U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

55–478 PDF 2010

S. HRG. 111–318 

NATIONAL PARKS LEGISLATION 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

ON

S. 760 S. 2726 

S. 1838 S. 2738 

S. 2097 H.R. 1849 

S. 2722 H.R. 3689 

DECEMBER 3, 2009 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

EVAN BAYH, Indiana 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

MARK UDALL, Colorado 

JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

BOB CORKER, Tennessee 

ROBERT M. SIMON, Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Chief Counsel 

MCKIE CAMPBELL, Republican Staff Director 

KAREN K. BILLUPS, Republican Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS

MARK UDALL, Colorado Chairman 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

EVAN BAYH, Indiana 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

BOB CORKER, Tennessee 

JEFF BINGAMAN and LISA MURKOWSKI are Ex Officio Members of the Subcommittee 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS 

Page 

Alexander, Brian, President & CEO, National World War I Museum at Liberty Memorial, Kansas City, MO ........................................................................ 25 

Barboza, Maurice A., Founder & CEO, Liberty Fund DC ................................... 30 

Burr, Hon. Richard, U.S. Senator From North Carolina ..................................... 4 

Cleaver, Hon. Emanuel, II, U.S. Representative From Missouri ........................ 8 

Foundation, Edwin L., Director, World War I Memorial Foundation ................. 42 

Madden, David, Chair, Louisiana Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Commission, 

Black Mountain, NC ............................................................................................ 37 

Robinson, Harry G., III, Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund ............................... 33 

Rockefeller, Hon. John D., IV, U.S. Senator From West Virginia ....................... 5 

Stevenson, Katherine H., Assistant Director, Business Services, National 

Park Service, Department of the Interior, Accompanied by Peter May, Associate Regional Director for Lands, Resources, and Planning, National Capital Region ............................................................................................................. 15 

Thune, Hon. John, U.S. Senator From South Dakota .......................................... 6 

Udall, Hon. Mark, U.S. Senator From Colorado ................................................... 1 

Webb, Hon. Jim, U.S. Senator From Virginia ....................................................... 7 

APPENDIX 

Additional material submitted for the record ........................................................ 53 

(1) 

NATIONAL PARKS LEGISLATION 

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 3, 2009 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in room 

SD–366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Mark Udall presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARK UDALL, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM COLORADO 

Senator UDALL. The Subcommittee on National Parks will come 

to order. 

This afternoon we have a very full agenda of eight bills, including several national memorial proposals. While some of the bills 

appear to be noncontroversial, a few of the bills do raise issues that 

will require greater review. 

Three of the bills on the agenda concern a proposed World War 

I National Memorial. S. 760, sponsored by Senators McCaskill and 

Bond, would designate the Liberty Memorial at the National World 

War I Museum in Kansas City, Missouri, as the National World 

War I Memorial, as does the House companion measure, H.R. 1849, 

sponsored by Congressman Emanuel Cleaver, who we will hear 

from in just a few minutes. 

We will also be receiving testimony on a different World War I 

memorial proposal, S. 2097, sponsored by Senators Thune, Webb, 

Rockefeller, and several others, which would rededicate the District 

of Columbia War Memorial as a National and District of Columbia 

World War I Memorial. 

The other bills on the subcommittee’s agenda include S. 1838, 

Senator Landrieu’s bill to establish a commission to commemorate 

the sesquicentennial—the 150th anniversary of the Civil War; S. 

2722, Senator Barrasso’s bill to authorize a study of the Heart 

Mountain Relocation Center in Wyoming, to assess the suitability 

and feasibility of designating the site as a unit of the National 

Park System; S. 2726, Senator Johnson’s bill to modify the boundary of the Minuteman Missile National Historic Site in South Dakota; S. 2738, sponsored by Senators Dodd and Grassley, which 

would authorize establishment of a memorial in the District of Columbia to honor free persons and slaves who fought for independence, liberty, and justice for all during the American Revolution; 

and H.R. 3689, sponsored by Congressman Rahall, which would ex-
2 

tend the legislative authority for construction of the Vietnam Veteran’s Memorial visitors center. 

We do have a lengthy witness list this afternoon. Several of our 

colleagues have asked to testify, we need to hear the administration’s views on all bills, and we have several witnesses testifying 

on the various proposals. 

I’m also informed that there are likely to be votes on the Senate 

floor this afternoon, beginning around 2:45. So that we have 

enough time to hear from everyone, I would ask everyone to please 

summarize your statements as much as possible. We will include 

your written statements and any other materials in the official 

hearing record. 

At this point, I’d like to recognize the ranking member of the 

subcommittee, Senator Burr, for any comments he may have. 

[The prepared statements of Senators Landrieu, Dodd, Barrasso, 

and Enzi follow:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MARY L. LANDRIEU, U.S. SENATOR FROM LOUISIANA, 

ON S. 1838 

The American Civil War, fought from 1861-1865, tore the United States apart, 

and engaged the U.S. in the most deadly struggle that has ever befallen our great 

Nation. As we approach the War’s 150th anniversary, we must remember the contributions of our forefathers, those many Americans who gave their lives to make 

America what it is now. That is why I introduced the Civil War Sesquicentennial 

Commission Act of 2009, along with my colleague, Senator Webb, to commemorate 

this turning point in American history. 

We all studied the Civil War in school. We know that the opening shots of the 

Civil War were fired at Fort Sumter, South Carolina in April of 1861 and that Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant agreed to peace at Appomattox Court House, Virginia on April 9, 1865. We recognize those most horrific battles-Antietam, Gettysburg, Fredericksburg, and the 10,000 other sites from New Mexico to Vermont that 

were host to fighting. We celebrate the strength and bravery of individuals such as 

Frederick Douglas and Harriett Tubman who risked everything to combat the deplorable institution of slavery. And every February, we observe President Lincoln’s 

birthday, a day to recollect his legacy. The Emancipation Proclamation and Gettysburg address are two of the most memorable documents in American history, and 

it is thanks to President Lincoln that slavery was eradicated. 

These are the most memorable aspects of the Civil War, but the influence and 

impact reaches so much further. The American Civil War has reverberated throughout our history. Every aspect of American life was affected whether economic, cultural, political, or otherwise. The most profound consequence of the Civil War was 

to end the legal edifice that justified the subjugation of people based on accidental 

characteristics such as race. 

We must remember what our forefathers sacrificed for us. More than 3 million 

men fought in the Civil War. They left their homes and their loved ones to fight 

for their beliefs, their families, their Nation. 620,000 of those soldiers gave their 

lives. 

We must remember the untold number of civilians who lost their lives or welfare 

because the battles were taking place all around them. No State, city, community, 

or family was untouched by devastation or loss. 

We must remember the legacies of the Civil War. The United States emerged 

completely altered after the four years of struggle, and as a testament of American 

resilience, grew stronger than it was before. The cultural and political ramifications 

still shape the American landscape today. It was in the era of Reconstruction that 

Congress adopted the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution, acknowledging black Americans as free and equal citizens of the United States. 

The Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission Act of 2009 is about preserving the 

memory. It will establish a Commission to ensure a suitable national observance. 

Consisting of 25 members from government, business and academia, this commission will develop and carry out programs to commemorate the 150th anniversary 

of the Civil War. It will work together with State and local governments, as well 

as various organizations, to assist with these activities and ensure that remembrance occurs at every level. 
3 

The year 2011 marks the anniversary of a monumentally tragic time in American 

history, but also a time of intensive change, growth, and hope. We must use this 

opportunity to reflect upon the Civil War, the sacrifices, legacies, and changes in 

our Nation. I urge my colleagues to support quick passage of the Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission Act of 2009. 

Thank you for your consideration. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, U.S. SENATOR FROM

CONNECTICUT, ON S. 2738 

Mr. Chairman, I thank you for holding this hearing on the National Liberty Memorial Act, a bill I introduced with my colleague Senator Grassley. This important 

legislation would authorize the construction of a memorial in Washington, D.C. honoring the African American patriots who fought in the Revolutionary War. 

For too long, the role these brave Americans played in the founding of our nation 

has been relegated to the dusty back pages of history. Fortunately, historians are 

now beginning to uncover their forgotten heroism, and they estimate that more than 

5,000 slaves and free blacks fought in the Army, Navy, and militia during the Revolutionary War. They served and struggled in major battles from Lexington and Concord to Yorktown, fighting side by side with white soldiers. More than 400 of these 

brave Americans hailed from my home state of Connecticut. 

More than twenty years ago, Congress authorized a memorial to black Revolutionary War soldiers and sailors, those who provided civilian assistance, and the 

many slaves who fled slavery or filed petitions to courts or legislatures for their 

freedom. Unfortunately, the group originally authorized to raise funds for and build 

the memorial was unable to conclude its task, and there remains no memorial to 

the important, and too often unacknowledged, contributions made by these 5,000 

Americans. 

But a group of committed citizens has formed the Liberty Fund DC to complete 

this memorial and ensure that these patriots receive the tribute they deserve here 

in our nation’s capital. I’m grateful that the Committee has invited Mr. Maurice 

Barboza to testify to the importance of this memorial today today, and I am honored 

to work alongside Mr. Barboza and the many others who have made honoring the 

contributions of these Americans their life’s work. 

The time has come to recognize the sacrifice and the impact of the African Americans who fought for the birth of our country. I urge my colleagues to support the 

National Liberty Memorial Act. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO, U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING, ON S. 2722 

Thank you for holding this hearing today Mr. Chairman on S.2722, the ‘‘Heart 

Mountain Relocation Center Study Act.’’ This legislation will authorize the National 

Park Service to conduct a special resource study of the site of Heart Mountain Relocation Center near Powell, Wyoming. 

The site is an important part of our national history and of the history of our communities in western Wyoming. Between 1942 and 1945, when Japanese American 

families from the West Coast were forcibly moved to Park County, Wyoming and 

interned at the site near Heart Mountain. During those years, the Heart Mountain 

site was the third-largest community in Wyoming, housing nearly 11,000 Japanese 

Americans. The experience during those years shaped internees and local residents 

alike. It represents an important chapter in American history. 

This legislation is a credit to the individuals, local communities and grassroots organizations supporting recognition of the Heart Mountain site. I have submitted 

eleven separate letters of support for S.2722 to be a part of today’s hearing record. 

I encourage Senators to read the heartfelt comments of Senator Alan Simpson and 

Secretary Norman Mineta about their experience as children at Heart Mountain. 

They are accompanied by support from local organizations, including the Heart 

Mountain Wyoming Foundation and the Park County Commissioners, along with 

national organizations, including The Conservation Fund, the Japanese American 

Citizens League, the National Parks Conservation Association, and the National 

Trust for Historic Preservation. 

The Heart Mountain Relocation Center Study Act will help to define this historic 

site. It will allow us to determine the best way to recognize the site as an important 

part of our national history. I look forward to working with this Committee to advance consideration of this bill. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 
4 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL B. ENZI, U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING, 

ON S. 2722 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding a hearing today on S. 2722, the Heart 

Mountain Relocation Center Study Act of 2009. The bill would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study to determine the suitability 

and feasibility of adding the Heart Mountain Relocation Center as a unit of the National Park System. 

Heart Mountain, Wyoming was one of ten relocation centers created during World 

War II to house Japanese and Japanese-Americans who were forcibly relocated inland from the west coast. The current site contains the most existing structures of 

any site in the country. To memorialize this history, the Heart Mountain, Wyoming 

Foundation is working to develop a Learning Center on the site of the Internment 

Camp. The Foundation is a well-established and credible organization with notable 

Board and Advisory Board members including former Senator Alan Simpson and 

former U.S. Department of Commerce and U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta. Senator Simpson and Secretary Mineta first met as Boy 

Scouts when Senator Simpson’s Cody, Wyoming Scout Troop visited Secretary Mineta’s troop while he was interned as a young man in the Heart Mountain camp. 

They developed a bond that would last for decades and eventually served in Congress together. 

Private and public entities alike strongly believe that Heart Mountain, Wyoming 

should be preserved for future generations. I, too, believe preservation of one of our 

country’s landmarks from World War II should be saved so our children and grandchildren have another tool to learn about our country’s history. There are many 

ways to preserve this important landmark, and our legislation allows for study of 

one of those methods. 

With introduction of S. 2722, we are examining whether the Heart Mountain Relocation Center meets the criteria to be a part of our National Park System. Simply 

because we introduced this legislation does not guarantee that Heart Mountain will 

become a part of the National Park System. The bill will allow the Secretary to 

study that question and to make a recommendation based on the merits of Heart 

Mountain and how it would fit within the entire National Park System. 

Heart Mountain Camp internees want to leave a legacy of learning through this 

Center to future generations such that abridgements of freedoms and lack of ethnic 

understanding not occur again in this great country. Preserving the land and structures and building the Learning Center will do just that. The Heart Mountain Relocation Center Study Act of 2009 is the next step forward in making their dream 

a reality. 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for considering the merits of the Heart Mountain Relocation Center Study Act of 2009. Senator Barrasso and I look forward to 

working with you on further advancing this legislation this Congress. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BURR, U.S. SENATOR FROM 

NORTH CAROLINA 

Senator BURR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

We do have a full agenda—and I’ll be brief—an agenda that includes 8 bills. 

I understand that today’s hearing is probably the last of this subcommittee this year. Yay. We’re glad to be at that point, and I’d 

like to take this moment to acknowledge the leadership of Chairman Udall of the subcommittee. It’s been very productive so far 

this year, and I know all the members appreciate the leadership in 

addressing their bills in a timely fashion. 

Most of the bills before us today involve memorials in Washington, DC, and elsewhere. All these memorials commemorate very 

important historic events in our Nation’s history, but one bill is 

particularly important to me, S. 2097, which I cosponsored, to rededicate the DC War Memorial as a National and DC World War 

I Memorial, also known as the Frank Buckles World War I Memorial Act. 
5 

We are very honored to have Mr. Buckles here with us today, 

and I would like to not only thank him for his service to his country, but also for joining us here today in an effort to establish a 

World War I Memorial for all of our Nation’s veterans on our National Mall. 

Having said that, there’s also competing legislation. I think it’s 

important for all members to thoroughly look at both pieces of legislation and to fairly evaluate both proposals that are on the table. 

I would like to thank all of our witnesses for being here. 

I yield the floor. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Burr. 

I would also like to acknowledge Mr. Buckles’ daughter, Suzanne, is here. I was pleased to learn from her that Mr. Buckles 

is a big fan of cowboy boots, and I was lucky enough to have my 

cowboy boots on today. So, I want to associate myself with the fine 

words of Senator Burr and thank Mr. Buckles for taking the time 

to be with us. 

Let me turn to Senator Rockefeller for comments he would have. 

Senator Rockefeller, the floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER, IV, U.S. 

SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and the ranking member, with whom I serve on the Veterans Committee. 

This is a very important effort that Senator Thune, Senator 

Webb, myself, and others are making here, the so-called ‘‘Frank 

Buckles World War I Memorial Act.’’ I’m especially proud to introduce Mr. Buckles, and, with the committee’s permission, after—I 

understand the committee will allow him to say a word. His daughter, Suzanne, as you pointed out, is here. She’s integral to his life. 

I’ve been to his house and walked with awe through his library to 

see books written in Chinese and German and French and Spanish, 

all of which he spoke at one time or another, and probably still 

does. Extraordinarily—not just patriotic but educated and visionary 

patriot. 

I think it’s really important that we have this memorial. I recognize there are others that have their views, but this is Washington, 

DC. This would not be the creation of a new mall, it would be the 

rededication of a mall—of a memorial that Herbert Hoover dedicated for those who served in World War I, but it’s never really 

gone over to the full veteran side of matters, as have—is the case 

with some others that just honor those who died in World War I. 

The wounds from World War I were often not very well treated, 

and—so that Frank Buckles is not here today just to share his remarkable story of valor and his own historic nature, but also as 

chairman of the World War I Memorial Foundation. 

Washington is the capital of the Nation. It’s the center point of 

the spiritual value. Some could say that Congress doesn’t always 

present all those spiritual values in the most admirable way, but, 

in terms of our fighting soldiers and our great moments in history 

and our great patriots, this is the center, and this is where they 

deserve to be honored. 

I honestly believe, and strongly believe, that our Nation owes a 

tremendous debt—more 4.3 million Americans, who, like Frank 
6 

Buckles, offered to go to service for a period of 4 years. So, I strongly support Senator Thune, Senator Webb’s and my proposal to have 

that firmly established, not just for the dead, but also for the survivors, of whom there is only one, and he’s with us in this room. 

At the conclusion of the other two members’ presentation, I would 

ask—hope that I could ask Mr. Buckles to say a word. 

I thank the Chair. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Rockefeller. 

Let me turn to Senator Thune for his remarks. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE, U.S. SENATOR FROM 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

Senator THUNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

It is a great honor to be able to be here today, in the presence 

of the lone survivor of that great conflict. I appreciate Senator 

Rockefeller, who is Mr. Buckles’ home-State Senator, taking a lead 

on this, and Senator Webb, who has combat experience, been a 

great advocate for those who have served our country. 

We think that this bill—what it does is, it does something that 

I think is very fitting, and that is to add a memorial to those veterans of World War I. We have what we call the ‘‘memorial triangle’’ on the National Mall today—World War II, Korea, Vietnam. 

There were, as Senator Rockefeller said, over 4 million Americans 

who served in World War I; over 100,000 casualties. It really was 

the first step in America’s path to superpower status, something 

that—there was so much sacrifice that was made by people in this 

country, although we were only involved in the conflict for about 

18 months. 

So, I think it’s fitting that all the great wars of the 20th century 

have their place on the National Mall, so that the people, when 

they come here to pay their respects and to honor and pay tribute 

to those who served in all those great conflicts, to also have the opportunity to honor the veterans of World War I. 

So, I hope that we can move this legislation. I hope we can move 

it fairly quickly. I understand the issues with regard to Missouri. 

I hope that we can work through those. It seems, to me at least, 

that where—with respect to our National Mall, that we ought to 

have a place that recognizes the service and sacrifice of our World 

War veterans—World War I veterans. 

Particularly honored, as I said, to have the lone survivor, the last 

man standing from World War I with us here today, in Mr. Frank 

Buckles. 

So, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity, and appreciate the chance to have a hearing on this legislation. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Thune follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE, U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA, 

ON S. 2097 

Chairman Udall, Ranking Member Burr, distinguished colleagues, thank you for 

the opportunity to discuss S. 2097, the Frank Buckles World War I Memorial Act. 

For far too long, the sacrifices of American World War I veterans have gone unrecognized on the National Mall in Washington, DC. Senator Rockefeller, Senator 

Webb and I introduced this legislation to provide proper recognition, which is long 

overdue. 

The Frank Buckles World War I Memorial Act would rededicate the existing District of Columbia War Memorial as the National and District of Columbia World 
7 

War I Memorial on the National Mall in Washington, DC. The act is named for 

Frank Buckles of West Virginia, who at 108 years of age is the last surviving American World War I veteran. 

While the United States was in World War I for only 18 months, the war had 

profound effects on our nation. Without question, World War I thrust the U.S. onto 

the world stage. The U.S. lost over 100,000 brave men fighting the war, more than 

both the Korean War and Vietnam War combined. 

Today, memorials on our National Mall rightfully honor the men and women who 

served and sacrificed during World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. 

However, nowhere on the National Mall do we recognize the service and sacrifices 

of all American World War I veterans—veterans like Frank Buckles. 

At 108 years old, Frank Buckles is the last surviving American World War I veteran. He joined the Army at the age of 16 and served in Europe during World War 

I, driving ambulances and motorcycles for a casualty detachment. Mr. Buckles is 

also the Honorary Chairman of the World War I Memorial Foundation, which is 

seeking refurbishment of the District of Columbia War Memorial and its establishment as the National World War I Memorial on the National Mall. S. 2097, The 

Frank Buckles World War I Memorial Act will help to make this vision a reality. 

The District of Columbia War Memorial honors the 499 District of Columbia residents who died in World War I. This legislation would rededicate the District of Columbia memorial as the ‘‘National and District of Columbia World War I Memorial.’’ 

The legislation would also authorize the non-profit World War I Memorial Foundation to make repairs and improvements to the existing memorial, as well as install 

new sculptures or other commemorations at the memorial to underscore the sacrifice 

of over 4 million Americans who served in World War I. 

The bill would not require any taxpayer dollars because the World War I Memorial Foundation would raise the necessary funds through private donations. 

All of the major wars our nation has fought in the 20th century are memorialized 

on the National Mall. Rededicating the District of Columbia World War I Memorial 

as the National and District of Columbia World War I Memorial fits the narrative 

of the Mall, with its wonderful memorials to World War II, the Korean War, and 

the Vietnam War. I think it only makes sense to rededicate a memorial to this twentieth century war that established our nation’s path to superpower status among the 

community of nations. I can think of no better way to honor Mr. Buckles and his 

departed comrades than by passing this bill which would provide long overdue recognition of all World War I veterans in our nation’s capital. 

Thank you for holding this hearing today. I look forward to working with this subcommittee and my colleagues to pass this bill. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Thune, for those thoughtful 

remarks and for taking the time to join the subcommittee. 

Senator WEBB. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JIM WEBB, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM VIRGINIA 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and also, Senator 

Burr, for your cosponsoring of the measure. I appreciate that—the 

timely hearing that you brought forward here. 

I would like also to express my appreciation to Senator Thune for 

having originally brought forth this idea. It’s a very sensible approach. Actually, My personal view is that we might be able to do 

something in concert with the other proposal. I recently spoke at 

the National Civil War Museum. It’s in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. 

It would be logical, if they were able to make their case for a World 

War I Museum, that it might be appropriately located in Missouri, 

where President Truman hailed from. He was a veteran of World 

War I. But, in terms of a national memorial to World War I service, 

I don’t think there could be any better place. 

If I could just ask my staff member to put this—with thanks to 

Google Earth. This the Mall. To your left would be the Lincoln Memorial; to the right would be the Washington Monument. You can 

see the—just the natural flow of the wars of the 20th century, if 
8 

we were to put the—to take this memorial in the right—lower 

right-hand corner, which is now the District of Columbia War Memorial, not add any more space, and no cost—this is privately 

funded—then you would have, in the Mall area, the Vietnam Veterans Memorial and then, going clockwise, the World War II Memorial, the World War I Memorial, and the Korean War Memorial. 

I can think of no greater tribute to those who fought the larger 

wars of the 20th century, to have them located in a way that they 

can be accessible to those who come and visit our national capital. 

With that, I again thank the Chair for this timely hearing. I 

hope we can work out something with the situation in Missouri. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator UDALL. Senator Rockefeller, let me turn to you, if I 

might, because the vote has just been called. We have been joined 

by Congressman Cleaver, and I know we want to hear his testimony, but I think it’s very important to hear from Mr. Buckles, so 

I’d like to recognize you and—— 

The CHAIRMAN. There’s no need to introduce Frank Buckles. He’s 

the last man standing, and an extraordinary man, at that. I just 

think that he should, as chairman of the Foundation—honorary 

chairman of the Foundation, have something to say. I appreciate 

your courtesy on this matter, of course. 

Senator UDALL. Mr. Buckles, the floor is yours. 

Voice: Papa, you want to—go ahead and tell them what you 

think. Can you do it? 

Mr. BUCKLES. What am I supposed to say? 

Voice: You’re supposed to tell them what you think about having 

a World War I Memorial on the Mall. 

Mr. BUCKLES. Oh. I think it’s an excellent idea. I think it was 

a nice idea to call it a National and—DC. 

Voice: Thank you, sir. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Buckles. 

I’m tempted to adjourn the hearing, because the case has been 

made—— 

[Laughter.] 

Senator UDALL [continuing]. But I know Senator Bond and Senator McCaskill would want to have their say, as well, as Congressman Cleaver is here to testify. 

