macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. today the House is considering the rule for H.R. 1270. and I think this is a real fair rule. It is one that provides for 10 amendments. 5 sponsored by Republican Members and 5 sponsored by Democrat Members. How much more fair can we get than that? H.R. 1270 was developed by the Committee on Commerce in a bipartisan manner over the past 2 years and enjoyed broad bipartisan support in the committee. Last month. the bill was reported out by a margin of 43 to 3. It is my hope that H.R. 1270 will enjoy the broad bipartisan support in the full House. This bill has been a long time coming. Mr. Speaker. 15 years ago. 15 years ago. the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 established a nuclear waste program based on a permanent repository that was expected to begin operation in 1998. However. this repository is well behind schedule and will not begin operation now until the year 2010. Last year a Federal court ruled that DOE had a legal duty to begin accepting the nuclear waste in January 1998. However. DOE cannot meet its legal duty to begin acceptance of this waste under current law. since this repository will not be operational now until the year 2010 and current law prevents DOE from developing interim storage facilities after a repository is licensed. The Federal Government should not shirk its legal responsibility. and the word of the Federal -Government should mean something to the American people. Congress must act to permit DOE to meet its legal duty under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act through acceptance at an interim storage facility. Although the January 1998 deadline is not achievable. it is possible to begin acceptance at an interim storage facility by the year 2002. That is a nearterm date that permits enough time for the NRC to license the interim storage facility. Failure on the part of DOE to fulfill its legal duties will have a heavy cost. State public utility commissions and utilities are suing DOE for damages to pay for their onsite storage costs. If the courts order DOE to pay these damages. funding for the nuclear waste program will dry up and progress toward permanent disposal of nuclear waste will grind to a halt. Current law also does not protect the consumers. Since 1983. consumers have paid $13 billion in fees to fund the nuclear waste program. Unfortunately. only a small part has really been paid for that. Recently as much as 85 cents of every dollar contributed by consumers has been diverted to other Federal programs. and this is a sham on the taxpayers in this country. This diversion will continue unless Congress amends the fee. tackles this issue. and goes at it. The issue before the House is a simple one. Should Congress really act to fulfill the legal obligations of the Federal Government? Should they? And should Congress act to maintain progress toward development of a permanent repository? Mr. Speaker. I think that we have to act and we have to act today. and I urge Members to support the rule for H.R. 1270.
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker. section 403(a)(3) of H.R. 1270 provides for payment of outstanding onetime fees owed by 13 utilities by the end of the fiscal year 2002. This provision is not in my estimation an unfunded intergovernmental mandate because it relates only to the timing of these payments. The obligation to pay these fees was created 15 years ago by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. not by H.R. I do have a letter here dated October 27. 1997. from the New York Power Authority. and it simply says: Pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. the Power Authority entered into a contract with the DOE for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel. We chose the option of paying the onetime disposal fee. and accumulated interest. for pre1983 fuel at the time we first ship spent nuclear fuel to the DOE facility. Accordingly. we do not view this payment as an unfunded mandate. as long as DOE meets its obligation under H.R. 1270 to provide interim storage and disposal capacity. Mr. Speaker. I think that a point of order is not inclined to be there. Mr. Speaker. I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that during consideration of H.R. 1270. pursuant to House Resolution 283. it may be in order to consider the amendment numbered 1 in House Report 105354 in the modified form that I have placed on the desk.
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Page 19. line 2. Insert before the period the following: . using routes that minimize. to the maximum practicable extent and consistent with Federal requirements governing transportation of hazardous materials. transportation of spent nuclear fuel and highlevel radioactive waste through populated areas Page 19. beginning in line 3. strike "In conjunction with" and insert the following: "(1) IN GENERAL.-In conjunction with" and add after line 16 on page 19 the following: "(2) RAIL ROUTES.-Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act. the Secretary of Transportation shall establish procedures for the selection of preferred rail routes for the transportation of spent nuclear fuel and highlevel radioactive waste to the interim storage site and the repository site. Such procedures shall be established in consultation with the designated emergency services planning management official for any State or Indian tribe affected by the rail routes selected. Page 20. line 20. insert after "organizations" the following: ". voluntary emergency response organizations.". Page 24. line 16. strike "regulations promulgated by the Commission" and Insert "existing Federal regulations". Page 25. beginning on line 1. strike "The" and all that follows through "paragraph (1)" on line 3 and insert "If training standards are required to be promulgated under paragraph (1). such standards". Page 25. line 5. strike "include the followIng provisions-" and Insert "provide for-". Page 25. after line 19. Insert the following: "The Secretary of Transportation may specify an appropriate combination of knowledge. skills. and prior training to fulfill the minimum number of hours requirements of subparagraphs (A) and (B).". Page 43. strike lines 17 and all that follows through line 13 on page 44. and insert the following:
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment. as modified. be considered as read and printed in the RECORD.
