Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3665, as amended, the Veterans Housing and Employment Improvement Act of 2005. This bill incorporates a number of important measures aimed at improving the quality of life of our servicemembers, veterans and military families.

I would like to thank Chairman Buyer and Ranking Member Evans for their leadership on the full committee and for their assistance in moving this bill to the floor today.

I also want to express my appreciation to the Chairman of the Economic Opportunity Subcommittee--Mr. Boozman, for all his hard work and bipartisan leadership on the subcommittee this legislative session. I look forward to continue working with my friend from Arkansas as we begin discussions with the Senate to ensure passage of a bipartisan, bicameral veterans' benefits package for this year. I know that the veterans of my home state of South Dakota and all veterans of this nation will appreciate the important benefits and program improvements we have included in this legislative measure.

Madam Speaker, H.R. 3665, as amended, incorporates important provisions that would provide greater flexibility to the VA's adaptive housing grant program. It also includes important measures to extend the Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program and improve the Department of Labor's Veterans Employment and Training Service. In addition, the bill also includes language from H.R. 1773, the Native American Veteran Home Loan Act--a measure I introduced along with a number of colleagues earlier this year.

Section 102 of the bill would make permanent the Native American Housing Loan Program, currently a pilot program administered by VA since 1993. The Native American Housing Loan program has provided 443 direct loans nationwide since its inception--20 to veterans in South Dakota. By all accounts the pilot program has been a great success and in fact currently has a negative subsidy--that is, it actually pays for itself. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that enactment of the provision would generate savings of $1 million over five years.

Section 103 of the bill would authorize non-native American veterans married to a Native American spouse and living on trust or tribal land to fully participate in this direct loan program. Because certain tribal sovereignty rules prohibit ownership interests by non-native persons they have been unable to qualify for this home loan program. The language in section 103 now makes it possible for a non-native military member or veteran to qualify for a VA loan if he or she shares a ``meaningful interest'' rather than ``ownership interest'' with their respective spouse in their home.

I want to thank Mr. Faleomavaega the Delegate of American Samoa for bringing this issue to my attention, and I want to also thank the VA for its assistance in drafting this particular provision.

Madam Speaker, the service members, veterans and military families of this nation have earned and deserve our best efforts here in Congress. Indeed, they deserve so much more.

As we approach Veterans Day, I am very proud to support this legislation and confident

it will benefit the veterans of my home state of South Dakota, as well as the other veterans around the country.

I fully support H.R. 3665, as amended, and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise in strong support of the Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2005. I want to thank the Judiciary Chairman Sensenbrenner and Ranking Member Conyers, as well as Agriculture Committee Chairman Goodlatte and Ranking Member Peterson, for their hard work in moving this legislation to the floor today.

I would also like to acknowledge and thank the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Henry Bonilla for his strong leadership on this very important issue as well as the work of Chairman Pombo and Congresswoman Waters who have been steadfast in their advocacy for private property rights in light of the threat posed by the Kelo decision.

This legislation is a priority for farmers and ranchers and landowners across my home State of South Dakota. I am extremely pleased that the Agriculture Committee acted swiftly on the legislation originally introduced by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bonilla) and myself, the Strengthening the Ownership of Private Property, or STOPP Act, and that Chairman Goodlatte made reporting out the bill from the Agriculture Committee a priority.

I am equally pleased by the determined, thoughtful attention demonstrated by the Judiciary Committee and the collaborative approach taken as we put together the Private Property Rights Protection Act. It is important, commonsense legislation that deserves our attention.

As my colleagues know, the Supreme Court's decision in Kelo v. City of New London dealt a serious blow to the fundamental rights of property owners in the United States. The House overwhelmingly expressed its disapproval shortly after the decision by a vote of 365 to 33. This court ruling allows governments to take private property from one landowner and give it to another private individual so long as some economic development justification is given. In short, it means that governments can take your property and give it to someone else.

I have been impressed by the widespread support for the proposition that this decision requires prompt congressional action.

As I have said before, South Dakotans from all walks of life are outraged about the Supreme Court's Kelo decision. As I have repeatedly noted in previous discussions of the case and as noted by Chairman Sensenbrenner earlier today, even Justice John Paul Stevens, the author of the Kelo decision, has expressed the feeling that the use of eminent domain by the City of New London was unwise as a matter of policy. And I agree.