Congressman Cleaver, thank you for making the trip over to the 

Senate side. It’s great to see you. We served together in the House. 

You’d like to share your testimony with us at this time, and the 

floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF HON. EMANUEL CLEAVER, II, U.S. 

REPRESENTATIVE FROM MISSOURI 

Mr. CLEAVER. Sure. Thank you. 

Mr. Chairman, it is somewhat uncomfortable testifying in opposition to some folk with whom I agree, about 99 percent of the time. 

But, I think it may have some importance for me to share with this 

committee what’s going on in Kansas City. I think it is important, 

also, that, if you have not seen the Liberty Memorial in Kansas 

City, that it’s difficult to have a good perspective. 

Mr. Chairman, before you is a newspaper article—front-page 

newspaper article, from the Kansas City Star. This newspaper arti-
9 

cle is important because, shortly after I became mayor, the first directive from me was to restore the eternal flame at the top of the 

Liberty Memorial. It’s actually steam, it’s not flame. The Liberty 

Memorial, which you’ll hear from our director shortly, was an effort 

put together by people in the community shortly after the end of 

World War I. It was built completely, and financed, by the people 

of Kansas City, Missouri. It went into some decay. 

I came to Washington as mayor, made a request that the Liberty 

Memorial be taken over by the National Park Service. They politely 

declined, saying that the National Park Service had difficulty trying to maintain all of the memorials they presently hold responsibility for. 

I went back to Kansas and City and made a pitch to the voters 

Kansas City. They responded and approved a sales tax, which was 

used to restore the Liberty Memorial. From that point on, the people of Kansas City, Missouri—the voters—decided that this was 

something that we would do. We would assume the responsibility. 

We did not want one dime from the Federal Government. This is 

no small monument. 

This is the Liberty Memorial today. This is downtown Kansas 

City in the background, Missouri’s largest city. This is the Liberty 

Memorial. Just 11 months ago, President Barack Obama stood on 

the mall with 75,000 people in the background. I drew the people 

there, but he spoke—— 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. CLEAVER [continuing]. After I spoke. Seventy-five thousand 

people on the mall of the Liberty Memorial. 

Every year, there’s a Veterans Day observance, where people 

from all over—all over the country—in fact, Mr. Buckles, 2 years 

ago, I sat next to him and his daughter at the Liberty Memorial 

on Veterans Day. The people of Kansas City, Missouri, are saying 

to the U.S. Senate the same thing they said to the House, which 

voted 418 to 1 to support this, that we want absolutely no money 

from the United States Federal Government. We don’t need to raise 

any money around the country. We are going to assume the responsibility for supporting and preserving the Liberty Memorial, which 

was built not as a municipal memorial, but as the national memorial, which is why 100,000 people, including all five leaders of the 

allied forces, gathered here for the beginning and opening to the 

Liberty Memorial. This is a national monument. If there is, sometime in the future, a need for repair, we will do it. 

We’ve added an entire dimension to it—a new dimension to this, 

because now we have a museum on the lower level of the museum. 

It is one of the most stately monuments that you will see anyplace, 

day or night. You can see it from all over Kansas City. Our community is a city that stretches 322 square miles. You can virtually see 

the top of the Liberty Memorial anyplace in Kansas City, Missouri. 

It is a city, as we say, on a hill. 

So, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I think that 

what we are trying to say to you, and we successfully said it to our 

colleagues in the House, across party lines, that this was something that our community will continue to give for the Nation. We 

assume the responsibility completely, and we hope that you would 
10 

see fit to give the people of Kansas City the opportunity to continue 

to spend their own money to preserve something for the Nation. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Cleaver follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF EMANUEL CLEAVER, II, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM

MISSOURI, ON S. 760 AND H.R. 1849 

Chairman Udall, Ranking Member Burr and other members of the Subcommittee, 

thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of S. 760 and H.R.1849 to designate the Liberty Memorial as the National World War I Memorial and to establish 

a World War I Centennial Commission. Along with my Missouri colleagues, Representatives Akin, Blunt, Carnahan, Clay, Emerson, Graves, Luetkemeyer, and 

Skelton, plus 101 other House cosponsors, we introduced and passed a bill in the 

House of Representatives designating the Liberty Memorial at the National World 

War I Museum in Kansas City, Missouri as the National World War I Memorial by 

a vote of 418-1. This bill also establishes a Centennial Commission to ensure a fitting observance of the centennial of World War I. 

The First World War extended through four of the bloodiest years in world history. This truly global conflict involved the world’s major powers, mobilizing over 

70 million military forces. The War to End All Wars ended with an armistice on 

November 11, 1918 on the Western Front in Europe, after approximately 16 million 

military and civilian deaths across the globe, including 375,000 American casualties. 

The death and destruction of World War I irrevocably impacted the lens through 

which people viewed the world: The optimism that initiated the early 1900s was 

swiftly sobered by a consciousness that came to be known as the Lost Generation. 

Many people, however, were determined to make this generation a generation remembered and honored. Concerned American citizens in Kansas City, Missouri initiated a movement to erect a lasting and meaningful monument to the men and 

women who served and died for liberty in World War I. 

According to R.A. Long, the founding president of the Liberty Memorial Association, the 217-foot Liberty Memorial was intended to represent ‘‘on the part of all 

people, a living expression for all time of the gratitude of a grateful people to those 

who offered and who gave their lives in defense of liberty and our country.’’ In 1919, 

the people of Kansas City, Missouri expressed an outpouring of support and raised 

more than $2,500,000.00, or the equivalent of $30, 815,028.90 today, in two weeks 

for a memorial to the service of Americans in World War I. This fundraising was 

an accomplishment unparalleled by any other city in the United States and reflected 

the passion of public opinion about World War I, at the forefront of everyone’s memory. 

H. Van Buren Magonigle won a national architectural competition officiated by 

the American Institute of Architects to further transform the Liberty Memorial idea 

into reality. On November 1, 1921, nearly 200,000 people witnessed the dedication 

of the site for the Liberty memorial in Kansas City, Missouri. The dedication 

marked the only time in history that the five allied military leaders—Lieutenant 

General Baron Jacques of Belgium, General Armando Diaz of Italy, Marshall Ferdinand Foch of France, General John J. Pershing of the United States, and Admiral 

Lord Earl Beatty of Great Britain, were together at one place. General Pershing 

echoed the significance of the dedication by asserting, ‘‘[t]he people of Kansas City, 

Missouri are deeply proud of the beautiful memorial, erected in tribute to the patriotism, the gallant achievements, and their heroic sacrifices of their sons and daughters who served in our country’s armed forces during the World War. It symbolized 

their grateful appreciation of duty well done, an appreciation which I share, because 

I know so well how richly it is merited.’’ 

Shortly after its dedication, the Liberty Memorial was again distinguished during 

an Armistice Day ceremony in 1926 when President Calvin Coolidge marked the beginning of its three-year construction project by laying the cornerstone of the memorial. In his dedication speech, President Coolidge declared that ‘‘[. . .] the magnitude of this memorial and the broad base of popular support on which it rests, 

can scarcely fail to excite national wonder and admiration [. . .].’’ A message on the 

Liberty Memorial’s tower bears an inscription that inspired its namesake: ‘‘In Honor 

of Those Who Served in the World War in Defense of Liberty and our Country.’’ 

Four stone ‘‘Guardian Spirits’’ representing courage, honor, patriotism, and sacrifice 

proudly perch above an observation deck, making the Liberty Memorial a noble tribute to all who served in World War I. 

The evidence articulated above demonstrates that the Liberty Memorial already 

is, has been, and deserves to be regarded as a national tribute to World War I. This 
11 

legislation aims to make official what so many people already consider to be the National World War I Memorial. 

While we look to the Liberty Memorial in remembrance of World War I, we likewise must look to the upcoming World War I centennial, to be honored in 2017. To 

ensure a proper observance of the World War I centennial, this legislation also aims 

to create a commission to be known as the World War I Centennial Commission. 

The Commission will promote not only a suitable observance of the centennial of 

World War I, but will also recognize the values of honor, courage, patriotism, and 

sacrifice, in keeping with the representation of these values through the four Guardian Sprits sculpted on the Liberty Memorial Monument. The Commission will plan, 

develop, and execute programs, projects, and activities to commemorate the centennial of World War I. With Kansas City, Missouri as its official host, the Commission 

will be composed of twenty-four members who will work together to facilitate and 

coordinate activities throughout the United States to honor the Great War. 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Burr, it is with great pride that I speak for myself, our Missouri Congressional Delegation and the citizens of Missouri in support 

of this legislation to make official the historic, powerful, and unparalleled stature 

of the Liberty Memorial as the National World War I Memorial coupled with the 

establishment of the World War I Centennial Commission to properly observe the 

World War I centennial. We owe the Liberty Memorial’s designation as the National 

World War I Memorial to the hundreds of thousands of people, including those who 

served our country in World War I, who have looked to the Liberty Memorial as 

the interminable symbol of sacrifice and sovereignty that continue to shape our 

country. The World War I Centennial Commission will further observe America’s 

historic commitment to freedom and appropriately remember those who fought for 

our country in the War to End All Wars. 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Burr, attached to my testimony is an overview 

of events at the Liberty Memorial, a time line of Significant Dates at the Liberty 

Memorial and reasons to support the Liberty Memorial designation as the National 

World War I Memorial. 

ATTACHMENT.—OVERVIEW, TIMELINE AND REASONS TO SUPPORT OF THE LIBERTY

MEMORIAL AS THE NATIONAL WWI MEMORIAL

Historical Background Overview 

• An armistice was declared on November 11, 1918 to end the fighting on the 

Western Front. 

• Concerned citizens in Kansas City, Missouri were determined to commemorate 

those who served in WWI. 

• Shortly after the armistice in November 1918, community leaders galvanized a 

campaign to raise money for the construction of a lasting tribute to the men 

and women who fought in WWI. 

• Within ten days—during an influenza epidemic—Kansas Citians raised $2.5 

million for the construction of what came to be known as the Liberty Memorial. 

$2.5 million calculated for inflation in today’s currency would be worth 

$30,815,028.90. 

• This fundraising was an accomplishment unparalleled by any other city in the 

United States and reflected the passion of public opinion about World War I, 

at the forefront of everyone’s memory. The slogan of the campaign was ‘‘Lest 

the Ages Forget.’’ 

• Following the fund raiser was a national competition for the selection of the 

New York architect H. Van Buren Magonigle. 

• Construction of the Liberty Memorial began in 1921 which was commemorated 

with a dedication ceremony on November 1, 1921, attended by General John J. 

Pershing of the United States; Admiral Lord Beatty of Great Britain; General 

Armando Diaz of Italy; Marshal Ferdinand Foch of France; and Lieutenant 

General Baron Jacques of Belgium. 

—The dedication marked the only time in history that the five allied military 

leaders were together at one place. 

—The allied military leaders spoke to a crowd of nearly 200,000. 

—General Pershing echoed the significance of the dedication by asserting, ‘‘[t]he 

people of Kansas City, Missouri are deeply proud of the beautiful memorial, 

erected in tribute to the patriotism, the gallant achievements, and their heroic sacrifices of their sons and daughters who served in our country’s armed 

forces during the World War. It symbolized their grateful appreciation of duty 

well done, an appreciation which I share, because I know so well how richly 

it is merited.’’ 
12 

—Harry S. Truman played a high-profile role in the parade following the 1921 

dedication ceremony as Vice Chairman of the Decoration Committee of the 

American Legion. 

• On Armistice Day in 1926, President Calvin Coolidge marked the beginning of 

the three-year construction project by laying the cornerstone of the memorial. 

—In his dedication speech, President Coolidge declared that ‘‘[. . .] the magnitude of this memorial and the broad base of popular support on which it 

rests, can scarcely fail to excite national wonder and admiration [. . .].’’ 

• There has been a Veterans Day observance at the Liberty Memorial every year 

since 1926. 

• There has been a Memorial Day observance at the Liberty Memorial every year 

since 1948. 

• A rededication ceremony in 1961 was marked by the attendance of President 

Harry S. Truman and President Dwight D. Eisenhower. 

—Then Mayor H. Roe Bartle expressed his support of the rededication ceremony: ‘‘For four decades Kansas City has pointed to its unique and unusual 

war memorial with pride. Millions of people from over the globe have visited 

our shrine to our heroic dead who fought in World War I for freedom of the 

world. It pleases me that the American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, 

and other veterans’ associations are joining hands with the city to make the 

40th anniversary program an event not soon to be forgotten.’’ 

—Representatives from 57 nations were present at the rededication ceremony; 

this was the largest diplomatic gathering ever assembled in the Middle West. 

—A crowd of 40,000 attended the ceremony; as in the celebrations of 1921 and 

1926, schools dismissed afternoon classes and businesses around Kansas City 

closed their doors for the event. 

—President Eisenhower delivered a speech addressing his hopes for everlasting 

world peace and the elimination of totalitarian power. 

• A rededication ceremony in 2002 was attended by General Myers as the Keynote as well as dignitaries from Italy, France, Belgium, and the United Kingdom. 

• The Liberty Memorial that overlooks Kansas City extends far beyond the Kansas City limits. The Memorial serves as a perennial reminder of and for all 

Americans who served our country during World War I. 

Reasons to Support the Liberty Memorial as the World War I National Memorial 

• The Liberty Memorial already exists and would not require any additional construction. 

• The Liberty Memorial is open to a partnership with the National Parks Service, 

but would prefer independent administration. 

• The Liberty Memorial was recognized by the 106th Congress as a national symbol of World War I. (The concurrent Resolution was passed on October 24, 2000, 

‘‘Recognizing the Liberty Memorial in Kansas City, Missouri, as a national 

World War I symbol honoring those who defended liberty and our country 

through service in World War I.’’) 

• The Liberty Memorial is a National Landmark (as of September 20, 2006). 

• The Liberty Memorial has been designated as a National Symbol for World War 

I. 

• The Liberty Memorial ultimately seeks the recognition as the National WWI 

Memorial; it does not necessarily wish to be managed by the National Parks 

Service. As with the designation of the National WWI Museum, the Liberty Memorial would prefer to be independently administered. Hundreds of thousands 

of people—since the memorial’s inception and even today—regard the Liberty 

Memorial as a powerful symbol of and tribute to Americans who served in 

World War I. 

• There is no nationally recognized memorial honoring the service of Americans 

who served in World War I. 

• Kansas City is home to the National World War I Museum (as designated by 

Congress in 2004), which is adjacent to the Liberty Memorial. 

• An inscription on the Liberty Memorial tower reads, ‘‘In honor of those who 

served in the world war in defense of liberty and our country.’’ • Many other national monuments exist outside of Washington, DC (examples include the Mt. Rushmore National Memorial in South Dakota; the Jefferson National Expansion memorial in St. Louis, Missouri; the AIDS Memorial Grove in 
13 

San Francisco, California; the Benjamin Franklin National Memorial in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; the Chamizal National Memorial in Texas, etc.) 

• Not only does the Liberty Memorial already exist, it boasts an extensive and 

unparalleled history. 

• H.R. 1849, the World War I Memorial and Centennial Act of 2009, passed the 

House of Representatives on November 5, 2009, by a vote of 418-1. 

Important Dates at the Liberty Memorial 

November 11, 1918 at 11am Armistice ended fighting on the Western 

front. 

November 1918 Citizens gathered to gather support to create 

a lasting monument to those who serve and 

those who died. 

1919 Campaign initiated to raise money. In only 

ten days and in the middle of a deadly influenza epidemic, Kansas Citians gave generously to the fund drive, whose slogan was 

‘‘Lest the Ages Forget.’’ 

1921 Site Dedication: Construction began with a 

dedication ceremony with General John J. 

Pershing of the United States, Admiral Lord 

Early Beatty of Great Britain, General 

Armando Diaz of Italy, Marshal Ferdinand 

Foch of France, and Lieutenant General 

Baron Jacques of Belgium. Harry S. Truman 

played a high-profile role in the parade following the 1921 dedication ceremony for the 

Liberty Memorial. Vice President Coolidge 

was also in attendance. 

1926 Armistice Day, Opening day and Dedication 

for the Liberty Memorial led by President 

Coolidge who gave a speech. 

1926-present Every Veterans Day has been observed at 

the Liberty Memorial. 

1948-present Every Memorial Day has been observed at 

the Liberty Memorial. 

1961 Rededication Ceremony—President Harry S. 

Truman and President Dwight D. Eisenhower where in attendance. 

2002 Rededication—General Myers was Keynote, 

Dignitaries from Italy, France, Belgium and 

United Kingdom were also in attendance. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Congressman Cleaver, for those compelling words, and for the history that’s attached to the project that 

you led and brought to fruition. We look forward to working with 

you, and the Senators that are here, to find a reasonable way forward, to commemorate the work of people like Frank Buckles, and 

the heroism that is attached to it. 

I think we do have a vote on the floor of Senate at this time. I 

think we ought to recess the committee, and we’ll return as quickly 

as we can to continue the hearing. 

So, thanks, again, to the witnesses who took the time to join us. 

Thanks, to Mr. Buckles. 
14 

* See Appendix. 

[Recess.] 

Senator UDALL. The Subcommittee on National Parks will come 

to order. 

Before I recognize Ms. Stevenson for her testimony, I wanted to 

make a few announcements. 

Senator McCaskill, the sponsor of S. 760, was unable to be here 

today, but has submitted a statement, and, without objection, it 

will be included in the hearing record. She has also submitted letters of support from the American Legion, the VFW, and the family 

of Sergeant Alvin C. York, and, without objection, those letters* 

will be included in the record, as well. 

[The prepared statement of Senator McCaskill follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. CLAIRE MCCASKILL, U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSOURI

I would like to thank the Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Burr for holding 

this hearing on S.760 and H.R. 1849, to designate the Liberty Memorial in Kansas 

City, Missouri as the National World War I Memorial and to establish a World War 

I Centennial Commission. These bills seek to honor the patriotism and dedication 

of those who fought in World War I (WWI), as well as those who have to sought 

to preserve that honor embodied in a national memorial and museum. 

Just two weeks after the 1918 Armistice, members of the Kansas City community 

embarked on a campaign to create a grand monument and museum to honor all 

those who fought and lost their lives in WWI. A community-based fundraising drive 

in 1919 raised over $2.5 million from citizens across the in US in just ten days. This 

was unprecedented for the time and reflected the passion of citizens from across the 

United States to support Kansas City’s efforts to establish a memorial to all of 

WWI’s fallen heroes. The national scope of the support for the endeavor and the inclusion of all of the nation’s WWI fallen as part of the Memorial set the foundation 

for the Memorial to be recognized as a National memorial, a moniker we now seek 

to finally give the memorial. 

Underscoring the scope and breadth of the Memorial, during the 1921 site dedication in Kansas City, the military commanders from each of the five Allied nations 

attended the dedication—the only time in history the five senior most military leaders from WWI were together in one place at the same time. Subsequently, after 3 

years of construction, the two hundred and seventeen foot tall memorial was dedicated by President Calvin Coolidge before a crowd of 150,000 people. 

In the decades since, veterans of the Great War and their families have come to 

this site to honor and remember those who fought. More recently, their experience 

has been enhanced with the expansion of the WWI Museum. In 2006, after a $105 

million renovation, the WWI Museum reopened its newly renovated 32,000 square 

feet of exhibitions that nobly honor the heroes of WWI. At the updated museum, 

visitors can view films dedicated to the War in a state of the art theater; follow US 

involvement in the war from the United States’ entry in 1917 to the Paris Peace 

Conference in 1919; and read real accounts of those connected to the war. Over 1 

million people have visited the site since the reopening in 2006. 

On October 24, 2000 the Liberty Memorial was recognized by Congress as a ‘‘national World War I symbol honoring those who defended liberty and our country 

through service in World War I’’. And in 2004, Congress designated the museum at 

the Liberty Memorial the National World War I Museum. Given this national recognition it is only befitting that the Liberty Memorial be finally and rightfully recognized as the nation’s National World War I Memorial. 

This legislation has received substantial support. The American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the family of Sgt. Alvin C. York, the most decorated U.S. 

World War I soldier, have all written letters supporting the designation of the Liberty Memorial at the National World War I Memorial. Each of these letters are attached to my testimony. Also attached to my testimony is a photo which helps to 

illustrate the grandeur and magnificence of the Liberty Memorial and its presence 

in the city. There is truly nothing like it. 

I am aware that others are seeking to establish the District of Columbia World 

War I Monument, which resides on the National Mall here in Washington, D.C., as 

a National World War I Monument. I am saddened by the disrepair of the D.C. 

Monument and the general lack of care it has received over many years. I believe 
15 

this must be addressed and remedied as soon as possible and I applaud those who 

have taken up this cause. However, I do not believe that a monument’s presence 

on the National Mall alone should entitle it to the moniker of a National monument. 

Nor should a monument’s presence elsewhere be exclusionary. Other considerations 

should also include the scope, history and care of a Monument, as well as the general manner in which the Monument is perceived by our citizens. With these types 

of considerations, it is clear that the Liberty Memorial in Kansas City is our nation’s National World War I Monument. I firmly believe we should assign it that 

moniker as we approach the 100th Anniversary of World War I. I look forward to 

working with my friends supporting the D.C. Monument and to seeking a solution 

that wins that monument revitalization and appropriate recognition associated with 

its location while also recognizing the national nature of the Liberty Memorial. 

Again, I want to thank Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Burr for holding 

this hearing. As you can tell from my testimony am so proud to be the lead sponsor 

of this legislation and even prouder of the citizens of Kansas City. 

Senator UDALL. We also have letters from the National Coalition 

To Save Our Mall opposing H.R. 3689, the Vietnam Memorial Visitor Center bill, and one from the AFL-CIO Building and Construction Trades Department in support of the same bill. 

We have a statement from District of Columbia shadow Senator 

Paul Strauss, opposing S. 2097, the DC World War I Memorial bill. 

All these letters and statements will be included in the hearing 

record. 

With that, let me turn to Ms. Stevenson, who is the assistant director of business services, the National Park Service, Department 

of the Interior. 

Ms. Stevenson, nice to see you. It isn’t your first visit to the subcommittee. 

Ms. STEVENSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator UDALL. The floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF KATHERINE H. STEVENSON, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, BUSINESS SERVICES, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ACCOMPANIED BY PETER 

MAY, ASSOCIATE REGIONAL DIRECTOR FOR LANDS, RESOURCES, AND PLANNING, NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION 

Ms. STEVENSON. Thank you very much. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to offer the views of the Department of the Interior on the eight bills before you. 

I’ll summarize my remarks and ask that the full text be entered 

into the record. 

With me today is Peter May, the Associate Regional Director for 

Lands, Resources, and Planning with the National Capital Region, 

in case you have any detailed questions about the projects on the 

Mall. 

S. 760 would designate the Liberty Memorial in Kansas City, 

Missouri, as the National World War I Memorial. A companion bill, 

H.R. 1849, would also establish the World War I Centennial Commission. The Department supports the intent of establishing such 

a commission, but believes it is premature to designate the Liberty 

Memorial as the National World War I Museum until a study of 

the various World War I memorials in the United States has been 

completed. That study would determine which memorial is best 

suited to be named the official National World War I Memorial. 

Such a study would be timely, as S. 2097, before you today, also 

proposes designation of the DC World War I Memorial as a National World War I Memorial. In 2008, the Congress directed the 
16 

National Park Service to study the Soldier Memorial Military Museum in Saint Louis, also a World War I Memorial, as a potential 

addition to the National Park System. 

S. 1838 would establish a Civil War Sesquicentennial Commemoration Commission to ensure that there’s a suitable national observance of the 150th anniversary of the Civil War. The Department supports enactment, with some minor amendments. 

