![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.302083333333333in" height="1.125in"}

# Legislative Bulletin.............................................March 5, 2007

**Contents:**

> **H.R. 122** - To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater
> Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
> participate in the Inland Empire regional recycling project and in the
> Cucamonga Valley Water District recycling project\
> **H.R. 467** - Southern Idaho Bureau of Reclamation Repayment Act of
> 2007\
> **H.R. 276** - Piedras Blancas Historic Light Station Outstanding
> Natural Area Act of 2007\
> **H.R. 903** - Colorado Northern Front Range Mountain Backdrop
> Protection Study Act
>
> **H.R. 995** --- To amend Public Law 106-348 to extend the
> authorization for establishing a memorial in the District of Columbia
> or its environs to honor veterans who became disabled while serving in
> the Armed Forces of the United States
>
> **H.R. 299** --- Lowell National Historical Park Boundary Adjustment
> Act
>
> **H.R. 1047** --- To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
> conduct a study to determine the suitability and feasibility of
> designating the Soldiers\` Memorial Military Museum located in St.
> Louis, Missouri, as a unit of the National Park System
>
> **H.R. 376** --- To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct
> a special resource study to determine the suitability and feasibility
> of including the battlefields and related sites of the First and
> Second Battles of Newtonia, Missouri, during the Civil War as part of
> Wilson's Creek National Battlefield or designating the battlefields
> and related sites as a separate unit of the National Park System
>
> **H.R. 807** --- Columbia Space Shuttle Memorial Study Act
>
> **H.R. 497**---Brigadier General Francis Marion Memorial Act
>
> **H.R. 247**---Jim Weaver Forest Service Trail Designation Act

H.R. 122 --- To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study
and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
participate in the Inland Empire regional recycling project and in the
Cucamonga Valley Water District recycling project (Dreier, R-CA)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, March 5, 2007, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 122 would authorize \$20 million for the
Secretary of the Interior in cooperation with the Inland Empire
Utilities Agency to design and construct a new regional water recycling
project in Southern California. The federal share of the cost of the
project could not exceed 25 percent.

H.R. 122 would also authorize an additional \$10 million for the
Secretary of the Interior, in cooperation with the Cucamonga Valley
Water District, to design and construct recycling plants in Rancho
Cucamonga, California, to reclaim and recycle roughly two million
gallons per day of domestic wastewater. The federal share of the cost of
the project could not exceed 25 percent.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 122 was introduced on January
4, 2007, and referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources, which
took no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A cost estimate is not available
for H.R. 122. However, the bill would authorize \$30 million for the
creation of two new water projects in California.

**[Does the Bill Create New Federal Programs or Rules?]{.underline}**:
Yes. The bill would create two new water projects.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A committee report citing
constitutional authority is unavailable.

House Rule XIII, Section 3(d)(1), requires that all committee reports
contain "a statement citing the *specific* powers granted to Congress in
the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint
resolution" *\[emphasis added\]*.

[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}: Joelle Cannon;
[**joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov**](mailto:joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov),
202.226.0718

**H.R. 467** - **Southern Idaho Bureau of Reclamation Repayment Act of
2007 (Simpson, R-ID)**

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Monday, March 5, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 467 would allow landowners within the
A&B Irrigation District in Idaho to repay their portion of the
construction costs of the District project facilities at any time. Once
a landowner discharges his debt, the land would no longer be subject to
the full-cost pricing limitations under federal reclamation law. The
landowner discharging his debt could request certification from the
Secretary of the Interior that the debt has been repaid.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: The House passed the same bill
by voice vote last year (H.R. 5666).

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 467 was introduced on January
12, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Resources' Subcommittee on
Water and Power. The subcommittee took no further official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A CBO score of H.R. 467 is
unavailable. An informal score for H.R. 5666 last year reported that
this bill would have no significant effect on the federal budget.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A committee report citing
constitutional authority is unavailable.

House Rule XIII, Section 3(d)(1), requires that all committee reports
contain "a statement citing the *specific* powers granted to Congress in
the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint
resolution" *\[emphasis added\]*.

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Joelle Cannon;
<Joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov>; 202.226.0718

H.R. 276 --- Piedras Blancas Historic Light Station Outstanding Natural
Area Act of 2007 (*Capps, D-CA)*

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Monday, March 5, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 276 would establish the Piedras Blancas
Historic Station Outstanding Natural Area as a part of the National
Landscape Conservation System. The bill exempts the land from
appropriation, disposal, mining, and mineral and geothermal leasing. The
Secretary of the Interior is directed to complete a management plan
within 3 years of enactment. Additionally, the Secretary must manage the
land in a manner so as to preserve and restore the light station
facilities; and to conserve, protect and enhance the historical,
natural, cultural, scientific, educational, scenic, and recreational
values of the area. Under the bill, all other uses of the land are to be
prohibited. The management plan should provide for a continuing public
education program about the light station.

