[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 127 (Wednesday, September 19, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H6128-H6132]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1950
MANHATTAN PROJECT NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK ACT
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules
and pass the bill (H.R. 5987) to establish the Manhattan Project
National Historical Park in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Los Alamos, New
Mexico, and Hanford, Washington, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 5987
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Manhattan Project National
Historical Park Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) the Manhattan Project was an unprecedented top-secret
program implemented during World War II to produce an atomic
bomb before Nazi Germany;
(2) a panel of experts convened by the President's Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation in 2001--
(A) stated that ``the development and use of the atomic
bomb during World War II has been called `the single most
significant event of the 20th century' ''; and
(B) recommended that nationally significant sites
associated with the Manhattan Project be formally established
as a collective unit and be administered for preservation,
commemoration, and public interpretation in cooperation with
the National Park Service;
(3) the Manhattan Project National Historical Park Study
Act (Public Law 108-340; 118 Stat. 1362) directed the
Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the Secretary
of Energy, to conduct a special resource study of the
historically significant sites associated with the Manhattan
Project to assess the national significance, suitability, and
feasibility of designating one or more sites as a unit of the
National Park System;
(4) after significant public input, the National Park
Service study found that ``including Manhattan Project-
related sites in
[[Page H6129]]
the national park system will expand and enhance the
protection and preservation of such resources and provide for
comprehensive interpretation and public understanding of this
nationally significant story in the 20th century American
history'';
(5) the Department of the Interior, with the concurrence of
the Department of Energy, recommended the establishment of a
Manhattan Project National Historical Park comprised of
resources at--
(A) Oak Ridge, Tennessee;
(B) Los Alamos, New Mexico; and
(C) Hanford, in the Tri-Cities area, Washington; and
(6) designation of a Manhattan Project National Historical
Park as a unit of the National Park System would improve the
preservation of, interpretation of, and access to the
nationally significant historic resources associated with the
Manhattan Project for present and future generations to gain
a better understanding of the Manhattan Project, including
the significant, far-reaching, and complex legacy of the
Manhattan Project.
SEC. 3. PURPOSES.
The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to preserve and protect for the benefit of present and
future generations the nationally significant historic
resources associated with the Manhattan Project;
(2) to improve public understanding of the Manhattan
Project and the legacy of the Manhattan Project through
interpretation of the historic resources associated with the
Manhattan Project;
(3) to enhance public access to the Historical Park
consistent with protection of public safety, national
security, and other aspects of the mission of the Department
of Energy; and
(4) to assist the Department of Energy, Historical Park
communities, historical societies, and other interested
organizations and individuals in efforts to preserve and
protect the historically significant resources associated
with the Manhattan Project.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Historical park.--The term ``Historical Park'' means
the Manhattan Project National Historical Park established
under section 5.
(2) Manhattan project.--The term ``Manhattan Project''
means the Federal program to develop an atomic bomb ending on
December 31, 1946.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
SEC. 5. ESTABLISHMENT OF MANHATTAN PROJECT NATIONAL
HISTORICAL PARK.
(a) Establishment.--
(1) Date.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, there shall be established as a unit
of the National Park System the Manhattan Project National
Historical Park.
(2) Areas included.--The Historical Park shall consist of
facilities and areas listed under subsection (b) as
determined by the Secretary, in consultation with the
Secretary of Energy. The Secretary shall include the area
referred to in subsection (b)(3)(A), the B Reactor National
Historic Landmark, in the Historical Park.
(b) Eligible Areas.--The Historical Park may only be
comprised of one or more of the following areas, or portions
of the areas, as generally depicted in the map titled
``Manhattan Project National Historical Park Sites'',
numbered 540/108,834-C, and dated September 2012:
(1) Oak ridge, tennessee.--Facilities, land, or interests
in land that are--
(A) at Buildings 9204-3 and 9731 at the Y-12 National
Security Complex;
(B) at the X-10 Graphite Reactor at the Oak Ridge National
Laboratory;
(C) at the K-25 Building site at the East Tennessee
Technology Park; and
(D) at the former Guest House located at 210 East Madison
Road.
