The major problem with this year's Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill is not what it does--it is what it does not do. The penurious budget allocation provided the subcommittee, while a vast improvement over the earlier target of only $11.3 billion, simply does not allow this bill to address adequately the myriad needs facing our nation's historical, cultural and geographical treasures.
The greatest shortfall occurs in the Administration's Lands Legacy Initiative. The President's budget requested the full authorization of $900 million for the land and water conservation fund for fiscal year 2000, including $795 million in the Interior Bill. Unfortunately, the bill reported from committee includes only $165 million, or 20 percent, of the budget request. That amount is less than one-half of the funding made available for land and water conservation projects in 1999. The result of this inadequate funding will be missed opportunities with the likely outcome of increased development and commercialization in and near some of our nation's most spectacular public places. According to the Department of the Interior, there is a land acquisition backlog of more than $5 billion for 4.5 million acres located within boundaries of park, refuge and recreation units. At 1998 land prices, allowing nothing for inflation, the existing backlog would take more than 30 years to purchase. There apparently are some Members of Congress who believe the federal government owns too much real estate already. However, there is a large and growing segment of the public that realizes how fragile and important our national parks, refuges, and forests are, and is willing to spend tax dollars to protect and preserve these holdings.
The land acquisition backlog does not begin to address the totality of unfunded needs facing the bureaus and agencies included in the Interior Appropriations Bill. The Department of the Interior estimates its deferred maintenance backlog to be up to $15 billion. The Forest Service estimates it would need $8 billion to satisfy its current maintenance backlog. If deferred capital improvements are included, the amount of the Forest Services total unmet needs nearly doubles. According to a needs-based budget developed by the tribes, the Indian Health Service should request $8 billion for services and facilities instead of the $2.4 billion contained in this bill. And the unmet needs exist not only for the larger agencies funded in this bill. The Smithsonian Institution estimates it currently needs at least $250 million and probably more to bring some of its aging museums and facilities up to code. The Kennedy Center estimates its maintenance and repair requirement will be $30 million and its capital renewal program will require $150 million over the next few years.
While the Committee's bill adequately funds the uncontrollable and inflationary costs of most of the agencies, the overall allocation barely allows agencies to keep even with their maintenance backlogs, much less try to reduce them. As every homeowner knows only too well, delaying repairs for whatever reason almost always mean the repairs cost more and are more extensive when finally done. If the funding levels assumed under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 are adhered to for fiscal years 2001 and 2002, the backlog of unmet needs for agencies in the Interior and Related Agencies Bill undoubtedly will increase significantly. An important point to remember is that most of the maintenance backlog and unmet needs estimates do not assume increased demands on facilities, parks and forests. Annual visitation figures for national parks, forests, refuges and other facilities have been increasing dramatically in recent years. Many press accounts tell about how we, as a people, are `loving our parks to death.' Annual visits to units in the National Park System are approaching 300 million. A little known fact is that visits to our National Forests exceed those to our National Parks. In the next few decades, considerable infrastructure and construction costs will be necessary to equip and prepare our parks and forests for the increasing crush of visitors. The status quo budgets of the past few years and those assumed in the future do little to prepare our national treasures for future demands they are likely to experience.
Another area where the Committee's bill falls far short of desired funding is for the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities. Total recommended funding for the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities is only $208.7 million, a 30 percent reduction from the requested level of $150 million for each Endowment. The Administration's budget this year includes a new initiative for the NEA called Challenge America, which had elements specifically targeted to increasing access to the arts and to making youth at risk more aware of the arts. The effects of the shortsightedness of underfunding the NEA and NEH for yet another year will reverberate throughout our society for a long time.
In summary, the funding recommendations contained in this bill will do much for our nation and its cultural, physical and historical heritage. But when compared to the outstanding needs that cry out to be addressed, they fall far short of the mark.
DAVID OBEY.