Native Americans would be allowed to continue to use the Area for
traditional cultural and religious purposes. At the request of the
Native American community, the Natural Area can be closed to the public
during cultural and traditional uses.

Lands adjacent to the Natural Area would be considered appropriate for
acquisition for inclusion in the Area.

[]{.mark}

The bill lists a number of findings, including the following:

-   "The publicly owned Piedras Blancas Light Station has nationally
    recognized historical structures that should be preserved for
    present and future generations;

-   "The coastline adjacent to the Light Station is internationally
    recognized as having significant wildlife and marine habitat that
    provides critical information to research institutions throughout
    the world;

-   "The Light Station tells an important story about California's
    coastal prehistory and history in the context of the surrounding
    region and communities;

-   "The coastal area surrounding the Light Station was traditionally
    used by Indian people, including the Chumash and Salinan Indian
    tribes;

-   "The Light Station is historically associated with the nearby
    world-famous Hearst Castle (Hearst San Simeon State Historical
    Monument), now administered by the State of California;

-   "The Light Station represents a model partnership where future
    management can be successfully accomplished among the Federal
    Government, the State of California, San Luis Obispo County, local
    communities, and private groups.

-   "Piedras Blancas Historic Light Station Outstanding Natural Area
    would make a significant addition to the National Landscape
    Conservation System administered by the Department of the Interior's
    Bureau of Land Management; and

-   "Statutory protection is needed for the Light Station and its
    surrounding Federal lands to ensure that it remains a part of our
    historic, cultural, and natural heritage and to be a source of
    inspiration for the people of the United States."

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: The House passed the identical
bill by voice vote last year (H.R. 3534).

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 276 was introduced on January
5, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Resources, which took no
official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: Although there is no CBO estimate
available for H.R. 276 this year, the CBO score for H.R 3534 last year
reported that the legislation would authorize less than \$100,000
annually.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: Yes, the bill directs the federal government
to manage and proscribe uses for the area.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: Although a committee report
citing constitutional authority for H.R. 276 is unavailable, the
committee report for H.R. 3534 last year cited constitutional authority
in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 (the congressional power to regulate
interstate commerce).

[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}: Joelle Cannon;
[**joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov**](mailto:joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov),
202.226.0718

H.R. 903---Colorado Northern Front Range Mountain Backdrop Protection
Study Act (*Udall, D-CO*)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, March 5, 2007, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 903 would direct the Secretary of
Agriculture, acting through the Chief of the Forest Service and in
consultation with the state and local officials and agencies, to study
specified lands in southern Boulder, northern Jefferson, and northern
Gilpin Counties, Colorado (i.e. certain lands in and adjacent to the
Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests), and report to such officials
and to Congress on the following:

-   The present ownership of such lands;

-   Which undeveloped land may be "at risk of development;" and

-   Actions that could be taken by the United States, the State of
    Colorado, or any other parties to preserve the open and undeveloped
    character of such lands.

The bill defines "undeveloped" as land that is free or primarily free of
structures, the development of which is likely to adversely affect its
scenic, wildlife, or recreational value.

The bill affirmatively states that, "Nothing in this Act shall be
construed as authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture to take any action
that would affect the use of any lands not owned by the United States."

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 903 was introduced on February
7, 2007, and referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources, which
took official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: Although an estimate for H.R. 903
is not available, CBO estimated that a similar bill offered last
Congress would have no significant impact on the federal budget.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A committee report citing
constitutional authority is unavailable.

House Rule XIII, Section 3(d)(1), requires that all committee reports
contain "a statement citing the *specific* powers granted to Congress in
the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint
resolution" *\[emphasis added\]*.

