Date: 1994-01-26
Speaker: DE LUGO (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. . Mr. Speaker. this legislation is of great significance to the territory of Guam and is also important to the Defense Department. It should have been enacted a few years ago * * * not only because the need for it is pressing but also because there has been a general consensus on accomplishing its main purpose for years. In fact. it would authorize completion of a process begun during the Carter administration that has been supported by each succeeding administration. Additionally. this legislation. which was developed through the cooperative efforts of the Natural Resources. Government Operations. and Armed Services Committees. Is similar to provisions that passed both Houses in 1990. Unfortunately. however. this legislation has been delayed for reasons that do not relate to its essential parts. The delays have been especially unfortunate since this measure would positively address what has become such an Issue in Guam that it is damaging Federal relations with the territory and is undermining military interests there. The issue is that the Federal Government continues to hold a substantial portion of the land acquired from Guamanians In the wake of World War fi although it is not using most of the land and Guamanians need it. The Nationand the people of Guamare fortunate to now have the leadership on this issue of Guams new Delegate. ROBERT UNDERWOOD. He has astutely approached both this legislation and the overall issue. What H.R. 2144 would do is establish a special process to transfer ownership to Guam of 22 parcels totaling some 3.219 acres that are now controlled by the Air Force. the Navy. and the Federal Aviation Administration. This special process is warranted by the special circumstances of the situation and is precedented. It would be more expedited than the normal dispoal process and provide broader possible uses. The transfers would take place after: other agencies confirm that they do not need the property. it is appraised. we haye had 180 days to review the insular governments plans for its use. and the National Park Service is given control over local government inholdIngs in the national park on Guam. The precedents I mentioned include acts regarding Guam as well as recent base closure law. The special circumstances primarily related to how the Federal Government acquired the 30 percent of Guam it owns. After Guam was liberated from a brutal enemy occupation during World War flwhich was marked by the unflinching loyalty of the Chamorro people of Guamour Armed Forces acquired most of the island in transactions that were often unfair. Islanders sold their land for a pittance. sometimes under pressure or.not understanding terms. and often out of a sense of patriotism or gratitude for freedom. There was also an assumption that the property would only be used for the Nations defense. Congress has acted to right the wrongs of the acquisitions themselves. Individuals whose land was unfairly acquired have been authorized to sue for fair compensation. But this did not resolve the problem of too much land being withdrawn from the community * * * a big problem for a small island. And there is no debate that the Federal Government holds more land in Guam that it needs. Guams legislature recently noted that only about 12.000 of the approximately 44.000 federally owned acres are even fenced and. of these. only half are apparently being used. So that is where this .legislation comes in. And it would really return land taken for a specific purpose that no longer exists rather than simply give It to Guam. Mr. Speaker. the 1950 law that organized Guams civilian government included an Initial effort to address this problem. Under It. land was returned to resettle and rehabilitate the island as well as help establish the government. But It has long been clear that more needs .to be done. Much of the land that the military owns on Guam was not used even during the height of the Vietnam war. While It has remained Idle. however. the people of Guam have developed an increasing need for land for housing and other essential purposes. Additionally. they have been priced out of the market as Japanese Investment has escalated values. And Guam. It should not be forgotten. as a territory lacks the leverage that a State would have to force Federal attention to its needs. Its pioneering first Delegate. my late friend. Tony Won Pat. was able to set the stage for this bill. though. by working with the Carter administration to Identify land not needed by the military. In 1980. he got special legislation enacted. to transfer some 927 acres to local control. But his effort regarding a few thousand other acres identified by the Defense Department was delayed when the Incoming Reagan administration wanted to review the Carter administrations decisions. After t finally concluded that most of the land could be released. Guams Delegate at the time. Ben Blaz. proposed a transfer bill in Unfortunately. the bill was handicapped by unrealistic provisions. Even more unfortunately. the Interior Departments territories office stymied passage by proposing an even more complicated alternative. While their proposals were unrealistic. however. what they sought to address is a very real feeling among many former landowners that the land ought to be returned to them. Many are unhappy with the $39.5 million settiement of their unfair takings cases. One problem with this idea. of course. is that the former owners have already been given the opportunity to obtain fair compensation through the courts for land taken unfairly. The settlement was hundreds of millions of dollars less than even Federal estimates of what it would be. But this will not convince many here that former owners should now be given land back. Another problem with the idea of returning land to former owners is that much of the