May 16, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H 5053

Conference agreement

compared with:

Budget estimates of new

(obligational) authority, fiscal year 1995 ...... ¥15,461,879,071

House bill, fiscal year

1995 .............................. +2,715,865,363

Senate bill, fiscal year

1995 .............................. ¥518,262,426

BOB LIVINGSTON,

JOHN T. MYERS,

RALPH REGULA,

JERRY LEWIS,

JOHN EDWARD PORTER,

HAL ROGERS,

JOE SKEEN,

FRANK R. WOLF,

TOM DELAY,

BARBARA F. VUCANOVICH,

JIM LIGHTFOOT,

S. CALLAHAN,

RON PACKARD,

Managers on the Part of the House.

MARK O. HATFIELD,

TED STEVENS,

THAD COCHRAN,

ARLEN SPECTER,

PETE V. DOMENICI,

P. GRAMM,

C.S. BOND,

SLADE GORTON,

MITCH MCCONNELL,

CONNIE MACK,

CONRAD BURNS,

RICHARD SHELBY,

JIM JEFFORDS,

JUDD GREGG,

R.F. BENNETT,

ROBERT C. BYRD,

D.K. INOUYE,

E.F. HOLLINGS,

J. BENNETT JOHNSTON,

PATRICK J. LEAHY,

DALE BUMPERS,

BARBARA A. MIKULSKI,

HARRY REID,

BOB KERREY,

HERB KOHL,

PATTY MURRAY,

REPORT ON RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF

Managers on the Part of the Senate.

fHOUSE CONGRESSIONAL RESOLUTION 67, CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEARS 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999,

2000, 2001, AND 2002

Mr. SOLOMON, from the Committee

on Rules, submitted a privileged report

(Rept. No. 104–125) on the resolution (H.

Res. 149) providing for consideration of

the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res.

67) setting forth the congressional

budget for the U.S. Government for the

fiscal years 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000,

2001, and 2002, which was referred to the

House Calendar and ordered to be

printed.

APPOINTMENT AS MEMBERS OF

THE BOARD OF VISITORS TO

fTHE U.S. NAVAL ACADEMY

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without

objection, and pursuant to the provisions of section 6968(a) of title 10, United States Code, the Chair announces

the Speaker’s appointment as members

of the Board of Visitors to the U.S.

Naval Academy the following Members

of the House: Mr. SKEEN, of New Mexico; Mr. GILCHREST, of Maryland; Mr.

HOYER, of Maryland; and Mr. MFUME, of

Maryland.

APPOINTMENT AS MEMBERS OF

There was no objection.

THE BOARD OF VISITORS TO

fTHE U.S. MILITARY ACADEMY

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without

objection, and pursuant to the provisions of section 4355(a) of title 10, United States Code, the Chair Announces

the Speaker’s appointment as members

of the Board of Visitors to the U.S.

Military Academy the following Members of the House: Mrs. KELLY of New

York; Mr. TAYLOR, of North Carolina;

Mr. HEFNER, of North Carolina; and Mr.

LAUGHLIN, of Texas.

APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO

THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF

There was no objection.

fTHE INSTITUTE OF AMERICAN

INDIAN AND ALASKA NATIVE

CULTURE AND ARTS DEVELOPMENT

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without

objection, and pursuant to the provisions of section 1505 of Public Law 99–

498 (20 U.S.C. 4412), the Chair announces the Speaker’s appointment to

the Board of Trustees of the Institute

of American Indian and Alaska Native

Culture and Arts Development the following Members of the House: Mr.

YOUNG of Alaska; and Mr. KILDEE of

Michigan.

APPOINTMENT AS MEMBERS OF

There was no objection.

THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF

fTHE HARRY S. TRUMAN SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without

objection, and pursuant to the provisions of section 5(b) of Public Law 93–

642 (20 U.S.C. 2004(b)), the Chair announces the Speaker’s appointment as

members of the Board of Trustees of

the Harry S. Truman Scholarship

Foundation the following Members of

the House: Mr. EMERSON of Missouri;

and Mr. SKELTON of Missouri.

There was no objection.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under

SPECIAL ORDERS

fthe Speaker’s announced policy of May

12, 1995, and under a previous order of

the House, the following Members will

be recognized for 5 minutes each.

previous order of the House, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. L

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a

f IPINSKI] is

recognized for 5 minutes.

[Mr. LIPINSKI addressed the House.

His remarks will appear hereafter in

previous order of the House, the genthe Extensions of Remarks.]

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a

f

tleman from Michigan [Mr. SMITH] is

recognized for 5 minutes.

[Mr. SMITH of Michigan addressed

the House. His remarks will appear

hereafter in the Extensions of Remarks.]

CLEAN WATER ACT AND THE

GREAT LAKES INITIATIVE

fThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a

previous order of the House, the gentlewoman from Ohio [Ms. KAPTUR] is recognized for 5 minutes.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I come to

the well this evening to express my

strong opposition to H.R. 961, the Clean

Water Act amendments and why I

urged its defeat. It steps back from the

progress resulting from our Nation’s

commitment to clean water as a national treasure.

I represent a Great Lakes district

along Lake Erie. Cumulatively, the

Great Lakes contain 20 percent of all

the fresh water on the face of the

Earth. For those of us who remember

when swimming or fishing in Lake Erie

was hazardous to your health, the actions the House is taking to weaken

Clean Water Act protections are backward-looking. I am astounded that

anyone can fail to see the great

progress we have made over the last 25

years to clean up our Nation’s water.

Today, after two decades, the job of

cleaning up Lake Erie is one-half finished. Our progress is laudable, but the

goal has not been achieved along our

coast or on the Nation’s other major

waterways.

I can remember when the Cuyahoga

River burned and when Lake Erie was

declared dead. Some of our colleagues,

Mr. Speaker, have apparently forgotten. We have made great strides toward

renewing our water resources, but

there is still a long way to go. In Ohio,

92 percent of our lakes and 60 percent

of our rivers still cannot support fishing or swimming on a year-round basis.

Some of our waters still cannot support aquatic life. Just last summer the

city of Toledo found it necessary to

pump fresh water into the Ottawa

River just to restore some oxygen and

flush out the polluted discharge from

combined sewer overflows. The job of

cleaning our waters is far from over.

The task of cleaning up dozens of

major toxic burial grounds leaching

into our fresh water tributaries stands

before us.

The aspect of H.R. 961 about which I

am most concerned is the provision to

make adherence to the standards of the

Great Lakes initiative voluntary on

the part of Great Lakes States. This

initiative has been a model bipartisan

effort to standardize water quality protections in the Great Lakes watershed.

Over the last 6 years, Federal guidelines have been developed, which, under

current law, the States have 2 years to

implement. Under H.R. 961, adherence

would be voluntary. States could

choose which standards to implement