My impression is it would set that work, the invested money, taxpayer money, and time--the Commission expended $10 million over the period of time to come to terms with where the memorial should be.

This is not a process that we can turn over because of a name.

As we rush this forward, questions will remain.

I think most of us would agree that the Commemorative Works Act has worked well in proving this rigorous approval process.

While it is clear that something needs to break the current impasse, I want the Committee to think long and hard about how we handle this issue.

And one of them, some have called on this panel and others, for the end of Federal funding for the memorial in addition to a new design.

I would urge the Park Service, so we don't begin to set some precedents here, that if something can be done and done expeditiously, I think it would be in everybody's best interest to do so.

Traditionally, as this Committee works, the Minority on the Committee, Democrats, have been provided a level of courtesy.

With drastic cuts to the Park Service budget we need to understand how to balance the demand for park experiences and the increased reliance of NPS on private money.

We again would encourage the Chair to consider bills as we see some before us today that have passed in the past and have received bipartisan support.

The reason I ask that--well, we will follow up with a question, because----

Just to thank Mr. Young, although the accolades are flowing today. Thank you very much for the legislation.