[House Report 115-264]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
115th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session } { 115-264
======================================================================
GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM WAR MEMORIAL ACT
_______
July 28, 2017.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Bishop of Utah, from the Committee on Natural Resources,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 873]
The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred
the bill (H.R. 873) to authorize the Global War on Terror
Memorial Foundation to establish the National Global War on
Terrorism Memorial as a commemorative work in the District of
Columbia, and for other purposes, having considered the same,
report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that
the bill do pass.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
The purpose of H.R. 873 is to authorize the Global War on
Terror Memorial Foundation to establish the National Global War
on Terrorism Memorial as a commemorative work in the District
of Columbia.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
In response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,
President George W. Bush launched the Overseas Contingency
Operations, formally known as the Global War on Terrorism
(GWOT).\1\ Since 2001, more than five million men and women
have served in the U.S. armed forces. All named campaigns
(e.g., Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom,
Operation New Dawn, etc.) fall under the umbrella of the GWOT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Defense Causality Analysis System, U.S. Department of Defense.
Accessed July 5, 2017. https://www.dmdc.osd.mil/dcas/pages/
casualties_gwt_combined.xhtml.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 873, would authorize the Global War on Terrorism
Memorial Foundation--a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization--to
begin the Commemorative Works Act (CWA, 40 U.S.C. 8901 et seq.)
process to establish a memorial on federal land in the District
of Columbia or its environs to commemorate and honor the
members of the United States Armed Forces who served on active
duty in support of the GWOT. In 1986, the CWA was enacted to
create a statutory process for the creation, design, and
construction of commemorative works in the District of
Columbia. The CWA codified procedures for authorizing and
siting commemorative works when the potential location of a
memorial will be on federal land administered by the National
Park Service or the General Services Administration. The CWA
delegated responsibility for overseeing design, construction,
and maintenance to the Secretary of the Interior or the
Administrator of the General Services Administration, and
several other federal entities, including the National Capital
Planning Commission, the Commission of Fine Arts, and the
National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission.
The CWA contains a specific requirement for military
commemoratives. For military works, the CWA requires Congress
to consider legislation only for the commemoration of ``a war
or similar major military conflict or a branch of the armed
forces'' that has been designated as officially ended for at
least 10 years (40 U.S.C. 8903(b)). The Global War on Terrorism
Memorial Act waives this requirement of the CWA, thus
authorizing the Global War on Terror Memorial now, rather than
ten years following the end of the GWOT. Proponents of the
proposed memorial argue that as the longest conflict ever
fought by the United States, the GWOT should be memorialized
while veterans have an opportunity to take part in determining
the memorial's scope and design. Proponents note that many
World War II veterans never had the chance to see the World War
II Memorial completed, because it was not finished until 59
years after the end of the war. Similarly, the World War I
Memorial was not authorized until 2014, nearly 96 years after
the Treaty of Versailles was signed.\2\ Additionally,
supporters advocate that because the nature of war has changed,
the CWA should be amended to allow for more timely military
commemorations. Opponents of the proposed memorial argue that
while the GWOT Memorial was a subject deserving of a memorial,
the intent of the CWA was to allow for a war or military
conflict to be declared over for at least 10 years prior to
commemoration efforts. Additionally, opponents cite the
precedent of providing an exemption to CWA provisions and
whether granting an exemption to one group might set a
precedent for future groups to seek a similar exemption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\Public Law 113-291, Section 3091 (Dec. 19, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 4, 2016, the National Capital Memorial Advisory
Commission met to discuss H.R. 5999 (114th Congress), a bill
similar to H.R. 873, introduced by former Congressman Ryan
Zinke (R-MT). The Commission heard testimony in support of the
legislation from Representative Zinke, as well as from Mr.
Andrew Brennen, Executive Director of the Global War on Terror
Memorial Foundation, and Mr. Todd Bowers, a Board Member of the
Foundation. At the meeting, the Commission did not reach a
consensus view on the legislation. Some Commissioners noted
that it was the obligation of the Commission to recommend
opposition to the bill because the conflict is ongoing and thus
inconsistent with the CWA. Other Commissioners noted that the
nature of warfare has changed over the years that the CWA has
been in place, and that modern conflicts may not have distinct
end dates, making it difficult for memorials to these conflicts
to comply with the CWA.
COMMITTEE ACTION
H.R. 873 was introduced on February 6, 2017, by Congressman
Mike Gallagher (R-WI). The bill was referred to the Committee
on Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the
Subcommittee on Federal Lands. On July 14, 2017, the
Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill. On July 25, 2017, the
Natural Resources Committee met to consider the bill. The
Subcommittee was discharged by unanimous consent. No amendments
were offered, and the bill was ordered favorably reported to
the House of Representatives by unanimous consent on July 26,
2017.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Natural Resources' oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.
COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII AND CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT
1. Cost of Legislation and the Congressional Budget Act.
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) and (3) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
sections 308(a) and 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974, the Committee has requested but not yet received a cost
estimate for the bill from the Director of the Congressional
Budget Office. However, the bill specifically bans the use of
federal funds for the memorial. In addition, the Congressional
Budget Office has concluded that similar bills authorizing
private groups to raise money to construct memorials in DC
would have an insignificant effect on the federal budget. See
H.R. 503 (113th Congress); S. 230 (113th Congress); and H.R.
497 (110th Congress).
2. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or
objective of this bill is to authorize the Global War on Terror
Memorial Foundation to establish the National Global War on
Terrorism Memorial as a commemorative work in the District of
Columbia.
EARMARK STATEMENT
This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined
under clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of
the House of Representatives.
COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4
This bill contains no unfunded mandates.
COMPLIANCE WITH H. RES. 5
Directed Rule Making. This bill does not contain any
directed rule makings.
Duplication of Existing Programs. This bill does not
establish or reauthorize a program of the federal government
known to be duplicative of another program. Such program was
not included in any report from the Government Accountability
Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139
or identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance published pursuant to the Federal Program
Information Act (Public Law 95-220, as amended by Public Law
98-169) as relating to other programs.
PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW
This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or
tribal law.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing
law.
[all]