[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}: Joelle Cannon;
[**joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov**](mailto:joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov),
202.226.0718

H.R. 995 --- To amend Public Law 106-348 to extend the authorization for
establishing a memorial in the District of Columbia or its environs to
honor veterans who became disabled while serving in the Armed Forces of
the United States (*Hare, D-IL*)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Monday, March 5, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

An identical bill, H.R. 4275, passed the House during the 109^th^
Congress by voice vote on July 10, 2006.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.R. 995 would exempt the establishment of
the Memorial to Honor Disabled Veterans of the United States Armed
Forces from compliance with the Commemorative Works Act by extending the
authority for constructing the memorial from the end of 2007 to October
24, 2015.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}:** The legislation to establish a
memorial on the National Mall to honor disabled U.S. Veterans was
introduced by Rep. Sam Johnson, a former U.S. Air Force pilot and
Prisoner of War during the Vietnam conflict. President Clinton signed
the legislation into law on October 24, 2000. For more information on
this Memorial, please [click
here](http://stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=36122&archive=true).

**[Committee Action]{.underline}:** H.R. 995 was introduced on February
12, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources'
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, which took no
official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}:** A CBO score of H.R. 995 is
unavailable. However, for an identical bill (H.R. 4275) passed in the
109^th^ Congress, CBO estimates that enacting it would have no
significant impact on the federal budget.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}:** No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}:** No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}:** A committee report citing
constitutional authority is unavailable.

House Rule XIII, Section 3(d)(1), requires that all committee reports
contain "a statement citing the *specific* powers granted to Congress in
the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint
resolution." *\[emphasis added\]*

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}:** Derek V. Baker;
[derek.baker@mail.house.gov](mailto:Derek.baker@mail.house.gov);
202-226-8585

H.R. 299 --- Lowell National Historical Park Boundary Adjustment Act
(*Meehan, D-MA*)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Monday, March 5, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

An almost identical bill, H.R. 395, passed the House during the 109^th^
Congress by voice vote on December 5, 2006.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.R. 299 would adjust the boundaries of the
Lowell National Historical Park to include five parcels of land located
in the City of Lowell, Massachusetts.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}:** H.R. 299 was introduced on January
5, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources'
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, which took no
official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}:** A CBO score of H.R. 299 is
unavailable, but the bill does not authorize new expenditures. An
informal estimate for H.R. 395 last year reported that the bill would
have no significant impact on the federal budget.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}:** No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}:** No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}:** A committee report citing
constitutional authority is unavailable.

House Rule XIII, Section 3(d)(1), requires that all committee reports
contain "a statement citing the *specific* powers granted to Congress in
the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint
resolution." *\[emphasis added\]*

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}:** Derek V. Baker;
[derek.baker@mail.house.gov](mailto:Derek.baker@mail.house.gov);
202-226-8585

H.R. 1047 --- To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a
study to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the
Soldiers' Memorial Military Museum located in St. Louis, Missouri, as a
unit of the National Park System (*Clay, D-MO*)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Monday, March 5, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

An almost identical bill, H.R. 452, passed the House during the 109^th^
Congress by voice vote on December 13, 2005.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 1047 would direct the Secretary of
Interior to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the
Soldiers Memorial Military Museum in St. Louis, Missouri, as a unit of
the National Park System.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}:** According to the Committee
Report for H.R. 452 in the 109^th^ Congress ([House Report
109-319](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp109:FLD010:@1(hr319))),
the Memorial is a tribute to all of the veterans living in the greater
St. Louis area. It was originally authorized by the City of St. Louis in
1923, and opened to the public on Memorial Day in 1938. The City of St.
Louis pays for the Memorial's current annual budget of \$192,000, but
local officials have expressed that the memorial faces an uncertain
future *without federal assistance* and would like a federal agency to
take over administration of the site (*emphasis added*).

**[Committee Action]{.underline}:** H.R. 1047 was introduced on February
14, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, which took
no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}:** A CBO score of H.R. 1047 is
unavailable. **However, for H.R. 452 last year, CBO estimated that the
bill would cost roughly \$200,000 over the next three years.**

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}:** The bill requires a new study to determine
whether the National Park System could and should be expanded.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}:** No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}:** A committee report citing
constitutional authority is unavailable.

House Rule XIII, Section 3(d)(1), requires that all committee reports
contain "a statement citing the *specific* powers granted to Congress in
the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint
resolution." (*emphasis added)*

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}:** Derek V. Baker;
[derek.baker@mail.house.gov](mailto:Derek.baker@mail.house.gov);
202-226-8585

H.R. 376 --- To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a
special resource study to determine the suitability and feasibility of
including the battlefields and related sites of the First and Second
Battles of Newtonia, Missouri, during the Civil War as part of Wilson's
Creek National Battlefield or designating the battlefields and related
sites as a separate unit of the National Park System (Blunt, R-MO)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Monday, March 5, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

A bill containing almost identical text, S.1829, passed the House during
the 109^th^ Congress by a voice vote on December 6, 2006. The bill,
because it was amended by the House, was never re-passed by the Senate
or signed into law.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.R. 376 would direct the Secretary of the
Interior to conduct a resource study relating to the First and Second
Battles of Newtonia in Missouri to determine the feasibility of adding
the battlefields and related sites as part of Wilson's Creek National
Battlefield or the National Park System. For additional information on
this Civil War battle, please [click
here](http://www.cwbattlefields.com/battlefields/newtonia.html).

