macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman. the amendment as offered by the gentleman from North Dakota in fact encompasses some of the discussions that we have engaged in and that I have engaged in during the day. Even though. listening to my distinguished colleague from Kansas about technicalities and technical problems. which I agree would be a problem. I still feel that dedicating ourselves and merely asking the Congress that some degree of advantage be given to the smaller familysized farms is good. But I have all day resisted the effort of Just bashing the big and bashing the rich and so on. So I would ask my distinguished colleague from North Dakota if we strike out the last part of his amendment which says. "and should achieve budgetary savings. to the extent possible. through lower support prices on production from the largest farms." and allowing us to dedicate ourselves to helping the small farmer. but not dictating that we would go solely to the large farm for support? I would ask the gentleman if he would agree to a unanimous consent request to strike out these words. and then I think the amendment would be within everything that we have discussed throughout the day.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous consent to strike out the words after the word "farms" on line 7 of the amendment offered by the gentleman from North Dakota .
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

I thapk the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman. I feel at this point. and I can sense Members interest in knowing some approximate time at which we would conclude this legislation. and I think it would be well if we could accommodate them. I think we have gotten past the more contentious issues in the legislation. We are still in the process of trying to accept amendments as we can. Mr. Chairman. I had aimed for 7 oclock. 7:30. but if the gentleman would be willing. I would suggest that. to the extent possible. that we could aim for 7:30 to finish all debate and votes on the legislation so that we can allow Members to go about their business at an early time this evening.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous consent that the amendments en bloc be considered as read and printed in the RECORD.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

I would tell the gentleman that he is correct and the amendments are in the en bloc amendment. I yield to my distinguished colleague from New York .
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: THOMAS A. LUKEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I rise in support of the substitute amendment offered by the gentleman from Nebraska as part of the amendments en bloc. On behalf of the Committe on Energy and Commerce. I would like to note that the amendment affects matters within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. In fact. a bill introduced by the gentleman from Nebraska only a few weeks ago. H.R 4782. included very similar provisions. and it was referred to our committee. We have reviewed the substitute amendment. and as chairman of the subcommittee with jurisdiction in this area. I have no objection to the gentlemans amendment and. in fact. I will support it The substitute was worked out with the Department of Agriculture. which I understand supports it also. I therefore urge my colleagues to support the Bereuter substitute.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. the process of the en bloc amendments is for correction. technical corrections. or amendments that have been agreed to by majority. by minority. and by everyone concerned.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

The gentleman is correct. The Secretary Is under a continuing obligation to perform the random -spot checks required under section 1704. I yield to our distinguished colleague. the gentleman from Minnesota .
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the requisite number of words. and I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota .
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I would like to inform the Members that we are trying in every way possible. and we had intended to finalize debate on all of the issues between 7 and 8 oclock. I would like to inform the Members of the pending amendments we have. we have about an hour of debate. maybe less. if Members reduce their time. We have no control over votes that my be called. We feel that we may have a final passage vote. a recommital vote. and maybe one vote on a separate amendment. But otherwise we are doing everything possible. I might inform my colleagues. to accept amendments where possible. to compromise wherever we can to accept amendments. However. basically now we have about an hour left. excluding the possibility of votes.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman and colleagues. I have no disagreement with either side on this issue. It is being done in some areas now. My problem is that there is a cost regardless of what anyone says. and I am concerned that we might go into legislation that conceivably we could not administer as well as we would like to. I was wondering .if I could ask my colleagues. both colleagues. that during the process we try to arrive at some compromiseif we could. in trying to save the Members time in case there would be another vote. and so we could finish -at -an early hour. if either the gentleman from Florida or the gentleman from California would agree to this. There was language discussed prior that would have the Secretary have a pilot program that would fit in place and see bow it works and then the Secretary would be instructed after perusal pf the result If he saw lit to apply this to the general law. Is there any interest from eithergentleman?
