous March 1946 ''Iron Curtain'' speech that has long held as a seminal event and marks the beginnings of the Cold War, has been a national landmark for some number of years.
However, the National Park System is woefully inadequate in interpreting and preserving resources relating to the Cold War. This theme study should serve as the catalyst for the creation of a Cold War National Historical Park.
In terms of some specific suggestions for strengthening this legislation, Section 1 of this section presently focuses largely on sites associated with American military strategy and technology. We believe that the legislation needs to be broadened to include perhaps a more diverse collection of sites, some of which Gary Powers has mentioned and some specific recommendations are in my written testimony, as well.
Page 76 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Also, we believe that the study should take a look at sites that are associated with the domestic war; for example, sites associated with intelligence-gathering and I might note espionage, as well, and certainly some associated personalities with the Cold War.
So that the study does not degenerate into simply an assessment of a motley collection of historic sites, some type of framework for assessment seems to be necessary, as well. We believe the theme study should concentrate on people, events and sites that are associated with a number of Cold War hallmarks, which are itemized in my testimony.
In terms of Section 3, the advisory committee, we certainly believe that there is a necessity for some type of outside review and assistance from the historical organizations and institutions in crafting this theme studybut it need not be an advisory committee. This Committee might want to consider directing the Park Service to conduct a series of workshops comprised of academic scholars, knowledgeable preservationists and NPS professionals. The Park Service has certainly had previous experience in conducting this type of information-gathering workshops. The history of the National Park Service themes and concepts, in essence, the overall theme study framework that was adopted by the Park Service in 1994 followed this type of framework, and, more recently, the painting and sculpture theme study that was put together in 1991 also made use of this model. We think that these workshops perhaps might be a little bit better in terms of getting the advice that the Park Service needs in terms of the establishment of a Cold War National Park and the production of a Cold War theme study.
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss this legislation with you, Mr. Chairman. I certainly welcome any questions that you or the other members of the Subcommittee might have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Craig follows:]
Page 77 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOCSTATEMENT OF BRUCE CRAIG, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL COORDINATING COMMITTEE FOR THE PROMOTION OF HISTORY, WASHINGTON, D.C.
I am Bruce Craig, Director of the National Coordinating Committee for the Promotion of
History (NCC), a national consortium of 59 historical and archival organizations. Since 1982, the
NCC has served as the national advocacy office for the historical and archival professions.
Specifically, we provide information services to Members of Congress and other policymakers.
The NCC also represents member organizations on matters relating to Federal funding and
appropriations, policy, and legislation that have an impact on historical and archival programs,
research, and teaching.
I possess a Ph.D. in history (1999) from The American University, Washington D.C. I am a
cold war historian with a speciality in the history of espionage. My dissertation, Treasonable
Doubt: The Harry Dexter White Case, 1948-1953'' traces the espionage activity of Treasury
Department officials during the early cold war period. I have written and published extensively
on the cold war for over fifteen years. I am also the principal in the legal challenge, Craig v. USA
which served as the catalyst for the 1999 Federal court judgment that resulted in the unsealing of
the grand jury records relating to the Alger Hiss case. This was the first time in American history
that grand jury records had been unsealed solely on the basis of their historical interest and value.
Page 78 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I am pleased to appear before this subcommittee today in support of H.R. 107legislation
introduced by Representative Joel Hefley to direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a
National Landmark theme study to identify sites and resources relating to the cold war and to
recommend alternatives for commemorating and interpreting the cold war era. While the NCC
fully supports the intent and objectives of this legislation, and we support enactment of this
legislation even as presently drafted, I would like to present for the Subcommittee's consideration, a few ideas that may strengthen the bill.
Mr. Chairman, for much of the second half of the twentieth century, the contest between
two nuclear superpowersthe former Soviet Union and the United Statesdefined the character of
global and domestic politics. The threat of mass destruction that carried with it the very real
possibility of annihilation of not only the citizens of both nations but nearly everyone else on
earth, also left a permanent mark on American life and politics. The cold war (as it was dubbed
in 1947 by journalist Walter Lippman) created an atmosphere of ever-present fear of
thermonuclear war that nearly every American over the age of 30 can well remember.
In the realm of international politics, the contest between the two superpowers shaped
American foreign policy worldwide: for some historians, the term preponderant power most
accurately describes America's foreign policy objective with respect to the Soviet Union and its
communist bloc allies. Preponderant power was achieved through unprecedented expenditures on
Page 79 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOCthe military (creating what President Eisenhower characterized as the military-industrial complex
) and through the creation of mechanisms for international collective security (NATO and
NORAD are but two examples). Through these institutions the United States sought to check the
expanding power of the Soviet Union.
