[Senate Report 107-77]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 179
107th Congress Report
SENATE
1st Session 107-77
======================================================================
ADAMS MEMORIAL
_______
October 1, 2001.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Bingaman, from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 1668]
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was
referred the Act (H.R. 1668) to authorize the Adams Memorial
Foundation to establish a commemorative work on Federal land in
the District of Columbia and its environs to honor former
President John Adams and his legacy, having considered the
same, reports favorably thereon without amendment and
recommends that the Act do pass.
Purpose
The purpose of H.R. 1668 is to authorize the Adams Memorial
Foundation to establish a commemorative work in the District of
Columbia or its environs to honor former President John Adams,
his wife Abigail Adams, their son, former President John Quincy
Adams, and the family's legacy of public service.
background and need
The family including our second President John Adams, his
wife Abigail Adams, and their son, the sixth President John
Quincy Adams has made a distinguished contribution to American
history. Historian and author David McCullough contends that
the force of John Adams' argument on the floor of the Second
Continental Congress was critical in securing sufficient
support for the Declaration of Independence. During the
Revolutionary War, Adams negotiated a loan from the Dutch that
allowed the former colonists to carry on the fight for
independence, and he later helped to negotiate the Treaty of
Paris, ending the American Revolution. Following his service as
the Nation's first Vice President, John Adams was elected
President in 1797, the first to live in the White House. As
President, John Adams managed to avoid a potentially disastrous
military confrontation with France, despite considerable
political pressure to declare war.
John Adams' wife, Abigail Smith Adams, was an early
advocate of women's rights, a fierce patriot, and a staunch
abolitionist. She is still regarded as one of the most
influential first ladies. Their son John Quincy Adams was the
only former president to be elected to the House of
Representatives. Prior to his election as President in 1825,
John Quincy Adams served in the Senate and later as Secretary
of State under the Monroe Administration. During his tenure in
the House of Representatives, John Quincy Adams was known as
``Old Man Eloquent'' for championing unpopular causes with
distinction and for his leadership in opposition to slavery.
H.R. 1668 would honor the family's legacy of public service
by authorizing the Adams Memorial Foundation to construct a
commemorative work in the District of Columbia or its environs
in accordance with the requirements of the Commemorative Works
Act.
legislative history
H.R. 1668 was introduced by Representative Roemer on May 1,
2001. The Act passed the House of Representatives by a voice
vote on June 25. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a
hearing on the bill on July 17, 2001. At its business meeting
on August 2, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources ordered H.R. 1668 favorably reported without
amendment.
committee recommendation
The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in
open business session on August 2, 2001, by a voice vote of a
quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass H.R. 1668 as
described herein.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1(a) contains congressional findings.
Subsection (b) authorizes the Adams Memorial Foundation to
establish a commemorative work in the District of Columbia or
its environs to honor former President John Adams, his wife
Abigail Adams, their son, former President John Quincy Adams,
and the family's legacy of public service.
Subsection (c) requires that the memorial be established in
accordance with the Commemorative Works Act (40 U.S.C. 1001 et
seq.).
Subsection (d) precludes the use of Federal funds to pay
for any expense relating to the establishment of the memorial.
The Commemorative Works Act requires the sponsoring entity to
raise the entire cost of construction, plus an additional 10
percent to be used to fund perpetual maintenance of the
commemorative work.
Subsection (e) provides that if the Adams Memorial
Foundation raises funds beyond the amount required, including
the maintenance reserve, then any additional funds are to be
transmitted to the Treasury in accordance with section 8(b)(1)
of the Commemorative Works Act.
Section 2 states that the terms ``commemorative work'' and
``the District of Columbia and its environs'' have the same
meaning as they are defined in the Commemorative Works Act.
Cost and Budgetary Considerations
The following estimate of the costs of this measure has
been provided by the Congressional Budget Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, August 17, 2001.
Hon. Jeff Bingaman,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1668, an act to
authorize the Adams Memorial Foundation to establish a
commemorative work on federal land in the District of Columbia
and its environs to honor former President John Adams and his
legacy.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Deborah Reis.