(2) Los alamos, new mexico.--Facilities, land, or interests
in land that are--
(A) in the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory National
Historic Landmark District, or any addition to the Landmark
District proposed in the National Historic Landmark
Nomination--Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory (LASL) NHL
District (Working Draft of NHL Revision), Los Alamos National
Laboratory document LA-UR 12-00387 (January 26, 2012);
(B) at the former East Cafeteria located at 1670 Nectar
Street; and
(C) at the former dormitory located at 1725 17th Street.
(3) Hanford, washington.--Facilities, land, or interests in
land that are--
(A) the B Reactor National Historic Landmark;
(B) the Hanford High School in the town of Hanford and
Hanford Construction Camp Historic District;
(C) the White Bluffs Bank building in the White Bluffs
Historic District;
(D) the warehouse at the Bruggemann's Agricultural Complex;
(E) the Hanford Irrigation District Pump House; and
(F) the T Plant (221-T Process Building).
(c) Written Consent of Owner.--No non-Federal property may
be included in the Historical Park without the written
consent of the owner.
SEC. 6. AGREEMENT.
(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary and the Secretary of
Energy (acting through the Oak Ridge, Los Alamos, and
Richland site offices) shall enter into an agreement
governing the respective roles of the Secretary and the
Secretary of Energy in administering the facilities, land, or
interests in land under the administrative jurisdiction of
the Department of Energy that is to be included in the
Historical Park under section 5(b), including provisions for
enhanced public access, management, interpretation, and
historic preservation.
(b) Responsibilities of the Secretary.--Any agreement under
subsection (a) shall provide that the Secretary shall--
(1) have decisionmaking authority for the content of
historic interpretation of the Manhattan Project for purposes
of administering the Historical Park; and
(2) ensure that the agreement provides an appropriate
advisory role for the National Park Service in preserving the
historic resources covered by the agreement.
(c) Responsibilities of the Secretary of Energy.--Any
agreement under subsection (a) shall provide that the
Secretary of Energy--
(1) shall ensure that the agreement appropriately protects
public safety, national security, and other aspects of the
ongoing mission of the Department of Energy at the Oak Ridge
Reservation, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Hanford
Site;
(2) may consult with and provide historical information to
the Secretary concerning the Manhattan Project;
(3) shall retain responsibility, in accordance with
applicable law, for any environmental remediation that may be
necessary in or around the facilities, land, or interests in
land governed by the agreement; and
(4) shall retain authority and legal obligations for
historic preservation and general maintenance, including to
ensure safe access, in connection with the Department's
Manhattan Project resources.
(d) Amendments.--The agreement under subsection (a) may be
amended, including to add to the Historical Park facilities,
land, or interests in land within the eligible areas
described in section 5(b) that are under the jurisdiction of
the Secretary of Energy.
SEC. 7. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall consult with
interested State, county, and local officials, organizations,
and interested members of the public--
(1) before executing any agreement under section 6; and
(2) in the development of the general management plan under
section 8(b).
(b) Notice of Determination.--Not later than 30 days after
the date on which an agreement under section 6 is entered
into, the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register
notice of the establishment of the Historical Park, including
an official boundary map.
(c) Availability of Map.--The official boundary map
published under subsection (b) shall be on file and available
for public inspection in the appropriate offices of the
National Park Service. The map shall be updated to reflect
any additions to the Historical Park from eligible areas
described in section 5(b).
(d) Additions.--Any land, interest in land, or facility
within the eligible areas described in section 5(b) that is
acquired by the Secretary or included in an amendment to the
agreement under section 6(d) shall be added to the Historical
Park.
SEC. 8. ADMINISTRATION.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall administer the
Historical Park in accordance with--
(1) this Act; and
(2) the laws generally applicable to units of the National
Park System, including--
(A) the National Park System Organic Act (16 U.S.C. 1 et
seq.); and
(B) the Act of August 21, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 461 et seq.).
(b) General Management Plan.--Not later than 3 years after
the date on which funds are made available to carry out this
section, the Secretary, with the concurrence of the Secretary
of Energy, and in consultation and collaboration with the Oak
Ridge, Los Alamos and Richland Department of Energy site
offices, shall complete a general management plan for the
Historical Park in accordance with section 12(b) of Public
Law 91-383 (commonly known as the ``National Park Service
General Authorities Act'') (16 U.S.C. 1a-7(b)).
