Parks and Monuments

Monday will be about water (next post), parks and monuments. Since there are no less than seven bills on parks and monuments, none of which are more then slightly more impressive than naming a post office, they will all be covered in summary.

HR 299, Lowell National Historical Park Boundary Adjustment Act, adjusts the boundary of said park, adding five small parcels of land in Massachusetts. No word on who owns the land,but since their is no eminent domain contingency (there usually is), I will assume it is owned by some government body.

HR 376 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to evaluate the two options for the parks which are the sites of the two battles of Newtonia from the civil war. One option is to maintain them as a separate park, and the other is to merge them with an existing park.

HR 497, the Brigadier General Francis Marion Memorial Act of 2007, starts with findings about this guy's life. Then it authorizes some sort of memorial, probably a statue, to be built somewhere in DC. No federal funds will be used for this project, all the money will come from the "Palmetto Conservation Fund" which is either private or run by the state government of South Carolina.

HR 247 names a forest trail for a former congressman.

HR 995, apperantly, there was authorized a memorial in DC to commemorate wounded veterens, which has not yet been built. This bill extends the time limit on that to 2015.

HR 1047 is another study bill. Currently there is a WW1 memorial in St. Louis. The study would consider whether or not the monument should be integrated into the park system.

HR 807 is studying whether or not to build a monument to the space shuttle Columbia in four already donated parcels of land along the crash line in Texas (Nacadoches, Lufkin, Hemp Hill, and San Augustine).

Comments: This does not deserve an analysis, I will get right to recommendations.

Because, HR 807, HR 497, HR 247 and possibly HR 299 cost nothing and are follow through for private actions, I would endorse a vote of YEA.

Because HR 1047 and HR 376 are just studies, which could presumably be defeated later depending on how much they cost and their constitutionality, I would endorse a vote of YEA.

Because HR 995 would increase the likelihood that a government funded project is completed, thus wasting that money, I would endorse a vote of NAY.

UPDATE: I have been informed that HR 995 is being done with absolutely no federal money, and as such, I can endorse a vote of YEA. Thanks for pointing that out.