Слике страница

Broyhill, N.C. Harvey, Mich. Pelly
Broyhill, Va. Hawkins Perkins

Burleson Hemphill Pillion
Byrne, Pa. Henderson Poage

Cameron Hoeven

Pool Cannon

Hoffman Price
Cederberg Holland


Chenoweth Hull

Reid, Ill.

Hutchinson Reid, N.Y.


Don H.

Rhodes, Pa.
Clawson, Del. Johansen

Cleveland Johnson, Wis. Riehlman


Jones, Ala. Rogers, Fla.

Jones, Mo. Rogers, Tex.

Rooney, Pa.
Cunningham Karth


Kastenmeier Rostenkowski


Delaney King, NÀY. St. George

Kluczynski Schadeberg


Kornegay Schweiker Downing Kunkel

Scott Duncan Langen

Secrest Dwyer

Lankford Selden Edmondson Latta

Senner Edwards Lennon


Lipscomb Shipley


Long, Md. Shriver


Finnegan McDowell Sikes


McIntire Smith, Calif. Flynt

McLoskey Snyder Fogarty

Macdonald Springer Ford

MacGregor Staebler
Fountain Madden


Frelinghuysen Marsh

Fulton, Pa. Martin, Calif. Stratton
Fulton, Tenn. Martin, Nebr. Taft


Matthews Teague, Calif.
Gathings May

Thompson, N.J.

Thomson, Wis.

Miller, Calif. Toll
Gonzalez Milliken


Goodling Montoya Tupper

Green, Oreg. Morse

Green, Pa. Morton


Van Deerlin

Murphy, Ill. Vanik

Van Pelt




O'Brien, N.Y. Whalley Halleck

O'Hara, Ill. Whitener Hanna

O'Hara, Mich. Wickersham

Olsen, Mont. Wilson, Bob
Harding Olson, Minn. Wilson, Ind.

Harrison Ostertag
Harvey, Ind. Patman

Addabbo Garmatz Murphy, N.Y.

Ashbrook Gilbert



Grabowski O'Neill

Hagan, Ga.

Brown, Calif. Hagen, Calif. Philbin


Byrnes, Wis.

Rivers, Alaska

Roberts, Ala.

Huddleston Rogers, Colo.

Jennings Rooney, N.Y.

Daddario Johnson, Calif. Roudebush

Davis, Ga. Keogh

Ryan, Mich. Dent

King, Calif. Ryan, N.Y. Derounian Kirwan

Derwinski Leggett



McMillan Slack
Donohue Matsunaga Smith, Va.

Ellsworth Minish

Teague, Tex.
Farbstein Monagan Thomas

Thompson, La.

Thompson, Tex.
Gallagher Multer



may revise and extend their remarks on Waggonner Charles H. Young

the bill just considered within 5 days.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to

the request of the gentleman from New Abernethy Holifield Rivers, S.C.

Anderson Hosmer

Roberts, Tex.

There was no objection.

St Germain

St. Onge


Landrum Shelley

Burkhalter Lindsay

Smith, Iowa
Long, La. Steed

Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. Mr.
McCulloch Stephens

Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to
Mailliard Stubblefield

extend my remarks at this point in the
Chamberlain Martin, Mass. Talcott

RECORD and include extraneous matter.
Miller, N.Y. Tuten

The SPEAKER. Is there objection
Davis, Tenn. Moorhead Watts

to the request of the gentleman from


O'Brien, Ill. Wharton

There was no objection.

Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. Mr.

Forrester Pirnie


Speaker, on October 17, 1963, I received

word through reliable sources that Jus-

tice Department personnel had rented

Rhodes, Ariz.

cars for the purpose of driving Martin So the motion to recommit was agreed

Luther King and other agitators in Selma

and Dallas County.
The Clerk announced the following

Upon receipt of this information I im

mediately sent a telegram to the Attorpairs:

ney General stating that such act was On this vote:

unwarranted, highly inflammatory and Mr. Wyman for, with Mr. Stephens against.

was an interference in local administraMr. Findley for, with Mr. Rodino against.

tion. I further stated that this was comMr. Rhodes of Arizona for, with Mr. Celler against.

pletely unjustified and requested that I Mr. Talcott for, with Mr. St. Onge against.

be advised as to the legal authority for

such expenditures of taxpayer's money Until further notice:

and further requested that the Attorney Mr. White with Mr. Anderson.

General issue an immediate order stopMr. Lesinski with Mr. Miller of New York.

ping this flagrant violation and illegal Mr. Denton with Mr. Lindsay.

use of public funds.
Mr. Pucinski with Mr. Westland.

On October 22, 1963, Mr. Speaker, I
Mr. Williams with Mr. Foreman.
Mr. Bass with Mr. Siler.

placed in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD a Mr. O'Brien of Illinois with Mr. Widnall. summary of the official report I had reMr. Roberts of Texas with Mr. Dague.

ceived on this subject together with a Mr. Hays with Mr. Avery.

copy of my telegram to the Attorney Mr. Holifield with Mr. Mailliard.