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous consent that the en bloc amendment be considered as read and printed in the RECORD.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. this is an amendment that has worked out. and basically it is the Americathe Beautiful Program. reforestation. planting trees. This is the program that the President and Mrs. Bush have. and I would urge the Members to accept the amendment.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. these are amendments to the conservation title basically dealing with the highly erodible land package. conservation priority areas. CRP lands and sale to Governinent entities. Our amendments. as had been stated before. are in agreement with all concerned.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

That is correct. The committee found it necessary to restate the definition of wetland in order to impress on the Department of Agriculture that wetland possesses three essential characteristics. hydrophytie vegetation. hydric soilsand wetland hydrology. And the Committee intends that the three criteria must all be met for an area to be Identified as wetland for all purposes of the swampbuster section of this bill.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. the gentleman is correct. The committee intends that all three characteristics must be present to arrive at a wetland designation. unless interrupted by temporary weather conditions or if hydrophytic vegetation has been removed by farming or ranching practices. I might further state that the committee does not intend that land subject to infrequent flooding or occasional. brief pooling such as from abnormally heavy rains or snowmelt te construed to meet the hydrological requirements of a wetland. The committee also recognizes that normal farming practices will often remove hydrophytic vegetation. but the committee intends that when a wetland designation is made for an area being farmed. determination must be made that hydrophytic vegetation would have been present except for the disturbance.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

The gentlemans understanding is correct. The Secretary of Agriculture is directed to delineate wetland on a map and to make a reasonable effort to make an onsite wetland determination whenever requested by an owner or operator. In addition. the committee intends that the Secretary conduct an onsite visit of the subject land prior to withholding any program benefits under the swampbuster provisions.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman. I wish to speak in favor of the amendment just adopted. I would yield to my distinguished. charming colleague. the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowry].
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. reclaiming my time. let me state to my friend that I have visited personally with all of the principals negotiating both in Brussels and in Geneva. and I have told all of them and have stated publicly and privately that what we are doing here is for the reasons that we need to do it here. and that it is on a parallel course. separate and apart from the negotiations in Geneva. Mr. Chairman. our legislation runs out at the end of September. So all of them can be assured and take heed from our word that it is in no way incompatible with the position of the administration. with what the administration is trying to arrive at at Geneva. Our committee has been and my public commitment. should I be chainnan. has been that we in no way wanted to Interfere. We in no way wanted to send a message or signal. They should do their thing for the reasons that need to be done there. and we should do our thing here for the reasons we need to do it here. and that when and if they arrive. and I hope they do. at some conclusion In Geneva. hopefully favorable to the endeavor of the administration. that we would be happy to revisit any section of this legislation that might be addressed or could be enhanced from the final resolution in Geneva.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio . the chairman of the Select Committee on Hunger.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. to finalize. let me state to my distinguished colleague. the gentleman from Minnesota that we appreciate what he is trying to do. We basically agree with his philosophy. and we have been frugal. and we have cut. I keep repeating. over $30 billion In the past 10 years. Mr. Chairman. we will accomodate the budget in this bill. and accomodation will be made by the Committee on the Budget. and even. hopefully. in the summit. to accommodate these increases. We have been responsible. We will continue to be responsible. The gentleman from Minnesota knows. and he can verify the fact. that we have been responsible throughout the process. I would just state to my colleagues that for the reasons that have been mentioned by all the Members that. even though we can tell the gentleman we sympathize with his efforts. we will accommodate in the budget. We will find money someplace. However. Mr. Chairman. as far as approving this amendment. all I cay say is. "Not here and not now."