(c) Interpretive Tours.--The Secretary may, subject to
applicable law, provide interpretive tours of historically
significant Manhattan Project sites and resources in the
States of Tennessee, New Mexico, and Washington that are
located outside the boundary of the Historical Park.
(d) Land Acquisition.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary may acquire land and
interests in land within the eligible areas described in
section 5(b) by--
(A) transfer of administrative jurisdiction from the
Department of Energy by agreement between the Secretary and
the Secretary of Energy;
(B) donation; or
(C) exchange.
(2) No use of condemnation.--The Secretary may not acquire
by condemnation any land or interest in land under this Act
or for the purposes of this Act.
(e) Donations; Cooperative Agreements.--
(1) Federal facilities.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary may enter into one or more
agreements with the head of a Federal agency to provide
public access
[[Page H6130]]
to, and management, interpretation, and historic preservation
of, historically significant Manhattan Project resources
under the jurisdiction or control of the Federal agency.
(B) Donations; cooperative agreements.--The Secretary may
accept donations from, and enter into cooperative agreements
with, State governments, units of local government, tribal
governments, organizations, or individuals to further the
purpose of an interagency agreement entered into under
subparagraph (A) or to provide visitor services and
administrative facilities within reasonable proximity to the
Historical Park.
(2) Technical assistance.--The Secretary may provide
technical assistance to State, local, or tribal governments,
organizations, or individuals for the management,
interpretation, and historic preservation of historically
significant Manhattan Project resources not included within
the Historical Park.
(3) Donations to department of energy.--For the purposes of
this Act, or for the purpose of preserving and providing
access to historically significant Manhattan Project
resources, the Secretary of Energy may accept, hold,
administer, and use gifts, bequests, and devises (including
labor and services).
SEC. 9. CLARIFICATION.
(a) No Buffer Zone Created.--Nothing in this Act, the
establishment of the Historical Park, or the management plan
for the Historical Park shall be construed to create buffer
zones outside of the Historical Park. That an activity can be
seen and heard from within the Historical Park shall not
preclude the conduct of that activity or use outside the
Historical Park.
(b) No Cause of Action.--Nothing in this Act shall
constitute a cause of action with respect to activities
outside or adjacent to the established boundary of the
Historical Park.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Hastings) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
General Leave
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that
all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their
remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Washington?
There was no objection.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5987 is a bipartisan bill authored by me that will
establish the Manhattan Project National Historical Park. Mr. Speaker,
there is a like bill, a bipartisan bill, also pending in the Senate.
The park will encompass three locations that were integral to the
tremendous engineering and human achievements of the Manhattan Project.
The three locations are the Hanford site in my home State of
Washington, Los Alamos in New Mexico, and Oak Ridge in Tennessee.
The vast majority of the facilities that are eligible to be included
in this park are already owned by the Federal Government, and they are
located on lands owned and controlled by the Department of Energy.
Our Nation already possesses these pieces of history, and the real
purpose of this bill is to officially declare the importance of
preserving the history, providing access to the public, and include the
unique abilities of the Park Service to help tell this story.
Currently, some of these facilities slated for inclusion in this park
are scheduled to be destroyed at considerable taxpayer expense. A great
many local community leaders in all three States and interested
citizens have worked to coordinate a commitment to preserving this
piece of our history. Additionally, the government will save millions
of dollars from foregone destruction, as opposed to the minimal cost of
providing public access and park administration.
In recognition of the important contributions to the Manhattan
Project by the men and women at sites across the country, the bill
contains a provision allowing communities like Dayton, Ohio, for
example, outside the historical park, to receive technical assistance
and support from the Department of the Interior as they seek to
preserve and manage their own Manhattan Project park resources.
This is a good piece of legislation, and it is part of our history,
Mr. Speaker. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
To my friend, Mr. Hastings, the technology which created the bomb
cannot be separated from the horror which the bomb created. The
celebration of the technology of the bomb bespeaks a moral blindness to
its effects, which include not only the devastation of the people of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but the $10 trillion Cold War between the U.S.
and Russia and the tens of thousands of nuclear weapons which today
hang over the world like so many swords of Damocles.
At a time when we should be organizing the world towards abolishing
nuclear weapons before they abolish us, we are instead indulging in
admiration at our cleverness as a species. The bomb is about
graveyards; it's not about national parks.