Mr. Dowdy with Mr. Kilburn.

On October 30, 1963, in reply to my
Mr. Forrester with Mr. McCulloch.

telegram Mr. Burke Marshall, Assistant Mr. Shelley with Mr. Gubser. Mr. Watts with Mr. Berry.

Attorney General, Civil Rights Division, Mr. Landrum with Mr. Laird.

U.S. Justice Department, categorically Mr. Long of Louisiana with Mr. Hosmer. denied the allegations and further stated Mr. Colmer with Mr. Bates.

that, “the reports to the contrary are Mr. Winstead with Mr Wharton.

false," Mr. Whitten with Mr. Schenck.

Today, Mr. Speaker, I received another Mr. Morrison with Mr. Quillen.

communication from Mr. Marshall enMr. Moss with Mr. Harsha.

closing a statement correcting the inacMr. Moorhead with Mr. Chamberlain. Mr. Rains with Mr. Weaver.

curate information furnished me under Mr. Hardy with Mr. Pirnie.

date of October 30, 1963. This stateMr. Stubblefield with Mr. Martin


ment was as follows: Massachusetts.

Reports were published in Alabama last Mr. Abernethy with Mr. Kyl.

month that automobiles rented by the DeMr. Tuten with Mr. Burton.

partment of Justice were used to transport Mr. Steed with Mrs. Kee.

Rev. Martin Luther King from Birmingham Mr. Davis of Tennessee with Mr. Baring.

to Selma on the evening of October 15. Mr. Everett with Mr. Carey.

The Department of Justice issued a stateMr. Burkhalter with Mr. St Germain.

ment on October 18, asserting that no autoMr. Rivers of South Carolina with Mr.

mobiles rented by the Department of Justice Smith of Iowa.

had been used to drive Reverend King either Mr. Passman with Mr. Pilcher.

from Birmingham to Selma or from Selma

to Montgomery. Messrs. ASHLEY, ROOSEVELT, and

No car rented by the Department was used THOMPSON of New Jersey changed

to drive Reverend King from Selma to Monttheir votes from "nay" to "yea."

gomery. However, a car rented by the DeMessrs. ASPINALL and BECKER partment and being used by a Department changed their votes from "yea” to “nay." lawyer was loaned to

lawyer was loaned to a private citizen who The result of the vote was announced subsequently drove Reverend King from Bir

mingham to Selma on October 15.
as above recorded.
The doors were opened.

During that time, the attorney, Thelton

Henderson, remained in Birmingham. NevA motion to reconsider was laid on ertheless, the use of the car for unofficial the table.

business was contrary to Department of Jus

tice regulations. It was also contrary to a GENERAL LEAVE TO EXTEND

statement which Mr. Henderson originally Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask

gave to the Department of Justice. Mr. unanimous consent that all Members Henderson came forward last night and

voluntarily gave a correct account of what the House resolve itself into the Committee lished, the committee, on May 22, 1963, occurred. He has submitted his resignation of the Whole House on the State of the Union adopted a resolution requesting the adto the Department and it has been accepted. for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 8969) ministration to submit to Congress its The Department regrets very much that to provide, for the period ending June 30,

recommendations with respect to legislaits earlier statement as to the use of a car 1964, temporary increases in the public debt rented by the Department in connection limit set forth in section 21 of the Second

tion to establish policies and procedures with Reverend King's transportation from Liberty Bond Act, and all points of order

relating to cost allocation, reimburseBirmingham to Selma was based on misin- against said bill are hereby waived. After

ment and cost sharing which would be formation and, therefore, erroneous.

general debate, which shali be confined to applicable to all water resource projects.

the bill and continue not to exceed four It would appear, Mr. Speaker, that an

It seemed to the committee that since hours, to be equally divided and controlled agency of the Government and particu- by the chairman and ranking minority mem

this was a matter involving several execlarly a law enforcement agency such as

utive departments and the jurisdiction ber of the Committee on Ways and Means, the Justice Department would, prior to the bill shall be considered as having been

of several committees of the Congress, rendering a report such as the one sub- read for amendment. No amendment shall

the recommendations of the administramitted to me by Mr. Marshall, and which be in order to said bill except amendments tion was a necessary first step toward enI ask to be inserted immediately follow- offered by direction of the Committee on actment by the Congress of legislation ing my remarks, would make a thorough

Ways and Means. Amendments offered by establishing a uniform policy. Pending investigation of the facts before writing Means may be offered to the bill at the con

direction of the Committee on Ways and receipt of the administration's recoma Member of Congress. However, I sub- clusion of the general debate, but said

mendation, the committee has not conmit, Mr. Speaker, that perhaps this is a amendments shall not be subject to amend

sidered any reclamation projects for autypical example of the operations of this ment. At the conclusion of the considera- thorization. Department which has used equipment, tion of the bill for amendment, the Commit- Since last May, in response to my commanpower and resources to aid racial tee shall rise and report the bill to the House mittee's request, the executive departagitators in my native Alabama without with such amendments as may have been ments and the Bureau of the Budget legal authority. If there are violations adopted, and the previous question shall be have been working diligently to reach

considered as ordered on the bill and amend- agreement on the policies which should or threatened violations of Federal laws, ments thereto to final passage without inthe Justice Department should be pres- tervening motion except one motion to re

be adopted and develop legislation to ent, but to place equipment and resources commit.

implement their recommendations. On at the disposal of agitators is to put the

Monday, the legislation was submitted Federal Government in the position of

to the Congress by the Bureau of the

HOUR OF MEETING TOMORROW encouraging unlawful and uncalled for

Budget and has been referred to the rioting, strife and racial unrest.

Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I ask Committee on Interior and Insular Afunanimous consent that when the House fairs. It is my hope that the committee

adjourns today it adjourn to meet at 11 TO AUTHORIZE THE VIRGIN

can give early consideration to this o'clock tomorrow.

legislation and that it can be expeditiousISLANDS TO ISSUE BONDS

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to ly approved by the Congress with whatMr. ASPINALL. Mr. Speaker, I ask the request of the gentleman from Okla

ever changes are found to be necessary unanimous consent to take from the homa?

in order that we may again be in posiSpeaker's table the bill (H.R. 1989) to

There was no objection.

tion to consider the authorization of authorize the government of the Virgin

reclamation projects. Islands to issue general obligation bonds,

The legislation involves projects of the with a Senate amendment thereto, and


Corps of Engineers which are under the concur in the Senate amendment.

Mr. FULTON of Pennsylvania. Mr. jurisdiction of the Committee on Public The Clerk read the title of the bill.

Speaker, as a member of the Committee Works. Therefore, I am advising the The Clerk read the Senate amendon Science and Astronautics, I was at a

chairman of that committee of the legisment as follows:

meeting of that committee at the Con- lation and assuring him that the views Page 2, line 5, strike out "operate” and gressional Hotel when rollcall No. 191 was

and recommendations of the Public insert "equip".

had, on H.R. 6143. We did not get word Works Committee will be fully considThe SPEAKER. Is there objection to there that the vote was being had. Had I ered in any action which my committee the request of the gentleman from been present I would have voted "yea" takes. Colorado? on the conference report.

I know that many Members are inMr. SAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, reserving

terested in this legislation and, therefore, the right to object, I take this oppor

I am including as a part of these retunity to ask the chairman of the House RECREATION ALLOCATION POLICY

marks, the letter from the Bureau of the Committee on Interior and Insular Af

Mr. ASPINALL. Mr. Speaker, I ask Budget to the Speaker along with the fairs whether or not the amendment unanimous consent to extend my remarks recommended legislation. It will be which was placed in the bill by the Sen

at this point in the RECORD and include noted that the legislation is concurred in ate is what was basically the intention the text of an executive communication by the Department of the Interior and of the House when the bill was reported. together with the text of a bill introduced by the Department of the Army. Mr. ASPINALL. The gentleman is by me today.

The letter follows: right.

The SPEAKER. Mr. SAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, I with


BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, draw my reservation of objection.

to the request of the gentleman from

Washington, D.C., November 2, 1963. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to


There was no objection. the request of the gentleman from

Speaker of the House of Representatives, Colorado?

Mr. ASPINALL. Mr. Speaker, back in Washington, D.C. There was no objection. March and April of this year, my com- DEAR MR. SPEAKER: The demands of the

American people for all forms of outdoor The Senate amendment was concurred mittee spent 5 days considering allocain.

tion policy for water resource projects recreation opportunities, particularly those A motion to reconsider was laid on with particular emphasis on allocations which are water related, have increased the table. of project costs to recreation and fish and sharply since the Second World War and are

expected to accelerate in the years ahead. wildlife. The committee found that the

This situation has resulted in general recadministration had not adopted a uni- ognition that recreation should be fully conTEMPORARY INCREASE IN THE form policy with respect to allocations, sidered along with other purposes served by PUBLIC DEBT LIMIT

and that multiple-purpose water resource Federal multiple-purpose water resources Mr. O'NEILL, from the Committee on projects were being submitted to the projects as part of a sound conservation proRules, reported the following privileged Congress by the Department of the In

gram. Uniform policies, including costresolution (H. Res. 564, Rept. No. 889), terior and the Corps of Engineers with

sharing and reimbursement policies, are

needed for the treatment of recreation and which was referred to the House Calen- recreation and fish and wildlife allocadar and ordered to be printed:

fish and wildlife as part of these projects. In tions determined on a different basis.

addition, the Secretary of the Interior should Resolved, That upon the adoption of this Feeling strongly that a uniform recre- have general authority, comparable to that resolution it shall be in order to move that ation allocation policy should be estab- now available to the Department of the

Army, for recreation development of projects sponsibility and non-Federal responsibility of the agency having jurisdiction over the under his control. I am transmitting here. For example, the National Park System has project, would be used: (1) provision by with for the consideration of the Congress long been recognized as a Federal responsi- non-Federal interests of land or interests a draft bill which would establish uniform bility. As another example, the Recreation therein or facilities required for the Federal policies regarding recreation and fish and Advisory Council this year established cri- project; (2) payment or repayment by nonwildlife and would provide the Secretary of teria for the establishment and manage- Federal public bodies with interest at a rate the Interior with appropriate authority. ment of national recreation areas with costs comparable to that for other project func