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Chairman. the gentleman is certainly correct. As is more fully explained in the committees report. the basic inequity arises from the fact that the current 1 mill fee assessed against nuclear generated electricity is treated as a mandatory receipt to the Federal Government. and all programmatic expenses are treated as discretionary spending. Now. as a result. spending for the waste program from the Nuclear Waste Fund is thus counted against various discretionary spending caps enacted after 1982 as a means of controlling overall Federal spending. As a result. while nearly $12 billion has been generated in fees and interest. only a little over $4.8 billion has been spent on the program.
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Chairman. if the gentleman would continue to yield. I would say to the gentleman. that is accurate. For example. under the solution to this problem chosen by the committee in the last Congress. the termination of the current mandatory 1 mill fee and the institution in its stead of a discretionary user fee. we were informed that we had violated the budget rules because the Treasury would no longer be receiving these revenues on the mandatory receipts side of the budget. even though the Treasury would be receiving user fee revenues on the discretionary side of the budget as an offset for appropriations to fund the waste program. Further. as the committee report indicates. 13 utilities availed themselves on the contractual option offered by the Department of Energy to pay fees assessed against spent nuclear fuel they gererated prior to the effective date of the 1982 act. By requiring these fees to be paid prior to the expiration of fiscal year 2002. the committee was ableto generate a $2.7 billion revenue offset which. as the committee report indicates. was necessary in order to assure that the legislation does not violate the budgetary payasyougo limitations. Our understanding was confirmed in the letter of September 25. 1997. by CBO Director ONeill to the gentleman from Virginia as well as the September 18. 1997. letter from the gentleman from Ohio . chairman of the Committee on the Budget. to the gentleman from Virginia .
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

My colleague again is correct. Mr. Chairman. As the committee report states. it appears that the annual user fee that averages one mill per kilowatt hour will be sufficient to continue development of the repository and acceptance of spent nuclear fuel and high level radioactive waste at the interim storage facility. Information supplied to the committee by DOE indicates that in order to achieve these goals. a fee of one mill per kilowatt hour will be sufficient to maintain progress on the repository and develop an interim storage facility..
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr.. Chairman. that is correct. Section 2 of H.R. 1270 provides that such contracts shall continue in effect under this act in accordance with their terms except to the extent that the contracts may have been modified by the parties to that- contract.
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself 30 seconds. Mr. Chairman. I want to reflect on what the gentleman from Texas had to say about the two Members from Nevada. They have been great on this issue. We know it is not an easy one to try and go forth on. and I just want to say that they have been very much gentlemen in this. and have been ferocious fighters. I have to say that we respect them tremendously. Mr. Chairman. I yield the balance of my time to close to the gentleman from Michigan . the author of the bill.
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Page 19. line 2. insert before the period the following: using routes that minimize. to the maximum practicable extent and consistent with Federal requirements governing transportation of hazardous materials. transportation of spent nuclear fuel and highlevel radioactive waste through populated areas Page 19. beginning in line 3. strike "In conjunction with" and insert the following: "(1) IN GENERAL.-In conjunction with" and add after line 16 on page 19 the following: "(2) RAIL RoUTES.-Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act. the Secretary of Transportation shall establish procedures for the selection of preferred rail routes for the transportation of spent nuclear fuel and highlevel radioactive waste to the Interim storage site and the repository site. Such procedures shall be established in consultation with the designated emergency services planning management official for. any State or Indian tribe affected by the rail routes selected. Page 20. line 20. Insert after "organizations" the following: ". voluntary emergency response organizations.". Page 24. line 16. strike "regulations promulgated by the Commission" and insert "existing Federal regulations". Page 25. beginning on line 1. strike "The" and all that follows through "paragraph (1)" on line 3 and Insert "If training standards are required to be promulgated under paragraph (1). such standards". Page 25. line 5. strike "Include the followIng provisions--" and insert "provide for-". Page 25. after line 19. Insert the following: "The Secretary of Transportation may specify an appropriate combination of knowledge. skills. and prior training to fulfill the minimum number of hours requirements of subparagraphs (A).and (B).". Page 43. strike lines 17 and all that follows through line 13 on page 44. and insert the following:
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman. I want to clarify that this pending amendment is an amendment made in order earlier by a unanimous consent request. The managers amendment makes a number of noncontroversial changes to H.R. 1270. and reflects the views of the Committee on Commerce. the Committee on Resources. and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Mr. Chairman. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Missouri [Ms.