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman. I rise at this time to advise Members that as far as we know there is only one more amendment pending that is a 10minute amendment. Then we have no control over requests for votes. Mr. Chairman. I would like to engage in a discussion with the gentleman from Georgia related to a topic of great interest to all Members. As you know. section 1751 of the bill waives food stamp quality control sanctions against States from fiscal year 1982 through 1990. The waiver will allow States to focus on the present and future administration of the Food Stamp Program. Notwithstanding the strong likelihood of passage of legislation waiving the sanctions. the State Food Stamp Appeals Board has begun the process ]A) on of scheduling evidentiary hearings on fiscal year 1984 food stamp quality control cases. According to my State. preparation for these hearings will require the investment of substantial resources. The 33 States appealing the fiscal year 1984 sanctions now face the prospect of having to pursue lengthy and expensive litigation regarding those sanctions notwithstanding the expressed intent of the House Agriculture Committee to waive those very sanctions. I. therefore. would like to go on the record in urging USDA to suspend all proceedings on fiscal year 1984 food stamp disallowances pending final action on the farm bill.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I want to advise the Members we have only one amendment left. and I know if there were any feelings hurt on any situation that I will take responsibility for It. and I apologize to anyone who has had their feelings hurt by any other Member. I am managing this bill on the majority side. and I hope that we will only go on the issues. that we will only request votes for good and valid reasons. and that we can proceed and finish this legislation. I am reminded that the legislation of yesterday had more policy changes and cost considerably more than this bill. and we are still here at this hour debating whether we are going to call another vote or not. I think that we can dispose of the amendment that will now be offered. hopefully in 10 minutes. and then we will be in the process of finalizing the bill with two en bloc amendments that should not have any votes.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. these amendments are one by our distinguished colleague. the gentleman from Michigan . on disabilities for farmers. a paperwork reduction amendment from the gentleman from Montana [Mr. MARLENEEI. a commodity report by the gentleman from Michigan . one by the gentleman from South Carolina . and a "buy American" amendment by the gentleman from Ohio .
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous consent that the en bloc amendments be considered as read and printed in the RacoPw.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. this is an amendment that has several amendments agreed to by all parties. It contains various and sundry amendments. and I would urge approval .of the amendment.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that the amendments en bloc be considered as read and printed in the Racoan.
Date: 1990-08-01
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that in the engrossment of the bill. H.R. 3950. the Clerk be authorized to correct section numbers. punctuation. and crossreferences. and to make such other conforming changes as may be necessary to reflect the actions of the House in amending and adopting the bill. H.R.
Date: 1990-08-02
Speaker: DE LUGO (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I rise as an original cosponsor of the Civil Rights Act of 1990. in full support of this historic measure which once again places our Nation in the forefront of the quest for equality and justice for all our people. In 1964 thenPresident Lyndon Baines Johnson stood up before the U.S. Congress and declaredwith infinite determination"We are gonna pass this Civil Rights Act if it takes all nightl" Mr. Speaker. my House colleagues and I are here today with the same infinite determination to pass this Civil Rights Act of 1990. Why? Because this restores the full prohibitions against discrimination on the basis of race. color. religion. sex. or national origin as embodied in that historic 1964 document whose power has been so diminished in recent years by diluting Supreme Court decisions. To those who oppose this proposed legislation I say the Civil Rights Act of 1990 will not generate quota systems across the land. as we have so often been told. As my colleagues are well aware. this act merely restores the standards used to determine discrimination as embodied in the Supreme Courts landmark 1971 Griggs decision. standards used by this Nation from 1971 to 1989 when another Supreme Court decision diluted this ruling. Further employers were asked to come forward. during hearings on this very bill. to tell us if they had any evidence that quotas were being used to comply with these standards used under the Griggs ruling. Not one employer chose to do so. Clear proof that the quota argument was merely a red herring. Opponents of the proposed Civil Rights Act of 1990 also balk at the expansion of the provision that allows compensatory and punitive damages to victims of intentional job discrimination based on race. But I ask my colleagues: Should not a person discriminated in the job marketplace for being of a different sex. of a different religion or a different national origin have just as much access to damages as remedies as those who are victimized because of being of a different race? Are not these victims of discrimination subject to just as much pain. suffering and economic deprivation when they are denied jobs? And I ask my colleagues. who among you can oppose legislation that would assure that. after a private contract is drawn up. no evils. such as discriminatory working conditions or racial harrassment. would later ensue. Should an employer cry that business necessity demands discrimination. then this legislation would place the entire burden of proof of that necessity on the employer. Mr. Speaker. this bill Is supported by over 180 of the most well respected organizations in this country. Every one of these groups has 4 long history in the struggle for ensuring that we keep alive the equality of opportunity. and freedom from harassment and victimization. of every living American. I. myself. and the pnople of the Virgin Islands also proudly stand up in full support of this bill.