In the realm of domestic politics, from the late 1940's through 1990 when what President
Ronald Reagan characterized as the evil empire collapsed, the culture of the cold war completely
transformed aspects of American life. For example, the excesses of the so-called McCarthy Era
played on the popular fear of communist subversion, which with thanks to the relatively new
invention of the television, found its way into the middle-class American household, and
permeated the American psyche. Another examplethe fallout from the Alger Hiss-Whittaker
Chambers controversy gave rise to the creation of an anti-communist liberal tradition and gave
new impetus to the modern conservative movement. The cold war also provided momentum to
the career of dozens of political leaders (perhaps most notably Richard Nixon), many of whom
dominated the political scene for the next three decades.
Clearly there is a need to identify, document, and preserve sites and resources that illustrate
cold war history. I believe that the historic events and associated locations of this time period
will be viewed by future generations of Americans as being every bit as important to preserve as
many Americans view Civil War sites today. With the exception of the Civil War, no other war
has shaped the American character so subtly or so intricately as did the cold war. This is because
virtually every American was a front-line soldier in the battle to defeat communism. Its fallout
Page 80 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOCwas unforgettable.
While there are some cold war related sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places
(for example, the Oak Ridge Historic District in Tennessee) and there are a few National Historic
Landmarks that commemorate people and events related to cold war history, (for example, the
Westminster College Gymnasium in Fulton, Missouri where Winston Churchill delivered his
famous March 1946 Iron Curtain speechlong heralded as the seminal event marking the
beginning of the cold war) for the most part, historic sites in our National Park System are
woefully inadequate in interpreting and preserving resources relating to cold war history. At
some already established sites, there are specific locations and resources that could be more fully
interpreted to tell aspects of the cold war storythe Harry S. Truman National Historical Site in
Missouri and the Eisenhower National Historic Site in Pennsylvania are but two examples. Still,
there is no representational national historical park focusing upon cold war history. There ought
to be. This theme study should serve as the catalyst for the creation of cold war National
Here then, Mr. Chairman are some specific suggestions for strengthening this legislation:
Section 1. COLD WAR STUDY
The thrust of this bill presently focuses upon sites associated with American military
Page 81 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOCstrategy and technology. The legislation needs to be broadened to include a more diverse
collection of sitesboth sites associated with the military story of the cold war as well as the
social and non-military aspects of that war. To this end, let me discuss each in order.
First, with respect to the military related resources, the legislation should be more inclusive
in focusing on diverse types of resources. For example, in addition to the types of sites reflected
in the reports and inventory of sites mentioned in the legislation [see page 2, items (1) and (2)], it
should be noted that the National Park Service maintains a master listing of National Register
and National Historic Landmarks sites that include cold war sites. Here one finds listings of a
Nike missile and other missile bases, ICBM launch complexes, proving grounds, military and
civilian operations/communications centers, air defense centers, and at least one nuclear
reactorall these sites should be examined in context with other military-related cold war sites.
In addition, each State Historic Preservation Office maintains a state inventory of
historically significant sites (including sites of local or regional, as well as national,
significance). These sites should be assessed in context with this study. Other
resourcesincluding representative examples of historic ships (especially submarines) and
airplanes (the B-29 bomber, for example, for years served as the principle short-range strategic
strike weapon) also need to be preserved and interpreted. To this end, we recommend either
Page 82 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOClegislative or report language be added directing the Secretary to consult with other Federal
agencies and state governments and historical institutions in compiling a master inventory of
cold war sites and resources. This should not be a costly endeavor as much of the work has
already been completed; it need only be compiled into a central data base.
Second, the legislation needs to be broadened to assess sites of a non-military nature that
contribute to telling the story of the cold war from the perspective of government officials and
civilians. To this end, the assessment should include: Federal buildings such as the State
Department Building in Washington, D.C., sites associated with intelligence gathering (i.e., the
CIA, FBI and NSA headquarters) and espionage (the home of Nathan Gregory Silvermaster who
spearheaded the largest communist intelligence gathering apparatus in Washington, D.C. during
World War II which centered out of a residence at 5515 30th Street, is an ideal candidate for
assessment), the headquarters of fringe political movements such as the Communist Party USA
and John Birch Society; sites associated with cold war personalities, including (but not limited
to) Henry Luce, John McCloy, Allen and John Foster Dulles, Lucius Clay, Dean Acheson,
Douglas MacArthur, Paul Nitze, Averell Harriman, Joseph McCarthy, George Kennan, George
C. Marshall, and Ronald Reagan. And certainly no cold war theme study could be considered
complete without assessing the merits of preserving the bunker under the Greenbriar Hotel in
West Virginia that was set aside to provide refuge for high government officials in case of
nuclear war, as well as typical representative civilian defense bunkers. With respect to the
assessment of these sites (some of which may prove controversial), it should be remembered that
the purpose of the theme study is to document where history happened, and not necessarily in
every case to commemorate or celebrate where history happened. Those decisions are best left to
Page 83 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So that this study does not degenerate into an enormous assessment of a motley collection
of historic sites, some framework for assessment needs to be created to give guidance to the NPS.