The philosopher, Alfred North Whitehead once wrote:
The major advances in civilization are processes that all
but wreck the societies in which they occur.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I advise my friend from Ohio
I have no more requests for time, and I am prepared to yield back if he
is prepared to yield back.
Mr. KUCINICH. I shall continue then.
When you walk into the Bradbury Science Museum at the Los Alamos
National Laboratory in New Mexico, you're greeted on your immediate
left by replicas of Fat Man and Little Boy, the two bombs that dropped
on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The space surrounding them does not include
a picture of the leveled Japanese cities, pictures of children with
massive birth defects, or stories of families and hundreds of years of
history obliterated in the blink of an eye. It does not include a
discussion of the health effects of worldwide distribution of radiation
from the bombs or from the larger proliferation of nuclear technology
that emanated from Los Alamos.
I am speaking about the Bradbury Science Museum. The bombs reside in
a section of the museum called Defense, which presents information on
the nuclear arsenal, the nuclear stockpile, plutonium, and explosives.
Other sections discuss how nuclear energy works and how the bomb was
triggered, how the bomb was triggered.
A substantive discussion of the myriad negative impacts of the
technology that came out of the Manhattan Project is relegated to
obscurity. A public forum tucked away in a corner provides space for
public input.
When the U.S. dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in
August of 1945, more than 200,000 people were killed instantly. In the
years that followed, over 100,000 additional people died of radiation
poisoning. The Japanese people today continue to experience the
devastating and long-term effects of the bomb.
It is now widely acknowledged by many top U.S. Government officials
at the time of the war that dropping the bomb on Japan was completely
unnecessary. I want to get into that section at this moment so that
those who say, well, we need to create a memorial to the bomb because
it ended the war, well, that's not true. I'm going to give you some
quotes, Mr. Speaker.
This is from Dwight David Eisenhower, who was general of the armies
and also, later on, President of the United States. He said:
In July 1945, Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my
headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was
preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those
who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to
question the wisdom of such an act. The Secretary, upon
giving me the news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico
and of the plan for using it, asked for my reaction,
apparently expecting a vigorous assent.
During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been
conscious of a feeling of depression, and so I voiced to him
my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that
Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was
completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that
our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of
a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory
as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that
Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender
with a minimum loss of ``face.'' The Secretary was deeply
perturbed by my attitude.
That's Dwight Eisenhower in a book called ``Mandate for Change,''
page 360.
[[Page H6131]]
{time} 2000
From General Douglas MacArthur.
Norman Cousins was a consultant to General MacArthur during the
American occupation of Japan. Cousins writes of his conversations with
MacArthur:
MacArthur's views about the decision to drop the atomic
bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were starkly different from
what the general public supposed.
Cousins continues:
When I asked General MacArthur about the decision to drop
the bomb, I was surprised to learn he had not even been
consulted. What, I asked, would his advice have been? He
replied that he saw no military justification for the
dropping of the bomb. The war might have ended weeks earlier,
he said, if the United States had agreed, as it later did
anyway, to the retention of the institution of the Emperor.
That's from a book called ``The Pathology of Power,'' Norman Cousins.
Leo Szilard was the first scientist to conceive of how an atomic bomb
might be made. That was in 1933. He speaks of a meeting with J. Robert
Oppenheimer, the head scientist of the Manhattan Project:
Szilard: I told Oppenheimer that I thought it would be a
very serious mistake to use the bomb against the cities of
Japan. Oppenheimer didn't share my views. Well, said
Oppenheimer, don't you think that if we tell the Russians
what we intend to do and then use the bomb in Japan, the
Russians will understand it? They'll understand it only too
well, Szilard replied.
Brigadier General Carter Clarke, who was the military intelligence
officer in charge of preparing intercepted Japanese cables:
We didn't need to do it, and we knew we didn't need to do
it, and they knew that we didn't need to do it, we used them
as an experiment for two atomic bombs.
This is quoted in Gar Alperovitz, ``The Decision to Use the Atomic
Bomb.'' Alperovitz, by the way, who did 30 years of research on the
subject, said:
I think it can be proven that the bomb not only was
unnecessary, but known in advance not to be necessary.