I am pleased to have been part of the effort to craft a good bipartisan response that addresses these policy shortcomings by discouraging State and local governments from arbitrarily taking land from private landowners and giving that land to another private party. I felt compelled to take a lead in this process because of the people I represent and my roots on my family's farm in South Dakota. South Dakota is a rural State, and our population's livelihood is deeply tied to the land. This is true for virtually all of the State's citizens, whether they live in town or whether they live on the farm.

Because of this, the belief in private property rights runs strong and deep, and everyone I have talked to back home on this matter has delivered the same message: Landowners should not be vulnerable to the whims of a government that decides to take their land and often their livelihood just to give it to someone else who the government decides would deliver more in tax revenues. I am pleased to say that many of my colleagues agree with this, which is why in the short term since its introduction, this act and other initiatives have garnered broad bipartisan support, because the legislation makes sense.

As many of you know and as Chairman Goodlatte was discussing, Chairman Bonilla and I, along with Chairman Goodlatte, drafted H.R. 3405 to provide a strong response to the Kelo decision. At the time we introduced the STOPP Act, other legislation which took a similar approach by withholding some Federal funds when eminent domain is used to facilitate a private-to-private transfer of property for economic development purposes left open the possibility that a creative community or State could essentially shift funds within its budget to render the Federal response less effective.

In the words of Bob Stallman, president of the American Farm Bureau, in his testimony before the Agriculture Committee: ``All of the Federal bills introduced thus far take this approach. The differences among them are the degree to which such funding is withheld. While we support all the approaches taken in these bills, H.R. 3405 seems to offer the most effective deterrent to abuses of eminent domain.''

The Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2005 incorporates the core components of the STOPP Act, namely, the withholding of all Federal economic development assistance for 2 years if communities choose to use eminent domain to take private property from one landowner and give it to another private individual for the purposes of economic development.

I think this development is a testament to the hard work of individuals like Chairman Bonilla, Chairman Goodlatte, Congresswoman Waters, Chairman Pombo, and others to define, develop, refine, and promote a strong commonsense approach to the situation presented by the Kelo decision.

As I have said, I am happy to have been a part of these important efforts, and I encourage my colleagues to join with me today in passing this important bill.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Zoe Lofgren).

(Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Salazar).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green).

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, let me just conclude by commenting in my remaining time on some of the testimony that we heard in Chairman Pombo's Committee on Resources, on which I also sit, about the compelling testimony of individuals, business owners, who have been victims of abuses of eminent domain for the purpose of a private-to- private transfer.

So not only have we heard these compelling stories from individuals, families who have been affected, both in cities and in the country, but we have also had good bipartisan work in drafting sessions, our legislative hearings, our markups, in the Agriculture Committee, in the Resources Committee, now the Judiciary Committee. The bill that is under consideration today, that has attempted to respond in the most effective way to a ruling, as I mentioned, that received strong disapproval from this body shortly after the Supreme Court's ruling and on which even the opinion's author and, as I understand, even another member of the court who recognized that this is something the legislatures should contend with. And that is precisely what we are doing today on the House floor.

Congress needs to take action. We need to take it immediately. Our hope is certainly that we can make this bill law in short order, because, as some of the testimony before the Resources Committee last week also indicated, certain municipalities and other local units of government moved quickly after the Supreme Court's decision in Kelo to exercise their eminent domain powers for purposes of economic development for a public purpose, public benefit, beyond the plain language of the United States Constitution that limits the eminent domain power to public use. This has been a broad trend for a number of years, culminating in the Supreme Court's decision in Kelo, that requires the action of this body.

I urge my colleagues to support final passage of this bill that is a well-crafted, careful, thoughtful attempt to address a serious problem for property owners across the country.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in support of H.R. 4061, the Department of Veterans Affairs Information Technology Management Improvement Act. This bill helps the VA construct a balanced, responsive and accountable system to manage information technology at the Department of Veterans Affairs.

The Department Chief Information Officer will be given the control and resources necessary to manage information technology department- wide. Measures of effectiveness across the administrations will be tracked and should demonstrate that VA has become a more effective organization. The CIO will have control of the budget, assets, personnel and systems necessary to achieve this success.