Subsection 1(a) states congressional policy generally to be borne by the Federal Gov- tions; and (3) repayment by use of project that (1) full consideration shall be given ernment. It is considered that recreation revenues at projects which have revenueto recreation and fish and wildlife enhance- opportunities provided by water resource producing functions such as hydroelectric ment as part of Federal water resource proj- projects in most cases will be of primary power or water supply. The water and power ects; (2) planning with respect to recreation benefit to people living in the locality of the users will benefit from the recreation opporaspects of a project shall be coordinated with project. In the absence of such a project, tunities provided by the project and will also existing and planning recreation develop- there would be little question that the pro- benefit from the additional economic activments; and (3) except where Federal admin- vision of similar recreation opportunities ities in the area which can be expected to be istration is authorized, the project con- would be a non-Federal responsibility. Thus, generated by the project. Interest comparastruction agency shall encourage non-Federal it would seem appropriate and equitable ble to that for other project functions would public bodies to assume responsibility for generally to require cost sharing by State be charged and repayment of recreation and the management of project areas and facili- and local interests for project costs allocated fish and wildlife enhancement costs would ties provided initially at Federal cost and to recreation and fish and wildlife enhance- be made during the payout of cost allocafor the additional development of the area ment. Such cost sharing would be consistent tions to water and power functions. Howto realize the full recreation and fish and with the administration's proposed program ever, if there were unusual circumstances wildlife potential.

of grants to States to assist them in pro- where deferral of repayment would be in the Subsection 1(b) provides that the value viding recreation opportunities. However, it public interest, the head of the agency could of recreation and fish and wildlife enhance- is recognized that to require cost sharing for recommend that deferred repayment be aument benefits shall be taken into account recreation and fish and wildlife enhance- thorized. in determining the economic value of water ment on every project may hinder the de- Enactment of the draft bill would estabresource projects, and that costs shall be al velopment of some much needed and worth- lish general cost-sharing and reimbursement located to recreation and fish and wildlife while water resource projects because of the policy for recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement in a manner which will insure inability of the State and local people to enhancement. The formulation of a policy that all project purposes share equitably share the costs. It is also recognized that to fit every circumstance is made difficult by in the advantages of multiple-purpose con

there will be some sharing of costs through the great variety among water resource projstruction.

recreation user charges and fees upon en- ects—in size, purposes served, and problems Subsection 1(c) deals with the subject of actment of the Land and Water Conserva- encountered. It is recognized that the apreimbursement and cost sharing of those

tion Fund legislation; however, this will also plication of the policy which would be estabcosts of Federal projects that are allocated to

be true of the National Park System and na- lished by the bill may not be appropriate in recreation and fish and wildlife enhancetional recreation areas.

every case. There will be instances when it ment. The two functions are combined for Taking these factors into account, we be- will be entirely fitting for the water resource this purpose because of the close relation- lieve it would be reasonable for the Federal agencies to recommend departures from the ship between the benefits that flow from Government to bear (1) the costs incurred general policy and we would expect the agenthem.

specifically for land and basic facilities for cies to do so. For example, there may be a Beginning in 1962, the Army Corps of En- recreation or fish and wildlife enhancement,

few instances where the strict application of gineers recommended Federal assumption of (2) the joint costs allocated to recreation

the provisions of the bill could result in rates the separable cost of balanced basic recrea

and to fish and wildlife enhancement up to a for electric power and water supply that tional development, plus a portion of joint dollar limit as described in the next para- would be higher than those generally preproject costs allocated to this function in graph, and (3) certain other Federal costs, vailing in the area

for obtaining equivalent the order of 25 percent or less of the total such as the cost of increasing the size of a amounts

of power or water. Other examples project costs. On June 21, 1962, we ad- reservoir for recreation, up to a limit of 25 might include water resource projects that vised the Secretary of the Army in connec- percent of the cost of joint-use land and affect a national park or are included within tion with the first project report contain facilities or $5 million, whichever is the a national recreation area, or where an outing this recommendation as follows:

lesser. Joint-use land and facilities are de- standing opportunity to further the migraThe administration is currently giving fined as land or facilities serving two or more tory waterfowl conservation program exists. consideration to the problems of cost allo- project purposes, one of which is recreation

Subsection 1(d) provides that the views of cation and of reimbursement and cost shar- or fish and wildlife enhancement.

the Secretary of the Interior, developed in ing between the Federal Government and The draft bill provides that the limit on accordance with section 3 of the act of May non-Federal bodies-matters not fully dealt nonreimbursable joint costs allocated to re- 28, 1963 (Public Law 88–29; 77 Stat. 49), with in the policies and standards recent- creation and fish and wildlife enhancement shall be included in each project report. ly approved by the President. There is also vary according to the size of projects—the