S. 2097 would rededicate and enhance the DC War Memorial as 

a National and District of Columbia World War I memorial. The 

Department cannot support S. 2097, both for the reasons I explained regarding other World War I Memorial candidates, and because the sculptural or commemorative elements proposed would so 

alter the existing memorial in purpose and design that the result 

would be, in effect, the creation of a new memorial within the reserve. Our position is supported by the National Capital Memorial 

Advisory Commission and by the American Battle Monuments 

Commission. 

S. 2722 would authorize the Secretary to conduct a study to determine whether it is suitable and feasible to add Heart Mountain 

Relocation Center as a unit of the National Park Service. The Department supports this bill. However, we feel that priority should 

be given to the 49 previously authorized studies. 

S. 2726 would modify the boundary of the Minuteman Missile 

National Historic Site in South Dakota by transferring 25 acres of 

Buffalo Gap National Grassland from the U.S. Forest Service to the 

National Park Service for use as a visitor facility and administrative site. The Department supports this bill, with some technical 

amendments. 

S. 2738 would authorize the National Mall Liberty Fund DC to 

establish a memorial in DC on Federal land to honor free persons 

and slaves who fought during the American Revolution. The Department supports the bill if it is amended to conform to the principles, purposes, and requirements of the Commemorative Works 

Act. While S. 2738 states that the memorial shall in established in 

accordance with the Commemorative Works Act, the bill contravenes a critical requirement of that Act by preselecting Area 1 

as the site. You will recall that the Commemorative Works Act was 

amended in 2003 to provide for the establishment of a reserve 

where no additional memorials may be located. 

Finally, H.R. 3689 would extend by 4 years the authority of the 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, Incorporated, to establish a visitor center. The Department supports that bill. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared testimony. I’d be 

happy to answer any questions you might have. 

[The prepared statements of Ms. Stevenson follow:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF KATHERINE H. STEVENSON, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, BUSINESS SERVICES, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ACCOMPANIED BY PETER MAY, ASSOCIATE REGIONAL DIRECTOR FOR LANDS, RESOURCES, AND PLANNING, NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION

S. 760 AND H.R. 1849

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your committee to 

present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 760 and H.R. 1849, bills 

to designate the Liberty Memorial at the National World War I Museum in Kansas 

City, Missouri, as the National World War I Memorial. H.R. 1849 also establishes 
17 

the World War I Centennial Commission to ensure a suitable observance of the centennial of World War I. 

The Administration appreciates the sponsors’ recognition of the sacrifices of Americans who served in World War I. This is an important era in American history 

which has been honored through a number of monuments throughout the nation. 

The Administration shares the sponsors’ sentiment on this subject and would like 

to continue working with the Congress on it. 

We believe however, that it is premature to designate the Liberty Memorial at 

the National World War I Museum in Kansas City, Missouri, as the National World 

War I Memorial. There has not been any study authorized or conducted to determine which of the various World War I Memorials in the United States would be 

best suited to be named as the single or official National World War I Memorial. 

The Department of the Interior supports the intent of establishing a World War I 

Centennial Commission; however, the Department of Justice has advised that it has 

constitutional concerns about certain appointment provisions in the bill and we understand Justice is providing its recommended amendments to the Committee to resolve these concerns. The Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Government Ethics would also welcome the opportunity to work with the Committee to address matters related to the status of the Commission’s members and employees for 

purposes of various laws governing Federal employment. We defer to those agencies 

for the specifics of their concerns.. 

Both S. 760 and H.R. 1849 as passed by the House would designate the Liberty 

Memorial at the National World War I Museum in Kansas City, Missouri, as the 

National World War I Memorial. H.R. 1849 also would establish the World War I 

Centennial Commission to plan and execute various activities to commemorate the 

centennial of World War I, encouraging private organizations and other governmental entities to participate in the centennial, and coordinate these activities 

throughout the United States. The Commission would consist of 21 members appointed by the President and certain members of Congress and would also include 

the executive director of the American Legion and the president of the Liberty Memorial Association. The bill authorizes $500,000 for fiscal years 2010 through 2019 

to carry out the activities of the commission. The Administrator of General Services 

would provide the administrative support services to the Commission. 

Mr. Chairman, our Department would be pleased to work with the Commission 

if it is established. This concludes my testimony. I will be pleased to answer any 

questions from members of the Committee. 

S. 1838

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to 

present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 1838, a bill that would 

establish a commission to commemorate the Sesquicentennial of the American Civil 

War. 

The Department supports the enactment of this legislation subject to addressing 

some minor amendments discussed in our testimony and the concerns of the Department of Justice, which has advised that it may have constitutional concerns about 

an appointment provision in the bill and will provide its recommended amendments, 

if any, at a later date to address these concerns. The Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Government Ethics also welcome the opportunity to work 

with the Committee to address matters related to the status of the Commission’s 

members and employees for purposes of various laws governing Federal employment. We defer to those agencies for the specifics of their concerns. 

S. 1838 would establish a Civil War Sesquicentennial Commemoration Commission to cooperate with and assist States and national organizations with programs 

and activities to ensure a suitable national observance of the 150th anniversary of 

the Civil War. It also authorizes a grant program for the development of programs, 

projects, and activities on the Civil War that have lasting educational value. 

The Civil War was, in the words of Robert Penn Warren, ‘‘the great single event 

of our history.’’ It was the both the greatest disaster that has ever befallen our nation, and also our era of greatest achievement. It was a wrenching conflict that resulted in the loss of 620,000 lives, the liberation of four million African American 

slaves, and the ratification of three Constitutional amendments that forever 

changed the face of American democracy. S. 1838 is mindful of this reality as it directs the Commission to recognize ‘‘the experiences and points of view of all people 

affected by the Civil War,’’ and provides for the development of ‘‘programs, projects, 

and activities on the Civil War that have lasting educational value.’’ 

As S. 1838 acknowledges, the military aspects of the Civil War are important 

events to commemorate. It is equally important, however, as we prepare to reflect 
18 

on the war from the vantage point of a-century-and-a-half later, that we explore the 

causes of the conflict to understand better why the democratic framework of the 

country failed to resolve the sectional issues short of war. Likewise, we would be 

doing a disservice to those who fought and fell, if the Sesquicentennial did not fully 

examine and reflect upon the consequences of the Civil War including not only the 

Reconstruction era and its aftermath, but also the subsequent constriction of equal 

rights for African American citizens, and the ultimate achievement of those civil 

rights for the descendents of enslaved peoples almost a century later. 

As the country approaches the 150th anniversary of the war, the meaning of the 

Civil War should be explored fully. Its causes and consequences, subjects which 

Congress directed the National Park Service to address in its programs and materials beginning in 1999, can and must be a major part of the Sesquicentennial. The 

Sesquicentennial should assume the broadest possible approach to remembering and 

commemorating the war. With that in mind, and subject to the concerns of the other 

federal agencies referenced above, the Department would recommend the following 

suggestions for strengthening S. 1838 and making its implementation more efficient 

and effective. 

First, the findings mention specific organizations and places important to the Sesquicentennial of the Civil War. It is important to remember that the Civil War was 

a national experience and its Sesquicentennial commemoration should likewise represent a broad spectrum of the nation. For example, the Virginia Center for Digital 

History (University of Virginia) with its The Valley of the Shadow project could contribute much to our understanding of the war. Other entities that might logically 

be considered would include the Center for Study of the American South at the University of North Carolina and the Center for the Study of Southern Culture at the 

University of Mississippi. We recommend that other scholarly centers and programs 

be acknowledged so that the social, political, and economic aspects of the war receive emphasis. 

Second, respecting the importance of the appointments to this nationally important commission, we recommend that the bill allow for 180 days instead of 60 days 

for the selection of the commission members. 

Third, the bill envisions a commission that would include twenty-seven members. 

We believe a commission of this size would significantly impede the timely selection 

of its members, diminish its ability to work efficiently and effectively, and would be 

too costly. We recommend a smaller commission, with perhaps fifteen or seventeen 

members. We would be glad to work with the committee on language for these proposed amendments. 

Establishing a commission, subject to modifications as discussed above, to commemorate the sesquicentennial of the Civil War as envisioned in S. 1838 would provide the nation an opportunity to reflect upon this momentous event within an environment that would be inclusive and contemplative. The Department of the Interior 

and the National Park Service stand ready to contribute its resources and expertise 

to this important commemoration. It would enable all Americans to reflect anew 

upon the war, its consequences, and its lasting legacies. It would result, we can 

hope, in greater public insight into the war and promote increased awareness of its 

remarkable influence upon our society today. 

This concludes my prepared testimony, Mr. Chairman. I would be pleased to answer any questions you or the committee might have. 

S. 2097

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to appear before you today to present the Department of the Interior’s views on S. 

2097, to authorize the rededication of the District of Columbia War Memorial as a 

National and District of Columbia World War I Memorial to honor the sacrifices 

made by American veterans of World War I. 

The Administration appreciates the sponsors’ recognition of the sacrifices of Americans who served in World War I. This is an important era in American history 

which has been honored through a number of monuments throughout the nation. 

The Administration shares the sponsors’ sentiment on this subject and would like 

to continue working with the Congress on it. 

However, we feel that it would be premature to designate the District of Columbia 

War Memorial (Memorial) as the National and District of Columbia World War I 

Memorial. There has not been any study authorized or conducted to determine 

which of the various World War I Memorials in the United States would be best 

suited to be named as the single or official National World War I Memorial. Further, the bill undermines several significant provisions of the Commemorative 

Works Act. Therefore, the Department cannot support S. 2097. 
19 

S. 2097 would authorize the World War I Memorial Foundation (Foundation) to 

establish a commemorative work rededicating the existing District of Columbia War 

Memorial as a National and District of Columbia World War I Memorial by restoring the Memorial and adding an appropriate sculptural or other commemorative element. 

The District of Columbia War Memorial was authorized by Congress on June 7, 

1924, to commemorate the citizens of the District of Columbia who served in World 

War I. The Memorial was funded by both organizations and citizens of the District 

of Columbia. Construction of the Memorial began in the spring of 1931 and was 

dedicated by President Herbert Hoover on November 11, 1931. It was the first war 

memorial to be erected in West Potomac Park and remains the only local District 

memorial on the National Mall. The Memorial is a contributing structure in East 

and West Potomac Parks entry in the National Register of Historic Places. 

Designed by Washington architect Frederick H. Brooke, with Horace W. Peaslee 

and Nathan C. Wyeth as associate architects, inscribed on the base of the Memorial 

are the names of the 499 District of Columbia citizens who lost their lives in the 

war. The Memorial was designed to be used as a bandstand and is large enough 

to hold an 80-member band. Concerts were held there until May 1, 1960. Today’s 

visitors are likely those who are there for its peaceful and contemplative setting. 

The Department concurs with the findings of the National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission (NCMAC) and the American Battle Monuments Commission 

(ABMC) that adding a National World War I Memorial near the District of Columbia War Memorial would allow a new memorial into the Reserve as well as encroach 

upon the existing Memorial, either of which would be violations of the Commemorative Works Act Moreover, the sculptural or commemorative elements that S. 2097 

proposes would so alter the existing District of Columbia War Memorial—in both 

its purpose and design—that the result would be, in effect, the creation of a new 

memorial. 

This legislation exempts this proposal from key provisions which are at the heart 

of the Commemorative Works Act. Section 8908 of the Act precludes the addition 

of new memorials in the Reserve, the great cross-axis of the Mall, which generally 

extends from the United States Capitol to the Lincoln Memorial, and from the 

White House to the Jefferson Memorial. Section 8905 of the Act requires the site 

and design for a new memorial be developed in a public process, first obtaining the 

advice of the National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission, and then obtaining 

approvals by the National Capital Planning Commission and the U.S. Commission 

of Fine Arts. 

Veterans of World War I are honored at the General John J. Pershing Park, 

which is a national World War I Memorial on Pennsylvania Avenue. Pershing Park, 

located in the center of Pennsylvania Avenue, between 14th and 15th Streets, was 

built by the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation and includes a statue 

of General Pershing, as well as artwork detailing the major battles in World War 

I that involved U.S. troops. This commemorative work represents all who served in 

that conflict. Quotations on this existing World War I Veterans Memorial include 

General Pershing’s tribute to the officers and men of the American Expeditionary 

Forces of World War I and a commemoration of those who served in the United 

States Navy in World War I. Veterans of World War I are also honored on the Mall 

near the White House by the 1st Division and 2nd Division Memorials. 

The Department appreciates the interest in improving the conditions at the District of Columbia War Memorial. While, as with other memorials, this memorial receives routine maintenance, the National Park Service has recognized it needs comprehensive attention. Open mortar joints and failed metal flashings have allowed 

water infiltration into the brick, terra cotta tile, and marble. Marble displacement, 

spalling, and cracking have also occurred. 

The character of the Memorial’s grounds has also changed. The Memorial grove 

is now a mix of hardwoods, evergreens, understory plantings, and non-native plants, 

altering the intended character of the open grove. The bluestone paving is severely 

deteriorated and broken from vehicular use. 

As a result of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, $7.3 million has been 

set aside for an extensive three-stage project to restore and rehabilitate the Memorial and grounds. First, stone conservators are conducting tests to determine the 

best methods for cleaning and removing general and biological soiling, stains, and 

old paint to restore the Memorial to an appearance consistent with the structure’s 

age and material character. Corrections to the built-in gutter and drainage systems 

will also be made to help eliminate moisture infiltration and the associated staining 

and spalling. 

Second, the project will restore the original planting plan, re-establishing the 50- 

foot open lawn around the Memorial, set within a grove of trees. 
20 

Third, the current deteriorated condition of the surrounding stone plaza and walkways will be rehabilitated with thicker, more durable stone paving and the walkways widened from eight feet to ten feet to address contemporary use. 

The National Park Service received approval for this restoration and rehabilitation project from the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts on September 17, 2009, and from 

the National Capital Planning Commission on September 24, 2009. Final design, as 

well as final approvals from both Commissions, is expected to be complete this 

spring, with the rehabilitation expected to be complete by September 30, 2012. 

As the District of Columbia World War I Memorial is dedicated to, and was built 

with funds from the citizens of the District of Columbia, any modification to rededicate it and turn this local memorial into a national memorial would run counter to 

the letter and spirit of its original authorization and to the intent of the Commemorative Works Act. Rather than making exceptions to the Commemorative Works Act 

and setting this precedent—superimposing a new memorial over an existing one, the 

Department believes that greater recognition could be given to studying opportunities to improve upon the national World War I Memorial in Pershing Park, in accordance with the Commemorative Works Act. . The Department believes that the 

memorial in Pershing Park could be given an even greater national stature, without 

impinging on the Commemorative Works Act. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be happy to answer 

any questions that you or any other members of the subcommittee may have. 

S. 2722

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to appear before you today to present the Department of the Interior’s views on S. 

2722, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study 

to determine the suitability and feasibility of adding the Heart Mountain Relocation 

Center, in the State of Wyoming, as a unit of the National Park System. 

The Department supports S. 2722. However, we feel that priority should be given 

to the 49 previously authorized studies for potential units of the National Park System, potential new National Heritage Areas, and potential additions to the National 

Trails System and the National Wild and Scenic River System that have not yet 

been transmitted to Congress. 

S. 2722 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to conduct a special resource study to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the 

Heart Mountain Relocation Center as a unit of the National Park System. The study 

would also consider other alternatives for the preservation, protection and interpretation of the site by federal, State, or local governmental entities, or private and 

nonprofit organizations. The bill also directs the Secretary to identify any potential 

impacts to private landowners if the site is designated as a unit of the National 

Park System and specifies that the Secretary, through the study process, shall consult with interested federal, State, or local governmental entities, federally recognized Indian tribes, private and nonprofit organizations, and owners of private property that may be affected by any designation. Not later than three years after funds 

are made available, the Secretary is directed to submit the results and recommendations of the study to Congress. We estimate that this study will cost approximately 

$240,000. 

Located in northwest Wyoming, in the Shoshone River Valley, the Heart Mountain Relocation Center is one of 10 relocation centers established by the U.S. military to incarcerate Japanese Americans during World War II. The Center opened 

on August 11, 1942, and operated for 39 months, closing on November 10, 1945. At 

its peak, Heart Mountain contained 10,767 Japanese Americans, nearly all of whom 

were former residents of California, Oregon, and Washington, and two-thirds of 

whom were United States citizens. 

The site tells the story of a group of American citizens whose constitutional rights 

were abrogated during a time when our nation was at war. Heart Mountain is also 

directly associated with one of the largest single draft resistance movements in 

United States history. To protest the confinement of their families, 315 Japanese 

Americans from all 10 relocation centers were imprisoned for resisting induction 

into the military. Heart Mountain had the highest rate of resistance with 85 men 

imprisoned for their resistance to the draft. 

The Heart Mountain Relocation Center originally encompassed 21,521 acres. However, the center’s core developed area, which included the residential and administrative areas, contained approximately 740 acres. 

Jointly managed by the Bureau of Reclamation and the Heart Mountain, Wyoming Foundation, the current Heart Mountain National Historic Landmark contains 

124 acres with the remaining parts of the area privately owned. The Bureau of Rec-
21 

lamation owns and administers 74 acres, which includes the site of the original hospital complex and a portion of the administrative complex. The Heart Mountain, 

Wyoming Foundation owns 50 acres, which includes the relocation center’s military 

police compound. The Foundation is currently engaged in a significant fundraising 

campaign to construct an 11,000 square foot Interpretive Learning Center at the 

site. To date, nearly one-half of the needed funds have been raised. 

Although, as a nation, we are not proud of what happened at the Heart Mountain 

Relocation Center and the other nine detention sites where Japanese Americans 

were incarcerated during World War II, such sites allow us to learn from our history 

and remind us of how far we have come. The designation of the Heart Mountain 

Relocation Center as a National Historic Landmark has brought increased public 

recognition and awareness of the site. However, this designation does not guarantee 

additional safeguards or protection of the site. The special resource study process 

would allow all interested parties to comment on ways to preserve and allow for visitor enjoyment of the Heart Mountain Relocation Center. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be happy to answer 

any questions you or any other members of the subcommittee may have. 

S. 2726

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your committee to 

present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 2726, a bill to modify the 

boundary of the Minuteman Missile National Historic Site in the State of South Dakota. 

The Department supports S. 2726 with some technical amendments included at 

the end of this statement. 

S. 2726 would authorize the Secretary to transfer 25 acres of Buffalo Gap National Grasslands from the U.S. Forest Service to Minuteman Missile National Historic Site in Philip, South Dakota, to establish a visitor facility and administrative 

site. The new facility would be located north of exit 131 on Interstate 90 in Jackson 

County, South Dakota. Minuteman Missile’s enabling legislation states, ‘‘On a determination by the Secretary of the appropriate location for a visitor facility and administrative site, the boundary of the historic site shall be modified to include the 

selected site.’’ The enabling legislation also included a map of the visitor center site 

indicating that the proposed area would be 10 acres in size. Later planning indicated that a minimum size for the visitor center site would require 25 acres. National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service personnel, in consultation with our respective lawyers, have discussed that in view of the increase in acreage, it would 

be appropriate to provide for that increase in new legislation. There would be no 

cost involved in this land transfer. 

The U.S. Forest Service (Buffalo Gap National Grassland) is in agreement with 

the recommended land transfer and has provided Minuteman Missile NHS with an 

outline of the land transfer process. The National Park Service’s Midwest regional 

architects and engineers conducted an on-site visit in March 2009 with the Minuteman Missile NHS staff to determine the number of acres necessary for the land 

transfer. The National Grassland representatives met with representatives from the 

National Park Service to discuss the proposed land involved in the transfer and the 

U.S. Forest Service has agreed to the transfer of 25 acres. We note that the U.S. 

Forest Service also has identified the Bankhead Jones Farm Tenant Act of 1937 as 

another possible vehicle for this transfer. 

Public Law 106-115 established the Minuteman Missile National Historic Site. 

The General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (GMP/EIS) 

scoping began in 2001 and the record of decision was signed on July 2, 2009. The 

GMP’s preferred alternative included the development of a visitor center/administrative facility and a land transfer from the U.S. Forest Service to the National Park 

Service for the site of the facility. The GMP recommended the preferred location at 

I-90 South Dakota Exit 131 with ‘‘up to’’ 25 acres for the complete facility. 

The estimated cost to build the visitor center and administrative site is $4.7 million, and the estimated cost to annual operate and maintain both facilities would 

be approximately $750,000. All funds would be subject to NPS priorities and the 

availability of appropriations. 

The transfer between the National Park Service and the U.S. Forest Service 

would be conducted in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and policies. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I look forward to working with the 

Committee on these amendments and other technical issues. I am prepared to answer any questions from members of the Committee. 
22 

Proposed amendments to S. 2726, the Minuteman Missile National Historic Site 

Boundary Modification Act 

Page 2, line 2, by striking ‘‘ respectively; and ’’ and inserting ‘‘respectively;’’ 

Page 2, line 6, by inserting ‘‘also’’ after ‘‘ historic site ’’. 

Page 2, line 18, by striking ‘‘ 2009 ’ . ’’ and inserting ‘‘ 2009 ’; and ’’ 

Page 2, after line 18, by inserting 

‘‘ (3) in section (3)(a)(3), as redesignated by paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘ 

(4) AVAILABILITY OF MAP.—The map described in paragraph (2)’’ and inserting ‘‘ (4) AVAILABILITY OF MAPS.—The maps described in paragraphs (2) and (3) ’’ 

——(4) in section (3)(e)(1), by striking ‘‘Except as provided in paragraph 

(2)’’ and inserting ‘‘Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3)’’. 

——(5) in section (3)(e), by adding a new paragraph (3) as follows: 

(3) The Secretary of Agriculture shall transfer administrative jurisdiction over 

the lands described in paragraph 3(a)(3) to the Secretary, and shall modify the 

boundaries of the Buffalo Gap National Grassland to exclude the transferred 

lands from the grassland boundaries. As soon as practicable after the transfer, 

the Secretary shall prepare a map and a legal description of the lands described 

herein, which shall be on file and available for public inspection in the appropriate offices of the National Park Service. 

S. 2738

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to appear before you today to present the Department of the Interior’s views on S. 

2738, a bill to authorize the National Mall Liberty Fund D.C. to establish a memorial on federal land in the District of Columbia to honor free persons and slaves who 

fought for independence, liberty, and justice for all during the American Revolution. 

The Department supports S. 2738 if amended to conform to the principles, processes, and requirements set forth in the Commemorative Works Act, which has successfully guided the process for establishing monuments in the Nation’s Capital 

since it was enacted in 1986 and as amended since that time. We also recommend 

that one technical correction be made to a map reference in the bill. 

The bill would authorize the establishment of a memorial on federal land in the 

District of Columbia to recognize and commemorate the contributions of 5,000 African Americans who served as soldiers and sailors or provided civilian assistance 

during the American Revolutionary War. The bill prohibits the use of federal funds 

to establish the memorial, directs that the memorial be established according to the 

Commemorative Works Act, and repeals two laws for the authorization and site selection of a similar memorial proposal that expired. 

In 1986, Congress enacted the Commemorative Works Act to guide the process 

for establishing memorials in the Nation’s Capital. Since its enactment, the Act has 

played an important role in ensuring that memorials in the Nation’s Capital are 

erected on the most appropriate sites and are of a caliber of design that is worthy 

of their historically significant subjects. The Act was amended in 2003 to, among 

other things, provide for establishment of a Reserve where no additional memorials 

may be located. 

While S. 2738 states that the memorial shall be established in accordance with 

the Commemorative Works Act, the bill contravenes a critical requirement of the 

Commemorative Works Act by pre-selecting Area I as the site for this memorial. 