Also under the bill, as the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes) noted, a Deputy CIO will be assigned to each of the three administrations. In this capacity, they are the principal advocates for the business and mission needs of their respective administrations at all levels of use, from senior managers to end-users throughout the field. The Deputy CIO will be responsible to the Department CIO for IT system alignment and related matters but will otherwise be in control of day-to-day IT operations in their respective administration.

I, too, would like to congratulate Chairman Buyer, Ranking Member Evans, their staffs and all Members who worked hard on working out this improved IT management system for the VA. I am glad to be a cosponsor of this bill which will help our veterans.

Mr. Speaker, I am saddened to report the passing of Specialist Daniel Bartels. He was killed, while serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The lives of countless people were enormously enhanced by Daniel's goodwill and service. He inspired all those who knew him. Our nation is a far better place because of his life. All Americans owe Daniel, and the other soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of freedom, a tremendous debt of gratitude for their service.

Every member of the House of Representatives has taken a solemn oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. While we certainly understand the gravity of the issues facing this legislative body, Specialist Daniel Bartels lived that commitment to our country. Today, we remember and honor his noble service to the United States and the ultimate sacrifice he has paid with his life to defend our freedoms and foster liberty for others.

Mr. Speaker, I express my sympathies to the family and friends of Specialist Daniel Bartels. I believe the best way to honor him is to emulate his commitment to our country. I know he will always be missed, but his service to our Nation will never be forgotten.

Mr. Speaker, I am saddened to report the passing of Chief Warrant Officer Paul Pillen. He was killed while serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The lives of countless people were enormously enhanced by Paul's goodwill and service. He inspired all those who knew him. Our Nation is a far better place because of his life. All Americans owe Paul, and the other soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of freedom, a tremendous debt of gratitude for their service.

Every member of the House of Representatives has taken a solemn oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. While we certainly understand the gravity of the issues facing this legislative body, Chief Warrant Officer Paul Pillen lived that commitment to our country. Today, we remember and honor his noble service to the United States and the ultimate sacrifice he has paid with his life to defend our freedoms and foster liberty for others.

Mr. Speaker, I express my sympathies to the family and friends of Chief Warrant Officer Paul Pillen. I believe the best way to honor him is to emulate his commitment to our country. I know he will always be missed, but his service to our Nation will never be forgotten.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Equitable Compensation Act of 2005.

Over 50 years ago, the Pick-Sloan Act initiated a major flood control and reclamation project along the Missouri River Basin. The construction of dams and reservoirs flooded hundreds of thousands of acres in South Dakota, dramatically altering the basin's landscape and the river's flow.

The American Indian communities in South Dakota were some of the most severely affected by this project. Five of the nine, Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota reservations in South Dakota, border the Missouri River.

The Cheyenne River Sioux Indian Reservation is in north central South Dakota and among the largest reservations in terms of land base. For generations the Lakota bands which comprised the Cheyenne River Sioux tribe camped in the river valley and shaped their way of life to match the contours of the land and the flow of the river.

This was no less true after the Plains Indians were confined to the reservations in the late 19th century. The fertile river bottomlands remained at the center of their society, providing the tribe's best crop land, pastures and wildlife habitat, as well as an important source of timber.

Perhaps even more significantly, the fertile bottomlands remained central to many of the tribe's cultural and spiritual practices. At the outset of the Pick-Sloan Project, the United States Government used its eminent domain power to seize large tracts of the fertile

Indian bottomlands. Payment for these takings was typically haphazard and piecemeal. Time and again, the government failed to fairly compensate both tribal and individual land owners for the loss of their property.

One such landowner is Freddy LeBeau. Freddy was born and raised on the Cheyenne River Sioux Indian Reservation. While serving 4 years in the U.S. Navy in the South Pacific during World War II, he arranged to purchase 200 acres of land along the Missouri River.

In Freddy's own words he explains, ``We live in a poor county, and if I can pay taxes on that land and help the county in that small manner, I would be glad to do that. I thought I was an asset there fighting for my country, and I would remain an asset when I came home in a small way and pay taxes on my land.''

Following his service, Freddy returned home and for a time he was able to work his land, raise horses and cattle and start a family. The Pick-Sloan Act changed all that.

