macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 1988-02-23
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I will be happy to inform the gentleman again. the gentleman knows that our staffs had only about 48 hours working through the day and through the night to finalize the version. This again. I repeat. is not someone saying that you should have done this or you should have done that. It has no additions. It is just limited to technical corrections. A word was left out. a line was left out over there. The wrong language was put in. because the wrong note was in the hands of the staff. That Is all it does. There is nothing new. nothing that was not discussed. nothing that was not agreed upon. It is not a technical improvement. as I mentioned. but merely corrections.
Date: 1988-02-23
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

I think that is one of the rewrites of grammatical language. Yes. these were grammatical changes. and the author of the amendment has informed us. he has seen the copies and it was cleared by Mr. McCLURE.
Date: 1988-02-23
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

All the staff was invited to the meeting yesterday. if the gentleman will yield. and the staff that was there worked on this. As the gentleman well knows. our committee operates in the open. It is bipartisan.
Date: 1988-02-23
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

It is very simple. You have to relate back to the conference report. What this is is that section 2.4 phases out in 6 months. It was put in one section and not in the other section of the bill. so that the bill is technically correct in its entirety. That is why this addition is to make it technically correct. I would refer the gentleman to page 97 of the conference report. that tie gentleman. of course. knowing his usual interest read. Ile might not recall it at this point. but that is all it is. The part that should have been in two places was only in one. Now it is reinserted so that it is technically correct.
Date: 1988-02-23
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

This is another one of the omissions. This was authorized in section 7.6. but It was left out of the merger part below. so then it is brought down to be put in the merger so that it follows from one section to the other. doing the same thing. Again. I repeat to my colleagues. I stand here telling you that there are no policy changes from the original act. It is not intended. If it Is here. it is again by error. The only intent is to make the legislation technically correct and compatible in all the sections so that it can move and be a workable section.
Date: 1988-02-23
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

This is the amendment of the gentleman from Iowa to the legislation. The amendment did not continue and transfer the assets as liabilities. so tie amendment as presented again was faulty to fit into the rest of the bill. so this I.. to make the amendment of the gentleman from Iowa applicable so that it is incorporated in the needed entirely to work with the legislation.
Date: 1988-02-23
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

This again. the information I have is that the agreement was reached in the conference to retire stock at par value at sections 101B and 101C. Again. by deleting the language relating to the coordination of the stock guarantee activities of the Assistance Board and inserting substitute language insuring that through access to the funds from the Assistance Board and the Assistance Insurance Corporation. each FCS institution will be able to meet its obligations. so again it was agreed to in the conference and a part of that was omitted and is being reinserted.
Date: 1988-02-23
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

No. again. if the gentleman will yield. the same problem as with section 2.4. It was done in the part that expires in 6 months. but then it was not put in the section that continues. so it is two different sections and the language had to be in the two different sections. what happened. if I might venture a guess. is that when they inserted it at the top where it expires In 6 months. they did not follow up and insert it into the permanent section. That is what we are doing now.
Date: 1988-02-23
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. reclaiming my time. I agree wholeheartedly with the gentleman from Pennsylvania . It has never been our intention for this to happen. but unfortunately we do not have control of the scheduling and the time. This is one of the bills where it is a frustrating situation at best for us. but we are given the allocation of time and we are nearing the end of the session. The gentleman was here and all of us remember that. This is not how I would choose to handle legislation. It is not the intent of the chairman or the members of the Committee on Agriculture to handle it in this manner but unfortunately we are working with the other body and we have two sets of staffs. and the scheduling is conducted by the leadership. and we have no control over It.
Date: 1988-02-23
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. and I am happy to yield to our distinguished colleague. the gentlewoman from Nebraska.
Date: 1988-02-23
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