Sincerely,
Robert A. Sunshine
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE
H.R. 1668--An act to authorize the Adams Memorial Foundation to
establish a commemorative work on federal land in the District
of Columbia and its environs to honor former President John
Adams and his legacy
H.R. 1668 would authorize the Adams Memorial Foundation to
establish (without the use of federal funds) a memorial in
accordance with the Commemorative Works Act. Under that act,
any association that receives a permit to construct a memorial
in the District of Columbia or its environs must deposit an
amount equal to 10 percent of the memorial's estimated
construction cost in the U.S. Treasury. The funds deposited are
then available without further appropriation for maintenance
and preservation of the memorial.
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 1668 would have no
significant impact on federal discretionary spending. Because
the act would affect offsetting receipts (from the payment of
10 percent of construction funds) and direct spending (from
using a portion of this money for annual maintenance), pay-as-
you-go procedures would apply. CBO cannot estimate the effect
of these transactions because a design or concept for the
memorial does not exist at this time. Based on the experience
with similar commemorative projects, however, we expect that no
amounts would be received or spent by the federal government
for several years after the legislation is enacted and that
such collections and spending would offset each other over
time.
The legislation contains no intergovernmental or private-
sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
and would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal
governments.
The CBO staff contact is Deborah Reis. This estimate was
approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for
Budget Analysis.
Regulatory Impact Evaluation
In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following
evaluation of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in
carrying out H.R. 1668. The Act is not a regulatory measure in
the sense of imposing government-established standards or
significant responsibilities on private individuals and
businesses.
No personal information would be collected in administering
the program. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal
privacy.
Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the
enactment of H.R. 1668
Executive Communications
On July 27, 2001, the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources requested legislative reports from the Department of
the Interior and the Office of Management and Budget setting
forth Executive agency recommendations on H.R. 1668. These
reports had not been received at the time this report was
filed. The testimony provided by the National Park Service and
the National Capital Planning Commission at the Subcommittee
hearing follows:
Statement of John G. Parsons, Associate Regional Director for Lands,
Resources, and Planning, National Capital Region, National Park
Service, Department of the Interior
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
Department of the Interior's views on H.R. 1668, which would
authorize the Adams Memorial Foundation to establish a memorial
in the District of Columbia and its environs to honor former
President John Adams, along with his wife Abigail Adams and his
son, former President John Quincy Adams, and the family's
legacy of public service.
The Department supports enactment of H.R. 1668 as amended
and passed by the House of Representatives on June 25, 2001.
This position is consistent with the recommendation of the
National Capital Memorial Commission, which endorsed the
proposed legislation by a unanimous vote on April 26, 2001.
H.R. 1668 authorizes the establishment of the Adams
memorial in accordance with the Commemorative Works Act of
1986. The Act established a process under which, following
authorization of the subject matter by Congress, the Secretary
of the Interior submits a plan for the site and design of the
memorial for approval by the National Capital Planning
Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts. The bill also
provides that no Federal funds shall be used to pay any expense
of the establishment of the commemorative work. The Adams
Memorial Foundation would be responsible for not only the cost
of construction of the memorial, but also for establishing a
fund in the Treasury equal to ten percent of the cost of
construction for catastrophic maintenance and preservation, as
provided for in Section 8(b) of the Commemorative Works Act.
A memorial to John Adams, Abigail Adams, and John Quincy
Adams in the Nation's Capital would be quite appropriate. As
one of the findings in H.R. 1668 states, ``Few families have
contributed as profoundly to the United States as the family
that gave the Nation its second president, John Adams; its
sixth president, John Quincy Adams; first ladies Abigail Smith
Adams and Louisa Catherine Johnson Adams; and succeeding
generations of statesmen, diplomats, advocates, and authors.''
One of the three Library of Congress buildings is named after
John Quincy Adams but, otherwise, there is no major public work
in the District of Columbia that recognizes or memorializes
John Adams or John Quincy Adams. We agree with the sponsors of
this bill that these father-and-son presidents and their
family's legacy of public service deserve a memorial in
Washington.