The Ohio dam and reservoir flooded over 100,000 acres of Cheyenne River Sioux lands, including Freddy's home. He and many other tribal members were forced to move their families to higher ground and begin again. Like many others, he did not receive a fair price for his loss. And at 83 years old, this World War II veteran says, ``I am still looking for a place as good as the place that I lost.''

Congress has already acknowledged this injustice and only a few years ago passed legislation to provide just compensation by creating the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Recovery Trust Fund. While this action was commendable, it left one important group behind, tribal members who lost privately owned land, elders now, who owned deeded land at the time it was taken by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Current law actually prohibits the tribe from using existing funds to compensate these individuals.

The tribe has recognized this shortcoming and has worked to craft a solution that requires no new expenditures, no new expenditures, and guarantees that the affected tribal elders and their families can be justly compensated for lands taken over a generation ago.

The leadership of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, a united South Dakota congressional delegation, and the moving testimony of private landowners like Freddy LeBeau have all contributed to the introduction of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Equitable Compensation Act. This bill would correct a historic wrong and compensate tribal members who have been left behind and treated unjustly for many years.

At 83 years old, Freddy and 33 other tribal elders are still waiting for just compensation. I urge this swift consideration and passage of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) be removed from H.R. 3954.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to report that South Dakota State University (SDSU) has been awarded the 2005 Secretary of Defense Employer Support Freedom Award.

The Secretary of Defense Employer Support Freedom Award was instituted in 1996 by Secretary of Defense William Perry and the National Committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve. The award was created to publicly recognize American employers who provide exceptional support to their employees who serve the Nation in the National Guard and Reserve.

Mr. Speaker, let me express my admiration for SDSU and the South Dakota National Guard and Reserve. South Dakota has one of the highest rates of mobilization in the Nation. This high rate of service is a reflection of the hard work and pride South Dakota National Guard and Reserve members maintain. I am grateful for SDSU's tremendous support of the National Guard and Reserve. The university represents South Dakota principles with remarkable distinction.

SDSU provides differential pay for its employees for the entire length of their activation and student academic progression support. In addition, it grants employees 40 hours of paid personal leave for preparation of a deployment. SDSU's support for its National Guard and Reserve employees and students is admirable and serves as an example for other institutions of higher learning to emulate.

I join with all South Dakotans in expressing my gratitude to SDSU. We are all proud and thankful for their demonstrated commitment to their employees and students who serve the Nation in the National Guard and Reserve.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the ``Pactola Reservoir Reallocation Authorization Act of 2005,'' a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to reallocate the costs of the Pactola Dam and Reservoir in western South Dakota, in accordance with an agreement that has been reached by the affected parties that rely on that water.

The population in and around Rapid City, South Dakota, has experienced welcome growth in the past several years. As a result, the city is experiencing an increasing demand for municipal water. The city relies upon the Pactola Reservoir, constructed by the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) in the central Black Hills mountain range approximately 10 miles west of town, for much of its municipal water.

Another group, the Rapid Valley Water Conservancy District (RVWCD), also relies on this reservoir as a source of water for agricultural irrigation. As Rapid City's needs for water has increased, the RVWCD's demands has gone down.

The two entities and the BOR have renegotiated their water service contract and have agreed to reallocate the costs of the Pactola Dam to better reflect the City's growing need for municipal water supply and RVWCD's decreasing need for irrigation.

The BOR is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the Pactola Dam and Reservoir, part of the Rapid Valley Unit under

the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program (Flood Control Act of 1944, PL 78-534). In 1992, discussions were initiated to renegotiate water supply contracts with Rapid City and the Rapid Valley Conservancy District to meet municipal, industrial, irrigation, recreation, and wildlife needs. An agreement between both parties and the BOR was reached in December 2000. This legislation would reallocate the benefits and costs of Pactola Dam and Reservoir in accordance with that agreement and it must be enacted before the contract can take effect.

My colleague in the Senate, Senator Tim Johnson, worked to get the Pactola Reservoir Reallocation Authorization Act through that chamber last week, and I urge my colleagues in the House of Representatives to support this important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, before I was elected to the House of Representatives, I made a promise to thousands of seniors in South Dakota that, if they would send me to Washington, I would fight for them, stand by them, and make their voice heard. To help keep that promise by protecting the retirement income of nearly 100,000 South Dakotans from rising health care costs, the ``Social Security COLA Protection Act'' was the first piece of legislation I introduced upon my arrival.