Another quote. Henry H. Arnold, Commanding General of the U.S. Army
Air Forces:
The Japanese position was hopeless even before the first
atomic bomb fell because the Japanese had lost control of
their own air.
Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the U.S.
Pacific Fleet:
The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The
atomic bomb played no decisive part from a purely military
point of view in the defeat of Japan.
The use of atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no
material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese
were already defeated and ready to surrender.
This is Admiral William D. Leahy, chief of staff to President Truman:
Certainly, prior to 31 December 1945, and in all
probability, prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have
surrendered even if atomic bombs had not been dropped.
That's from the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey.
This is from Major General Curtis LeMay:
The war would have been over in 2 weeks without the
Russians entering and without the atomic bomb. The atomic
bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all.
Now it's just not disputable that this technology was not necessary.
So let's go back to the creation of a national park and the naming of
the park after the Manhattan Project.
May I ask how much time I have?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 10 minutes remaining.
Mr. KUCINICH. Thank you.
We have to now ask ourselves, since it can be widely disputed--and by
top military officials--that the dropping of the bomb was not
necessary, then why are we honoring this technology with a national
park? It's really a legitimate question.
When the U.S. dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in
August of 1945, again, 200,000 people were killed. And to have this
discussion in the context of honoring a technology that created a bomb,
I think, really raises questions about where we are with this country
and where we are with the bomb. The splitting of the atom and the use
of the split atom to create an atomic bomb actually bespeaks a split
consciousness in this country. It was, in a sense, an intensification
of dichotomized thinking, of us versus them, whoever they are. We then
decided that all of our problems in humanity could be solved by
technology, that the bomb then was put in place of reason, that the
bomb was put in place of diplomacy, that the bomb was put in place of
talking with each other and settling our differences. No, the bomb then
became the metaphor for how technology rules over humanity. We're
captives of our own machines.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I remember as a young person going to elementary
school and that children would have to do drills called duck-and-cover
because we believed that the United States was going to be targeted by
nuclear weapons launched by the Soviet Union. The fear drove an entire
generation's dreams. The fear caused the United States to spend
trillions of dollars on a Cold War that took away from the needs of the
people. The fear resides in the world today when there are some who
urge an attack on Iran. Why? Because they are said to be developing a
nuclear weapon.
Where does this stop? We cannot honor this technology. We cannot
celebrate ingenuity that was used to put all of humanity at risk. We
have to begin to reassess who we are as human beings and ask ourselves
whether or not we have essentially reached the limits of our ability to
develop technology which we can control.
And it's not only about nuclear weapons. When you learn that the
globe itself is experiencing tremendous upset because of the human
activity, when you learn that science can now create genetically
modified organisms that can change the nature of food. As a matter of
fact, life itself can be changed through cloning. We act as these mini
gods who can endlessly tinker with our planet and life itself and then
name parks after it. No.
In the scheme of things, someone will say, Dennis, this is just a
park. What are you getting so excited about? This is about naming a new
national park after the Manhattan Project. And we have to just stop and
reflect on where this takes us. There should be a discussion about the
full legacy of the Manhattan Project, including its devastating effects
upon the Japanese people and upon the rest of the world.
If there was going to be a new park, it should serve as a solemn
monument to Japanese American friendship that rose from the ashes and
the worldwide work for nuclear disarmament that continues to this day,
rather than a celebration of a technology that has brought such
destruction to the world. Failure to recognize this dimension, even in
its first iteration, really is a significant injustice.
I looked at the CRS report on this, and there's no mention of how
this is going to be framed or phrased. The museum at Los Alamos is a
celebration of the triumph of technology over humanity. It's a powerful
illustration that we're developing technology at a rate that far
exceeds our ability to manage it. Now we are faced with the choice to
memorialize this point of view into a national park.
I would ask how much time I have left.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 4\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. KUCINICH. In the last 4\1/2\ minutes I want to read a poem by
Henry Reed. He juxtaposes in this poem Japan before the dropping of the
bomb and the technical aspects of the bomb itself.
{time} 2010
It's called ``The Naming of Parts'':
Today we have the naming of parts. Yesterday, we had daily
cleaning. And tomorrow morning, we shall have what to do
after firing. But today, today we have the naming of parts.
Japonica glistens like coral in all of the neighboring
gardens, and today we have naming of parts.