As noted above, this legislation simply authorizes the
process for developing an Adams memorial to move forward. The
Adams Memorial Foundation has not yet proposed a design or site
for the memorial, nor have there been any decisions made by the
National Capital Memorial Commission, the Commission of Fine
Arts, or the National Capital Planning Commission other than
endorsement of H.R. 1668 by the National Capital Memorial
Commission. However, because the three commissions have
established policies against siting any more memorials in the
``reserve,'' the area that represents the Mall east to west and
the White House to the Jefferson Memorial north to south, the
memorial would not be located there. Instead, the recommended
site would likely be one of the 100 sites that have been
identified in a master plan for memorials and museums in the
District of Columbia and its environs by the three commissions
as sites that are appropriate for new memorials.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. I would be
pleased to answer any questions you or other members of the
Subcommittee may have.
Testimony of Patricia E. Gallagher, Executive Director, National
Capital Planning Commission
Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to speak on
behalf of the National Capital Planning Commission regarding
the proposal to construct a memorial honoring former President
John Adams; his wife, Abigail; and his son and former President
John Quincy Adams. The Commission recognizes the enduring
legacy and remarkable contributions the Adams family made to
the social and political life of our nation. Commemorating John
Adams and his family's life and work in our Nation's Capital is
a fitting and appropriate tribute.
The Commission is particularly pleased to support this
proposal because this is among the first memorials whose
location and development will be guided by the new Memorials
and Museums Master Plan. The Commission developed the master
plan in cooperation with the Commission of Fine Arts and the
National Capital Memorial Commission and released it in draft
form several months ago. The plan is the result of a two-year
collaborative effort to preserve the historic open space of
Washington's Monumental Core while identifying sites for new
cultural and commemorative facilities.
A key feature of the master plan is a Commemorative Zone
Policy that establishes a Reserve in the central cross-axis of
the Mall in which the three commissions have agreed to approve
no new memorial sites. The area immediately adjacent--Area I--
is a sensitive area designated for memorials of preeminent and
historic national significance. Finally, the Commemorative Zone
Policy delineates an Area II that encompasses the rest of the
city and where the review agencies will encourage development
of future commemorative works. The plan integrates key natural
features--rivers, ridges, overlooks--with the avenues, parks
and squares created by Pierre L'Enfant and subsequent planning.
Although it builds on these earlier plans, it also introduces
new elements that strengthen Washington's symbolic and
commemorative character.
The master plan identifies approximately 100 sites for new
museums and memorials and provides general guidelines for how
these facilities should be developed. The plan seeks to reach
public consensus on locations in the National Capital that are
appropriate for these important public spaces and offers
memorial sponsors suitable locations for their projects. The
plan is also intended to ensure that future generations of
Americans have a sufficient supply of desirable sites for their
own commemorative and cultural needs. For your information, we
have provided maps of the Commemorative Zone Policy and the
proposed master plan sites.
In preparing the master plan, we have consulted with a team
of nationally recognized planning and design professionals and
with the District of Columbia government and local and
community and professional groups. Released in draft form for
public comment this past December, the plan has enjoyed broad
public acceptance. Benjamin Forgey, the Architecture Critic of
the Washington Post has called the plan ``a brilliant piece of
work.'' The Washington Chapter of the American Institute of
Architects has applauded the plan, and the Virginia Chapter of
the American Planning Association has recognized it with its
highest award. We are now incorporating the comments we
received from the public and expect to release the final
version in September.
The Commission believes that with the help of the master
plan, the Adams Memorial Foundation will be able to identify
several highly desirable possible locations for its project. We
look forward to working with the Adams Memorial Foundation to
identify a location of beauty and significance and to approve a
design that is worthy of this remarkable family. We believe
that the Memorials and Museums Master Plan offers a new
landscape of commemoration in the Nation's Capital and that
this memorial will permit us to demonstrate that we can pay
tribute to our national history in a way that makes us all
proud.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement and I will be
happy to answer any questions.
changes in existing law
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee notes that no
changes in existing law are made by the Act H.R. 1668 as
ordered reported.