To my understanding. that was not the intent of my committee. nor of the committee of conference on the 1985 farm credit amendments.
Date: 1988-02-23
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I would inform the gentlewoman from Nebraska that that is the advice of our legal counsel and certainly consistent with my understanding of the conference.
Date: 1988-02-23
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the bill just passed.
Date: 1988-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I rise to address the Members of the House today to recognize the tragic loss of a distinguished civil servant and to pay tribute to his memory. On February 19. 1988. Donald L. Houston. a 27year veteran of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and an outstanding agricultural leader died of cancer. His dedication to the Department of Agriculture. to the men and women with whom he worked. and most of all. to the public who lie served was exemplary. Dr. P oustons abilities as an administrator of the Food Safety and Inspection Service and most recently. as Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service were wellrecognized in both the Department and the Halls of Congress. A distinguished scientist and manager. Dr. Houstons skills will be sorely missed. Dr.: Houston joined USDA in 1961 as a veterinary meat Inspector In East St. Louis. IL. After moving to Washington. DC in 1965. which is the year I came to Congress and first met Dr. Houston. he served In various positions in the meat and poulty inspection program. Dr. Houstons knowledge. dedication. and leadership capabilities led to his advancement in the Food Safety and Quality Service and ultimately. to his appointment as the agencys administrator in 1979. Under his leadership. the Servicenow known as the Food Safety and Inspection Servicedealt effectively with a variety of pressures and problems. ranging from dramatic reductions in agency budgets to controversial changes in inspection procedures. Throughout it all. Dr. Houston illustrated a capability to take the issues head on. to Innovate and make changes in programs when needed. and to ensure that the elnployees of FSIS were provided with the skills and the confidence needed to effectively perform their duties. In 1987. Dr. Houston was asked to accept a new role as Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. Although Dr. Houstons tenure as the Administrator of APHIS was short. his influence has already been felt in many positive ways. Fortunately. Dr. Houstons dedication and service did not go unnoticed during his tenure at USDA. Dr. Houston was the recipient ol many awards and honors at the Department and was recognized by both Presidents Carter and Reagan for his capabilities and achievements. Mr. Speaker. all Americans owe a debt of gratitude to Dr. Donald Iouston. although most will never know it. As Administrator of the Food Safety and Inspection Service. Dr. Houston was entrusted with protecting the health and safety of the agricultural products on which we all depend. And during his watch as head of FSIS. the publics safety was never more secure. We on the Committee on Agriculture will miss Dr. Houston for his lionesty. his integrity. and his knowledge and dedication. My sincere condolences go to his family and friends. We all share in your loss. God bless Don Houston. and may we have more throughout the Government of the United States who will follow in his footsteps. Mr. Speaker. I yield at this point to my distinguished colleague from Texas [Mr. STENHOLM3.
Date: 1988-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the subject of my special order today. Dr. Don Houston.
Date: 1988-03-17
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I rise today in support of Senate Joint Resolution 265. to designate March 20. 1988. as "National Agriculture Day." The Honorable Edward R. Madigan. the distinguished ranking member of the House Committee on Agriculture. and I introduced House Joint Resolution 466. to make all Americans conscious of the importance of agriculture to their lives and wellbeing. This observance. which has been in elftect for more than a decade. is traditionally celebrated on the first day of spring. a season of rebirth and growth after the chill days of winter. With the help of the Agriculture Council of America. it has been our goal to educate Americans about the importance. both historically and culturally. of those whose means of livelihood have provided the very fiber of Americas existence. and have led to the growth of our great land. The proclamation of this observance. which has bipartisan support in both Houses of this Congress and the full support of the executive branch. has always been a useful way of adding to the importance of National Agriculture Day. and helps to promote an understanding of agriculture and those that have dedicated their lives to it. This understanding goes beyond just those Americans that live in our rural areas. and provides an education to Americans in urban areas that may not have had the benefit of knowledge regarding rural communities and areas that have helped to feed America and the world. I urge my colleagues in the House to pass this resolution as a show of support for Americas farmers and ranchers and as a declaration of faith in agricultures importance to Americas health and wellbeing.
Date: 1988-03-28
Speaker: MAX FRANKEL (democrat)
Chamber: S

Executive Editor. the New York Tinies. New York. NY. DEAR MR. FRANKME On Saturday. March 26. the page one story by Martin Tolchin on foreign investment in the United States caught my attention. Inasmuch as Mr. Tolchin and his wife have a financial interest in promoting their topical book. Buying Into America. does It not seem inappropriate he should write page one "news reports" on tile Issue? I am sure op ed page items by Mr. Tolchin or his wife on the subject of foreign investment would be of interest to your readers. but Just as you would never permit a reporter who owns shares in a company to write news items about it. nor a reporter who had authored a book sympathetically portraying the PLO to write news reports about Palestinian claims against Israel. I think the self interest of the reporter in this case is also too close to the subject matter. Sincerely.
Date: 1988-03-28
Speaker: DE LUGO (democrat)
Chamber: S