Area I is located within the Monumental Core of the Nation’s Capital extending 

around the Capitol Reflecting Pool to the eastern boundary of Arlington National 

Cemetery and along the Virginia shoreline. Area I excludes the Reserve, the great 

cross-axis of the Mall, which generally extends from the United States Capitol to 

the Lincoln Memorial, and from the White House to the Jefferson Memorial. Congress, in the Commemorative Works Act, reserved Area I for subjects determined 

to be of preeminent and lasting historic significance to the Nation and it established 

a process for making this determination which has worked well for over 20 years. 

Through this process, a new memorial may be located in Area I only if the Secretary 

determines, after consulting with the National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission, which holds public meetings, that the memorial’s subject warrants location in 

Area I and recommends it to Congress. If Congress agrees with the recommendation, it enacts a law within 150 days approving the location. As currently written, 

S. 2738 bypasses this important process. 

Following the Commemorative Works Act, in the Department’s view, would not 

hinder the Liberty Memorial Foundation in its ability to establish this memorial. 

In fact, if it obtains an Area I designation through this process, it would be granted 
23 

an additional seven years to complete the memorial, for a total of 14 years. This 

change was made by Congress when it amended the Commemorative Works Act in 

2003, and as a result sponsors no longer need to fear that seeking an Area I designation might cost them their authority to establish the memorial at all. 

We also would note out that S. 2738 makes no provisions for the disposition of 

monies raised in excess of funds needed for the establishment of the memorial or 

to hold in reserve the amount available should the authority to establish the memorial expire before completion. The Department recommends that the bill be amended 

to clarify the disposition of these funds. 

The Department also notes that the bill references the 1986 map, which Congress 

amended in 2003 when it changed the boundaries of Area I and created the Reserve. 

The 1986 map is no longer valid. We recommend that the bill be amended to reference the revised map, numbered 869/86501B and dated June 24, 2003. 

The Department reiterates our support of the establishment of a memorial in the 

Nation’s Capital that recognizes and commemorates the contributions of African 

Americans who fought for independence, liberty and justice during the Revolutionary War. We look forward to the opportunity to work with the subcommittee to 

develop language that would provide for such authorization in a manner consistent 

with the principles, processes, and requirements set forth by existing authorities. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my prepared testimony, I would be glad to answer 

any questions that you or other members of the subcommittee may have. 

H.R. 3689

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to appear before you today to present the Department of the Interior’s views on H.R. 

3689, a bill to provide for an extension of the legislative authority of the Vietnam 

Veterans Memorial Fund, Inc. (the Fund) to establish a Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

visitor center, and for other purposes. 

The Department supports H.R. 3689 as passed by the House. 

The visitor center was authorized by Public Law 108-126, signed on November 17, 

2003. Following site analysis and the completion of an environmental assessment, 

the visitor center was approved to be located on the NPS proposed site on the 

grounds of the Lincoln Memorial, bounded by Constitution Avenue, Henry Bacon 

Drive, Lincoln Memorial Circle, and 23rd Street, N.W., so long as certain mitigation 

set forth in design standards developed jointly by the National Capital Planning 

Commission (NCPC) and the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts (CFA) are met. To protect the sensitive landscape of the site, which includes views to and from the Lincoln 

Memorial and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, the design team is responding to 

these critical design standards and criteria. The criteria have been helpful to move 

this important commemorative work forward while minimizing potential impacts to 

the surrounding views and nearby memorials. In addition to public consultation 

under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), the Commemorative Works 

Act requires an important series of reviews and approvals by NCPC and CFA. To 

meet the challenges associated with designing this project on such a sensitive and 

highly visible site, and the legislative requirement that it be located underground, 

the NPS and the Fund have made design refinements as needed during this process. 

We are pleased to report that significant progress has been made gaining approvals for the design. Furthermore, the NPS believes that the design will be fully approved in a timely fashion and that the visitor center can be completed and open 

to the public within the additional four years that H.R. 3689 would allow. Without 

the proposed extension, the Fund’s current authority to establish this visitor center 

will expire on November 17, 2010. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to comment. This concludes my prepared remarks and I will be happy to answer any questions you or other committee 

members might have. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Ms. Stevenson. 

I will recognize myself for a series of questions. 

Your testimony states that the administration believes that the 

designation of a World War I memorial at this time is premature, 

since there hasn’t been a study yet. Do you have an estimate as 

to how long it would take and what it would cost? 

Ms. STEVENSON. We ordinarily testify that between $200- and 

$300,000 is required for such a study and that it takes approximately 3 years. 
24 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for that clarification. 

As you know, the statue in Pershing Park is considered to be a 

World War I memorial. The cross in the Mohave National Preserve 

has been designated as a National Memorial commemorating 

World War I, as well. Do you think there should be a single official 

national World War I memorial, or whether it makes sense to have 

multiple recognized memorials? 

Ms. STEVENSON. I believe we’ll defer that answer to the Congress. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for that opportunity. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator UDALL. My understanding is the Liberty Memorial in 

Kansas City is privately owned. Do you have any concerns with 

designating a private facility as a national memorial? 

Ms. STEVENSON. That would depend on how the designation was 

written. We have other private buildings that are units in the National Park System, and agreements have been worked out. 

Senator UDALL. You mentioned in your testimony that $7.3 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is available 

to restore the District of Columbia War Memorial. Do you know if 

these funds are sufficient to restore the memorial, or would additional funds be necessary? 

Ms. STEVENSON. May I ask Mr. May to assist me with that question? 

Senator UDALL. Of course. 

Mr. May, join us at the witness table and—— 

Mr. MAY. Thank you very much—— 

Senator UDALL. Would you give your name and title, for the 

record, please. 

Mr. MAY. Certainly. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

Mr. MAY. Peter May, Associate Regional Director for Lands, Resources, and Planning for the National Capital Region of the National Parks Service. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. May. You’re recognized. 

Mr. MAY. Thank you. 

We do believe that we have sufficient funds to complete the restoration of the DC World War I Memorial. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

Feel free to continue to sit at the witness table. 

Ms. Stevenson, let me turn to World War I and Civil War Commissions. With respect to those two bills authorizing Federal commissions to commemorate the anniversaries of the Civil War and 

World War I, just to clarify for the record, the administration supports the creation of both commissions, but wants to modify the 

way in which commission members are appointed in order to avoid 

appointments cause—clause conflicts. Is that correct? 

Ms. STEVENSON. That is as we understand it. The Justice Department is the one that has raised that objection. So, it will be 

they who deal with you all. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for that clarification. 

Let me move to the Black Revolutionary War Patriots Memorial. 

That is S. 2738, which would a be a new authorization for the 

Black Revolutionary War Patriots Memorial. You object to a provi-
25 

sion in the bill which finds that the subject matter of the proposed 

memorial is of preeminent and lasting significance to the United 

States, as required under the Commemorative Works Act. Given 

that the Secretary of the Interior and Congress has already made 

that determination for the previously authorized memorial, and 

since the subject of the new memorial is identical to the previously 

authorized one, why does the Park Service believe it’s a problem 

to acknowledge that significance in this legislation? 

Ms. STEVENSON. Mr. May. 

Senator UDALL. Mr. May, you’re recognized. 

Mr. MAY. Thank you. 

On a certain level, this is a matter of principle in the execution 

of the Commemorative Works Act. We believe that the Congress 

very wisely set a specific process for establishing when something 

is worthy of being in Area 1. We’d like to see that confirmed at this 

point for this memorial. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for that clarification. 

I have no further questions. 

I know Senator Burr, because of the busy nature of this week, 

and this day in particular, has been unable to join us immediately. 

He may well have questions for you, and I know you’ll be willing 

to—— 

Ms. STEVENSON. I’d be delighted to answer—— 

Senator UDALL [continuing]. Answer those questions. 

Thank you for taking the time to—— 

Ms. STEVENSON. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator UDALL [continuing]. Come up to the Hill. We will see you 

again soon, I’m sure. 

Ms. STEVENSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator UDALL. As Ms. Stevenson, Mr. May depart, I’d ask the 

next panel to take your seats at the table, and we’ll turn to your 

testimony. 

[Pause.] 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. Good afternoon, to you panel members that have joined us. 

I’d like to turn to your testimony with dispatch. So, what I’ll do 

is introduce each of you in turn, and I’ll start with Mr. Alexander, 

who’s on my left, and on the right of those of you sitting at the 

table. Mr. Brian Alexander is president, CEO of the National 

World War I Museum, Kansas City, Missouri. 

Sir, the floor is yours. We’d ask you to keep your testimony within a 5-minute timeframe, give or take, and would make that same 

request of all those who are going to testify. 

Welcome, and I look forward to hearing what you have to say. 

STATEMENT OF BRIAN ALEXANDER, PRESIDENT & CEO, 

NATIONAL WORLD WAR I MUSEUM, KANSAS CITY, MO 

Mr. ALEXANDER. Chairman Udall, thank you for the opportunity 

to present the views of the National World War I Museum on H.R. 

1849 and S. 70, to designate the Liberty Memorial as a National 

World War I Memorial and to establish a World War I Centennial 

Commission. 

Shortly after the 1918 armistice, citizens in the heart of our Nation raised money to build a memorial in Kansas City, Missouri, to 
26 

honor the 4 million American men and women who served during 

the first World War. In 2 weeks, they raised over $2 million, roughly the equivalent of $30 million today. The 1921 Site dedication in 

Kansas City was attended by the military commanders of the five 

allied nations—France, Italy, Great Britain, Belgium, and the 

United States, represented by General John J. Pershing of Missouri. It was at the Liberty Memorial that these five leaders met 

together for the first time. 

The Liberty Memorial opened on November 11, 1926. During the 

dedication, President Calvin Coolidge addressed the more than 

100,000 attendees, saying, ‘‘Erected in memory of those who defended their homes and their freedom in the World War, it stands 

for service and all that service implies. Today, I return in order 

that I may place the official sanction of the national government 

upon one of the most elaborate impressive memorials that adorn 

our country.’’ Today, we’re here to request that you formalize President Coolidge’s sanction by the national government. 

For 8 decades, all American veterans from the Great War have 

been honored by the words carved on the base of the 217-foot-tall 

Liberty Memorial tower, ‘‘In honor of those who served in the 

World War in defense of liberty and our country.’’ 

In 1961, former Presidents Truman and Eisenhower, both World 

War I veterans, joined together to rededicate the Liberty Memorial, 

further recognizing it as the national memorial. 

H.R. 760 also establishes a Centennial Commission to oversee 

the 100th anniversary of World War I. While the matter is not directly before this committee, the National World War I Museum is 

strongly supportive of this legislation that will properly coordinate 

the national program to commemorate the great sacrifices of those 

who served. 

Through the years, more than 60,000 historical objects from the 

war have been donated to the Liberty Memorial from around the 

world, resulting in the most comprehensive collection of World War 

I materials in our country. 

Our efforts were greatly enhanced with the massive expansion of 

a new museum built directly beneath the Liberty Memorial. In 

2004, the 108th Congress enacted legislation designating the museum as the National World War I Museum. The new state-of-theart museum opened its doors to critical acclaim in 2006. That same 

year, the Liberty Memorial was also designated by the Department 

of Interior as a National Historic Landmark. 

Since the 2006 grand opening, more than a million guests have 

visited the 80,000-square-foot complex and 47-acre grounds, including more than 55,000 school students. 

For 83 years, the Liberty Memorial has honored all those who 

served this country in the war. Since then, American soldiers, on 

their way to subsequent conflicts, have visited the memorial to 

honor those who came before them. As an example, General David 

Petreus toured the museum shortly before his deployment to Iraq. 

Other dignitaries have acknowledged the importance of the memorial and museum through their visits, including, among others, 

Vice President Dick Cheney, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, and then-Senator Barack Obama. 
27 

On Veterans Day 2009, the son and grandson of Sergeant Alvin 

York, the most decorated American World War I ‘‘doughboy,’’ were 

special guests of the museum and memorial. We are proud that the 

York family has endorsed our legislative efforts and that members 

of the York family are here today. 

We are also proud to have two national member-based organizations representing nearly 5 million veterans endorse our efforts for 

national memorial designation and the creation of a Centennial 

Commission. I have with me a resolution that was passed unanimously by the Veterans of Foreign Wars, as well as a letter of support from the American Legion and its members. We are grateful 

that both organizations are represented here today. 

We are not asking that ongoing operational funding be tied to 

this designation. Our request is simply to recognize the Liberty Memorial as the Nation’s official World War I memorial, fulfilling 

President Coolidge’s pronouncement in 1926. 

In conclusion, since the end of the war, the American people established hundreds of memorials throughout our Nation to honor 

their countrymen who served. Right here in the District of Columbia, one can find several memorials dedicated to soldiers from this 

area. We support the renovation of these and other memorials. 

However, the Liberty Memorial stands apart from all other efforts, 

in size, in scale, and in its ongoing commitment in interpreting and 

honoring all veterans from the first World War. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement, and I’m happy to 

answer any questions. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Alexander follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF BRIAN ALEXANDER, PRESIDENT & CEO, NATIONAL WORLD

WAR I MUSEUM AT LIBERTY MEMORIAL, KANSAS CITY, MO, ON S. 760 AND H.R. 1849 

Chairman Udall, Ranking Member Burr and other members of the committee, 

thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the National World War I Museum on H.R. 1849 and S.760 to designate the Liberty Memorial as the National 

World War I Memorial and to establish a World War I Centennial Commission. 

The events of 1914 through 1918 profoundly shaped world history and forever 

changed America’s role on the world stage. Shortly after the 1918 Armistice, citizens 

in the heart of our nation raised money to build a memorial in Kansas City, Missouri to honor the four million American men and women who served during the 

First World War. 

In two weeks they raised over two million dollars—the equivalent of more than 

26 million dollars today. Following this successful fundraising drive, a national architectural competition for a monument design was held. 

The 1921 site dedication in Kansas City was attended by the military commanders of the five Allied nations—France, Italy, Great Britain, Belgium and the 

United States, represented by General John J. Pershing of Missouri. It was at the 

Liberty Memorial that these five leaders met together for the first time. 

The Liberty Memorial opened on November 11, 1926. During the dedication, 

President Calvin Coolidge addressed the more than 100,000 attendees, saying: 

It is with a mingling of sentiments that we come to dedicate this memorial. Erected in memory of those who defended their homes and their freedom in the World War, it stands for service and all that service implies. 

Today I return . . . in order that I may place the official sanction of the 

national government upon one of the most elaborate and impressive memorials that adorn our country. 

Today we are here to request that you formalize President Coolidge’s official sanction of the national government. For eight decades all American veterans from the 

Great War have been honored by the words carved on the limestone base of the 217- 
28 

* Documents have been retained in subcommittee files. 

foot tall Liberty Memorial Tower—‘‘In Honor of Those Who Served in the World War 

in Defense of Liberty and Our Country.’’ 

In 1961 former Presidents Truman and Eisenhower, both World War I veterans, 

joined together to rededicate the Liberty Memorial—further recognizing it as the national memorial. 

H.R. 760 also establishes a Centennial Commission to prepare for and oversee the 

100th anniversary of World War I. While this matter is not directly before this committee, the National World War I Museum is strongly supportive of this legislation 

that will properly coordinate a national program to commemorate the great sacrifices of those who served by making available the vast resources of the Museum. 

Through the years, more than 60,000 historical objects from the war have been 

donated to the Liberty Memorial from around the world—resulting in the most comprehensive collection of World War I materials in our country. 

Our ability to share the stories and honor those who served in the First World 

War was greatly enhanced with the massive expansion of a new museum built directly beneath the Liberty Memorial. In 2004 the 108th Congress enacted legislation 

designating the museum as the National World War I Museum. The new state-ofthe-art Museum opened its doors to critical acclaim in 2006. That same year, the 

Liberty Memorial was also designated by the Department of the Interior as a National Historic Landmark. 

Since the 2006 grand opening, more than a million guests have visited the museum and its historic grounds including more than 55,000 students on school sponsored field trips. 

For 83 years, the Liberty Memorial has honored all those who served this country 

in the First World War. Since then, American soldiers on their way to subsequent 

conflicts have visited the memorial to honor those who came before them. As an example, General David Petraeus toured the Museum shortly before his deployment 

to Iraq. 

Other dignitaries have acknowledged the importance of the Memorial and Museum through their visits including Vice President Dick Cheney, former Secretary 

of State General Colin Powell and then Senator Barack Obama. 

On Veterans Day 2009, the son and grandson of Sergeant Alvin York, the most 

decorated American World War I doughboy, were special guests of the Museum and 

Memorial. We are proud that the York family has endorsed our legislative efforts, 

and that members of the York family are here today. As the Centennial approaches 

and world attention focuses on this event, other family descendants, historians and 

organizations throughout the world are turning to us to help in their remembrance. 

We are proud to have two national member-based organizations, representing 

nearly five million veterans, endorse our efforts for National Memorial designation 

and the creation of a Centennial Commission. I have with me a resolution to this 

effect that was passed unanimously at the Veterans of Foreign Wars national convention, as well as a letter of support from the American Legion and its members, 

who also formally endorsed our proposed legislation.* We are grateful that both organizations are represented here today. 

I ask unanimous consent that these letters and the letter from the York family 

be included in their entirety along with my full statement. 

We are not asking that ongoing operational funding be tied to the designation as 

national memorial. Our request is to simply recognize the Liberty Memorial as the 

nation’s official World War I Memorial—fulfilling President Coolidge’s pronouncement in 1926. 

In conclusion, since the guns fell silent on November 11, 1918, the American people established hundreds of memorials throughout our nation to honor their countrymen who served in the Great War. Right here in the District of Columbia one 

can find several memorials dedicated to soldiers from this area. However, the Liberty Memorial stands apart from all other efforts—in size, in scale and in our ongoing commitment in honoring and interpreting this event. 

For more than 80 years, the Liberty Memorial has served as the de facto national 

memorial. The grandeur of the Liberty Memorial combined with nearly a century 

of honoring ALL United States veterans from the First World War positions the Memorial uniquely as the national symbol for World War I. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to answer any 

questions you or any members of the subcommittee may have. 
29 

* Graphic has been retained in subcommittee files. 

ATTACHMENT.—ADDITIONAL COMMENT

NATIONAL WORLD WAR I MUSEUM AT LIBERTY MEMORIAL FUNDING STRUCTURE

The 2009 operating budget for the National World War I Museum at Liberty Memorialas $2,802,250. The Museum is able to fulfill its mission through various 

revenue streams which include earned income, a city subsidy and philanthropic contributions. 

EARNED INCOME (ADMISSION)

An admission fee is charged to each guest which allows access to the view the 

galleries and to ride the Tower elevator. As the largest revenue generator for the 

Museum, the admission revenue equals 32% of the Museum’s budget. Guests ages 

12 to 64 pay $10 to see the National World War I Museum and the view from the 

top of the Tower. The Museum does not charge admission for active duty military 

or career retired military. 

It is important to understand that the Museum does not charge a fee to view the 

Liberty Memorial. Visitors can view the 217-foot Liberty Memorial Tower, the 

Guardian Spirits, and symbolic sphinxes for free daily from dawn to dusk. Tens of 

thousands of guests visit the Memorial grounds annually without paying an admission fee. 

EARNED INCOME (OTHER)

Earned income from other sources, which makes up another 27% of the Museum’s 

revenue, includes Museum Store sales; Over There Cafe ́ sales; Walk of Honor brick 

sales; and rental events. 

The Museum Store features a selection of WWI treasures ranging from vintage 

t-shirts to military collectibles. The goal of the Museum Store is to inform, educate 

and extend the visitor’s experience by offering quality products and excellent service. 

At the Over There Cafe ́, guests dine surrounded by WWI-themed de ́cor featuring 

the flags of the Allied and Central Powers, a poppy field mural and music of the 

era. The Walk of Honor currently has more than 7,500 bricks bought to recognize individuals and organizations. The Walk of Honor is divided into three sections. 1) a 

section dedicated solely to those who served in World War I, 2) a section for veterans of any military service and 3) a section to honor civilian friends, family or 

organizations. 

Each year, more than 200 private events are held on Museum grounds. Revenue 

is earned from both facility rentals and catering fees. 

CITY FUNDING

The National World War I Museum at Liberty Memorial and surrounding 47 

acres are owned by the City of Kansas City. The Museum is managed by the nonprofit Liberty Memorial Association through a long-term contract with the City of 

Kansas City. In 2009, the Museum received $625,000 from the City of Kansas City 

as part of a contractual subsidy and maintenance endowment, which equals 22% of 

the Museum’s revenue.* 

PHILANTHROPIC CONTRIBUTIONS

Philanthropic gifts from individuals, corporations and foundations currently make 

up 17.5% of the Museums budget. Revenue in this area comes from individual gifts, 

memberships, grants, sponsorships, planned gifts and commemorative gifts. 

The Museum successfully completed a We the People challenge grant from the 

National Endowment for the Humanities in 2009. This prestigious grant establishes 

two important endowments. The Education Endowment will support programming 

that strengthens and improves the visitor’s understanding of World War I history 

and the Acquisitions Endowment will fund the purchase of significant World War 

I artifacts. Under the terms of the grant, the National World War I Museum raised 

$1.5 million with matching money of $500,000. Both the Education Endowment and 

the Acquisitions Endowment are restricted funds which can only be used to support 

their respective missions. 

Other major grants have been awarded to the Museum by the Ewing Marion 

Kauffman Foundation, Save America’s Treasures, U.S. Department of Education, 

and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 
30 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Alexander, for that testimony. 

I, too, want to offer my welcome to the York family. I think every 

American is familiar with that phenomenal story from World War 

I. So, welcome to your Nation’s capital, to the York family. 

We’ve been joined by Mr. Maurice A. Barboza, who’s the founder 

and CEO of the National Mall Liberty Fund DC, based here in 

Washington, DC. 

Mr. Barboza, welcome, and the floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF MAURICE A. BARBOZA, FOUNDER & CEO, 

NATIONAL MALL LIBERTY FUND D.C. 

Mr. BARBOZA. Thank you very much, Chairman Udall and members of—— 

Senator UDALL. If you’ll turn your mic on. I didn’t set a very good 

example, starting this panel, but—— 

Mr. BARBOZA. Thank you. 

Thank you for inviting me to testify on the National Liberty Memorial Act. We commend the sponsors, Senator Chris Dodd and 

Senator Charles Grassley, for 25 years of fidelity to the project. 

I’m the founder and CEO of the organization. Our purpose is to 

create a memorial to the unique circumstances and aspirations of 

African American soldiers, sailors, patriots, and freedom-seekers of 

the American Revolutionary War. This is not a war memorial. 

These men and women strove to become ‘‘We the People,’’ and to 

have children and grandchildren who were secure in their own skin 

and free to give of themselves to the Union. 

What stirred the slave at sunrise, could instruct Americans 

today. In 1988, Congress approved, and President Reagan signed, 

a bill setting aside the land on the mall. The history was declared 

a preeminent historical and lasting significance. However, in 2005, 

2 years after the moratorium was approved, the separate authorization of the sponsor expired and the site became unavailable. Although the memorial was not built, discoveries inspired by the exposure are meaningful and mounting. The long delay is revealing 

itself as a building block instead of a missed opportunity. 

Emerson said, ‘‘Liberty is a slow fruit. It is made difficult because freedom is the perfection of man.’’ Approval of this bill would 

reaffirm the worthiness of the history. The National Park Service 

and the new organization could then identify potential sites in Area 

1, outside of the reserve. 

The Sons of the American Revolution estimates that as many as 

10,000 African Americans fought for independence, serving largely 

in integrated units. They were killed, captured, and wounded. 

Slaves and free persons volunteered, in hopes of winning liberty 

and citizenship. Afterward, they lived exemplary lives, nurturing 

families and liberty. Some founded churches and self-help groups; 

these eventually spawned the civil rights movement. Many were 

farmers and artisans, others become preachers and entrepreneurs. 

A few even voted. Tens of thousands of slaves were emboldened to 

run away or petition for liberty. Some bartered chains for muskets. 