This is the lower sling swivel. And this is the upper sling
swivel, whose use you will see when you are given your
slings. And this is the piling swivel, which in your case you
have not got. The branches hold in the gardens their silent,
eloquent gestures, which in our case we have not got.
This is the safety-catch, which is always released with an
easy flick of the thumb. And please do not let me see anyone
using his finger. You can do it quite easily if you have any
strength in your thumb. The blossoms are fragile and
motionless, never letting anyone see any of them using their
finger.
And this, you can see, is the bolt. The purpose of this is
to open the breech, as you see. We can slide it rapidly
backwards and forwards: we call this easing the spring. And
rapidly backwards and forwards. The early bees are assaulting
and fumbling the flowers: They call it easing the spring.
[[Page H6132]]
We're naming a park today. Yesterday we had the naming of parts, and
not just Japan but our humanity was obliterated. Do we get a chance to
reclaim it?
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I am prepared to close, Mr. Speaker, if
the gentleman will yield back his time.
Mr. KUCINICH. I yield back the remainder of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, this bill is really not as complicated as my good friend
from Ohio tries to make it appear to be.
Now, I recognize, and we've had conversations on this when the bill
was introduced, and I respect his opinion, but I respectfully disagree
with his opinion and his arguments. There is nothing wrong with that.
After all, we're Americans, and we can do that in America.
But I want to, and with the gentleman, what I heard him saying was
dealing in what if and what would be an ideal world. Well, we'd all
like to have an ideal world. But let's talk about reality at that time.
We were forced into the Second World War. Germany, of course, had
started, some can say, started that war with their blitzkrieg on
September 1, 1939, into Poland. You could say it may have started when
Japan started expanding where they were going in the Pacific, and
certainly when they attacked us on December 7, 1941.
Whether we liked it or not, we were in a war for survival. There is
no question about that. That is simply the facts.
In the process of carrying out that war, and by the way, Mr. Speaker,
let me say that war is absolutely unpredictable, but because if you're
logically thinking about war, if it were predictable, it wouldn't have
happened in the first place. But the very nature of war is
unpredictable.
So we didn't know where we were, but we had heard that Nazi Germany
was developing an atomic weapon. Now, they had been building a military
machine long before because we were caught a bit off guard in the
Second World War. We were not a warring Nation. So we had to use
whatever technology we had in order to defend our freedoms. One way
that was decided was to build an atomic weapon if we had to use that
atomic weapon.
What this bill purports to do is nothing more than to talk about the
ingenuity of the American people to develop this weapon when the
nuclear industry was relatively in its infancy, and did it in such a
short time frame. That is something that we ought to put into our
history books because we do put past battles in our history books.
Just earlier this week was the 150th anniversary of Antietam, right
up the road here in Sharpsburg, Maryland--the largest single-day
casualty in American history at that time. Yet we memorialize the
battlefield because it helped preserve our Union and get our Union back
together.
So I think it's right that we look at these from that perspective.
Now, I can only imagine how difficult a decision it was for President
Truman shortly after President Roosevelt had died to make this
decision; but he made it because in his judgment, given the information
he had, it would probably save more lives than it would cost by
dropping a bomb. That was the judgment he made.
Let me speak just a little bit about, again, the ingenuity and the
technology of what happened, and I can only speak about my area,
Hanford, and about, specifically, about the B Reactor.
This is the first nuclear reactor that was built in this country; and
from start to finish, it was built in less than a year. The technology
at that point wasn't even proven. Yet when they started the B Reactor
and went ``hot,'' as they said, it obviously did what it was supposed
to do. It was a tremendous scientific achievement.
To open this up to the public and open this up to school children to
see what we can do and what we did in this country to protect the
freedoms and liberty we have, I think is worth preserving.
Again, all this does is take those three main sites that largely are
already owned by the government, transfer them to the National Park
Service, and show them to the public so we can learn and remember what
happened during that time.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, let me say that I've been down on this floor
many times criticizing the Obama administration. But the Obama
administration, through Secretary Salazar and the Department of the
Interior, is in favor of legislation establishing precisely what this
bill and the Senate bill hope to do.
So while I have differences with them, I certainly congratulate them
for recognizing how important this legislation is.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the legislation, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5987, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
____________________