Subsection 1(e) confirms the limitations under consideration the development of de- limit expressed in percentages would be rela- of the first proviso of section 2(d) of the tailed standards to supplement the new tively iarge for small projects with progres- Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (72 Stat. principle for estimating recreation benefits, sively smaller percentages for larger projects. 563, 16 U.S.C. 662(d)) with respect to measincluding those derived from the recrea- The effect of this is that the limit on non- ures for the enhancement of fish and wildtional aspects of fish and wildlife. We reimbursable costs in dollar terms increases

life properly includable in a Federal water would expect that prior to the initiation gradually for larger projects rather than in resource project; it also repeals the second of construction, the project would be re- direct proportion to the size of projects. The proviso of that section of the Fish and Wildevaluated in light of the administration's rationale for this approach is that the Fed- life Coordination Act, which applies to projstandards and policies applicable at that eral investment for recreation at water re- ects constructed under reclamation law. time.”

source projects should not be inordinately The effect of repeal of the second proviso is Similar statements were included in let- large in any area merely because the water re- twofold: first, it will result in the costs of ters of advice on other project reports. Thus,

source project happens to be large for other mitigation of project-occasioned damage to it is abundantly clear that the administra- purposes.

It would appear reasonable to fish and wildlife being distributed among all tion made no commitment regarding the 25

start the percentage limit at 25 percent of the project purposes the same as any other projpercent formula and that the proposed proj- cost of joint-use land and facilities for small

ect cost; and, second, it will terminate the ects would be reevaluated before estimates of projects with decreasing percentages for reimbursement policy for costs allocated to appropriations are requested to initiate proj, larger projects.

fish and wildlife enhancement now set out ect construction.

Under the draft bill, cost sharing or reim- in the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act so Enactment of the proposed legislation bursement for recreation and fish and wild- that the reimbursement policy established would establish general cost-sharing and re- life enhancement would not be required for by this bill may take effect. imbursement policy for recreation and fish the great majority of water resource projects. Subsection 1(f) is largely self-explanatory; and wildlife enhancement. Therefore, this Even where cost sharing or reimbursement it places a limitation of $28 million on water matter was given very careful consideration would be required, a large part of the cost resource project funds that may be expended We requested and received the views of sev- allocated to recreation and fish and wildlife for land acquisition to accomplish the Federal agencies on the bill and held discus- enhancement would in general be borne by eral Government's obligations to conserve sions with representatives of the agencies the Federal Government.

and protect migratory waterfowl. These exincluding the Department of the Interior and Under the provisions of the bill, non-Fed- penditures are in addition to those made the Department of the Army. The enclosed eral interests would reimburse the Federal from the migratory bird conservation fund draft bill takes into account the agencies' Government for costs in excess of the spec- for migratory waterfowl refuges. The $28 views. The following explains our views with ified limits. The draft bill provides for million limitation applies only to expendirespect to the bill.

three methods of payment or reimbursement. tures for acquisition of lands or interests in A basic consideration is the need to dif- One or a combination of the following meth- lands which would otherwise not be acquired, ferentiate appropriately between Federal re- ods, as determined appropriate by the head when they are acquired at a water resource project for incorporation into a migratory of the general authority contained in the located to recreation or fish and wildlife waterfowl refuge located there. The $28 mil- bill, we understand that the Department enhancement shall not exceed the lesser of lion limitation specifically does not apply to does not plan to undertake construction of the benefits from those functions or of the expenditures for the mitigation of damages basic facilities or land acquisition activity at cost of providing recreation or fish and wildto migratory waterfowl, since that is properly existing projects without notification to the life enhancement benefits of reasonably a project cost to be allocated to project pur- Congress.

equivalent use and location by the least poses in the same manner as any other proj- Because of the contingent nature of the costly alternative means. ect cost.

program that may be pursued under the (c) For each project or appropriate unit Subsection 1(g) brings several recently proposed bill, it is not possible at this time thereof, except local flood control, beach eroauthorized Corps of Engineers projects that to prepare the data required by the act of sion control, small boat harbor, or hurrimay include migratory waterfowl refuges July 25, 1956 (5 U.S.C. 642a) with respect cane protection projects, the Federal costs under the provisions of this bill. to this bill.

incurred specifically for land or basic facilSubsection 1(h) provides that the act shall Because of the increasing use of Federal ities for recreation or fish and wildlife ennot apply to the Tennessee Valley Author- reservoirs for recreational purposes, water hancement shall be nonreimbursable; joint ity nor to projects constructed under the pollution can be expected to become a greater costs allocated to recreation and to fish and authority of the Small Reclamation Projects problem. We have discussed this matter with wildlife enhancement shall in the aggregate Act (43 U.S.C. 422a). We believe that cost- the Department of Health, Education, and be nonreimbursable up to a dollar limit desharing and reimbursement requirements Welfare and understand that adequate au- termined in accordance with the following for recreation and fish and wildlife enhance thority exists under the Water Pollution table: ment at small reclamation projects should Control Act to correct such problems as may

If the cost of joint-use be considered in relation to such require- occur. We also understand that the Depart

land and facilities ments at watershed protection projects con- ments of the Army and the Interior have


The dollar limit isstructed under the Watershed Protection and adequate authority to deal with water pollu

Not over $10,000,- 25 percent of the Flood Prevention Act (Public Law 566, 83d tion problems at reservoirs under their juris


cost of joint-use Cong.), as amended. diction and that further steps will be taken

land and faciliThe Tennessee Valley Authority has in- where necessary in controlling pollution to

ties; formed us that they have adequate author- protect recreation values.