These declarations of independence are footprinted on roads, backwoods, and newspaper ads seeking to apprehend them in their 

tracks. 
31 

Books and scholarship about their tenacity have blossomed since 

1986. Records and the spirits abiding within them have been unshackled; they’re free and discoverable. Last year, the names of 

over 5,000 were released. ‘‘Forgotten Patriots’’ contains proof of 

their military service, and clues to spouses and children. Asa 

Snelling, Henry Bakeman, and Sergeant Isaac Brown are among 

dozens of patriots reunited with their families. Absalom Martin, a 

North Carolina soldier is one of them. Any one of your States’ citizens could be a descendant of the 10,000. Heirs to this legacy could 

number in the millions. Hundreds more will discover their inheritance over the next decade. The coming together of ancestor and descendant liberates both. 

I’ve seen women organize commemorations to convey ancient 

recollections to the living. I have seen Black and white families 

honor common ancestors and ancestors who knew one another. I 

have seen it bring grown men to tears. In Connecticut, Venture 

Smith and his son, a Revolutionary War soldier, is celebrated annually by his family and community. Historians, anthropologists, 

and genealogists will gather tomorrow in Hartford for the Documenting Venture Smith Conference. Citizens of Montrose, Iowa, 

celebrate the life of Cato Mead, a Connecticut soldier who moved 

to Lee County and died there in 1846. Citizens of Savannah, Georgia, and Haiti built a monument to Haitian soldiers who fought 

there with General Pulaski in 1779. Oscar Marion was honored in 

the capital in 2007, near his portrait with General Marion. 

The National Park Service has identified 103 Black soldiers at 

Bunker Hill and many others at other historic battles. 

Next year, the Cato Freedom Project, at Hartwick College in 

New York, will announce the National Freedom Descendants Commission. Students are writing papers, searching for descendants, 

and traipsing through woodlands to discover graves and ancestral 

lands. The history is required reading in the grade schools of New 

Jersey. A traveling exhibit, ‘‘Oh, Freedom,’’ commemorates the 

State’s Black patriots. 

A treasure map of the Nation’s birth—cherished principles is 

being redrawn. Americans of all races and points of view are finding common identity, common values, and common purpose. The 

day is coming when the spell cast over history by slavery and Jim 

Crow is broken. No longer will that warp the way an American 

sees himself and colors see one another. Lincoln cautioned, ‘‘A 

house divided against itself cannot stand.’’ Imagine this future memorial as a lighthouse guiding us to where all citizens are bound 

beyond doubt as ‘‘We the People.’’ In that aim is the preservation 

of liberty. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Barboza follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MAURICE A. BARBOZA, FOUNDER & CEO, LIBERTY FUND

D.C., ON S. 2738 

Chairman Udall, Senator Burr and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for 

inviting me to testify on S. 2738, the National Liberty Memorial Act. We commend 

the sponsors, Senator Chris Dodd and Senator Charles Grassley, for 25 years of fi-
32 

1This 501(c)(3) non-profit was incorporated in the District of Columbia in 2005. 

2Public Law 100-265, March 1988, declares the history of these patriots to be of preeminence: 

‘‘. . .slaves and free black persons who served as soldiers and sailors or provided civilian assistance during the American Revolution and to honor black men, women, and children who ran 

away from slavery or filed petitions with courts and legislatures seeking their freedom’’. 3 Black Revolutionary War Patriots Memorial, Public Law 99-558, October 1986. 

4Forgotten Patriots, African American and American Indian Patriots in the American Revolution, Washington, D.C.: Daughters of the American Revolution, 2008 (Required by membership 

settlement agreement of Lena Santos Ferguson, May 1984). 

delity. I am the founder and CEO of Liberty Fund D.C.1 Our purpose is to create 

a memorial to the unique circumstances and aspirations of African American soldiers, sailors, patriots and freedom seekers of the Revolutionary War. Above all, 

these men and women strove to become ‘‘We the People’’ and to have children and 

grandchildren who are secure in their own skin and free to give of themselves to 

the union. What stirred the slave at sunrise could instruct Americans today. 

In 1988, Congress approved, and President Reagan signed, a bill setting aside 

land on the Mall. Public Law 100-265, a prerequisite, declares the deeds of ‘‘preeminent historical and lasting significance.’’2 However, in 2005, two years after the 

moratorium was approved, the separate authorization of the sponsor expired and 

the site became unavailable.3 Although, the memorial was not built, discoveries inspired by the exposure are meaningful and mounting. The long delay is revealing 

itself as a building block, instead of a missed opportunity. Emerson said, ‘‘liberty 

is slow fruit. It is never cheap. It is made difficult because freedom is the accomplishment and perfection of man.’’ Approval of S. 2738 would reaffirm the worthiness of the history. The National Park Service and the new organization could then 

identify potential sites in Area 1—outside of the Reserve. 

The Sons of the American Revolution estimates that as many as 10,000 African 

Americans fought for Independence. Serving largely in integrated units, they were 

killed, captured and wounded, from 1775 to 1783. Slaves and free persons volunteered in the hope of winning liberty and citizenship. Afterward, they lived exemplary lives, nurturing families and the tree of liberty. Some founded churches and 

self-help groups. These eventually spawned the Civil Rights Movement. Many were 

farmers and artisans; others became preachers and entrepreneurs. A few even 

voted. Tens of thousands of slaves were emboldened to run away or petition for liberty. Some bartered chains for muskets. These declarations of independence are 

foot-printed on roads, backwoods and newspaper ads seeking to apprehend them in 

their tracks. 

Books and scholarship about their tenacity have blossomed since 1986. Records, 

and the spirits abiding within them, have been unshackled; they are free and discoverable. Last year, the names of over 5,000 were released, after 24 years. Forgotten Patriots4 contains proof of their military service, residences and clues to spouses 

and children. Asa Snelling, Henry Bakeman and Sergeant Isaac Brown are among 

dozens of patriots reunited with their families. Absalom Martin, a North Carolina 

soldier, is one of them. Any one of your state’s citizens could be a descendant of the 

10,000. Heirs to this legacy could number in the millions. Hundreds more will discover their inheritance over the next decade. The coming together of ancestor and 

descendant liberates both. I have seen women organize commemorations to convey 

ancient recollections to the living. I have seen black and white families honor common ancestors and ancestors who knew one another. I have seen it bring grown men 

to tears. 

In Connecticut, Venture Smith and his son, a Revolutionary War soldier, are celebrated annually by his family and community. Historians, anthropologists and genealogists will gather tomorrow in Hartford for the Documenting Venture Smith Conference. Citizens of Montrose, Iowa, celebrate the life of Cato Mead, a Connecticut 

soldier, who moved to Lee County and died there in 1846. Citizens of Savannah, 

Georgia and Haiti built a monument to Haitian soldiers who fought there with Gen. 

Pulaski in 1779. Oscar Marion was honored in the Capitol near his portrait with 

Gen. Marion. The National Park Service has identified 103 black soldiers at Bunker 

Hill. 

In April 2010, the Cato Freedom Project at Hartwick College in New York will 

announce the National Freedom Descendants Commission. Students are writing papers, searching for descendants and traipsing through woodlands to discover graves 

and ancestral lands. The history is required reading in the grade schools of New 

Jersey. A traveling exhibit, ‘‘Oh Freedom!’’, commemorates the state’s black patriots. 

A treasure map of the nation’s birth and cherished principles is being redrawn. 
33 

5 In March 1984, Congress approved Public Law 98-245 to encourage commemorative and educational activities to honor the black patriots. President Reagan signed the Act in a ceremony 

in the Oval Office. This precursor to the authority for the Black Revolutionary War Patriots Memorial offers thanks to descendants. 

Americans of all races and points-of-view are finding common identity, common values, and common purpose.5

The day is coming when the spell cast over history by slavery and Jim Crow is 

broken. No longer will they warp the way an American sees himself and colors see 

one another. Lincoln cautioned, ‘‘a house divided against itself cannot stand.’’ Imagine this future memorial as a lighthouse guiding us to where all citizens are bound 

beyond doubt as ‘‘We the people.’’ In that aim is the preservation of liberty. 

[Additional materials submitted have been retained in subcommittee files.] 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Barboza, for those powerful 

words. 

We now turn to Mr. Harry G. Robinson III. He’s board of directors, the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, Washington, DC. 

Mr. Robinson, welcome, the floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF HARRY G. ROBINSON, III, BOARD OF 

DIRECTORS, VIETNAM VETERANS MEMORIAL FUND 

Mr. ROBINSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I’m Harry Robinson, currently appointed as the Silcott Chair of 

Architecture and Dean Emeritus at Howard University. 

I’m joined today by Jan Scruggs, the young man who had the 

idea of The Wall, and actually built it. 

I speak to you today as a member of the Board of Vietnam Veterans Memorial fund and as a combat veteran of the war in Vietnam, for which I was awarded the Bronze Star and the Purple 

Heart. 

My purpose here today is to support and extension of H.R. 3689, 

the authorization to build the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Education Center, from the year 2010 to 2014. I offer a special perspective on this request. I was twice appointed by the President to 

serve on the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, served as his chair and 

vice chair of that body. Suffice it to say, I understand the requirements of normal flow of approvals for projects on the Mall. 

In a—November 2003, Congress passed legislation, subsequently 

signed by the President, authorizing that a visitor center be built 

at or near the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. The Memorial Fund 

starting working on the project immediately. By February 2004, we 

had commissioned a comprehensive site study and environmental 

analysis to determine the most suitable site for the Mall—for the 

center. We retained design professionals who cared deeply about 

the National Mall, who had deep involvement in its development. 

Our requirements and theirs were to conduct a study that respected and protected the Mall’s historic character and national 

heritage. 

Subsequently, the Fund held a national design process to choose 

an architect and an exhibit designer. The selection committee chose 

Polshek Partnership Architects and Ralph Appelbaum Associates, 

a team that had worked together on many award-winning projects. 

Supporting this effort, we formed a National Advisory Board to 

develop recommendations about purpose and content. We chose a 

broad range of U.S. citizens for this committee—veterans, distinguished former military leaders, authors, journalists, educators, 
34 

and sociologists—who would guide us in the best way to tell story 

of the Vietnam War in the Center. 

We also began meeting with the Federal commissions responsible 

for overseeing all the structures built on the National Mall. This 

is where the delays began. Over the period of more than 4 years, 

the Fund and its consultants were subjected to extreme and often 

unwarranted delays and disruptive staff maneuvering, including 

the 2005 December removal of the Education Center from the agenda of NCPC. At every turn, the Fund and its consultants and the 

National Park Service cooperated in good faith with the agencies. 

We conducted and paid for every study requested and were forthcoming in changes to the concept design. To date, we have spent 

more than $1 million on concept design fees directly related to concept design proposals and revisions, and an $80,000 environmental 

study. 

Our response to delays was measured, passed by the House, and 

considered by the Senate, to end delays. It was only at the presence 

of this pending action that the site was approved by NCPC, nearly 

a year and a half from the first meeting with those agencies. I 

should note that the changes to the Memorial Fund that we were 

willing to make have been sufficient, including reducing the size of 

the structure, removing skylights, redirecting walkways, and reorienting the building on the site. We have also reduced the size of 

the structure significantly. 

Most recently, fortunately, we had a meeting with NCPC and 

CFA together, and we are on track to move forward, with their consent. 

This committee, quite appropriately, needs to know why we are 

asking for an extension. Here is one answer: Our good-faith efforts 

to meet the unprecedented demands of the Federal commissions 

have cost us considerable time and money that we need to recoup. 

There’s another reason. We are in the middle of the worst recession 

our Nation has experienced in decades. I don’t have to tell any of 

you the challenges that every citizen is facing, from families trying 

to make ends meet to small businesses trying to survive in tough 

times. 

But, in the midst of this, there is good news to report. In spite 

of the economy, people believe in this project enough to put their 

money behind it. We have raised more than $3.5 million in 2009. 

This includes a $2.5-million pledge that is not only the largest individual pledge for the Center, it’s the largest that the Fund has ever 

received. These pledges have reinvigorated our efforts. We have 

raised nearly $25 million in donations and in-kind gifts, and we estimate that it will take 85 million to build the Center. 

Momentum for this project is also building because of our new 

corporate chairman, San Antonio Spurs owner, Peter M. Holt, who 

actively pushed the movement forward on all fronts. He is joined 

by a robust leadership that includes seven Governors from Texas, 

Pennsylvania, Virginia, Louisiana, Florida, Georgia. We have 

pledged to gather support for the Center in their States. The AFLCIO and its building construction trades department have endorsed 

this project, as has the VFW, which has pledged $1 million. Of importance, it has been determined that the construction of this center will generate 200 new jobs. 
35 

When Congress passed this bill, authorizing the Center in 2003, 

you approved the final language unanimously, in both the House 

and Senate. We ask you to join the House in approving H.R. 3689. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Robinson follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HARRY G. ROBINSON, III, VIETNAM VETERANS MEMORIAL

FUND, ON H.R. 3689 

Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee—good afternoon. My name is Harry 

Robinson. I am a trained architect and city planner, currently serving as professor 

of urban design and dean emeritus of Howard University. I am also the principal 

of my own international design firm, TRG Consulting. 

I am here today to talk about the Education Center at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, and I offer a unique perspective. Twice I was appointed by the president to 

serve on the Commission of Fine Arts—one of the organizations you will be hearing 

about today. In fact, I was CFA’s chairman. I am also a long-time member of the 

board of directors of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, the group that is working with the National Park Service to build the Education Center. I am myself a 

Vietnam veteran, having served in the U.S. Army from 1966-68, including a tour 

of duty in Vietnam, where I received the Bronze Star and the Purple Heart. 

I stand before you today, wearing all of these hats, to ask that you support HR 

3689 to extend the authorization deadline for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Education Center for four years—from 2010 to 2014. 

You are probably wondering why this project needs an extension. I’d like to give 

you some background. 

In November 2003, Congress passed legislation, subsequently signed by the president, authorizing that a visitors’ center be built ‘‘at or near’’ the Vietnam Veterans 

Memorial. The Memorial Fund started working on the project immediately. By February 2004, we had commissioned a site study and environmental analysis to determine the most suitable site for the center. The survey evaluated visitor circulation, 

vegetation, vistas, historic landmarks, sound and visual activity, as well as pedestrian and traffic counts. In short, every possible way that the visitor center would 

affect the area around it was evaluated. 

And we chose people who care deeply about the National Mall to conduct this 

study: JC Cummings, the architect of record for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial; 

as well as Henry Arnold and George Dickie, who designed Constitution Gardens, 

where the Vietnam Veterans Memorial is located. We were confident that this team 

would not recommend a site that was in any way detrimental to the National 

Mall—and, indeed, that was one of our original stipulations in choosing a site. 

The Memorial Fund also held a national design contest to choose an architect and 

exhibit designer. We formed an Advisory Board to give us recommendations about 

displays. We chose a broad range of Americans for this committee: veterans, former 

military leaders, authors, journalists, educators and sociologists who could guide us 

in the best way to tell the story of the Vietnam War in this center. 

We also began meeting with the federal commissions responsible for overseeing 

any new structures built on the National Mall. This is where the delays began. Once 

the results of our site survey were completed, we presented the results, along with 

our recommendation, to the National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission. After 

the first meeting, which was held in March 2005, the Commission asked for further 

study of three sites. After the second meeting the following May, the Commission 

gave approval to two sites: the site on Henry Bacon Drive for which we ultimately 

won approval, and a site within the Department of Interior South building. 

CFA approved the Henry Bacon Drive site at a September 2005 meeting ‘‘subject 

to conditions of architectural development.’’ While the Memorial Fund and the National Park Service had reasonable expectations that NCPC would follow suit, instead, it deadlocked on every vote on the subject after lengthy debate during an October 2005 meeting. In the end, NCPC asked for further study of the front lawn of 

the Interior South Building, even though the Secretary of the Interior had removed 

this building from consideration the previous June. In addition, they asked for further study of one other site and ‘‘program information’’ for the preferred site. In 

other words, although site approval had not been given, NCPC was asking the Memorial Fund to provide design details for the building it wanted to place there— 

a building that could not be designed until the final location was known. 

While the Memorial Fund and the National Park Service prepared to make a 

presentation to NCPC at its December 2005 meeting, we were shocked to find that 

the Education Center had been stricken from the agenda, with the Commission say-
36 

ing it wanted an environmental study completed before it would consider the site 

favored by the Memorial Fund. 

So, working in good faith with NCPC, the Memorial Fund hired an engineering 

firm to conduct a thorough environmental study on two sites at or near the Memorial to comply with the request. The study took several months to complete and cost 

$80,000. 

In the end, it nearly took an act of Congress to get site approval for the Education 

Center. In spite of the fact that the Memorial Fund and National Park Service had 

submitted to every request of every federal commission they met with, there was 

no progress. In March 2006, the House passed a measure that would end the delays 

in site approval by a wide margin, and the Senate began considering the measure 

the following May. It was only then that NCPC was moved to grant site approval 

in August 2006—nearly three years after Congress had approved the idea of a visitor center, and nearly a year and a half from the time that the Memorial Fund 

first met with the federal commissions. 

All of that time and money spent—and it was just for site approval. 

The complex work began with the design process. Congress mandated that the 

structure be built ‘‘underground.’’ And indeed, everyone involved with this project, 

including the Memorial Fund and National Park Service, have been sensitive to preserving the historic vistas near that end of the National Mall. On the other hand, 

we also need to ensure that our visitors—especially the disabled, and veterans who 

may have PTSD issues, feel comfortable and safe in the visitor center environment. 

We are fortunate to have on our team one of the world’s leading architectural 

firms, Polshek Partnership Architects. These award-winning architects, led by Jim 

Polshek, have designed a number of nationally celebrated buildings, as well as some 

highly successful underground spaces. In Polshek’s capable hands, the daunting 

challenge of an underground visitor center was managed with innovation and creativity. 

To be sure, we still had differences to work out with the federal commissions. But, 

during meetings with both CFA and NCPC, commissioners were complimentary of 

the efforts of Jim Polshek and his team, noting that if any architect could take a 

set of almost impossible conditions and make them work, it was Polshek. 

In August 2006, CFA and NCPC jointly issued a set of 15 design guidelines for 

the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Education Center. While these were guidelines and 

not binding requirements, the Memorial Fund and National Park Service took these 

suggestions seriously and worked to incorporate as many as possible into the subsequent building plans. 

By the spring of 2007, our architects had developed three different plans for how 

an underground center could be achieved. We took these plans to CFA and NCPC 

in informal meetings to get their feedback, so we would know how we should proceed. We worked in good faith with these commissions every step of the way, and 

this good faith work paid off. CFA gave us design concept approval in October 2007 

and NCPC, while it does not vote for concept approval, indicated that the design 

should move forward. 

We continue to work with CFA and NCPC to refine our design of the visitor center and work through the approval process. We conducted informational and formal 

presentations of our latest design earlier this year, receiving feedback from both 

groups and acting on those recommendations. I should note that the changes the 

Memorial Fund has been willing to make have been significant, including reducing 

the size of the structure, removing skylights, redirecting walkways and reorienting 

the building on the site. At every meeting, we have proven our willingness to listen 

and accept the commissioners’ advice. Informal meetings with the commissioners 

have shown us we are on track and moving forward. 

I think everyone involved with this project has been relieved that the delays and 

disagreements of the site approval phase have not resurfaced during the design approval phase. However, it cannot be ignored that site approval ate up hundreds of 

thousands of dollars and years of effort that could have been better used later. 

This committee, quite appropriately, needs to know why we are asking for an extension, and here is one answer: our good faith efforts to meet the unprecedented 

demands of the federal commissions have cost us time and money that we need to 

recoup. 

There’s another reason: we are in the middle of the worst economy our nation has 

experienced in decades. I don’t have to tell any of you the challenges that every 

American is facing—from the family trying to make ends meet to the corporation 

trying to survive in tough times. All of this affects nonprofit organizations, like the 

Memorial Fund, as we try to raise money for our various programs. The economy 

has affected our fundraising for the center as well. 
37 

But in the midst of all of this, there is good news to report. In spite of the economy, people believe in this project enough to put their money behind it. We have 

raised more than $3.5 million in 2009 alone. This included a $2.5 million pledge 

that is not only the largest individual pledge the center has received, but also the 

largest individual donation the Memorial Fund itself has ever received. These 

pledges have reinvigorated our fundraising efforts. We have raised nearly $25 million in donations and in-kind gifts, and we estimate it will take $85 million in total 

to build the center. 

Momentum for this project is also building because of our new campaign chairman, San Antonio Spurs owner Peter M. Holt, who has actively pushed the movement forward on all fronts. He is joined by a robust leadership team that includes 

seven governors, from Texas, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Louisiana, Florida, Georgia 

and New Mexico, who have pledged to gather support for the center in their states. 

The AFL-CIO, and its Building and Construction Trades Department, have endorsed the project—and many veterans’ organizations are behind us as well. In fact, 

VFW pledged $1 million. We feel that this is a good indication of how much support 

we have from all facets of the American public. 

When Congress passed the bill authorizing the Education Center in 2003, you approved the final language unanimously in both the House and the Senate. We took 

that as overwhelming evidence that Congress wants this important learning facility 

built, so future generations can remember and honor the sacrifices of those who 

served in Vietnam. The Education Center was conceived as a way to help put faces 

to the thousands of names on The Wall, to educate future generations about these 

honorable men and women who gave everything for their country and to give a 

glimpse into their lives. Help us keep the momentum going by giving us more time. 

We respectfully ask you to approve HR 3689 at the committee level, and ask for 

your help to provide for its consideration on the floor of the Senate. 

Thank you. 

[Additional documents and graphics submitted have been retained in subcommittee files.] 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Robinson. 

If I might, I’d thank you for your service, on behalf of all the 

members of this subcommittee and the Senate in general. Your 

story is one of many that inspires us. Thank you for being here 

today. 

Mr. ROBINSON. Thank you. 

Senator UDALL. I’d now like to turn to Mr. David Madden, who 

hails from Black Mountain, North Carolina. 

Mr. Madden, the floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF DAVID MADDEN, CHAIR, LOUISIANA ABRAHAM 

LINCOLN BICENTENNIAL COMMISSION, BLACK MOUNTAIN, NC 

Mr. MADDEN. Thank you, Senator Udall. 

My testimony comes out of this background. I was founding director of the United States Civil War Center, present chair of the 

Louisiana Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Commission, and the author of 40 books, including some Civil War history. 

Profoundly convinced of the enduring truth that, in the words of 

the late venerable historian Shelby Foote, ‘‘The Civil War is the 

crossroads of our being,’’ I initiated, several years ago, the grassroots effort that has led to S. 1838. Shelby Foote put the emphasis 

on ‘‘is,’’ not on ‘‘was,’’ as I do today, because the 4 years of battles, 

which begin and end, produced almost 12 years of reconstruction, 

the legacy of which Americans in the North and in the South have 

experienced, to this very day. 

To study, meditate upon, and commemorate the Civil War 

throughout the years 2011–2015 is to understand 150 years of 

aftershocks as we also become more informed and aware of the 
38 

positive effects, one of which is that African Americans now hold 

a multitude of high offices throughout this land. 

I understand that the commission described in this bill will ensure a suitable national observance of the sesquicentennial of the 

Civil War by cooperating with and assisting State and national organizations, encouraging inclusiveness and appropriately recognizing the experiences and points of view of all people affected by 

the Civil War, and by providing assistance in the development of 

programs, projects, and a vast array of activities about the Civil 

War and reconstruction that have lasting educational value. 

