May 23, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H 5387

Mr. Speaker, these are all honorable

people caught in a difficult position because they all have close personal ties

to the Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Ethics Committee has had this since last

December. It will never get resolved

any other way.

It is not just DAVE BONIOR and others

here who are calling for it. Public Citizen, the New York Times, Richard

Phelan, Roll Call, Robert Scheer in the

L.A. Times, Al Hunter in the Wall

Street Journal, Common Cause, the

Hartford Courant, the San Francisco

Chronicle, the list goes on and on. The

Atlanta Constitution, his home newspaper. All have called for an independent outside counsel. It is time that we

had one.

A STREAMLINED BUT UNCOMPROMISED FOREIGN AID BILL

f(Mr. COBLE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1

minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, since the

start of the 104th Congress, Republicans have made no attempt to hide

our conviction that the Federal Government has grown out of proportion

to its responsibilities. The conviction

is not limited to domestic programs.

Just as spending at home has come

under intense scrutiny, our spending

habits abroad should not escape notice.

Although foreign aid is only a small

part of the budget, it still consumes

billions of dollars. Republicans will

streamline this part of the budget, and

insure every penny going overseas is

wisely and responsibly. We propose to

eliminate repetitive bureaucracy by

closing three agencies and ending dozens of useless, silly named programs

like the Permanent International Association of Road Congresses.

Mr. Speaker, while our plan streamlines, it does not compromise America’s position of world leadership. We

can only be the world’s leader if we do

what is right by our future and by our

children, and that is the essence of our

plan.

(Mr. GUTIERREZ asked and was

TERM LIMITS

fgiven permission to address the House

for 1 minute and to revise and extend

his remarks.)

Mr. GUTIERREZ. Mr. Speaker, after

the Supreme Court ruled yesterday on

the issue of term limits, you heard a

lot of complaining.

One who protested the loudest was

the distinguished majority leader.

In fact, Mr. ARMEY promised that a

vote on term limits would be the first

vote in the next Congress.

In January 1997—if he is relected—

Mr. ARMEY will get sworn in for his

seventh term, then turn around and

vote for a bill that says that serving

more than six terms is hazardous to

the political health of our Nation.

If you think term limits is such a

good idea, here is the solution: Here is

a map of Washington.

Here is the Capitol. Here is the airport.

It is a short drive, and parking is a

breeze because Members of Congress

still have that perk.

From there, you can go back to the

Sixth District of Georgia, the Eighth

District of Florida, or anywhere else

where someone got elected by talking

about term limits.

Remember, my friends on the other

side of the aisle—the Supreme Court

decision will not bar you from acting

honorably, from following through on

your campaign promises and Republican rhetoric.

That decision is still in your hands.

(Mr. GOSS asked and was given perTERM LIMITS IS NOT DEAD

fmission to address the House for 1

minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, this morning

in the Washington Post we read that

the former Speaker of this House, Tom

Foley, believes that term limits is

dead. Actually that should be term

limits are dead.

Either way, so speaks the man who

did not understand the term limits

movement when he was the Speaker,

and he still does not get it. The citizens of Washington State and 21 other

States passed term limits, and they are

not ready to concede defeat on the

issue.

Yes, yesterday’s decision by the Supreme Court shows an unfortunate disconnect between the judicial branch

and the majority of Americans who

favor term limits. That type of thing

has happened before and Congress has

fixed it. Now it is up to Congress to

act.

The ruling gives us a clear course:

the term limit constitutional amendment. We have seen the arrogance of

power here resulting from a system

where longevity, not merit, determines

clout. Let’s return to the idea of citizen legislators who go to Washington

to serve and then go back home to live

among the people that they have

worked for. That is what the people

want, and they are the people we work

for.

REPUBLICAN MEDICARE CUTS

HURT RURAL AMERICA

f(Mr. HILLIARD asked and was given

permission to address the House for 1

minute.)

Mr. HILLIARD. Mr. Speaker, the Republican Medicare plan places a major

burden on rural America which will literally squeeze the lifeblood out of

America’s rural hospital system.

Almost 10 million American citizens

who live in rural America depend on

the Medicare benefits they receive to

stay healthy. Under the Republican

Medicare plan, significant cuts in Medicare revenue will cause a great number of rural hospitals to either close or

increase their cost.

It is wrong to make rural America

pay such a high price. My Republican

colleagues say all they are doing is

shifting the cost to the private sector.

What they really mean is that they are

shifting the cost back to the taxpayers

who have already paid that cost

through monthly deductions.

Rural America deserves good health

care and good hospitals. That is why

the Republican plan must be defeated.

REPUBLICAN BUDGET CLOSES

DOOR OF OPPORTUNITY

f(Mr. DURBIN asked and was given

permission to address the House for 1

minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Speaker, most

American families cannot leave their

children a fortune. What we try to

leave them is a set of values and an opportunity.

Last week, the Republican budget

resolution closed the door of opportunity for millions of American kids.

The Republican budget resolution cut

college student loans by $18 billion.

That is right. At a time when America

needs a well-educated generation to

lead us into the next century, at a time

when our kids need the opportunity for

education for a good-paying job, the

Gingrich Republicans make the biggest

cut in student loans in our Nation’s

history.

And why have the Republicans done

this? Why are the Republicans increasing a student’s cost of financing a college education by an average of $5,000?

Because the Republican student loan

cuts fill the Republican piggy bank to

pay for tax breaks for the privileged

few.

Cutting college student loans may be

the GINGRICH view of America. How

does your family feel?

(Mr. LINDER asked and was given

THE FOREIGN AID BILL

fpermission to address the House for 1

minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, today and

through tomorrow and the next day,

the House takes up a historic foreign

affairs bill that for the first time in

many, many years actually authorizes

the spending that we take on behalf of

the interests of the U.S. policies in respect to foreign lands.

There will be much debate as to

whether we are doing it the way other

people wish us to do it or we are cutting too deeply, but the fact of the

matter is that less than 1 percent of

our entire budget is invested in foreign

affairs. That is the issue we need to

begin to take to the American people.

It surprises me when you ask Americans what they think is the largest

item in the Federal budget and they

consistently say foreign affairs, and indeed it is perhaps the smallest. When