Over $10,000,000 but $2,500,000, plus 15 ity to plan for, evaluate benefits from, and The Bureau of the Budget, with the con

not over $40,000,- percent of the allocate costs to recreation and fish and currence of the Department of the Interior


amount over wildlife enhancement in connection with and the Department of the Army, recom

$10,000,000; multiple-purpose projects. They believe that mends enactment of the proposed legislation

Over $40,000,000 but $7,000,000, plus 10 the bill contains language which is inapas consistent with the administration's ob

not over $100,000,- percent of the propriate for TVA, for example, the require jectives.


amount over ment that the views of the Secretary of the Sincerely,

$40,000,000; Interior be included in any report concern


Over $100,000,000 $13,000,000, plus 4 ing a project within the bill's purview.

Deputy Director.

but not over percent of the While TVA consults and cooperates with


amount over other Federal agencies, TVA believes it must

$100,000,000; as a unified development agency take full

H.R. 9032

Over $200,000,000 $17,000,000, plus 2 responsibility for all phases of projects which A bill to provide uniform policies with respect

percent of the it plans and constructs. This was recog- to recreation and fish and wildlife bene

amount over nized in TVA's exemption from the Fish and fits and costs of Federal multiple-purpose

$200,000,000; Wildlife Coordination Act. Furthermore, water resource projects, and to provide the

other Federal costs allocated to recreation the policy of the Tennessee Valley Author- Secretary of the Interior with authority ity is not to provide recreation facilities at for recreation development of projects un

and to fish and wildlife enhancement shall Federal cost but to transfer lands adjacent der his control.

in the aggregate be nonreimbursable up to to reservoirs to non-Federal bodies for rec

a limit of 25 per centum of the cost of joint

Be it enacted by the Senate and House reation development and management. We of Representatives of the United States in

use land and facilities or $5 million, which

ever is the lesser. Provision shall be made agree the TVA has been quite successful in

Congress assembled, That (a) it is the policy for the reimbursement, or for the contributhis policy and recommend that the bill of the Congress and the intent of this Act

tion by non-Federal interests, of costs in not apply to TVA.

that (1) full consideration shall be given excess of the limits specified above under The purpose of section 2 of the bill is to to outdoor recreation opportunities and fish provide the Secretary of the Interior with

one or a combination of the following methand wildlife enhancement where these can

ods, as may be determined appropriate by the the authority to implement the provisions be provided or enhanced in the investiga- head of the agency having jurisdiction over of section 1. Since 1944 the Department of tion, planning, construction, operation, and the Army has had basic statutory authority maintenance of Federal navigation, flood

the project: (1) provision by non-Federal

interests of land or interests therein or to provide recreation development at reser- control, reclamation, hydroelectric, and mul- facilities required for the Federal project; voir projects under its control; in 1962 this tiple-purpose water resource projects; (2)

(2) payment or repayment, with interest at authority was expanded to embrace water planning with respect to the development a rate comparable to that for other project resource development projects generally of the recreation potential of any such proj- functions, pursuant to agreement wfth one (sec. 4 of the act of Dec. 22, 1944, as ect shall be based on the coordination of or more non-Federal public bodies; (3) reamended; 16 U.S.C. 460(d)). On the other the recreational use of the project area with payment, with interest from the date of first hand, only piecemeal authority exists for the use of existing and planned Federal, delivery of water or power from the project certain individual projects under the con- State, or local public recreation develop- for beneficial use at a rate comparable to that trol of the Department of the Interior. A ments; and (3) except in the case of project for other project functions, by use of projnotable example of this project-by-project areas or facilities which heretofore or here- ect revenues that will be available during approach is section 8 of the Colorado River after are authorized by law for inclusion payout of cost allocations to water and Storage Project Act of 1956 (70 Stat. 105; within national recreation areas or are ap- power functions: Provided, That if the head 43 U.S.C. 620g). Enactment of the proposed propriate for administration by other Fed- of the agency having jurisdiction over the legislation will fill in the statutory gaps and eral agencies as part of the national forest project finds there are unusual circumstances permit the realization of potential returns system or in connection with other author- when deferral of repayment would be in the on recreation resources created by publicized Federal programs, the project construc- public interest, he may recommend that reinvestment in the development of water re- tion agency shall encourage non-Federal payment by use of project revenues be desource projects of the Department of the public bodies to assume responsibility for ferred until after the payment of costs alloInterior.