Date: 1990-08-03
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman and my colleagues. there is an old saying: "You shouldnt criticize an Indian until you walk in his moccasins for a day." or some sort of semblance to what I have just said. Mr. Chairman. the indignity of discrimination has been suffered by some who served in this Chamber. There are some of us who have walked in the moccasins of that Indian. When that happens. if the hurt runs deep and the scar is permanent. our very soul cries out for vengeance and for justice. That is what we are about today. justice and equity. We hear so often the words that our Founding Fathers left with us. that there are certain unalienable rights bestowed upon us by the Creator of the human beings. This is but another step in the neverending process of trying to achieve the ultimate in that vow. and that promise and that challenge of the Founding Fathers. I would say. and I have heard all of the arguments. that there is not that much difference. But should there be difference. justice demands that the doubt be given in the favor of those who suffered. So. that is the only difference. and I will cast my vote. even though there may be doubt. but on the side of those who walked in the moccasin of that Indian for that one day. Then. hopefully. one day we will arrive at a point where there should not be any discussion. or any emotion. because we truly will follow the mandate from above and that desire that somehow. some day. protected by law and respected by our neighbors. those words would have full meaning.
Date: 1990-09-05
Speaker: DE LUGO (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. the U.S. Virgin Islands is suffering from an intolerable crisis in its Federal court system. We do not have a single permanent judge. Our senior district court judge went into retirement more. than 2 years ago. after giving a years advance notice to Justice. Our other judge died tragically 9 months ago. after an unsuccessful battle with cancer. In all this time. from 1987 until now. Justice has failed to submit an acceptable nominee. Just last month. the only nomination ever forwarded to the Senate was sent back to the White House. based on bipartisan agreement in the Senate Judiciary Committee. True. visiting judges are sent down on a rotating basis to keep our courts afloat. But the backlog of cases is growing enormously. And public confidence in the courts is suffering. as the people of the Virgin Islands see long delays. and watch a procession of new judges file through our courts. with one judge handling the trial and another judge handling the sentencing. and no continuity. The Department of Justice has to make the appointment of Federal judges in the Virgin Islands a top priority. We have a pool of talented. nativeborn Virgin Islands lawyers from which Justice can select judicial nominees if the White House is willing to put aside politics and put priority where it belongson the administration of justice.
Date: 1990-09-11
Speaker: DE LUGO (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. the airport in Guam. a U.S. insular area in the Pacific. was just recently officially named the Antonio B. Won Pat Guam International Airport in honor of our late colleague. Tony Won Pat. who died in 1987. Tony was my predecessor in the job of chairman of the Insular affairs subcommittee of the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee. In fact. when he became chairman in 1981. he was the first island representative to become a chairman of a legislative subcommittee of the House. Prior to his coming to Congress in 1973. he served his beloved Guamanians in various elected capacities from the 1930s on. so he had a long history of public service. Tony was a tireless campaigner and lobbyist on behalf of the Guamanian people and it is fitting that they should honor him by naming their airport after him. I insert an editorial from the June 6. 1990 Pacific Daily News that applauds the decision to name the airport after Mr. Won Pat at this point in the RECORD.
Date: 1990-09-17
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to exchange certain property in the Chattahoochee National Forest for the construction of facilities in the national forest. as amended.