for their contributions toward building agreement on the compact. It was not an easy task to forge an agreement between the House. Senate. and administration of our Government. as well as the three branches of government in Palau. I particularly wish to thank Mr. DE LUGO. chairman of the House Subcommittee on Insular and International Affairs. who traveled to Palau to impress upon the Palauan leadership the need to maintain the integrity of this agreement. His efforts have paid off and the agreement remains intact. I also intend to continue to support the integrity of the compact as enacted under Public Law 99Finally. and most importantly. I would like to recognize the achievements of the people of Palau. During the 40 years of U.S. administration they have assumed greater selfgovernment and they are now on the threshold of independence. In the two generations of United States administration. the people of Palau have made major strides in their social. political. and economic development. This is not to say that there are not problems in Palau. There are. But the Compact of Free Association offers the best framework in which to deal with these problems. The people of Palau have a greater interest in. and a greater ability to solve. Palauan problems than do bureaucrats of another nation thousands of miles away. We have only to observe the Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia to witness the success of the compacts. If there is any great danger of the people of the former trust territory. it is that we in the United States are unable to accept our new role as a partner. and cease being a big brother to Palau. Delay in implementation of the compact. and in assuming our new partnership role. has already contributed to political instability in Palau. The United States has a moral and legal obligation to respect the wishes of the people of Palau and to implement the compact as soon as possible. Mr. President. I look forward to swift enactment of this resolution and to the fulfillment of our Nations obligations to the people of Palau. In our 40 years of administering the trust territory we strived to teach democracy. We must now provide the people of Palau the opportunity to practice it.
Date: 1988-03-30
Speaker: DE LUGO (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. we have all read those little news stories that appear every now and then about a letter being delivered by the U.S. Postal Service years after being posted. There are usually some amusing remarks by the recipient. but rarely any explanations by the Postal Service. A lost letter is one thing. but how about a whole trailerload with over 2.000 packages and an untold amount of second- and thirdclass mail. that had been lost. if that is the word for it. for 21/2 years? The trailer was destined for my district. the U.S. Virgin Islands. It left Jacksonville. FL. on November 5. 1985. and was discovered just last week sitting in a shipping yard in San Juan. Puerto Rico. Whether the trailer ever did go to the Virgin Islands. whether all the contents are still there. how the trailer was lost for 2/2 years. why it wasnt discovered when claims were filed and paid. are all questions that the U.S. Postal Service has been unable to answer. Well. I want the Postal Service to know that it is going to have to come up with the answers. and will have to come up with them soon. I have asked the gentleman from Michigan. the chairman of the Post Office and Civil Service Committee. and my colleagues on the committee for a fullscale investigation. and we will be scheduling these hearings soon. And here is the kicker. the priority of the Postal Service right now is trying to figure out how to collect the insurance claims that may have been paid on all this missing mail. Its time the Postal Service got Its act together and its priorities straight. The first priority is to find out why the mail was missing for 2V2 years. Give us a break.
Date: 1988-04-12
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. for many years now. I and many of my distinguished colleagues have been engaged In a debate over the question of the military contracting with private firms for certain services. Although the administration has argued that private contracts are the most costeffective means of providing certain essential servicessuch as security and maintenanceI have steadfastly maintained the position that whatever dollars are saved in the short term are more than lost in the long. Often. quality service Is sacrificed at the altar of cost efficiency. creating situations in which saving money is really no savings at all. A perfect example of this has emerged in my district. where controversy has arisen between employees and the firm United International Investigative Services. which is under contract to provide security for the Naval Underwater Systems Center. In this case. many employees paychecks have bounced. causing personal embarrassment and genuine hardship as workers have been unable to pay their rent or buy groceries. Repeated efforts by my office to resolve the difficulties have met with resistance from both the firm and the Navy. No one seems to care. The Navy claims it has no jurisdiction in dealing with United International. United Internatt._al has been intermittent in its responsiveness. Workers calls to my office to complain die down for a time. then start up again shortly thereafter. This kind of fiscal turmoil Is quite naturally affecting the morale and. I presume. the performance of the employees. Given the importance of NUSC. security shouldmustbe of paramount importance at the facility. Yet with the ongoing troubles the company has meeting Its payroll obligations on time and in full. the firms ability to do its Job Is certainly deservIng of doubt. Recently. for example. several guards walked off the Job in