the administration and additional develop- cated to water and power functions are comBy its terms section 2 of the bill applies ment of project land and water areas for pleted, and such recommendation shall to all water resource projects under the con- recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement become effective only when specifically autrol of the Department of the Interior, both purposes, including operation, maintenance thorized by law. The term "nonreimbursaheretofore and hereafter constructed. Thus, and replacement of basic recreation facili- ble" as used in this act shall not be conconstruction or acquisition of land for rec- ties provided initially at Federal cost. strued to prohibit the imposition of enreation purposes at existing projects could (b) The benefits of the recreation and trance, admission, and other recreation user be undertaken under the authority of that fish and wildlife enhancement features of fees or charges. For purposes of this subsection if it were to be enacted. In this con- each project or appropriate unit thereof section "joint-use land and facilities” shall nection, it is important to note what the shall be taken into account in determining mean land or facilities serving two or more section does not do; the first proviso of sec- the economic benefits of the project or unit. project purposes one of which is recreation tion 2 specifically provides that the bill shall costs shall be allocated to the purposes of or fish and wildlife enhancement. not be the basis for allocation of water, recreation, fish and wildlife enhancement, (d) The views of the Secretary of the reservoir capacity, or joint project costs at and other purposes in a manner which will Interior developed in accordance with secexisting or previously authorized projects. insure that all project purposes share equi- tion 3 of the Act of May 28, 1963 (Public Law While the Department of the Interior does tably in the advantages of multiple-purpose 88–29; 77 Stat. 49), with respect to the outpropose to review existing projects in light construction: Provided, That the costs al- door recreation aspects shall be set forth in any report on any project or appropriate unit within the exterior boundaries of a national officers' pay from $25,000 to $40,000 yearly. thereof within the purview of this act.

forest unless the Secretaries of Agriculture In his speech Congressman UDALL makes a (e) Nothing in this Act shall be con- and Interior jointly determine otherwise. good and strong argument for the Federal strued as amending the first proviso of where any project lands are transferred here- Government to give comparable pay for comsection 2(d) of the Act of August 12, 1958 under to the jurisdiction of the Secretary parable skill and responsibility to that paid (72 Stat. 563; 16 U.S.C. 662(d)), and the of Agriculture, the lands involved shall be- by private enterprise for similar duties. second proviso of section 2(d) of that Act come national forest lands: Provided, That UDALL has sent us a charming letter conis hereby repealed.

the lands and waters within the flow lines cerning this bill which we will read to you (f) Expenditures for lands or interests of any reservoir or otherwise needed or used tomorrow. Our only comment at this time in lands hereafter acquired by project con- for the operation of the project for other after imparting this information is "A freshstruction agencies for the establishment of purposes shall continue to be administered man Representative with this much audacity migratory waterfowl refuges recommended by the Secretary of the Interior to the extent can't be all bad." by the Secretary of the Interior at Federal he determines to be necessary for such operawater resource projects, when such lands or

Mr. Speaker, I have been paid more eftion. Nothing herein shall limit the authorinterests in lands would not have been ac- ity of the Secretary of the Interior granted fusive compliments on occasion, but I quired but for the establishment of a mi- by existing provisions of law relating to have never had one I appreciated more. gratory waterfowl refuge at the project, recreation development of water resource "Not all bad" is good enough for me. shall not exceed $28 million; Provided, That projects or to disposition of public lands for Also, I want to report to my colleagues the aforementioned expenditure limitation recreational purposes.

that I am continuing to receive favorable in this subsection shall not apply to the

SEC. 3. This Act may be cited as the “Fed- comments, resolutions, letters, telegrams, costs of mitigating damages to migratory eral Water Project Recreation Act.”

and newspaper editorials from across waterfowl caused by such water resource

the Nation in support of Federal pay projects.


legislation. (g) The provisos with respect to wildlife

I particularly want to call the attenrefuges applicable to the authorizations for

Mr. UDALL. Mr. Speaker, I ask tion of all Members to a column in Monthe Trinity River, Wallisville Reservoir,

unanimous consent to address the House day's Washington Evening Star by WilTexas, contained in section 101 of the River and Harbor Act of 1962 (76 Stat. 1175), and for 1 minute, to revise and extend my re- liam s. White, one of the real authorities for the Kaysinger Bluff Reservoir, Osage marks, and to include several editorials. on the Congress. Does Mr. White think River, Missouri, and the Kaw Reservoir, Ar- The SPEAKER. Is there objection the proposed pay increases for Congresskansas River, Oklahoma, contained in sec- to the request of the gentleman from

men are too great? Far from it; he tion 203 of the Flood Control Act of 1962 Arizona?

thinks they are inadequate. Here is his (76 Stat. 1186 and 1187), are hereby amend

There was no objection.

conclusion: ed by adding before the punctuation marks

Mr. UDALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise toat the end thereof the following, "until such time as the Secretary of the Interior

To put congressional pay at the level where day to offer further encouragement to

men there could go about their high jobs has approved the establishment of such a those of my colleagues who, while favor

free of financial fear-and free of financial refuge."

ing Federal pay legislation, have feared temptation, for they are human, too-would (h) This Act shall not apply to the Ten- the consequences of advocating pay in- be the best and soundest investment the peonessee Valley Authority nor to projects con- creases for themselves and other Mem- ple of the United States could make, even if structed under authority of the Small Rec- bers of Congress.

it cost double or triple what the present lamation Projects Act (43 U.S.C. 422a).