Today, I am reintroducing the ``Social Security COLA Protection Act'' because the situation facing seniors in South Dakota and around the country is just as dire today as it was a year ago.

For retirees who depend on Social Security benefits to live, the only defense against increasing prices for food, clothing and energy is an annual cost-of-living adjustment, or COLA. However, rising Medicare premiums are diminishing the purchasing power of this yearly increase in benefits.

Over the last 5 years, monthly Medicare Part B premiums have nearly doubled. On September 16th, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced that Medicare beneficiaries will pay an additional 13 percent out of their Social Security checks in 2006. This marks the third consecutive rise of more than 10 percent and exceeds the 12 percent increase Medicare's trustees predicted in March. Every dollar that goes toward rising Medicare premiums is one less South Dakota's seniors can use to pay for groceries or utility bills.

We're not wealthy in South Dakota. Retirees in South Dakota clip coupons. They put off buying the things they need. They live modestly because that is what they must do to get by. It is no exaggeration to say that retirees in South Dakota need every penny of their COLA. Not just so they can maintain a basic standard of living--but so they can live with dignity.

My legislation protects retirees by ensuring that no more than 25 percent of their COLA can be absorbed by the increase in Medicare premiums. Next year, it would protect 100,000 South Dakotans who otherwise would see their scarce dollars taken from food, clothing and other essential purchases. For those who depend on Social Security to pay their bills, this legislation will help them save enough to buy new clothes, extra medicine or just a plane ticket to visit the grandchildren.

Last Congress, my legislation had the support of 116 members of the House and of prominent advocacy groups for seniors such as the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, the Alliance for Retired Americans and Families USA. I hope that Congress will take up and pass this legislation quickly, because the need for it is real and immediate.

This fall, just as Medicare premiums go up, temperatures in South Dakota will be going down. Seniors will sit at their kitchen tables, reading through the bills, and they may wonder yet again how they are going to make it through the month. We owe it to them to do better. I will work to see that we will.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding me this time, and I wish to engage the chairman of the Committee on Resources in a colloquy.

For many years, Mr. Chairman, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has engaged in river management practices that have harmed several species of native wildlife that live in and near the Missouri River and undermine the economic livelihood of many communities along the upper Missouri River basin. My State, and others in the upper reaches of the basin, have repeatedly endeavored to influence the decisions of the Corps as it makes critical river management decisions.

The interagency consultation provisions found in the current law are one of the few tools at our disposal. So I am concerned that the alternative procedures defined but not specified in section 12 of the Threatened and Endangered Species Act would create a way for the Corps to disregard the consultation requirement, and I want to make sure the alternative procedures provision is not designed as a way to eliminate consultation between Federal agencies.

Therefore, under the new bill, would the Corps be required to manage the Missouri River in a manner that meets current standards under the

I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for recognizing my concern and clarifying the intent of the bill. I am satisfied the bill will not weaken the interagency consultation requirement, and I appreciate your consideration.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan for his hard work and do the same to urge my colleagues to support this motion to recommit so that this body will take an important step to addressing the concerns of all consumers in the country, particularly those in rural America.

We need to take steps to be able to define price gouging, with the FTC having the authority to do that, and then to investigate these thousands of complaints that have come into the Energy Department in the past many weeks.

As co-chair of the Rural Working Group for the House Democratic Caucus, we know what the impact of high fuel costs has been for rural Americans, those that drive many miles to get to their jobs, those that are trying to harvest crops this fall.

This is an important step because inaction is inexcusable, and accountability is absolutely necessary. It is no longer a sufficient answer to say, well, price gouging is difficult to define; it is hard to prove.

This is the importance of this motion to recommit, so that we can take a step to allow the FTC to promulgate a rule defining the price gouging and the market manipulation that we believe is taking place and to help overcome the skepticism, especially in rural America, about the role of multinational oil companies who are taking measures that are not allowing the market to operate fairly and efficiently and effectively.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the Wind Cave National Park Boundary Revision Act of 2005.