protest of repeatedly bounced checks. I am not alone in my sense of both skepticism and frustration over this ludicrous situation. Mr. Speaker. the pile of evidence that indicates that private contracting for certain types of service to the military is not the most costeffective manner of handling such things as security and maintenance. Although the balance sheet may reflect a savings. the human price is not figured into that equation. Ultimately. there is even the possibility that the taxpayers will suffer. if the Government ever.tually must step in. the jeople will pay double for what could have beer. handled satisfactorily inhouse. I am not suggesting. M:. Speaker. that all private conLrct! of this type awarded by tLi. military are wrong. But I do believe that many of them possess serious enough drawbacks that we should carefully consider whether we want to continue to encourage this practice in the future.
Date: 1988-04-12
Speaker: DE LUGO (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill to amend the Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 1987. 1988. 1989. and 1990. and for other purposes. as amended.
Date: 1988-04-12
Speaker: DE LUGO (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker. H.R. 11 authorizes appropriations for the National Transportation Safety Board for fiscal years 1988. 1989. and 1990. Although the amounts involved are small. this is important legislation. The NTSB has critical responsibilities for ensuring the safety of our transportation system by investigating and determining the probable causes of accidents in all modes of transportation. Budget cuts in recent years have forced the Board to cut its staff and have made it extremely difficult for the Board to carry out its important safety responsibilities. For example. lack of staff has caused delays in preparing accident investigation reports. The authorizations in the bill now before us would permit the Board to stabilize its staff at 347 positions. This staffing level. which has been found by the Congress to be the minimum needed for the Board to carry out its important responsibilities. is well below the Boards 1980 staffing level of 401 positions. The remaining provisions in the bill are designed to help the Board improve its efficiency or to obtain small amounts of additional funding. The bill would relieve the Board of some obligations which serve no useful purpose. such as the requirement of publishing notice of issuance of NTSB decisions in the Federal Register when issuance of these decisions is widely publicized in the media. The bill would also permit the Board to charge fees for services provided voluntarily by the Board In assisting State. local. and foreign governments. The Board would receive these fees as part of its appropriations. In addition. the Board would be permitted to charge fees to persons attending its accident investigation schools. These fees would be used to offset the expenses incurred by NTSB in training its own employees. Mr. Speaker. the bill now before us is a compromise between the bills reported by the Committee on Public Works and Transportation and the Committee on Energy and Commerce. I appreciate the cooperation of the Energy and Commerce Committee in working out tle relatively minor differences between the two bills. Mr. Speaker. the bill we are considering will be of great importance in ensuring transportation safety. I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in pa.sing this legislation.
Date: 1988-04-12
Speaker: THOMAS A. LUKEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. the main purpose of H.R. 11. the Incpendent Safety Board Act Amendments of 1988. is to reauthorize the activities of the National Transportation Safety Board. The NTSBs last authorization expired on September 30. 1986. Yet this agency has continued to perform vital safety functions which we believe should be reauthorized. The NTSBs responsibilities include investigating and determining the probable cause of transportation accidents of all kinds. Following its investigations. the Board makes recommendations to Federal. State. and local agencies to prevent recurrcnce of accidents. Mr. Speaker. the NTSBs performance in these areas has been a great help to our committee In investigative and oversight hearings during this Congress. and in previous years. More importantly. investigations by the NTSB to determine the cause of rail. air. motor vehicle. and pipeline accidents have helped in many instances to prevent similar occurrences. Reauthorization at the levels provided for in this bill will mean that the Board will be able to continue making a valuable contribution to our public safety. The NISB is a unique agency in that it has broad oversight and investigative rc:xponsbility. but no regulatory powers. Thle only way NTSB can correct a serious safety problem is to publicize itto expose hidden problems to the bright light of public scrutinyand to argue. cajole. or nag others into taking action. Thii can be an enormously I rustrahing process. Yet the NTSB has earned a remarkable record for impartiality. accuracy. and farsightedness. For example. the NTSB has been recommending for some time that the Department of Transportation require the instailation of automatic train controls on all locomotives. Automatic train controls are not .some new. exotic equipmenttheyve b2en available since the 1930s. Yet it was not until 6 month. ago that DOT proposed to require this equipment on trains operatilng just in the crowded Northeast corridor. 1lad the earlier warning and recommendation by NTSB been heeded. serious rail accidents might have been avoided. Including the fatal Amtrak crash in Chase. MD. just a little over a year ago. Mr. Speaker. I join my colleague Mr. MINETA In urging the House to pass this bill. The NTSBs Important work must continue.