Expecting a certain amount of interest proposal would cost. SEC. 2. Subject to the provisions of section in this matter, I recently mailed every Mr. Speaker, I also wish to call the at1 of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior

newspaper and broadcasting station in tention of my colleagues to editorials on is authorized as a part of any water resource development project under his control, ex- my district a copy of my remarks in this this subject published recently by the cept projects or areas within national wild- Chamber on October 10. Along with the Des Moines Register, the Washington life refuges, to construct, operate, and main- speech I sent a short letter which began Post, and the Daily Local News of West tain or otherwise provide for basic public like this:

Chester, Pa. Without objection, I insert outdoor recreation facilities, to acquire or

When you read a few days ago that I had these items at this point in the RECORD. to otherwise include within the project area introduced a bill to increase my own pay [From the Washington (D.C.) Evening Star, such adjacent lands or interests therein as

(along with all other Government officials) are necessary for present or future public I can imagine some of you said, “Well, UDALL

Nov. 4, 1963) recreation use, to allocate water and reserhas done it again." In case this kind of

PAY RAISE BILL FALLS SHORT voir capacity to recreation, and to provide for thought did cross your mind, I think it

(By William S. White) the public use and enjoyment of project might be well for you to have just a little A bipartisan congressional committee has lands, facilities and water areas in a manner background on what my Federai pay bill is at last had the courage to recommend a coordinated with the other project purposes: all about.

bill for an increase in the salaries of MemProvided, That this Act shall not provide the Secretary of the Interior with the basis for As I knew they would be, the editors to $32,500 a year.

bers of the Senate and House from $22,500 allocation to recreation of water or reservoir and broadcasters of Arizona have been It is not an adequate raise: The minimum capacity or joint project costs at any existing very fair. Some have disagreed with me should be $50,000 a year, which would be, or heretofore authorized project. The Sec

in part, and others have agreed with me, perhaps, a tenth of the annual take of one retary of the Interior is authorized to enter

but the whole discussion has been on a of the junior glamour girls of Hollywood. into agreements with Federal agencies or State or local public bodies for the operation, rational plane, free from the emotion But, perhaps understandably, everything be

ing considered, not quite enough guts is to be maintenance, and additional development of that often develops on such issues. project lands or facilities, or to dispose of I think the response that has warmed propose what really ought to be done.

found in any congressional committee to project lands or facilities to Federal agencies my heart the most is an editorial car- For even the suggestion for this very modor State or local public bodies by lease, trans- ried some days ago on radio station est increase in the pay of the men who colfer, conveyance or exchange, upon such terms KTKT, the largest and most prosperous lectively hold the life and honor of this Naand conditions as will best promote the de- radio station in my district.

tion in their hands is meeting a howling velopment and operation of such lands or facilities in the public interest for recreation

chorus of complaint from two sets of critics.

Mr. Speaker, without objection, I inpurposes. No lands under the jurisdiction of sert the text of that editorial at this horizons are so pinched and small that they

of any other Federal agency may be included point in my remarks.

honestly believe a Member of Congress should for or devoted to recreation purposes under EDITORIAL, RADIO STATION KTKT, TUCSON, be content with less pay than can readily the authority of this Act without the con

ARIZ., OCTOBER 28, 1963

be earned by a good wholesale salesman in, sent of the head of such agency; and the head of any such agency is authorized to speech in the House of Representatives Octo

say, cosmetics or beer. Of this set, no more Our Congressman, MORRIS K. UDALL, in a

will be said in this column, for their oppositransfer any such lands to the jurisdiction ber 10, proposed passage of House of Repreof the Secretary of the Interior for purposes sentatives bill 8716, a bill to adjust the rates

tion is at any rate in good faith, however

wrong it may be. of this section. The Secretary of the Interior

of compensation for most of the officers and But the second set of critics is made up is authorized to transfer jurisdiction over

employees of the Federal Government. In of people who know perfectly well that in project lands within or adjacent to the ex

Mo's” own words, he said, “I am beginning today's world and at today's cost of living terior boundaries of national forests and to suspect that one feature of my bill may it is absurd to maintain so pennypinching facilities thereon to the Secretary of Agri

not go unnoticed. This is the section in- an economic ceiling on men chosen to write culture for recreation and other national creasing the salary of Representatives and the laws of this country. These fellows, in forest system purposes, and such transfer Senators from $22,500 to $35,000.” We admit short, are not really concerned with saving shall be made in each case in which the that this is only one small part of the legis- tax money. Instead, they are tirelessly conproject reservoir area is located wholly lation, which would also increase Cabinet cerned with cutting down Congress, as an

« ПретходнаНастави »