When I created the U.S. Civil War Center, 15 years ago, I envisioned a sesquicentennial that would be far richer in possibilities 

than the centennial, given the fact that we are a far different Nation. A sesquicentennial would look at the war through the perspectives of every academic discipline, profession, and occupation, 

greatly enhanced by the perspectives of African Americans, Native 

Americans, and other ethnic minorities, and civilians, generally, especially women and children. By overemphasizing the battles, 

Americans have missed the war’s many other facets, including the 

national effects of reconstruction. 

Our emotions, our imaginations, and our intellects have not yet 

completed the unfinished business to which Lincoln referred in the 

Gettysburg Address. The 4-year commemoration of the centennial 

of the Civil War, in the years 1961 to 1965, had a special relevance 

back then, and produced a national interest in the war that has 

continued to this day. The sesquicentennial provides a second time, 

and the last time, for Americans living today to deepen and broaden our understanding of the causes and effects of the war. Or, as 

the bill states, ‘‘The sesquicentennial presents a significant opportunity for Americans to recall and reflect upon the Civil War and 

its legacy in a spirit of reconciliation and reflection.’’ 

As even more special time—an even more special time exists for 

us today as we try to understand the Civil War of other countries 

in which we are engaged and the numerous other civil wars worldwide that demand our attention and our concern. The historical 

context for our Civil War is, then, global. For almost every Nation 

throughout history has forged its being in civil war. 

Civil War Web sites throughout the country reveal that our Civil 

War is helping other nations understand their own civil wars. 

President Abraham Lincoln’s primary goal was to unite the Nation, 

not just for its own sake, but also for the good of all nations. He 

envisioned the leadership that our democracy would provide for the 

world as a sacred obligation. It is, therefore, only fitting, in our favored time, that, following its creation of the commissions charged 

with commemorating the bicentennials of the Nation, and, currently, of the great President Lincoln, and the centennial of the 

Civil War, the Congress of these United States create a Civil War 

Sesquicentennial Commission to support the efforts of the States, 

North and South, that are now planning, or that have already created, their own commissions to make a 4-year revisit to the crossroads of our being. 

Thank you, sir. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Madden follows:] 
39 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DAVID MADDEN, CHAIR, LOUISIANA ABRAHAM LINCOLN

BICENTENNIAL COMMISSION, BLACK MOUNTAIN, NC, ON S. 1838 

My name is David Madden, founding director of the United States Civil War Center at Louisiana State University, present Chair of the Louisiana Abraham Lincoln 

Bicentennial Commission, and the author of 40 books, including Civil War history. 

Profoundly convinced of the enduring truth that, in the words of the late venerable historian Shelby Foote, the Civil War is the crossroads of our being, I initiated, 

several years ago, the grass roots effort that has led to Senate Bill 1838. Shelby 

Foote put the emphasis on ‘‘is’’, not ‘‘was,’’ as I do today because the four years of 

battles that began and ended produced almost 12 years of Reconstruction, the legacy 

of which Americans, in the North and in the South, have experienced ever since. 

To study, meditate upon, and commemorate the Civil War throughout the years 

2011-2015 is to understand 150 years of aftershocks as we also become more informed and aware of positive effects, one of which is that African Americans now 

hold a multitude of high offices throughout this land. 

I understand that the Commission described in this bill will ensure a suitable national observance of the sesquicentennial of the Civil War by cooperating with and 

assisting States and national organizations with programs and activities, encouraging inclusiveness and appropriately recognizing the experiences and points of 

view of all people affected by the Civil War, and by providing assistance in the development of programs, projects, and a vast range of activities about the Civil War 

and Reconstruction that have lasting educational value. 

When I created the United States Civil War Center over ten years ago, I envisioned a Sesquicentennial that would be far richer in possibilities than the Centennial, given the fact that we are a far different nation. A Sesquicentennial would look 

at the war through the perspectives of every academic discipline, every profession, 

every occupation, greatly enhanced by the perspectives of African Americans, Native 

Americans, other ethnic minorities, and civilians generally, while emphasizing 

women and children. By over emphasizing the battles, Americans have missed the 

war’s many other facets, including the effects of Reconstruction, for 150 years. 

Our emotions, our imaginations, and our intellects have not yet completed the 

‘‘unfinished business’’ to which Lincoln referred in his Gettysburg Address. 

The four-year commemoration of the Centennial of the Civil War in the years 

1961-1965 had a special relevance and produced a national interest in the war that 

has continued to this day. The Sesquicentennial provides a second time and the last 

time for Americans living today to deepen and broaden our understanding of the 

causes and effects of the war. Or, as the bill states: ‘‘The sesquicentennial of the 

Civil War presents a significant opportunity for Americans to recall and reflect upon 

the Civil War and its legacy in a spirit of reconciliation and reflection.’’ 

An even more special time exists for us today as we try to understand the civil 

wars of other countries in which we are engaged and the numerous other civil wars 

worldwide that demand our attention and our concern. The historical context for our 

civil war is global, for almost every nation throughout history has forged its being 

in civil war. The United States Civil War Center’s website reveals that our civil war 

is helping other nations understand their own. President Abraham Lincoln’s primary goal was to unite the nation, not just for its own sake but also for the good 

of all nations. He envisioned the leadership that our democracy would provide for 

the world as a sacred obligation. 

It is therefore only fitting in our favored time that, following its creation of the 

commissions charged with commemorating the bicentennials of the nation and currently of its great President Lincoln and the Centennial of the Civil War, the Congress of these United States create a Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission to 

support the efforts of the states north and south that are now planning or that have 

already created their own commissions to make a four year re-visit to the crossroads 

of our being. 

Over a decade ago, Gabor Boritt, founding director of the Gettysburg Civil War 

Institute, and I, as founding Director of the United States Civil War Center, seeing 

the need to voice a grass-roots call for a Sesquicentennial Commission, drafted passages for the bill, first introduced by Senator Breaux of Louisiana. 

Hard times and wars were probably the reason the bill has languished. But we 

remain convinced that even, or especially, in hard times, the positive effects of these 

commemorative activities are well worth the resources of towns and cities, states, 

and the federal government. 

After resigning my directorship of the Civil War Center at LSU to finish writing 

the Civil War novel, out of the research for which I conceived the Center, I remained committed to urging the creation of the Commission. In 2007, aware that 

the Sesquicentennial was drawing nigh, I created, in the office of Louisiana Sec-
40 

retary of State Jay Dardenne, the National Civil War Sesquicentennial Initiative; 

its mission is to stimulate and direct efforts to plan and facilitate the commemoration. Connecting with all Civil War organizations, I discovered that, with time passing and fearing that no commission was forthcoming, the leaders of most organizations were disheartened. 

One year later, I am glad to report progress. Several states have taken the idea 

of commemorating the Sesquicentennial of the Civil War seriously. Some are working with their neighbors while others working alone. Virginia, Maryland, and North 

Carolina each have strong state organizations and are cooperating in extended trail 

and tourist marketing. Pennsylvania and Virginia have established a regional driving route study called The Journey Through Hallowed Ground along Route 15/20, 

the Old Carolina Road, from Gettysburg to Charlottesville. West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia have created the John Brown 150th Anniversary 

Quad-State Committee, which effectively begins the Sesquicentennial activities. 

Maryland has created the Hear of the Civil War Heritage Area. Connecticut has created a Sesquicentennial Commemoration group to honor the role its soldiers played. 

New Jersey and Ohio have created similar bodies. West Virginia now has the Civil 

War Task Force to prepare for the celebration. Arkansas created its commission and 

has since divided the state into regions that focus on campaigns fought in the state 

as well as events for each year of the war. Missouri has created the Civil War Heritage Foundation, which has similar goals. An initial effort through the Louisiana 

Secretary of State’s Office has begun limited planning in the Pelican State. Texas 

is beginning the process of establish historic trails and byways. All of these efforts 

have been created without a great deal of synergy. Each can be strengthened and 

augmented by a central planning structure and clearing house—a Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission. The diverse nature of not only each state, but of their efforts put forward during the Civil War exemplifies the rich complexities of the subject and the positive challenge of the task ahead. 

Not yet in formation are several states that were heavily involved in the war and 

that may be in special need of federal guidance and assistance. However, the fact 

that some states and even regions have already secured some funds and set plans 

in motion will lessen the need for federal funds. 

The effectiveness of states already involved will be greatly enhanced by the leadership of the federal commission, the existence of which may also act to encourage 

other states to create activities. The Civil War and its aftermath affected every state 

in the Union and its territories, including California and even Montana. 

Likely activities of the Sesquicentennial extend across a broad spectrum, consisting of commemorative ceremonies, speeches, lectures, Civil War heritage trails, 

preservation projects, exhibits, plays, movies, and other mass media presentations, 

newspaper and periodical articles, and, of course, books. Many very fine books came 

out of the Centennial years, as during the current Lincoln Bicentennial. Among universities whose presses are known for publishing Civil War books are LSU, Mississippi, University of Arkansas, University of Kansas, Southern Illinois University, 

University of Tennessee, University of Georgia, and Kent State, which also publishes a periodical. 

Since the Civil War, many little known places and events of the war have been 

further explored or discovered. For instance, the steamboat Sultana, carrying homeward about 2,000 Union soldiers released from Cataba and Andersonville prisons, 

exploded in the dark, in the rain several miles above Memphis; over 1500 soldiers 

and about 200 civilians drowned in the worst maritime disaster in American history, worse than the Titanic, as President Lincoln’s funeral train was crossing the 

country. Even after four books and a documentary have appeared, most Americans 

remain unaware. This event is a symbolic expression, embodying every adjective for 

sad loss, of the Civil War. Missing so far is a national conceptual imagination that 

places the Sultana disaster in a tragic light. Meanwhile, the darkness of that night 

still hangs, almost 150 years deepening, over the smoke, the screams and the prayers of the victims and the compassionate cries of the rescuers, some of them Confederate soldiers who were also returning home. Only the light of an extraordinary 

imagination can unvex and raise this unique and complexly meaningful event from 

the bottom of the Father of Waters. 

The Sesquicentennial will call attention to other places and events. 

The Centennial gave a boost to longtime efforts to create a state park at Port 

Hudson, Louisiana, which kept the Union army from coming down river to New Orleans after Vicksburg fell; even so, its fame is not widespread. Efforts that are well 

underway to bring well-deserved attention to the vital Red River Campaign may 

well be successful if given encouragement and support by the Sesquicentennial Commission. 
41 

The siege at Fort Sanders in Knoxville, Tennessee and generally, the war in the 

southern Appalachian region are little known. 

A Sesquicentennial Commission would help speed up the effort now underway to 

create a Knoxville area Civil War Center. An effort in the Office of Louisiana’s Secretary of State to create a Civil War and Reconstruction Center is now in the planning stage. 

The Commission could encourage small towns to discover and make known as 

tourist attractions Civil War events in their history, thus stimulating their economies. A good example is Black Mountain, North Carolina, about which it is little 

known, even by its citizens, that so many black slaves escaping from South Carolina 

made their way to Black Mountain that its population grew from 0.3% African 

American, to over 89% African American. 

Very seldom is the fact cited that 30,000 civilians were Civil War casualties. 

Interest in the American Civil War is worldwide. The United States Civil War 

Center website has received an astonishing number of hits from nations around the 

world, from Israel to Malaysia. Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright told 

me that she wishes she had had in hand the book I am writing on the nature and 

history of civil wars worldwide when she was Ambassador to the UN. Many parallels are readily apparent between our Civil War and The Taiping Rebellion, a 

widespread civil war in China from 1850 to 1864, led by Christian convert Hong 

Xiuquan, against the ruling Qing Dynasty. To understand our Civil War is, then, 

to understand ourselves as we are; to understand the Chinese Civil War is to understand the Chinese today. 

If we think of the Civil War Sesquicentennial as four years of many kinds of occasions for revisiting not only the history of the Civil War but also for revisiting our 

entire history, we will see, as Lincoln often did, how it reflects the legacy of the Declaration of Independence and the consequent Revolutionary War and the legacy of 

the era in which the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment 

were forged. The legacies of those events often played a role in successive phases 

of the Civil War era. 

We will see how issues dramatized throughout the pre-War and the War years 

affected the conduct of the long, punitive Reconstruction era, affected by the fact 

that the assassinated President could not pursue his carefully crafted non-punitive 

plan for Reconstruction. 

We will see how prolonged economic, racial, political, and social problems in the 

former Confederate states put a drag on the progress of democracy in the nation 

as a whole throughout times of both prosperity and adversity, and through the 

Spanish American war, two world wars, the Korean and Vietnam wars, and the civil 

rights era. 

And we will see ways in which the Sesquicentennial will open up fresh perspectives on our involvement in the Iraq and Afghanistan ‘‘civil wars.’’ How that may 

happen, we will see, if we remember how the discussions, debates, and books during 

the conduct of the Civil War Centennial years of 1961 through 1965 influenced the 

activities of the civil rights movement in ways both negative and positive. 

In such considerations of history, we made and we shall make history. 

Historian Shelby Foote also said, ‘‘There are two sins for which America can never 

atone—slavery and reconstruction.’’ Even though he was a Southerner, he stressed 

America, North and South in that pronouncement. Lincoln made the first great effort to atone for slavery; it is clear that we, both North and South, would not have 

to atone for Reconstruction had Lincoln lived, newly re-elected with enhanced power 

to promulgate his own plan. A major change in the study of the Civil War since the 

Centennial is an increased emphasis upon the effect of the war: Reconstruction. The 

one can most meaningfully studied within the context of the other. Most obviously, 

the effect of the war upon John Wilkes Booth was to assassinate President Lincoln 

and that act affected the nature of Reconstruction. The legacy of Reconstruction is 

in force in our daily lives. 

An understanding of the causes and effects of the Civil War in the context of these 

very changed United States of America will make the democratic vistas of our future brighter, will perhaps lead us at long, long last into an era of reconciliation 

between north and south and conciliation between white and African Americans. 

The Centennial’s published report to the Congress and a recent book, Troubled 

Commemoration by Robert J. Cook, provide guidance for a Sesquicentennial Commission by describing the organization’s structure and its procedures, the trials and 

tribulations of the Centennial, and the ways and extent to which they were conducted and overcome. 

Those books also clearly show how very different the Sesquicentennial must and 

may be. With the guidance of the African American Civil War Museum in Washington, along with many other organizations, the participation of African Americans 
42 

will be stronger, as will that of Native Americans and other minorities, including 

Latinos, Asians, Jews, and Americans of every national origin. 

Today, our democratic spirit of compromise and practices of resolution make disputes among all participants far less likely. For instance, despite infrequent and 

strictly localized debates over the Confederate battle flag (often replaced by the far 

less problematic Confederate states flag), the Southern states are so thoroughly 

transformed, economically, politically, and socially as to make predictions of greater 

cooperation with Northern states and with African Americans credible. 

The following list of the U. S. Civil War Center’s advisory board members who 

have served over the years will give some indication of the sustained support for 

the creation of a Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission: 

Gabor Boritt, Lincoln scholar and Founding Director of the Civil War Institute at Gettysburg, sister organization to the USCWC; James I. ‘‘Bud’’ 

Robertson, Jr., formerly chair of the Civil War Centennial board, present 

director of the Virginia Center for Civil War Studies, John Hope Franklin, 

renowned African American program historian (deceased); Shelby Foote, 

Pulitzer Prize-winning novelist and historian (deceased); Ted Turner; Ron 

Maxwell, author and director of Gettysburg and Gods and Generals; Jeff 

Shaara, author of Gods and Generals, two other Civil War novels and several others depicting America’s wars, donor of the Michael Shaara prize for 

Civil War novels; Glenn Seaborg, Nobel Prize winner in physics (deceased); 

William Davis, author of 40 books of mostly Civil War history, director of 

Virginia Center for Civil War Studies; Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, sports legend, 

writing a Civil War novel; Rita Dove, African American former U. S. Poet 

Laureate; Frank Magill, publisher, who pledged a million dollars to establish the USCWC at LSU (deceased, replaced by his son); E. O. Wilson, Pulitzer Prize winning biologist; Ken Burns, renowned director of the epic documentary The Civil War; T. Michael Parrish, Civil War historian who first 

proposed the creation of the Sesquicentennial Commission; John Simon, 

Grant historian and director of the Grant Foundation; Ed Bearss, chief historian of the National Park Service; Waylon Jennings, composer-singer of 

Civil War songs (deceased); Tom Wicker, journalist, novelist. 

The nature of the Civil War, its causes and effects, and its status as the crossroads of our being, make the work of a Sesquicentennial Commission peculiarly well 

situated to make American citizens aware of their entire history. Our generation 

has already been favored with major commemorations: The Civil War Centennial, 

the Bicentennial of our nation, the Louisiana Purchase Bicentennial. Nevertheless, 

ignorance of our history, from Plymouth Rock to Iraq, is a reality of very serious 

national concern. For instance, despite the good work of the Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Commission and several state commissions, the hard fact is that many 

Americans, among them the well educated, do not know, within three months of the 

end, that the Bicentennial is underway. All the greater was and is the need for the 

current Lincoln Commission and in the following year for the Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission. 

A major focus of most activities during the four years of the Civil War sesquicentennial, as it has been for the one-year Lincoln Bicentennial, will be upon the 

children, in schools and in other public venues. Teaching history to our children is 

made all the more difficult in a context of adult ignorance of history. A nation regarded as the leader of the world must not act out of ignorance of its own history. 

Knowing its own history will make this nation as world leader much more credible 

and effective. We would do well to close that sequence of commemorations in our 

time with the Civil War Sesquicentennial. 

[Additional information submitted has been retained in subcommittee files.] 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Madden. I know Dr. Foote would 

have been thrilled to hear what you just shared with us. As I 

glanced over your testimony, the story of the Sultana, for example, 

is one that could be told more broadly. 

Mr. MADDEN. Oh, yes. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for your testimony here today. 

Mr. MADDEN. Thank you, sir. 

Senator UDALL. We now turn to Mr. Edwin Fountain, who’s the 

director of the World War I Memorial Foundation here in Washington, DC. 
43 

Mr. Fountain, welcome, and the floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF EDWIN FOUNDATION, DIRECTOR, 

WORLD WAR I MEMORIAL FOUNDATION 

Mr. FOUNTAIN. Thank you, Chairman Udall. 

My name is Edwin Fountain. I’m an attorney in private practice 

here in Washington, the grandson of two World War I veterans, 

and a cofounder of the Foundation. 

In addition to the support of Senators Webb, Thune, and Rockefeller, I’d like to acknowledge the other cosponsors of the bill, Senators Barrasso, Burr, Inhofe, Lieberman, Brownback, Byrd, and 

Tim Johnson, and I’m advised that Senators Inouye and DeMint 

will also be signing on to the bill. We also have the support of the 

American Legion Department of the District of Columbia, which 

holds a annual Memorial Day commemoration at the DC War Memorial. Two days ago, the District of Columbia city council passed 

a resolution in support of S. 2097, which I would be happy to pass 

up to staff to be entered into the record. 

Senator UDALL. We’ll introduce that in the record, without objection. 

Mr. FOUNTAIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

We come to the question of a national World War I memorial 

somewhat through the backdoor, because in the 1920s, when the 

Liberty Memorial and the DC War Memorial were being developed 

and built and dedicated, we didn’t think of national war memorials. 

Every town in the country has its own local war memorials, whether they be to the local veterans of the Civil War or World War I 

or, often, all the Nation’s wars collectively. In Washington, of 

course, there are numerous memorials to generals and statesmen 

of the Revolution and the Civil War. But, until the Vietnam Veterans Memorial came along, there were no national war memorials, 

so to speak. The District of Columbia War Memorial sat on the 

Mall, alone, for 50 years. Then the Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

was dedicated, around 1980—I forget exactly the year. Since then, 

the Korean War Memorial and the World War II Memorial have 

come along and followed. 

So, in an ad hoc fashion, we now have this war memorial park, 

located around the Lincoln Reflecting Pool, including national memorials to three of the four great wars of the 20th century, but no 

national memorial to World War I. World War I was, of course, the 

first time that American soldiers went overseas in defense of liberty and against foreign aggression. 

I don’t think I need to make the case, at this point, for a national 

memorial. But the absence of a national memorial on the Mall has 

now become a glaring omission, because we tell part of the story 

of the American century on the Mall, but not the entire story, without a national memorial. I wager that most members of the committee, like myself, drove by the DC memorial, or walked past it, 

or ran past it, for years, without ever knowing what it was. It’s a 

neglected, forgotten memorial. Frankly, that’s part of its beauty 

and its poignancy. But it is overlooked. No one really knows what 

it is. Part of our purpose, frankly, is not to Federalize the DC memorial, but to elevate its status, and give it stature commensurate 

with that of the other memorials. It doesn’t appear on most maps 
44 

or signs on the National Mall, directing visitors to it, or even telling them what it is. 

So, there’s this quartet of memorials to the major wars of the 

20th century; only World War I lacks a national memorial on the 

Mall, and the proposed bill would rectify that by authorizing rededication of the DC memorial as a National and a District of Columbia War Memorial, thereby giving honor to the veterans of 

World War I that is equal to that bestowed on the veterans of other 

majors wars, while helping future generations of Americans to 

know the complete history of America’s 20th-century struggle 

against aggression and totalitarianism. 

Director Stevenson suggested that the proposed design would 

overwhelm or so alter the present site that it would become a new 

memorial. To the contrary, the bill expressly provides that any additional element introduced would complement and preserve the 

existing memorial. Moreover, under the Commemorative Works 

Act, any design would be subject to design review by the Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital Planning Commission. 

So, those concerns would certainly be taken into account. 

Finally, the location of a national memorial on the Mall in Washington need not detract from the commendable efforts of the citizens of Kansas City. The Liberty Memorial has properly been designated by the government as a national symbol of World War I. 

The National World War I Museum is appropriately located in 

Kansas City, much as the National World War II Museum is located in New Orleans, while the National Memorial is here in 

Washington. We fully support the proposal to establish a World 

War I Centennial Commission based in Kansas City. 

Now, speaking to commissions, the Interior Department proposes a study for their—of World War I Memorials at a cost of $300,000 

and taking 3 years. In 3 years, we will be on the eve of the centennial of the—of World War I, leaving no time to make appropriate 

provisions for a national memorial in time for that centennial. 

So, we believe the Congress would diminish the sacrifice of 

Frank Buckles and almost 5 million other Americans in World War 

I, including 116,000 dead, if it did not honor them on the Mall in 

the same manner as the veterans of the wars that followed. We ask 

the Senate to pass S. 2097. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Fountain follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF EDWIN L. FOUNTAIN, DIRECTOR, WORLD WAR I MEMORIAL

FOUNDATION, ON S. 2097 

Chairman Udall and members of the Committee: 

My name is Edwin Fountain. I am an attorney in private practice here in Washington, and the grandson of two World War I veterans. I am a co-founder and director of the World War I Memorial Foundation. The Foundation is proud to have as 

its honorary chairman Mr. Frank Buckles, the last surviving American veteran of 

World War I. 

Last year, Mr. Buckles came to Washington for a ceremony in his honor at the 

Pentagon. During that trip he visited the District of Columbia War Memorial, located on the Mall between the World War II and Korean War memorials. He was 

distressed to see that it was only a memorial to the veterans of D.C., and not a national memorial. 

Throughout our country’s history, towns and cities have erected their own war 

memorials, be they to local veterans of the Civil War, or of World War I, or of all 

the nation’s wars collectively. In Washington, there are of course numerous memo-
45 

* Map has been retained in subcommittee files. 

** See Appendix. 

rials to generals and statesmen of the Revolution and the Civil War. But until the 

Vietnam Veterans Memorial was conceived thirty years ago, there were no national 

war memorials. 

Today we have on the Mall national memorials to three of the four great wars 

of the 20th century, located in what has become a de facto ‘‘war memorial park’’ 

around the Lincoln Reflecting Pool. 