The legislation should provide that framework. To this end, at a minimum, we suggest the theme
study concentrate its assessment work on people, events and sites associated with the following
cold war hallmarks:
Beginnings of the cold war
Marshall Plan and the German Question (including sites
associated with the Berlin airlift)
Development of Nuclear Weapons
Strategic Defense and Offense at Home and Abroad
The cold war on the Home Front
Development of the National Security State (including
Korean and Vietnam War (the domino theory in practice)
Cuban Missile Crisis (including training and staging sites associated with the Bay of Pigs
Page 84 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOCinvasion)
End of the cold war (through the creation of the Russian Republic and Commonwealth of
Section 2. INTERPRETIVE HANDBOOK ON THE COLD WAR
We fully support the production of an interpretive handbook on the cold war that focuses on
historic sites and resources, people, and events associated with the era. The cost associated with
the production of such an interpretive book, I understand, generally runs about $100,000.
Therefore, the dollar figure in Section 4 (AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS) may
need to be revised upward.
Section 3. COLD WAR ADVISORY COMMITTEE
We believe that there is a necessity for some type of outside review and assistance from
historical organizations and institutions in crafting this theme study. Either some type of advisory
committee along the lines of the one established in Section 3 needs to be created, or another
suitable alternative should be Congressionally mandated.
Page 85 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Instead of creating an advisory committee, the Committee may want to consider directing
the National Park Service to conduct two workshops comprised of academic scholars,
knowledgeable preservationists, and NPS professionals. During the first scoping meeting, the
workshop participants would provide advice in discussions about representational themes, help
refine the study framework, advise on methodology for collecting data and suggest sites for study
and assessment. At a second review meeting (conducted after a draft report has been prepared),
the same group of experts would review the NPS draft report and make formal recommendations
relating to the selection of National Landmark nominations and sites that meet the tests of
national significance, suitability and feasibility thus making them candidates for possible
National historic site or national historical park designation.
Mr. Chairman, the National Park Service has had previous experience in conducting this
type of information gathering workshop. For example, the NPS in partnership with the
Organization of American Historians assisted in the development of the History in the National
Park Service: Themes and Concepts, historic site framework which was adopted by the NPS in
1994. Several dozen scholars and academics also assisted the NPS in a Painting and Sculpture
Theme Study Workshop conducted June 10-14, 1991. That workshop resulted in the creation of
a Framework for the Visual Arts Theme Study that defined the National Park Service's role in
preserving and interpreting sites associated with American painting and sculpture. The
Committee may want to model the workshop requirement after legislative language found in
Public law 101-628 Section 1209 (1991) directing the NPS to revise the 1986 thematic
framework. It well may be, though, that the more relevant model is the Painting and Sculpture
Theme Study Workshop which had no legislative mandate. I would be pleased to provide the
Page 86 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOCCommittee with copies of both of these excellent reports that were prepared based on this
I thank you for the opportunity today to discuss this legislation and I welcome any questions the members of this Committee may have.
Mr. HEFLEY. Thank you, Dr. Craig.
And I am pleased that we did get all the testimony in before the bells started going off. As I said earlier, we may want to submit questions to you to be answered in writing.
In the meantime, Mrs. Christensen, do you have questions?
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have maybe a few for both Mr. Norquist and Mr. Wymbs.
Mr. Norquist, in developing the Ronald Reagan Memorial we would be really making an exception to the CWA on a case-by-case basis and I am having difficulty understanding why we should make such an exception.
If the 25-year waiting period contained in the CWA were respected in this case in your opinion wouldn't this memorial still be built, that the legacy of President Ronald Reagan is such that it can withstand the 25 years until such time that it would be in compliance with the law?
Mr. NORQUIST. I think his legacy certainly stands the test of time. It is my point that the legacy is so clear and it is very unusual that a legacy is this clear this early, that his victory over Communism was so complete, his success as a President and his character so exceptional that we can make this exception.
Page 87 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC And I fully agree with you. It is a big exception. It should be a rare exception. I do not expect us to be fighting and winning a Cold War again for hundreds of years. These are very substantial accomplishments that Reagan had and they are very unique ones.
So yes, I agree with you that it should be an exception, that it should be rare and I would argue and I think the country agrees that Ronald Reagan's greatness is of that nature.
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. In spite of the fact that President Reagan himself agreed with the 25-year period of waiting?