**[Committee Action]{.underline}:** H.R. 376 was introduced on January
10, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources'
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, which took no
official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}:** A CBO score of H.R. 376 is
unavailable.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}:** No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}:** No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}:** A committee report citing
constitutional authority is unavailable.

House Rule XIII, Section 3(d)(1), requires that all committee reports
contain "a statement citing the *specific* powers granted to Congress in
the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint
resolution." *\[emphasis added\]*

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}:** Derek V. Baker;
[derek.baker@mail.house.gov](mailto:Derek.baker@mail.house.gov);
202-226-8585

H.R. 807 --- Columbia Space Shuttle Memorial Study Act (Gohmert, R-TX)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Monday, March 5, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

An almost identical bill, H.R. 5692, passed the House during the 109^th^
Congress by voice vote on September 27, 2006.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 807 would direct the Secretary of the
Interior to conduct a feasibility study to add at least four parcels of
land in Texas to the National Park System as memorials to the Space
Shuttle Columbia disaster. The study may consider only lands which would
be donated for the purpose of memorializing the disaster. The bill
includes a description of four sites that may be donated for memorials.
The Secretary is allowed to make suggestions for other sites for
National Park System memorials.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: On February 1, 2003, the
Columbia Space Shuttle disintegrated upon re-entry over the skies of
north Texas, killing the seven crewmembers aboard. The four parcels of
land listed in the bill had debris from Columbia's disintegration fall
within their boundaries.

For additional information on the Space Shuttle Columbia Disaster,
please visit [this NASA website](http://www.nasa.gov/columbia/home/).

**[Committee Action]{.underline}:** H.R. 807 was introduced on February
5, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources'
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, which took no
official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}:** A CBO score of H.R. 807 is
unavailable. An informal cost estimate for last year's bill reported
that the legislation would authorize about \$200,000.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}:** No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}:** No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}:** A committee report citing
constitutional authority is unavailable.

House Rule XIII, Section 3(d)(1), requires that all committee reports
contain "a statement citing the *specific* powers granted to Congress in
the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint
resolution." *\[emphasis added\]*

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}:** Derek V. Baker;
[derek.baker@mail.house.gov](mailto:Derek.baker@mail.house.gov);
202-226-8585

**H.R. 497---Brigadier General Francis Marion Memorial Act**

**(Wilson, R-SC)**

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, March 5^th^, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 497 would authorize the Marion Park
Project, a committee of the Palmetto Conservation Foundation, to
establish a commemorative work on federal land in the District of
Columbia (or its environs) to honor Brigadier General Francis Marion.
Federal funds could not be used to pay for any aspect of the memorial,
and any funds collected for the establishment of the memorial---yet not
used for such establishment---would have to be forwarded to the U.S.
Treasury.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: As the legislation notes,
Brigadier General Marion commanded the Williamsburg Militia
Revolutionary force in South Carolina during the American Revolution and
was instrumental in delaying the advance of British forces by leading
his troops in disrupting supply lines. Brigadier General Marion's newly
developed tactics included lightning raids on British convoys, after
which he and his forces would retreat into the swamps to avoid
capture---hence his nickname, "The Swamp Fox."

As the legislation also notes, Brigadier General Marion's troops are
believed to be the first racially integrated force fighting for the
United States, as his band was a mix of whites, free and enslaved
blacks, and American Indians.

For more information on Marion, visit this website:
<http://www.americanrevwar.homestead.com/files/MARION.HTM>.

**[RSC Bonus Fact]{.underline}**: Since 1878, United States Reservation
18, located between 4th and 6th Streets, SE at the intersection of E
Street and South Carolina Avenue, SE, Washington, DC, has been
officially referred to as Marion Park.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: On January 16, 2007, the bill was
referred to the Natural Resources Committee, which took no subsequent
action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: Although a formal CBO cost estimate
for this bill is unavailable, the legislation explicitly prohibits the
use of any federal funds for the commemorative work.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}**: Though the bill
contains no earmarks, and there's no accompanying committee report, the
earmarks rule (House Rule XXI, Clause 9(a)) does not apply, by
definition, to legislation considered under suspension of the rules.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A committee report citing
constitutional authority is unavailable.