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Chairman. the Traficant amendment certainly prohibits the disposal of spent nuclear fuel from other plants in foreign countries. and I think the gentleman is right on. We worked out. I think. all the problems on this and we appreciate the fact that we have found a resolution to this. We have no problems on this side. and we will accept the amendment.
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Chairman. I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Michigan . the author of the bill.
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman. this can turn into a political issue very. very rapidly when a Governorof a particular State has to make the decision on whether or not they are going to allow the transport of this across State lines. I guess the one concern that I have on this is that every one of these Governors politically are going to say. hey. no way. and we will end up leaving the waste in the 35 States or 38 States that it is in today. So I would just say I oppose the amendment.
Date: 1997-10-29
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman. I did not claim any time in opposition. because I think it is a terrific amendment. and we over on this side are certainly willing to accept it.
Date: 1997-10-30
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the bill. H.R. 1270.
Date: 1997-10-30
Speaker: DAN SCHAEFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent the Clerk be authorized to make technical corrections in the engrossment of the bill. H.R. 1270. including corrections in spelling. punctuation. section numbering and crossreferencing.
Date: 1997-10-30
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. just a couple of weeks ago 295 Members of this Congress voiced their support for local schools. for local school board members. for parents and for our children with respect to national testing. We decided. a majority of us in this body. that independent national testing. that parental measures of quality. that school board standards established locally are in fact the best measurements of how our children are succ6eding in our schools and how our public education system is delivering quality service. The White House on the other hand persists in pushing forward their plan for governmentrun national testing defined by bureaucrats here in Washington. another effort by people here in the City of Washington. DC to consolidate education authority in the hands of powerful bureaucrats so far removed from the children In our districts and the schools that we represent here in Congress. Mr. Speaker. we need to stick to our guns here in the House. The 295 Members need to tell the White House that our schools need to continue to be governed locally. Mr. Speaker. Congress has a choice. It can ignore the findings of the 1983 report on education in AmericaA Nation at Riskfor yet anotheryear. Or it can get serious and pass real reforms that have the benefit of a proven track record and common sense behind them. Previous Congresses have chosen to sell out to the special interests and protect the status quo. The results are there for all to see. The other side of the aisle is proposing to do exactly that for one more year. Its always the same storymore money into the very same wasteful bureaucracies with money that taxpayers already forked over the last time the Government asked for more money. More Federal programs. more bureaucracy. and more control from Washington. DC. This is the essence of how the other side thinks problems are solved. Its time to change course. Public schools can compete in a free marketthey should be permitted to do so. Its time to change course. Competition works. Greater parental control and less intrusion from Washington means better decisions about how our children are educated. Its time to give parents school choice.