land will never be able to be returned since It will continue to be retained by the military or has been given to the local government. I. and others. sought to break the stalemate by working out a compromise in 1990. It provided the best balance possible between the view in Guam that the land should be given to Individuals for their private use and the general Federal policy of requiring that land given for free be used for public purposes. It would allow the land to be used for a broader array of purposes that benefit the people of Guam. Although this compromise passed both Houses. it was not enacted. however. after final action on the other side of the Capitol came too late In the 101st Congress. Delegate Blaz sponsored a bill based on the 1990 compromise in 1992. Interiors territories office then again effectively stymied passage by raising questions which were not essential to it. Meanwhile. tensions related to the continued Federal control of so much of Guam Intensified during these years of unnecessary delays. Frustration grew as original land owners passed away. The discontent has become so great that It has led to occupations of military land and become a dominant Issue on the island. The current gentleman from Guam . has approached this difficult situation intelligently and aggressively. He resurrected the 1990 compromise through this bill. He has also organized talks related to other land issues among all concerned Federal and local parties. And he has passed the Defense Department to Identify more land that It does not need. So. his efforts may require action on our parts In the future In addition to this bill. Mr. Speaker. the Insular and International Affairs Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R. 2144 last July 29th. There was general support expressed for this compromise with one exception that I mention because it has affected the consideration of this legislation. Interiors territories office. which. I should note. does not have authority over the matters covered by this legislation. proposed that the land be transferred to It for disposal. It wanted to use the land. first. for exchanges for private inholdings In the nationl park and also require the government of Guam to transfer ownership of Its inholdings In the park to the Federal Government before it would receive any of the land not used for these exchanges. It also wanted to have to approve of Guams plans for using any land It did get and the power to require Guam to pay the Federal Government if it used this land in a way not approved by the office. The subcommittee did not agree with the territories offices proposal and approved the legislation essentially as planned. But the office did get other Issues to be raised. The leadership of the National Parks. Forests. and Public Lands Subcommittee Insisted that the Issue of the government of Guams inholdings in the national park be addressed. The chairman of the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee wanted to ensure that land could be used for conservation purposes. We have worked up until shortly before we came on this floor today to address the national park issue. My own view was that It is an unrelated issue that should be handled separately. If possible. I recognized that the territorial governments land within the park must be maintained In a manner consistent with the park. But I also recognized that this did not require a transfer of ownership. that such a transfer would be objectionable to Guam given the emotions surrounding the Issue of Federal land ownership. and that Guam would only be willing to compromise so much to obtain the land that would be transferred by this legislation. Additionally. though. I recognized the reality of the strong sentiment among Members for ensuring the Guams obligations regarding the park are fulfilled. The gentleman from Guam also recognized It. Thanks to his leadership and work. as well as the consideration and efforts of the distinguished gentlemen from Minnesota and Utah. we have. therefore. developed the fairest compromise possible. It would retain Guams ownership of the land Involved and provide Guam with an opportunity to work out matters relatIng to management of the land with the National Park Service. Mr. Speaker. the text of the substitute that I have presented have been worked out with the chairmen of the two other committees to which the bill was referred--Govemment Operations and Armed Servlcesas well as the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee. One of the changes made from the language reported by the Natural Resources Committee Is the deletion of a provision that would have made clear that a law providing the homeless a priority claim to disposed of land does not apply to the land covered by this bill. We have agreed to delete this provision because it is not necessary. Regulations already make clear that the law that would have been cited does not apply when land Is transferred pursuant to special legislation. which Is what this measure is. Further. the other provisions of this measure should already provide sufficient guidance regarding the lands future use. In concluding. Mr. Speaker. I want to note that the executive branch also supports this measure. The Defense Department recognizes that finally returning the land Involved to Guam is critical to gaining the community acceptance necessary for Its continued use of land that it does need there and that acceptance is important since our national security mission In Guam is vital. The Air Force and Navy commanders on the island. Deputy Assistant Secretary Stanley Roth. Under Secretary Frank Wisner. and others have been helpful in explaining the importance of this legislation. The Interior Department has also come to support this measure. So. as I hope that I have made clear. this measure also deserves this Houses support. Mr. Speaker. I reserve the balance of my time.