There is, however, no national memorial to World War I. With the irony of hindsight, that war was at first called ‘‘the war to end all wars.’’ In retrospect, we now 

know that ‘‘the Great War’’ was but the first time that American soldiers would go 

overseas in defense of liberty against foreign aggression. Over 4.7 million Americans 

served in uniform, and 116,516 gave their lives—more than in Korea and Vietnam 

combined. 

World War I was also the first great conflict of what has come to be known as 

‘‘the American century.’’ It led directly to the Second World War, and its consequences are still felt today in ongoing conflicts in the former Yugoslavia, Israel 

and Palestine, and Iraq. 

Few Americans today know this history, and the absence of a national memorial 

to World War I on the Mall in Washington has become a glaring omission, all the 

more so because the centennial of the war is less than five years away. 

S 2097 would fill that void, by authorizing the re-dedication of the District of Columbia War Memorial as a ‘‘National and District of Columbia World War I Memorial.’’ 

The D.C. War Memorial was dedicated in 1931 as a memorial to the 499 residents 

of the District who died in the war. President Hoover spoke at its dedication, and 

John Philip Sousa conducted the Marine Corps band. It stood alone for fifty years, 

until it was joined by the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, and then later by the Korean 

War and World War II memorials. 

As indicated on the attached map,* together with those three other memorials, 

it comprises a quartet of memorials to the major wars of the 20th century. Yet alone 

among those memorials, it lacks national status. Few residents or visitors are even 

aware of the memorial, much less know what it is. Most maps and signs do not even 

refer to the memorial. 

S 2097 would authorize its re-dedication as a national memorial, and thereby give 

honor to the veterans of World War I that is equal to that bestowed on the veterans 

of the other major wars, while helping future generations of Americans to know the 

complete history of American’s 20th-century struggle against aggression and totalitarianism. 

Re-dedication of the D.C. memorial would not be contrary to the Commemorative 

Works Act. That Act prohibits the location of any new commemorative works on the 

Mall. However, S 2097 does not authorize a new commemorative work, but rather 

the re-dedication and enhancement of a memorial that already exists on the Mall. 

Moreover, the local character of the existing memorial would be preserved. While 

Section 3 of the proposed bill permits the addition of an appropriate sculptural or 

other commemorative element, in order to give the memorial a national character, 

it also specifies that any such feature shall ‘‘complement and preserve the existing 

memorial and its landscape.’’ In this way the sacrifice of District residents in the 

war will continue to be honored, and the peaceful and secluded character of the site 

will be preserved. 

We emphasize that S 2097 is not meant to somehow ‘‘federalize’’ the District’s memorial. Rather, it will bring attention to the memorial by elevating it to the same 

status enjoyed by the surrounding war memorials. At the same time, the memorial 

will provide visitors a lesson in the history of our memorials, while calling their attention to their own memorials back home. 

Finally, location of a national memorial on the Mall in Washington need not diminish the commendable efforts of the citizens of Kansas City. The Liberty Memorial has already, and properly, been designated by the Congress as a national symbol of World War I. The national World War I museum is appropriately located in 

Kansas City—much as the national World War II museum is located in New Orleans, while the national memorial is here in Washington. As noted in Mr. Buckles’ 

letter of October 4, 2008 to the Missouri Congressional delegation (attached),** both 

he and our Foundation support Kansas City’s museum and its proposal to establish 

a World War I centennial commission based in Kansas City. 

Twenty-five million people, from around the country and across the world, visit 

the Mall each year. As we have heard from thousands of students, veterans and citizens around the country who support our cause, those visitors expect to honor the 
46 

nation’s veterans in the nation’s capital—as evidenced by the location of the other 

great war memorials in Washington. 

Congress would be minimizing the sacrifice of Frank Buckles and almost five million other Americans in World War I, including 116,000 dead, if it did not honor 

them on the Mall in the same manner as the veterans of the wars that followed. 

We ask the Senate to pass S 2097. On behalf of Mr. Buckles and the Foundation, 

thank you for the opportunity to testify today. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Fountain. 

I will now recognize myself for a series of questions. I think I’d 

like to start by focusing on this discussion of the World War I memorial. Mr. Alexander, I’ll direct some questions to you and then 

turn to Mr. Fountain. 

Mr. Alexander, in your opinion, is it important that there be one 

recognized national World War I memorial or are multiple memorials in different parts of the country appropriate? 

Mr. ALEXANDER. There are numerous memorials throughout the 

country, but on different levels, different scales. So, there are, I 

would estimate, something like 500 different memorials, most of 

which are dedicated to local communities whose members sacrificed 

during World War I. The memorial in Kansas City was designed 

to honor those people throughout the United States who sacrificed 

during World War I. So, we’re different than many other local 

kinds of memorials. 

In essence, we’ve been acting as the de facto national memorial 

for 80-some years, and we’ve been given that sanction, first by 

President Coolidge, then again by President Eisenhower and President Truman, and we hope that we can continue doing that in Kansas City. 

Senator UDALL. A second question for you. What’s your response 

to those who question whether it’s appropriate to have a national 

war memorial that’s privately owned and operated and charges an 

entrance fee? 

Mr. ALEXANDER. As a point of clarification, the museum and memorial are owned by the city of Kansas City and managed by the 

Liberty Memorial Association, through a management agreement 

with the City, so it’s not privately owned, but it’s operated independently. I’m sorry—your question? 

Senator UDALL. What’s your response to those who would question whether it’s appropriate to have a national war memorial 

that’s privately owned and operated and that charges an entrance 

fee? 

Mr. ALEXANDER. I mean, we are self-supporting. We get a small 

subsidy from the City, but we are essentially self-supporting. We 

also have taken, traditionally, no tax dollars to support ourselves, 

and it’s necessary for us to charge an admission to manage ourselves. So, I think, one way or another, the citizens of this country 

pay for it. In our case, the users are actually paying directly to visit 

the museum, rather that it coming through a tax base or another 

means. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

Let me turn to Mr. Fountain. 

I’d like to know more about the World War I Memorial Foundation. Was it established just for the purpose of rededicating the memorial, or is it involved with other issues? 
47 

Mr. FOUNTAIN. It was established with 2 purposes. The first was 

to advocate and raise funding for the restoration of the memorial. 

I do want to applaud the National Park Service for allocating 

funds, under the stimulus bill, to that restoration. So, they accomplished that half of our mission for us, and we’re very grateful. 

The other purpose is to, first, advocate for congressional authorization for the rededication, and then to raise the funds necessary 

to implement that, and it would be a entirely privately funded, noFederal-funds project. 

Senator UDALL. Let me follow up on the money. What kind of 

money do you anticipate it would take to do the rededication work? 

Do you have a plan for raising those funds? 

Mr. FOUNTAIN. To be honest, if this was over $5 million, then we 

were too ambitious, in terms of the scale of what we’re providing— 

what we’re seeking. I’ve—you know, some sculptors have already 

approached us, expressing interest in the project. You know, a 

back-of-the-envelope quotation for an-foot-high bronze is a few hundred thousand dollars. So, we’re not talking—you know, we are not 

talking something the size—the scale of the World War II Memorial. 

We would anticipate accommodation of corporate and private donations. One of my cofounders was a photographer, who set out the 

photograph the last surviving veterans of the war, when there were 

about a dozen left, has a traveling exhibit of his photographs and 

other artifacts of the war that is now going to schools around the 

country that are using it as a basis of fund-raisers, much as the 

DC War Memorial was funded, in large part through schoolchildren 

contributions. We would seek to include that, as well. But, a combination of corporate and private funding. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for that clarification. 

I did, for the record, want to include a conversation I had with 

Senator Thune on the way to vote. He had a chance to visit with 

Mr. Buckles earlier during the day, and he asked him what his secret was—or his secrets were, to live to the age of 108. Mr. Buckles’ 

response was a threefold response. No. 1, it’s important to stay 

busy and engaged. No. 2, to exercise. No. 3, to start young. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator UDALL. Now, Senator Thune and I think he meant that 

about exercising, but I think he also meant it in a sense of stay 

young in your thinking and your outlook. But, given the celebrity 

nature of his appearance here today, I want to make sure we 

learned the appropriate lessons—along with his wonderful, patriotic service. 

Mr. Madden, let me turn to you. Some Senators have criticized 

other Federal commissions established to commemorate a significant historical event as a waste of money. As you noted, several 

States are already planning their commemoration efforts. Can you 

explain what you see the Commission adding to the sesquicentennial commemoration efforts? 

Mr. MADDEN. The States that have already begun, did not begin, 

really, until a couple of years ago, when, I understand, Civil War 

organizations generally—despite an early attempt that I made to 

bring them all together to support this bill, they felt that there 

probably wouldn’t be, because time was running out, a commission. 
48 

So, certain States and organizations went ahead on their own. 

There are very few who have made significant progress. I think 

Virginia is probably in the lead, North Carolina is significant. But, 

that leaves out a good part of the Nation, and that leaves out what 

I consider a very important opportunity for other parts of this nation—other States—to get to know the significance of this crossroads of our being, to make it part of their being, so that we need 

leadership of a commission, if not funds. But, certainly funds for 

those States and those places that don’t have any money. We need 

the leadership and some degree of funds to jumpstart, to inspire, 

to encourage those States and organizations that have not yet gone 

ahead on their own. 

I think it would be a piecemeal celebration that would not bring 

honor to this country if the rest of the Nation looks at what Virginia, let’s say, is doing, Pennsylvania is doing, but that feels that 

it is a localized sort of experience. So, I think it’s essential that this 

have some strong national face. 

As far as the money is concerned, I just want to point out that 

I created the Civil War Center with almost nothing. I conducted it 

for 7 years for less than 30,000 a year. So, there are ways, with 

a little bit of money and with the authority I had from the University, which is the parallel to the commission—there are ways to do 

an incredible lot, as we’ve done with the Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial in Louisiana, with very, very little money. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for that clarification. My wife’s from 

North Carolina. She has a number of degrees. One of them is in 

English and American Literature. She was very fond of Faulkner. 

Because you’re here, I wanted you to edify me. I think she is fond 

of pointing out that one of Faulkner’s characters, when asked about 

the Civil War and whether it was over, said something to the effect, ‘‘No, the Civil War is not over. It’s never over. We’re still fighting the Civil War.’’ 

Mr. MADDEN. Oh, yes. That’s right. 

Senator UDALL. Is that reasonably accurate? 

Mr. MADDEN. Yes. But, I think—as I pointed out in the long 

version of my testimony, I think that the conflict is not going to 

be anywhere near as severe as it was in the Centennial, which was 

a success, after all. This is a democracy, where you deal with conflicts. I think that we’re such a totally different Nation, that those 

elements that might want to make this a contentious occasion are 

in the tiny minority. But, I will say, for your wife’s edification, if 

I may—— 

Senator UDALL. My edification. 

Mr. MADDEN [continuing]. That the greatest Civil War novel is 

‘‘Absalom, Absalom!’’ 

Senator UDALL. I take note, and I will do my best to find the 

time to—— 

Mr. MADDEN. I hope she went to Appalachian State University, 

where I first taught, in 1957; my first teaching job. 

Senator UDALL. I’m sorry to disappoint you, but she’s a Tar Heel. 

She went—— 

Mr. MADDEN. What? 

Senator UDALL [continuing]. To school in Chapel Hill. 

Mr. MADDEN. Oh, Chapel Hill. Oh, yes. 
49 

Senator UDALL. She’s a Tar Heel. So, she—— 

Mr. MADDEN. OK. Yes. 

Senator UDALL. But, thank you for indulging me. This is powerful testimony, and the more we remember the right kinds of lessons, the better our country will be. So, thank you, again, for elaborating. 

Let me turn to Mr. Barboza. Perhaps more than anyone in this 

room, you have the difficulty of seeing a memorial through to completion. Given the difficulty and the years of delay with the previous authorization, why do you expect that a new authorization 

would be more successful? 

Mr. BARBOZA. I know what some of the problems were with the 

previous one, and it didn’t have anything to do with the merit of 

the history or of raising funds. Certainly, enough funds were built 

to build a memorial, but it didn’t get done. Those things happen. 

It’s happened with many projects. But, I feel that the difference 

here is that we have living descendants, now, who are discovering 

their ancestors. This is very powerful stuff. We needed to do this 

many, many years ago, generations ago. After the Civil War, we 

needed to reconcile ourselves, our history, and come to understand 

who we are as Americans, because the only thing that holds us together is our principles. If we don’t understand that, and we continue to question who an American is, because of their race, their 

color, their background, their religion, their political thought, we’re 

never going to get anywhere. In order to preserve our Nation, we 

have to preserve liberty. 

This connection to the Civil War—it was my great-great-grandfather—a photograph that I saw when—my first memory of my 

grandmother’s house was walking in and seeing this picture of my 

great-great-grandfather in a Civil War uniform. I didn’t know who 

he was or what. It wasn’t until years later that I began to ask 

questions. That’s how I discovered the Black patriots, through my 

own research, finding out that I had an ancestor who served in the 

Revolutionary War, having my aunt’s application rejected by the 

Daughters of the American Revolution, then spending 24 years to 

have the Daughters of the American Revolution fulfill her membership agreement in 1984, and that is to identify every Black soldier 

who served in the war. That has been completed. Now we know 

who they are, and people are discovering their ancestors through 

that documentation. 

One last thing. I started young. Fortunately. Half an age ago. So, 

I’m pleased to be here. 

I just want to say that the name Udall stands out in my memory 

of the Kennedy administration, of the very height, and your family’s contributions. So, I’m honored to be here. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for that acknowledgment, and I’ll 

pass your regards on to my Uncle Stewart, who served as Interior 

Secretary and—— 

Mr. BARBOZA. Indeed. 

Senator UDALL. He started young, too, given he’s 90 years old. 

Mr. BARBOZA. Wonderful. 

Senator UDALL. Let me—one last question. Do you anticipate 

you’d stay with the same design for the previously authorized memorial, or—— 
50 

Mr. BARBOZA. No. 

Senator UDALL [continuing]. Are you considering something different? 

Mr. BARBOZA. No, we’ll—we will consider a new design. That will 

be entirely left behind. This will be an entirely new project with 

a new site and a new design. 

Senator UDALL. OK. Thank you for those insights and sharing 

your own story. It gave me goose bumps to hear you account— 

share that account with us. I think—and it’s hard—what you’re 

saying is, we’re all Americans. America is a place, but it’s also an 

idea; and you keep both alive by pursuing what you’re proposing. 

Let me turn—not last, but not least—to Mr. Robinson. 

I had—before I ask you my question, I had a wonderful opportunity—Jan Scruggs might be interested in this—to spend a few 

days with Maya Lin in, all places, Tibet, about 15 years ago. I was 

on an expedition to Mount Everest. She happened to be traveling 

in Tibet with a friend. She’s Chinese-American. She doesn’t speak 

a word of Mandarin or the major Chinese dialects, but she was eagerly soaking up all that that great country has to offer, and she 

was in Tibet, as well, when I met her. The story of that memorial 

and the effect it’s had on all of us is such a powerful one. 

You described the efforts that the Memorial Fund has made in 

securing the necessary authorizations and steps you’ve, so far, 

taken to raise the funds. You still need to raise—I think, it’s about 

$60 million, which is—— 

Mr. ROBINSON. About 60 million. 

Senator UDALL [continuing]. More than double what you’ve 

raised to date. How confident are you that your organization can 

raise those remaining funds by the extended authorization deadline? 

Mr. ROBINSON. We’re very confident. Our current chairman, our 

current corporate campaign chairman, Peter Holt, has taken this 

on as a full-time endeavor. He’s—he has a firm that’s working for 

him on just this. In just the past several months, we’ve had major 

contributions. We have a plan to raise this money. One of the plans 

is that we would go to VFW and Military Order of the Purple 

Heart chapters and ask them to support the names that are on The 

Wall from those locations; $1,000 per name. We’ve tried that. We’ve 

been very successful at doing it, and we’re very confident that we’re 

going to be able to raise this money. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for that additional detail, and for the 

work you’ve done, again, and for—as I said earlier, for your service 

and your example. It’s a powerful one. 

Senator UDALL. Let me bring the hearing to a conclusion. 

I want to thank all of you for your time and the insights you provided. Clearly, each one of you is passionate about your specific 

proposal, and your testimonies helped us, and me, better understand the issues. 

Mr. Alexander, did you want to—— 

Mr. ALEXANDER. Senator, may I make a point of clarification? 

Senator UDALL. Yes. Sure. Of course. 

Mr. ALEXANDER. Thank you. 

Senator UDALL. Of course. 
51 

Mr. ALEXANDER. I just want to note that there is no cost to see 

the memorial itself at the Liberty Memorial. It is just admission to 

the museum. Part of our success throughout the years has been our 

ability to generate support, both publicly and privately, to help 

minimize that cost. 

I might also note that the National Park Service now is forced 

to charge admission to many of its sites, as well. It’s one of those 

unfortunate necessities to sustain nonprofit organizations. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for that clarification. 

That does lead into my final comments, as we formally end the 

hearing, and that’s that some members of the committee may submit additional questions in writing to each of you, and, if so, we’d 

ask you submit answers for the record. We’ll also keep the record 

open for a couple more weeks for any additional comments you may 

want to make. There may be ways in which you want to elaborate 

or clarify or provide us with additional information. We want you 

to do that, because, as we move forward to making decisions about 

how we may proceed, or changes we might want to make, we need 

that information. 

So, again, thank you for spending your time here this afternoon. 

This was a memorable hearing today. 

The subcommittee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:15 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(53) 

APPENDIX 

Additional Material Submitted for the Record 

[Due to the large amount of materials received, only a representative sample of 

statements follow. Additional documents and statements have been retained in subcommittee files.] 

VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS, 

Washington, DC, November 24, 2009. 

Hon. MARK UDALL, 

U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building 110, Washington, DC. 

DEAR SENATOR UDALL: On behalf of the 2.2 million members of the Veterans of 

Foreign Wars of the United States and our Auxiliaries, I would like to offer our 

strong support for H.R. 3689, to provide for an extension of the legislative authority 

of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, Inc. to establish a Vietnam Veterans Memorial visitor center. 

This important legislation would help build a visitors’ center near the Vietnam 

Memorial on the National Mall. This visitors’ center would show the many unique 

and meaningful items that have been left at the memorial to honor those who gave 

their lives serving our country. The center would serve as a place to educate America’ youth as well as continue the healing fought valiantly for our country. We thank 

you for reviewing this bill before your committee. 

We look forward to working with you to help pass this legislation into law. 

Sincerely, 

THOMAS J. TRADEWELL, SR., 

Commander-in-Chief. 

BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION TRADES DEPARTMENT, 

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR—CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS, 

Washington, DC, December 1, 2009. 

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN, 

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 304 Dirksen Senate Office 

Building, Washington, DC. 

DEAR SENATOR BINGAMAN: On behalf of the skilled craft professionals who comprise the 13 national and international unions of the Building and Construction 

Trades Department, I write to you today to encourage your active support for HR 

3689, which would extend the legislative authority for the Viet Nam Veterans Memorial Fund, Inc. and authorize the funds for the construction of an Education and 

Visitors Center for the Memorial. 

The Viet Nam Veterans Memorial has become not only an iconic symbol of the 

courage, bravery and sacrifice exhibited by the men and women who served during 

that era, but it also serves as a spiritual destination for millions of Americans who 

make the determined pilgrimage to Washington, DC in order to come to grips with 

the loss of a loved one or comrade, or to alleviate their suffering and begin the process of healing. 

The Education and Visitors Center has been conceived as a way to put faces to 

the names that are on the Wall; to bring to life their stories; and to help millions 

of Americans better understand, and appropriately honor, the men and women who 

gave all that they had in service to their country during that era. 

Therefore, on behalf of the tens of thousands of our members who are veterans 

of the Viet Nam War (including myself), I respectfully request that you do all that 

you can to approve this legislation and provide an additional boost to the momentum that is carrying us towards the construction of this important facility. 
54 

With kind regards, I am 

Sincerely, 

MARK H. AYERS, 

President. 

NATIONAL COALITION TO SAVE OUR MALL, 

Rockville, MD, December 1, 2009. 

Hon. MARK UDALL, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Senate Committee on Energy & Natural Resources, 304 Dirksen Senate Building, Washington, DC. 

RE: Reauthorization of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Visitor Center 

DEAR CHAIRMAN UDALL AND SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS: We urge you during the 

December 3 hearing of the Subcommittee on National Parks to shine new light on 

the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Visitor Center project, especially on new circumstances that raise serious doubts about the need, location, and long-term impact 

of the project on the Vietnam Memorial itself and the National Mall. The failure 

of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund to secure adequate funding in seven years 

speaks also to the lack of strong public support for this addition to the Memorial. 

The National Coalition to Save Our Mall is a nonprofit citizens organization seeking a broad, visionary plan for the National Mall. We are the only organized voice 

for the public on Mall matters. We have strongly opposed the location for the visitor 

center at the Vietnam Memorial, stating in writing and during public consultation 

meetings that it will detract from the visitor’s experience of the Memorial itself, encroach on the nearby Lincoln Memorial, and destroy more open space on the National Mall. We have participated actively in the Historic Preservation Act public 

consultation process for this project for several years now and our opposition has 

only intensified as we learn more about the project details. 

Reasons for Congress to reject reauthorization of the Visitors Center on the National Mall site including the following: 

1. Most significant is the question of need. The stated reasons for the Visitors 

Center now seem redundant with the reopening of the newly revamped National Museum of American History. The justification for construction of this 

visitor center was to explain the Vietnam War to visitors who do not know 

about this critical event American history. The Vietnam Veterans Fund also has 

stated that the center would put this war in the larger context of American 

wars. The newly reopened American History Museum, located only a few blocks 

from the Vietnam Memorial, accomplishes these goals amply. The museum features a marvelous new exhibit entitled ‘‘The Price of Freedom’’ that puts the 

Vietnam War in an interesting perspective as part of the larger story of Americans at war. A separate Vietnam War visitor center is not needed and would 

compete with the Smithsonian’s new permanent exhibit. 

2. Modern electronic communications, not yet well developed at the time the 

visitor center was first authorized, can be developed to offer simple, low-cost 

educational and interpretive materials without the need for costly new construction and the long-term maintenance and other costs associated with underground construction. Furthermore, electronic materials can be updated and revised as needed in coming years to readily adapt to changing needs. 

3. Congress mandated that the Visitors Center be located ‘‘underground’’ to 

protect the Mall’s open space but the project, while sunken below grade, is not 

underground but instead creates a large open pit on this historically sensitive 

site. We understand the difficulty of meeting the ‘‘underground’’ requirement. 

However, after three years of trying to find a successful solution, it seems clear 

that the designers are unable to build the structure underground that also protects, as required by the Commemorative Works Act, the Mall’s historic plans 

and public open space. This sensitive Mall site simply cannot accommodate the 

proposed project. An added consequence of the location, which is at the main 

bus drop-off for this part of the National Mall and thus the first attraction visitors will encounter, is that visitors may choose to visit the visitor center first 

and afterwards decide not to cross busy Henry Bacon Drive to the Memorial 

itself—a tragic loss for visitors and this powerfully moving Memorial. 

4. This visitor facility already has spawned new calls for such centers elsewhere, most recently in connection with the future Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial. In the case of the MLK Memorial, a new Visitor Center/Bookstore/Restroom facility was added to the project in 2005—two years after Congress passed 

the moratorium on any future memorials or visitors centers on the Mall—be-
55 

cause the Memorial sponsor and the National Park Service argued that such 

a visitor center was needed to provide interpretation for the Memorial. The federal and District project review agencies have accepted that reasoning. We are 

concerned that with the Vietnam visitor center as a precedent the floodgates 

will open to additional visitors centers at each and every memorial on the National Mall, further cluttering the open landscape with retail and exhibitions 

better reserved for our national museum buildings. With no enforcement, the 

moratorium is not working. 