Date: 1997-11-04
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the gentleman from California yielding me the time. I would like to direct the bodys attention. if I could. over here to my left. This graph shows and explains the choices that are expressed by Members of Congress. These bars express. according to committee. the first bar here is the Committee on Senate Finance. for example. Seventy percent of the Members on the Committee on Senate Finance send their children to private schools. And these show other committees that show a high number of Members of Congress who. when given the choice. send their children to private schools. Now. the debate is all about this. What the American people want and what they expressed to us is the same kind of treatment and same kind of choices that politicians are able to afford for themselves. This is what the debate really is about. With the thousands and thousands of parents who we have heard from. here is just a sample of the letters that I received from parents. What they tell us is that they do not want the Democrat model of restricted choices. of suppressed opportunity. of poor performing schools and no choice beyond that. What they do want. however. is to be treated like real customers. Allowing parents to be treated like real customers is what the bill before us is all about. I have to tell my colleagues. I am a strong supporter of public education. I have 3 children who are in public schools today. and they are there because in my district the public school system provides excellent opportunity and excellent results and it has earned my confidence. But what the American people are asking us for today and what we are hoping to deliver is a Republican model that treats the American people like the politicians in Washington treat themselves. just like you treat yourselves. I would ask the following: When they retire tonight to their cocktail parties and their highbrow fundraising receptions. please think about the parents from - innercity school districts throughout the country who have written to us and asked us to be treated like real customers. to choose the education settings that are in the best interest of their children. to think about the teachers who would like to be treated like real professionals. to have you choose them. to stand in line if you would like and choose the educational services that professional teachers offer. I suggest we stand in strong support of public education today. and this bill is a good first step.
Date: 1997-11-04
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. I sure would. Those of my colleagues who wish to come upand defend this kind of a legacy. which has been a worldwide failure. I say be my guest. What America should not do is move in the direction that they would propose. that we have seen in Eastern Europe. for .example. where they create centralized government monopolies. We should do just the opposite. We should preserve what is great about public schools in America.
Date: 1997-11-04
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

The legacy which the gentleman defends over here to my left is one that I would submit we should not allow to occur here in the United States. Our public school system has become the strongest in the world. particularly because it is forced to innovate. bi cause it is forced to be challenged. an that is what we ought to presern about our system. We should not allo my colleagues side to consolidate at thority in Washington. D.C.. which hi been a failure throughout the rest the world.
Date: 1997-11-05
Speaker: LINDA SMITH (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Washington

Mr. Speaker. I rise today in support of this bill. called the Political Freedom in China Act of 1997. but I would especially like to commend its author. This is not a fun thing to talk about. but she has worked very hard to bring it to the floor today. Mr. Speaker. included in the Political Freedom in China Act is a provision from several of us in the House. It is House Concurrent Resolution 180. which was originally introduced by the gentlewoman from California . the gentleman from New York . the gentleman from New York . the gentleman from Illinois . the gentleman from New Jersey . the gentleman from Virginia . and the gentleman from California [Mr. Cox]. chair of the Republican Policy Committee. as well as . the gentleman from Kansas . and the gentleman from Connecticut . This language expresses the sense of Congress that the Chinese Government should be condemned for its practice of executing prisoners and selling their organs for transplant. It also says that any Chinese official directly involved in these executions and operations should be barred from entering the United States ever. Finally. it calls upon U.S. officials to prosecute those who are illegally marketing and selling these organs in the United States. Wealthy Americans are reported to be paying $30.000 and then travel to China. where they receive the kidney of an executed prisoner at a special hospital operated by the Peoples Liberation Army. Mr. Speaker. while reports of prisoners being executed have gone on. these reports. for several years. it was not until just a month ago that there was a broadcast by "Primetime Live." an ABC program. that brought the issue into focus. I am going to submit for the RECORD a copy of the transcript. This will show what we saw on the program. and I would like it to be a part of the CON-
Date: 1997-11-05
Speaker: SAM JOHNSON (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. it is high time to stop products produced by slave labor in China from entering the United States of America. For more than 50 years. we have banned products produced by slave labor in China. but they continue to flood our markets every day. I think it is appalling. We should not support products that are produced by a nation that endorses or uses slave labor. Myquestion is. where is the administration? The President promised he would no longer tolerate these practices from China. but these products still enter this country. and the administration refuses to enforce current law. President Clinton is unable or un.willing to stand up to the Chinese and say this will no longer be tolerated. This bill goes a long way toward making up for the administration failings. It gives the Customs office the tools to hire more inspectors to track and stop these tainted goods from entering the United States. It also gives -the American Embassy the equipment they need to monitor goods produced in these inhumane slave camps throughout China. I have to wonder. if the President spent as much time and effort improving human rights in China as he has on State parties and fancy dinners for President Jiang. maybe China would change its ways. Mr. President. the prisoners stuck in these slave camps depend on our actions speaking louder than our words. Let us vote for this bill.