H 4934 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 15, 1995

Society of Lyndon Johnson, it is a rollback to the days when we were indeed

a society of extreme wealth and people

struggling to make ends meet.

We bridged a lot of that gap. We

made America a place of promise for

virtually 80 percent of our population

after the Second World War. And this

latest budget is a rollback.

So I would say to my senior friends

particularly who are watching, but also

to my friends and colleagues from the

country who approximate my age, 50,

that these cuts will take a terrible, terrible toll, a psychological toll, a financial toll, and a spiritual toll, on the

Nation.

I urge my colleagues in this body to

reject this budget when we vote on it

on Thursday of this week. Send it back

to the Committee on the Budget. Let

us have hearings on it. This was rolled

out at midnight, by the way. Nobody

saw it. Democrats did not see this until

1 o’clock in the morning, and they

rolled it out a few days later on votes.

The American people need to see

what is in this budget, and when they

get a load of what has happened, to

students, to our seniors, to Social Security. There was a promise made by

the Speaker, Mr. GINGRICH, sitting up

directly behind me, that they would

not touch Social Security, and they

have. They have cut COLA’s, and it

will affect every senior in this country

hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars.

They said they would not monkey

with Medicare, but they have. They

have. It should not be surprising that

they have. The majority leader, Mr.

ARMEY, when he first ran for Congress,

ran against Social Security. He does

not really think we ought to have it,

he thinks we can devise a better system, we should get rid of it. Back in

1986, Speaker GINGRICH hedged Medicare and the payments on Medicare

against additional defense spending.

There are no friends of Social Security or Medicare, or few friends, I

should say, on this side of the aisle.

There are some. I do not mean to impugn the motives and actions of all of

the Members on the Republican side of

the aisle, because there are some who

do care for these. But, for the most

part, they will be voting in lockstep on

Thursday to implement these cuts.

So I would just like to conclude, Mr.

Speaker, by urging each and every one

of my colleagues to look at the Robert

Pear piece in the New York Times

which outlines the memo that talks

about the additional cuts in Social Security, the additional deductibles on

Medicare, the additional premium increases, and also to look at the AARP

report with respect to the same issue.

One final comment on choice, because I know it is so important, because so many of our seniors rely on a

certain doctor for their care. They

have confidence in that doctor. They

should know that with this new system

that we are about to embark on, if it

becomes law, that choice will be taken

away. Or you can keep it if you want,

but you are going to have to pay an

even higher premium, an even higher

premium than I have talked about here

on the floor this afternoon.

fRECESS

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without

prejudice to the resumption of legislative business, pursuant to clause 12 of

rule I, the Chair declares the House in

recess until 5 p.m.

Accordingly (at 1 o’clock and 36 minutes p.m.), the House stood in recess

until 5 p.m.

fb 1700

AFTER RECESS

The recess having expired, the House

was called to order by the Speaker pro

tempore [Mr. W

fELLER] at 5 o’clock p.m.

REMOVAL OF NAME OF MEMBER

AS COSPONSOR OF H.R. 1114

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 1114.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there

objection to the request of the gentleman from California?

REMOVAL OF NAME OF MEMBER

There was no objection.

AS COSPONSOR OF H.R. 1120

fMr. RAMSTAD. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent to withdraw my

name as a cosponsor of H.R. 1120.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there

objection to the request of the gentleman from Minnesota?

There was no objection.

Mr. HANCOCK. Mr. Speaker, for the

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

ffirst time in over 6 years, I was out of

town on personal business last Thursday and Friday, and missed a portion

of the rollcall votes on H.R. 961. I ask

that the RECORD reflect that had I been

present, I would have voted in the following manner: ‘‘No’’ on rollcall votes

321, 322, 323, 324, 325, and 328; and ‘‘aye’’

on rollcall votes 326, 327, and 329.

fRECESS

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12 of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess subject to

the call of the Chair.

Accordingly (at 5 o’clock and 2 minutes p.m.), the House adjourned subject

to the call of the Chair.

The recess having expired, the House

AFTER RECESS

fwas called to order by the Speaker pro

tempore [Mr. WELLER] at 6 o’clock and

3 minutes p.m.

PERMISSION FOR COMMITTEE ON

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS TO

SIT TOMORROW, TUESDAY, MAY

16, 1995, DURING 5-MINUTE RULE

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I

ask unanimous consent that the Committee on International Relations and

its subcommittees be permitted to sit

tomorrow while the House is meeting

in the Committee of the Whole under

the 5-minute rule.

It is my understanding the minority

has been consulted and there is no objection to this request.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there

objection to the request of the gentleman from Alaska?

CLEAN WATER AMENDMENTS OF

There was no objection.

f1995

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 140 and rule

XXIII the Chair declares the House in

the Committee of the Whole House on

the State of the Union for the further

consideration of the bill, H.R. 961.

b 1804

IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole

House on the State of the Union for the

further consideration of the bill (H.R.

961) to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, with Mr. MCINNIS in

the chair.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Friday, May

12, 1995, the amendment offered by the

gentleman from Texas [Mr. DE LA

GARZA] had been disposed of, and title

VIII was open at any point.

Are there any amendments to title

VIII?

AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. BOEHLERT

Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Chairman I

offer an amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. BOEHLERT:

Strike title VIII of the bill (page 239, line

3, through page 322, line 22) and insert the

following:

TITLE VIII—WETLANDS CONSERVATION

AND MANAGEMENT

SEC. 801. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ‘‘Wetlands

and Watershed Management Act of 1995’’.

SEC. 802. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds and declares

the following:

(1) Wetlands perform a number of valuable

functions needed to restore and maintain the

chemical, physical, and biological integrity

of the Nation’s waters, including—

(A) reducing pollutants (including nutrients, sediment, and toxics) from nonpoint

and point sources;

(B) storing, conveying, and purifying flood

and storm waters;

(C) reducing both bank erosion and wave

and storm damage to adjacent lands and

trapping sediment from upland sources;

(D) providing habitat and food sources for

a broad range of commercial and recreational fish, shellfish, and migratory wildlife species (including waterfowl and endangered species); and