In conclusion, the Vietnam Visitors Center, so controversial and divisive from the 

start, has been proven in recent years to be redundant and destructive of the sensitive historic landscape and should not be reauthorized. 

In our view—and given the recurring problems of exceptions such as this project 

being made to the Commemorative Works Act—there is a need for a hearing about 

reviewing and perhaps reforming the Commemorative Works Act. We welcome the 

opportunity to speak with you further about such a review. 

Sincerely, 

JUDY SCOTT FELDMAN, PH.D., 

Chair and President. 

November 24, 2009 

Hon. CLAIR MCCASKILL, 

U.S. Senator, Hart Senate Office Building, SH-717, Washington DC. 

DEAR SENATOR MCCASKILL: On behalf of the SGT. Alvin C. York Family, we fully 

support the federal legislation to designate the Liberty Memorial as the National 

World War I Memorial. We are very pleased that this designation is under consideration. 

Alvin C. York of Pall Mall, Tennessee, is the most decorated United States World 

War I soldier. His battlefield exploits on October 8, 1918, earned him the Medal of 

Honor. He fearlessly lead seven men who charged with great daring a machine gun 

nest which was pouring deadly and incessant fire upon his platoon. In this heroic 

feat the machine gun nest was taken, together with four officers and 128 men and 

several guns. The courage and sacrifice that Sergeant. York and all World War I 

soldiers gave our nation are honored everyday at the Liberty Memorial. 

The Liberty Memorial was built to honor all American World War I soldiers. A 

fundraising drive in 1919 raised more than $2.5 million in less than two weeks to 

fund it’s design and construction. From the beginning, the Liberty Memorial has 

been recognized as a national treasure. As stated by President Coolidge during the 

1926 opening ceremony: 

Today I return at the special request of the distinguished senators from 

Missouri and Kansas, and on the invitation from your committee on arrangements in order that I may place the official sanction of the national 

government upon one of the most elaborate and impressive memorials that 

adorn our county. 

This was further solidified when Congress passed a resolution in October 2000 

‘‘recognizing the Liberty Memorial in Kansas City, Missouri, as a national World 

War I symbol honoring those who defended liberty and our country through service 

in World War I.’’ 

The National World War I Museum was designated as such by the U.S. Congress 

in 2004 and is located within the Liberty Memorial complex. It is the only Museum 

in the United States solely dedicated to the Great War. The site also received National Historic Landmark status in 2006. 

The inscription at the base of the Liberty Memorial Tower reads, ‘‘In Honor of 

Those who Served in the World War in Defense of Liberty and Our Country,’’ and 

for more than eighty years, the Liberty Memorial has been the country’s leading institution in remembering World War I. I believe the National World War I Memorial 

should be in Kansas City, Missouri. 

Sincerely, 

GEORGE EDWARD YORK. 

BETSY YORK LOWERY. 
56 

* Document has been retained in subcommittee files. 

THE AMERICAN LEGION, 

Washington, DC, October 28, 2009. 

Hon. EDOLPHUS TOWNS, 

Chairman. 

Hon. DARRELL ISSA, 

Ranking Member, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, U.S. House of 

Representatives, 2347 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. 

DEAR GENTLEMEN: After reviewing the proposed Amendment in the Nature of a 

Substitute to H.R. 1849, the World War I Memorial and Centennial Act of 2009, offered by Mr. Towns (NY), The American Legion is prepared to offer its full support 

of this proposed amendment. 

The American Legion was founded in 1919 by veterans of the War to End All 

Wars—World War I. Public Law 108-375 officially recognized the National World 

War I Museum. The American Legion believes it is only fitting to officially designate 

the Liberty Memorial at the National World War I Museum as the National World 

War I Memorial. 

This legislation also calls for the establishment of a World War I Centennial Commission to ensure a suitable observance of the centennial of World War I that would 

promote the values of honor, courage, patriotism and sacrifice. The American Legion 

would be honored to have a representative on such a Commission. 

Again, The American Legion fully supports this proposed amendment and would 

encourage you and your colleagues to aggressively pursue timely enactment. 

Sincerely, 

CLARENCE E. HILL, 

National Commander. 

THE AMERICAN LEGION, 

Jefferson City, MO, October 7, 2009. 

Hon. EMANUEL CLEAVER, II, 

U.S. Representative, 1027 Longworth Office Bldg., Washington, DC. 

DEAR REPRESENTATIVE CLEAVER, On Behalf of the 54,000 Legionnaires of The 

American Legion Department of Missouri, we would like to take this opportunity 

to thank you for your service to our Country and to the citizens of the Great State 

of Missouri. Recently during our 91st Annual Department Convention, held in Jefferson City, Missouri, we adopted Missouri Resolution Three, which urges The Congress of the United States to designate The Liberty Memorial, at the National World 

War I Museum in Kansas City, Missouri as ‘‘The National World War I Memorial’’. 

I have attached a copy of said resolution.* 

The Liberty Memorial site was dedicated in November of 1921 and marks the only 

time in history that five Allied Military Leaders were present to honor the more 

that 4,000,000 men and women that served during World War I. General of the Armies, John J. Pershing, a native of Missouri, noted on that day’’ the people of Kansas City, Missouri are deeply proud of this beautiful memorial, erected in Tribute 

to the Patriotism, the gallant achievements, and the heroic sacrifices of their sons 

and daughters who served in our country’s Armed Forces during the World War. 

It Symbolized their grateful appreciation of Duty Well Done, and appreciation, 

which I share, because I know so well how richly it is merited’’. 

The Memorial has been and still remains a proud part of the patriotic heritage 

of, not only the people of Missouri, but of The United States of America and should 

be designated as ‘‘The national World War I Memorial’’. 

Thank you for your consideration and continued support. 

Sincerely, 

VICTOR J. STRAGLIATI, 

Department Commander. 

WADE F. PROSSER, 

Department Adjutant. 
57 

VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS, 

Kansas City, MO, March 31, 2009. 

Brian Alexander, 

National WWI Museum, 100 West 26th Street, Kansas City, MO. 

DEAR MR. ALEXANDER, On behalf of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United 

States, we fully agree with the federal legislation granting official status to the Liberty Memorial, designating it as the National World War I Memorial. 

As you know, just two weeks after the November 11, 1918 Armistice, Kansas Citizens embarked on a campaign that would one day create the National World War 

I Museum. A community-based fundraising drive in 1919 raised more than $2.5 million in less than two weeks to build the Liberty Memorial. After three years of construction, the Liberty Memorial opened on November 11, 1926, immediately becoming an iconic landmark. 

Because of their efforts, we have today a valuable repository of America’s heritage. The Liberty Memorial is a place where history, achievement, courage and sacrifice become real for all people. The Liberty Memorial is the strongest link we have 

to the more than 2 million American men and women who served during World War 

I. 

Since its dedication, the Liberty Memorial has enabled millions of deserving citizens and foreign visitors alike, an opportunity to travel to Kansas City to visit and 

appreciate one of America’s most cherished monuments. Without the existence of 

the Liberty Memorial, it is quite possible the memory of those who fought during 

World War I would fade and then disappear. 

The effort to secure official designation is easily supported by the VFW. As an organization of combat veterans, we believe that it is imperative to ensure the memory of their courage and sacrifice will not fade or disappear into anonymity . . . that 

would be an irretrievable loss to the nation. Accordingly, we will present the attached resolution proposal at our 110th National Convention in August. 

We thank you for your service and dedication in honoring such a critical historical 

legacy and please let us know where we can further assist in this noble effort. 

Sincerely, 

GLEN M. GARDNER, JR., 

Commander-in-Chief. 

AFRICAN-AMERICAN CIVIL WAR MUSEUM, 

Washington, DC, December 3, 2009. 

Hon. MARK UDALL, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Energy and Natural Resources Committee, U.S. Senate, Dirksen Senate Office Building—Room 304, Washington, 

DC. 

Re: Bill S. 2097 

DEAR SENATOR UDALL: On behalf of the African American Civil War Memorial, 

I am concerned anytime a memorial which was raised up for the sole purpose of 

honoring a specific group brave and honorable American soldiers is threatened with 

any change that would dilute it’s solemn purpose. 

Re-dedicating the District of Columbia World War I Memorial to include veteran’s 

of the 50 States with voting congressional representation, World War I veterans diverts attention away from the original, intended concept, which was honoring their 

brave, fallen of the District of Columbia. 

Perhaps more importantly though. the dangerous precedent set by this piece of 

legislation threatens the status of many other memorials that by deliberate design 

are meant to honor specific groups. Once such memorial is The African American 

Civil War Memorial located in D.C.’s Shaw Community on U Street, N.W. This memorial proudly honors the lives of African American soldiers that fought in the Civil 

War, but were soon forgotten. If you pass this bill, I fear that later on some group 

might come along and decide that Washington lacked a comprehensive Civil War 

memorial and demand we rededicate our memorial as the African-American and 

Caucasian’s-Also Civil War Memorial. 

It is my request that you do not allow the only existing memorial for the soldiers 

of the District of Columbia, who, unlike the soldiers from the other States, died 

without a voting representative in Congress, to be altered and to honor the legacy 

of past Washingtonians that toiled to create a legacy for their soldiers. 

Regards, 

DR. FRANK SMITH, 

Founding Director. 
58 

STATEMENT OF PAUL STRAUSS, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, ON S. 2097 

Chairman Udall, Ranking Member Burr, and others on the Subcommittee, as an 

elected United States Senator for the District of Columbia, I thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony for the record regarding my opposition to Bill 

S. 2097, otherwise known as the Frank Buckles World War I Memorial Act. I am 

honored to appear here today on behalf of the residents of the District of Columbia 

both past and present. 

The re-authorization to re-dedicate the District of Columbia World War I Memorial is yet a further diminution to the dignity of an already disenfranchised people. 

This memorial was dedicated on the 11th hour of the 11th day of November 1931, 

13 years to the date of the Armistice. For over 78 years, it has stood proud and serene as the only memorial to the brave men and women from the Nation’s Capital 

who, along with other brave Americans, fought and died for their country. However, 

unlike those other brave Americans, DC’s ‘‘Doughboys’’ fought and died without anyone in the Congress of the United States ever being able to cast a vote to declare 

the war which took their lives. 

Although well intentioned, Bill S. 2097, is instead a further insult to the already 

underrepresented people of the District of Columbia. Re-dedicating the District of 

Columbia World War I Memorial as the National and District of Columbia World 

War I Memorial, while noble in its intention to commemorate the lives of the Americans that fought and died in WWI, in reality only takes away the one and only memorial erected to specially commemorate DC’s members of the armed forces. Each 

of the 499 names inscribed on this memorial all died without a vote for a country 

who would not give them the same democratic rights their fellow soldiers enjoyed. 

Currently the memorial stands not just as a symbol of the legacy of the men and 

women that died in WWI, but also as a symbol of the spirit and patriotism of the 

unrepresented and vote-less citizens of the District of Columbia. 

Neither this bill, nor this hearing today is about the great injustices that come 

from DC’s lack of Statehood. It is, however, a fitting and appropriate opportunity 

to remind Americans that the District of Columbia provided more soldiers to the 

Great War than ten states and territories and according to Star articles published 

after the war, 26,000 DC men and women total served in the war, of which 535 gave 

their lives. Following the war, a memorial commission, comprised of Washington 

citizens, was formed to mobilize a campaign for the memorial and it was an Act of 

Congress in 1924 that led to the authorization of the District of Columbia War Memorial on June 7 that same year. 

It was not on a whim or oversight that this memorial was dedicated only to the 

District of Columbia’s fallen soldiers. In fact, the very history of the memorial points 

to the rationality that the memorial continues on as a District of Columbia World 

War I Memorial. From the locally raised funds that were raised to erect the memorial to the local residents that helped design and build it; the District of Columbia 

was the heart and soul of this memorial. 

—The lead architect was local, DC based architect, Frederick H. Booke 

—Then president of the D.C. Chamber of Commerce, Harry King insisted that, 

‘‘Construction of the war memorial by out-of-town agencies would violate the 

principle and do injustice to the people of our city.’’ In that spirit, a local construction company, James Baird Co., was chosen as the contractor. 

—At the time, it was even encouraged for individual states to honor their fallen 

and an American Legion executive committeeman for D.C. spoke out against 

D.C.’s lack of a memorial, ‘‘Washington lags behind every State in the Union 

in expressing its appreciation of the services of its sons and daughter who 

‘went to war’.’’ 

—The Star, a local paper at the time, reported in July 1926 on the WWI Memorial commission’s stated purpose of the memorial, ‘‘The memorial, which, as 

the great bridge across the Potomac shall speak a Nation’s remembrance for 

her defenders shall speak our own more intimate gratitude to those more intimately bound to us; is to be built by subscription from the people of Washington. . . .It will stand through the years as the expression of a city’s pride 

in the men who fought in its behalf.’’ 

Furthermore, I am concerned about the misguided education of some of my fellow 

District Memorial enthusiasts that have thrown their support behind this Bill with 

the false impression that its approval is necessary to pay for the refurbishment of 

the memorial. A staff member of the Council of the District of Columbia told me 

that the support for this bill was based on the belief that this legislation would fund 

the needed repairs. He was unaware that in the recently approved American Recov-
59 

ery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, money has been already allocated to refurbish 

this memorial with the stimulus money presented to the National Parks and Services to the tune of $7.3 million dollars. I am pleased to note that in her statement 

today, Katherine Stevenson, the Obama Administration’s representative, also made 

note of these funds, and reiterated the Department of Interior’s commitment to the 

monument’s complete refurbishment. 

The mere geographic location of the memorial, on the National Mall is not reason 

enough to re-dedicate the memorial’s status. DC’s memorial was erected and dedicated before the other wars for which the additional memorials now exist. Additionally, aside from the question as to how best to commemorate the fallen of this war, 

is the larger question of the preserving our great national mall for future generations. It must remain more than a collection of multiple monuments to the armed 

conflicts of the 20th Century. 

As a D.C. resident, I reject the notion that only one part of our Nation’s Capitol 

is appropriate to commemorate our honored veterans. One particularly appropriate 

and poignant monument to brave American veterans lies approximately 20 blocks 

to the north of our mall. The African-American Civil War memorial located in the 

historic Shaw community is one exceptional example of how the brave veterans of 

our tragic Civil War are honored with a much dignity and sincerity as any soldier 

commemorated on the mall. 

This unique and special purpose memorial shows us that not only can we honor 

veterans with equal dignity both on and off the mall, but it offers a cautionary 

warning as well. The dangerous precedent set by this piece of legislation threatens 

the status of many other memorials that by deliberate design are meant to honor 

specific groups. In addition to the overlooked African-Americans who fought in the 

Civil War, many other ethnic groups also made great sacrifices. Irish-American’s in 

particular contributed heavily to the Union’s war efforts. If you pass this bill, what 

will we say to those advocates who might later on come along and decide that Washington DC lacks a comprehensive enough Civil War commemoration? Would they 

site the precedent of this bill and later demand we rededicate that memorial as the 

‘‘African-American and Irish-Americans also Civil War Memorial.’’ What would we 

tell advocates of other victims of genocide when they demand their share of exhibit 

space at the US Holocaust Memorial? 

A memorial to commemorate all of the American lives lost during WWI is certainly appropriate. I would happily support this effort but not at the cost of diminishing the legacy of the late World War One veterans of the District of Columbia. 

I would be proud to offer my support and the full cooperation of my office to help 

identify an appropriate location in our great District of Columbia that would both 

honor all of our nation’s World War One veterans appropriately. 

I would ask that this Committee hold the record of this hearing open for some 

number of days so that I can include some letters from my Constituent’s to whom 

the memorial has special significance. In closing, let me thank, Ms. Jenna A. 

Kohler, my Legislative Assistant, for her help in the preparation of this statement. 

HEART MOUNTAIN WYOMING FOUNDATION * THE CONSERVATION FUND * 

JAPANESE AMERICAN CITIZENS LEAGUE * NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION

ASSOCIATION * NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION

December 1, 2009. 

Hon. JOHN BARRASSO, 

307 Dirksen Senate Office Building, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR SENATOR BARRASSO: On behalf of our organizations, we write to express our 

support for your legislation (S. 2722) to authorize the National Park Service to conduct a special resource study of the Heart Mountain Relocation Center, located near 

Cody, Wyoming. We greatly appreciate Senator Enzi also cosponsoring the legislation and Congresswoman Lummis introducing companion legislation in the House. 

During World War II, the U.S. government incarcerated over 14,000 Japanese 

Americans at the Heart Mountain site over its three year period of existence. 

Today, the site features important historic resources. In 2006, the U.S. Department of the Interior designated the site as a National Historic Landmark and the 

State of Wyoming has additionally named the location as a Wyoming Heritage Site. 

The site retains a significant degree of physical and historic integrity and still has 

a number of buildings surviving in the original placement. The site is additionally 

significant for its association with U.S. military history and U.S. constitutional law, 

and for its association with Japanese American social history. 

The Heart Mountain Relocation Center opened on August 11, 1942 and operated 

for 39 months, closing on November 10, 1945. At its peak, Heart Mountain con-
60 

tained 10,767 Japanese Americans from California, Washington and Oregon, twothirds of whom were United States citizens. As one of only ten such camps in seven 

mostly western states, the center housed Japanese Americans removed from the 

West Coast under the authority of Presidential Executive Order 9066. Although not 

charged with any crimes and without benefit of judicial hearings, Japanese Americans as a group were uprooted from their homes and businesses and taken under 

armed guard for detention in a system of assembly and relocation centers. 

Your legislation would provide the National Park Service with the authority to 

engage the public in an important dialogue about the future of the site and to outline various options to conserve and manage the site’s important historic resources. 

Your bill will enable local stakeholders to develop a vision for the long term management of the site and provide additional information for you, Congress and the 

public at large on future options to realize the full educational potential of the Heart 

Mountain site. 

We appreciate your strong support for conserving our nation’s rich and diverse 

heritage and look forward to working with you to advance this important legislation. 

Sincerely, 

SHIRLEY HIGUCHI, BOARD CHAIR, 

DAVID REETZ, PRESIDENT & EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

Heart Mountain, Wyoming Foundation. 

FLOYD MORI, NATIONAL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

Japanese American Citizens League. 

DANIEL SAKURA, VICE PRESIDENT FOR GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, 

The Conservation Fund. 

BARBARA PAHL, DIRECTOR, MOUNTAIN PLAINS OFFICE, 

National Trust for Historic Preservation. 

SHARON MADER, GRAND TETON PROGRAM MANAGER, 

National Parks Conservation Association. 

HILL & KNOWLTON, 

November 25, 2009. 

Hon. MARK UDALL, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Parks, U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, 304 Dirksen Senate Building, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN UDALL: Please accept this letter as my support for legislation (S. 

2722) to authorize the National Park Service to conduct a special resource study of 

the Heart Mountain Relocation Center, located near Cody, Wyoming. 

As you know, I was interned there with my family during World War II so the 

site has special significance to me. But in addition, it is considered to be an important historic site and in 2006 the U. S. Department of Interior designated the site 

as a National Historic Landmark. It has also been named a Wyoming Heritage Site. 

This important legislation would provide the National Park Service with the authority to engage the public in an important dialogue about the future of the site 

and to outline various options to conserve and manage the site’s important historic 

resources. 

Being such a nationally significant site, this Study will enable stakeholders to develop a vision for the long term management of the site and to realize the full educational potential of the historic resource. 

America has come a long ways in acknowledging the injustices of this period, but 

it has lessons for future protections of individual liberties and freedoms that must 

not be forgotten. You have my strong support for conducting this critically needed 

study. 

Sincerely, 

NORMAN Y. MINETA, 

Vice Chairman. 

NATIONAL MALL LIBERTY FUND D.C. 

December 14, 2009. 

Hon. MARK UDALL, 

Chairman, Senate Subcommittee on National Parks, Hart Office Building, Suite SH317, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN UDALL, Thank you for conducting the hearing of December 3, 

2009, on S. 2738, the National Liberty Memorial Act, introduced by Sen. Chris Dodd 
61 

and Sen. Charles Grassley. This bill authorizes a memorial to African American soldiers, patriots and liberty-seekers of the Revolutionary War. It affirms the bipartisan decision of the 100th Congress and President Ronald Reagan to designate the 

history of ‘‘preeminent historical and lasting significance.’’ This warrants praise and 

lasting gratitude—not re-examination by the Interior Department. The Department 

might wish to rethink this request. 

Among 24 witnesses commenting on this identical class of persons 24 years ago, 

an extemporaneous remark of Rep. Parren J. Mitchell electrified a House hearing: 

‘‘This memorial will remind us that, from the Revolution to Vietnam, we’ve been 

there fighting and dying for America.’’ The entire nation will have an opportunity 

to consider that statement in the context of a sweeping new four-hour documentary. 

‘‘For Love of Liberty’’ will air on PBS stations in February 2010. I ask that this explanation and the endorsements provided by filmmaker Frank Martin be included 

in the Record. 

Rep. Mitchell knew what we all knew—that a modest memorial derived from the 

unique status of the forerunners, strategically placed near existing and future symbols, could interact and mature with them to tell a multi-generational story about 

liberty and unity that transcends color and a time. His 19 words condensed nearly 

200 pages of remarks that day, including my own. Through Revolution, slavery, civil 

war, Jim Crow, world wars and nonviolent protest ‘‘we’ve been there,’’ never conceding defeat and never giving up the fight to defend, protect and become ‘‘we the 

people.’’ 

In the process, they established liberty in America and helped preserve the liberty 

of European nations that had enslaved their ancestors. Current members of the 

Congressional Black Caucus are among them. Mr. Martin and a cast of over 40 distinguished Americans, including Morgan Freeman, a memorial advisor 20 years ago, 

weave the story, from the Revolution to Iraq. This film is destined to become as 

mind-opening and beloved as ‘‘Roots.’’ 

In 1988, Congress declared the ‘‘preeminent’’ deeds of the forgotten founders eligible for memorialization in Area 1. Secretary Donald Hodel made the recommendation in conformance with the Commemorative Works Act (CWA). President Ronald 

Reagan signed it into law. In 2007, the Memorial Commission confirmed the nexus 

between that law and the current project. Promptly, it was rejected by the past Secretary. Now, this Department has asked the Energy Committee to repeal Public 

Law 100-265 entirely and allow the National Park Service to reconsider the worthiness. This would expunge a legacy of the 99th and 100th Congresses, President 

Reagan and Secretary Hodel. 

Over two decades of observations and warm associations suggest that the land 

managers have deep affection for this memorial. But they are reading into the CWA 

what is not there while ignoring an established precedent and hundreds of reaffirming books, articles and discoveries since 1985. These need no further scrutiny, consecration or hallowing by government agencies. 

Before a hearing in the House is conducted on Rep. Donald Payne’s bill, H.R. 

4036, the Department might consider the testimony of nearly three dozen witnesses 

between 1985 and 1986; the absence of any provision in the CWA that obligates 

Congress to approve a separate Act to declare what it has already declared in a freestanding public law; and recent letters praising ‘‘For Love of Liberty’’ by Sen. Carl 

Levin, Sen. John McCain (cosponsors with Sens. Dodd and Grassley in 1985) and 

filmmaker Ken Burns. 

Then, I commend a remark of President George H.W. Bush while making a donation in the Oval Office during Desert Storm: ‘‘Think about how much they must 

have loved this country, how they believed in its dreams. It’s an astounding devotion. It’s in a league by itself.’’ 

Moving across the president’s desk in February 2010 (Black History Month), without the worthiness of its honorees being muddled, the National Liberty Memorial 

Act and ‘‘For Love of Liberty,’’ could teach the nation a long-deferred lesson in liberty and human potential. 

Sincerely, 

MAURICE A. BARBOZA, 

Founder. 

Æ