Mr. NORQUIST. Every time you pass a law you supersede all the previous laws you have passed and Congress does it every week here. I think what Reagan signed in the previous law is generally the right thing to do but obviously it is not in the Constitution so it is a law that new laws can supersede and I think we should put it to Congress that the greatness of Reagan's presidency and his accomplishments do merit making the exception, and it should be an exception. It should be rare. The law is a good one.
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. We do not disagree with the contributions but I think it is a bad precedent to set, to make an exception like this.
And there is another departure, which is to remove the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts from the approval process for the memorial. Why is it necessary, do you think, to create another Federal commission to oversee this memorial?
And as a follow-up to that question, if the memorial is subject to the review by the two entities, the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts, don't you think it would still move forward, given the 25-year waiting period?
Mr. NORQUIST. I am supportive of Congressman Hansen's proposal. I am not wedded to the particulars. I am sure that he had reasons for structuring it the way he did. I would defer to his thoughts and recommend that he sit down with you on why he did it that way.
Page 88 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Okay, just two more brief questions for Mr. Wymbs, the Chairman of the Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home Foundation.
Mr. Wymbs, would you be opposed to the Park Service completing a standard resource study of the site before we move forward with Federal acquisition?
Mr. WYMBS. It makes no difference to me what is done because I know the condition of the property and what we have there and there is going to be no difficulty with any type of study. We will be happy to have our people there show them anything they need to see.
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Do you have an estimate for how much it would cost for the Federal Government to acquire and restore the site?
Mr. WYMBS. In our first talks with the people we know full well that, of course, we cannot recoup what the Foundation itself has spent. It has been quite an expensive proposition. Just as an example, the Reagan home itself we bought for $29,000. It had been converted from a single-family home into a two-flat. We laugh about the price of it because it only cost us $450,000 to restore it to its original condition.
So we cannot estimate. As I told one of the staff members from the Committee that called me, I said there is no way we could come up with an estimate of the value of what has been, for example, put into the corner park. How do you estimate the value of what essentially is a small vacant lot with a 15-ton bronze statue right in the middle? Our appraisers could not touch that. We could not come up with any figures for you because this has been an on-going process since the early 1980's when the President was elected and the money has been spent over those years and we do not show it anywhere in our books and records as a real investment in the property, but it is all there.
We are willing to go with whatever values the department comes up with with their own expert examination, providing they do not make us look too silly in selling it.
Page 89 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Just one final question. What relationship, if any, does this site have to the Ronald Reagan birthplace in Tampico, where I believe he spent a longer time?
Mr. WYMBS. Ronald Reagan was only there for a very few months after his birth. He was a babe in arms when the family moved from there. It was a small apartment above a store in a small town that is about three blocks long. That has no relationship here.
The family, oddly enough, was living in Tampico just before they moved to Dixon but the house they lived in down there is not available to the public. It is in private ownership and they will not even let you set foot on the property. Again it was a house that they rented for a short period of time, as Mr. Jack Reagan, Ronald's father, made arrangements with the owner of the store he was working for to finance the new store up in Dixon. So the President had no real memory of that spot.
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. I thank all of our panelists for their testimony. I apologize for having to step out for a few minutes.
Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Kildee?
Mr. KILDEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a brief remark.
The Cold War began basically when Harry Truman was President and began to wind down under President Ronald Reagan.
Mr. Powers, it is interesting. I lived in Pesawar, Pakistan in 1958 and '59 and there were two American facilities there at the timethe American Air Force base plus the CIA base. One was nonexistent and the other was secret.
It was very interesting. Shortly after I returned home I realized that I was living very, very near a very crucial element of our effort to defend ourselves in the Cold War and your father played a very important role in that defense and we certainly appreciate that. It was very interesting to realize that I was so close to what was a very closely guarded secret over there but a very important element in our efforts to defend ourselves. I appreciate your testimony.
Page 90 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Mr. POWERS. Thank you for your remarks and the honoring of my father.
Mr. HEFLEY. I want to thank this panel, as well. I think the testimony was especially helpful. We may be coming back to each of you not only to respond to questions but to get additional help in forming legislation. And Dr. Craig, I appreciate your suggestions about how to make the legislation on this Cold War thing better.
I appreciate, Mr. Wymbs, what you all in Dixon have done. If you had not stepped in and done that that would not be available. We would not be considering something like this at this point. So I appreciate that a group of citizens took it upon themselves to proceed that way.
Mr. Powers, I have, and I am sure the Committee has, great respect for your father. He was a true cold warrior who risked his life and almost lost his life to defend this country and we appreciate what he has done and we appreciate what you are doing to preserve that heritage.
Mr. POWERS. Thank you.
Mr. HEFLEY. If there is nothing else, the Committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:05 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]