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Paul S. Teller,
<paul.teller@mail.house.gov>, (202) 226-9718

**H.R. 247---Jim Weaver Forest Service Trail Designation Act**

**(*DeFazio, D-OR*)**

**Note Possible Conservative Concerns Below**

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, March 5^th^, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 247 would designate U.S. Forest Service
trail number 3590 in the Willamette National Forest in Lane County,
Oregon, as the "Jim Weaver Loop Trail" under Section 4 of the National
Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 1243) (regarding certain requirements for
designation, such as consent of the appropriate people and reasonable
accessible to urban areas). Presumably, the required consent from the
State of Oregon has been received. The Secretary of Agriculture would
have to prepare, install, and maintain an appropriate sign at the
trailhead of the Jim Weaver Loop Trail to indicate the name of the trail
and to provide information regarding the life and career of former
Congressman Jim Weaver.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: The existing trail is a
19.6-mile trail that begins and ends at North Waldo Campground and
circumnavigates Waldo Lake in Lane County, Oregon.

Congressman James Howard Weaver served in the House of Representatives
from the 94th Congress through the 99th Congress (January 3,
1975-January 3, 1987). He was a former subcommittee chairman of the
Committee on Resources and active in conservation issues.

**[RSC Bonus Fact]{.underline}**: Rep. Peter DeFazio, the sponsor of
this legislation, was once a staffer for Rep. Jim Weaver.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: On January 5, 2007, the bill was
referred to the Natural Resources Committee, which took no subsequent
action.

**[Possible Conservative Concerns]{.underline}**: Conservatives may be
concerned with naming a peaceful trail after a former congressman known
for his vitriolic political rhetoric. For example, Jim Weaver recently
said that he expected Republicans to stage a terrorist attack and
declare martial law before the 2006 elections in order to hold on to
congressional majorities. Furthermore, Weaver has said repeatedly in
public that he "hates Republicans" and has misjudged how "vicious" they
can be.

<http://media.www.thevoyager.net/media/storage/paper977/news/2005/10/17/News/Former.Congressman.Faults.Democratic.Party-2058082.shtml?norewrite200612041118&sourcedomain=www.thevoyager.net>

Weaver once said: "Republicans have to lie, and I mean this very
seriously. They couldn\'t possibly get elected otherwise."
<http://www2.eugeneweekly.com/2002/10_24_02/news.html#news1>.

The Eugene Weekly reports that the "cantankerous" Weaver "rocked the
establishment with his loud, intense and eloquent advocacy for
wilderness preservation, his attacks on the nuclear power industry, his
stand against the Vietnam War and wasteful military spending, and his
objections to herbicide and pesticide proliferation."

<http://www2.eugeneweekly.com/2002/10_24_02/news.html#news1>.

Weaver has also come to be known for harsh rhetoric against President
Bush and his supporters, including but certainly not limited to:

"Doves are powerless against hawks. They can beat the \[expletive\] out
of us anytime. George Bush can right now," he says. "The only chance
we\'ve got is voting, because we've got the numbers." Also: "George Bush
in his speech yesterday --- a dozen lies in a five-minute speech."
<http://www2.eugeneweekly.com/2002/10_24_02/news.html#news1>

Lastly, conservatives may be concerned about naming a trail after a
congressman cited by the Democrat-controlled Ethics Committee for using
campaign money for personal investments:
<http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50716FA3C5C0C7B8CDDA90994DE484D81>.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: Although a cost estimate for this
bill is unavailable, the CBO estimate for an identical bill last
Congress (H.R. 1090) reported that this legislation would yield no
significant costs to the taxpayer.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}**: Though the bill
contains no earmarks, and there's no accompanying committee report, the
earmarks rule (House Rule XXI, Clause 9(a)) does not apply, by
definition, to legislation considered under suspension of the rules.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A committee report for H.R.
247 is unavailable. Last Congress, the Resources Committee, in House
Report 109-331, cited constitutional authority in Article I, Section 8
(the long list of congressional powers), but failed to cite a specific
clause of authority. House Rule XIII, Section 3(d)(1), requires that all
committee reports contain "a statement citing the *specific* *powers*
granted to Congress in the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the
bill or joint resolution." *\[emphasis added\]*

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Paul S. Teller,
<paul.teller@mail.house.gov>, (202) 226-9718