Wind Cave National Park is one of our Nation's oldest national parks and one of the jewels in our national park system. Established over 100 years ago, Wind Cave was the first cave in the world to be set aside as a national park. At the turn of the 20th century, its first explorers reported that the cave was only three miles long. Well, that report was a little off. Today, we know that the cave has over 117 miles of mapped tunnels and explorers are still discovering new passages. This makes it the fifth largest cave in the world.

These passages contain many natural treasures--rare and exceptional displays of box work, a honeycomb-shaped formation that protrudes from the cave's ceilings and walls, as well as other rare cave formations, and a geology that scientists are still working to understand. Past Congresses recognized the value of these treasures by creating the park; our ability to enjoy them today is a testament to their foresight.

With over 28,000 acres today, the park's surface is an impressive asset as well. The Wind Cave National Park Boundary Revision act would expand this stewardship to include an additional 5,000 acres of mixed grass prairie, ponderosa pine forest, and a dramatic river canyon. Home to native wildlife such as bison, elk, pronghorn, mule deer, coyotes, and prairie dogs, the park is one of the few remaining mixed-grass ecosystems in the country. The expansion would be a natural extension of this habitat and enhance the park's holdings.

This project began when the ranching family that owns the land approached the National Parks Service over 3 years ago. The Black Hills region of South Dakota is developing rapidly and, rather than allow the land to be developed into subdivisions and strip malls, they envisioned preserving it for future generations. That initial discussion expanded to the surrounding community, State government, and eventually, the United States Congress. The bill's passage in the Senate and its consideration here today are the fruits of those discussions.

In addition to receiving support in the House of Representatives from my two predecessors and myself, this bill enjoys the bipartisan backing of the South Dakota Senate delegation and South Dakota Governor Mike Rounds. As the expansion project has proceeded, interested parties have weighed in with their concerns and they have been answered.

Wind Cave National Park has protected and preserved a national treasure for over 100 years. The Wind Cave National Park Boundary Revision Act is a unique opportunity to expand the park and enhance its value to the public so that visitors can enjoy it forever. It is my hope that my colleagues will support the expansion of this park and vote in favor of this important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank my colleagues who just moments ago voted in support and helped pass the Wind Cave National Park Boundary Revision Act of 2005.

Wind Cave National Park is one of our Nation's oldest national parks and one of the jewels of our National Park system. Established over 100 years ago, Wind Cave was the first cave in the world to be set aside as a national park.

At the turn of the 20th century, its first explorers reported that the cave was only 3 miles long. Well, that report was a little off. Today, we know that the cave has over 117 miles of mapped tunnels; and explorers are still discovering new passages. This makes it the fifth largest cave in the world.

These passages contain many natural treasures, rare and exceptional displays of boxwork, a honeycomb-shaped formation that protrudes from the cave's ceilings and walls, as well as other rare cave formations and a geology that scientists are still working to understand. Past Congresses have recognized the value of these treasures by creating the park. Our ability to enjoy them today is a testament to their foresight.

With over 28,000 acres today, the park surface is an impressive asset as well. The Wind Cave National Park Boundary Revision Act will help expand this stewardship to include an additional 5,000 acres of mixed grass prairie, ponderosa pine forest and a dramatic river canyon.

Home to native wildlife such as bison, elk, pronghorn, mule deer, coyotes and prairie dogs, the park is one of the few remaining mixed grass ecosystems in the country. The expansion would be a natural extension of this habitat and enhance the park's holdings.

This project began when the ranching family that owns the land approached the National Park Service over 3 years ago. The Black Hills region of South Dakota is developing rapidly, and rather than allow the land to be developed into subdivisions and strip malls, they envisioned preserving it for future generations. That initial discussion expanded to the surrounding community, State government and, eventually, the United States Congress. The Bill's approval in the Senate and its passage here today are the fruits of those discussions.

In addition to receiving support in the House of Representatives from my two predecessors and myself, this bill has enjoyed the bipartisan backing of South Dakota's Senators and South Dakota Governor Mike Rounds. As the expansion project has proceeded, interested parties have weighed in with their concerns, and they have been answered.

Wind Cave National Park has protected and preserved a national treasure for over 100 years. The Wind Cave National Park Boundary Revision Act is an important step toward expanding the park and enhancing its value to the public so that visitors can enjoy it forever.

I would like to extend my gratitude again to my many colleagues who voted for this legislation, and I look forward to moving the proposed expansion forward in the future.