macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 1990-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. as in the exchange that the gentleman from Arkansas had with the gentleman from North Carolina . the distinguished chairman. we have to insist that that is not what the bill does. The establishment and review of written policy and criteria for evaluating. it is not the Governor. The panel shall be composed of more than 16 members. and those are the people that conceivably better than the Congressmen from that area know the need. and we do not select. The Member of Congress does not say yea or nay on any project. as well as we know that area. But I think it should be made clear now. It is not the Governor. the Governor or a person designated by him. One of Sixteen. The Governor. person designated by him.. a Member of Congress now does not have the authority of. in fact. saying yea or nay on any project. The Member could not. if they did not want to give that grant to Clay County. the gentleman could have done somersaults on top of the dome. and they still would not give it. So I just wanted to clear the air to see that we are addressing the issue as it relates to the bill and the practicality of the situation.
Date: 1990-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

I just want the gentleman to know. I can appreciate the gentlemans interest and I can sympathize with it. but I just want us to be correct in the discussion. The gentleman would replace 29. The Governors designee is only one. one of whom is appointed by a statewide association of rural telephone companies. Who better knows the needs than the telephone company? One is appointed by a statewide association of noncooperative phone companies. by rural electric companies. by health care organizations. It is not the Governor. It is a 16member board with several advisory nonvoting members. if the gentleman will just read the bill.
Date: 1990-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

I just want to clear .the record. The gentleman has no authority under the Constitution or the laws. but if the gentleman is concerned. again I guess he is obsessed with mention of the Governor.
Date: 1990-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. if the gentleman will yield further. I doubt that very much. because now under this administration. which is of a different political party. the gentlemans influence is very. very small.
Date: 1990-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Go back to the bill. read the bill. One is appointed by a statewide association of counties and the State.
Date: 1990-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Let me just conclude. I just wanted to insist that when the gentleman says Governor. he is but one of the members of the group. When the gentleman says that the influence of a Member of Congress would be eroded. he is yielding that influence to the people who elect him and the people who elect the Congressman are the associations within the State. So leave the Governor out. Leave it that the Member may or may not have influence. This says that the local entities decide through their Representatives. That is what we know as representative government.
Date: 1990-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. it is awkward to be placed in a -position truthfully of trying to correct the record and to insist that we discuss the areas covered by the bill. The gentleman said would confiscate funds. and so forth. agreed to by the gentleman from North Carolina. This legislation does not deal with the EPA. EPA funds. or EPA funding at all.
Date: 1990-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. that is an erroneous statement. We do not deal with EPA funding or EPA funds. Also. priorities for health reasons: that is explicitly mandated in the bill. page 27.
Date: 1990-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

If the gentleman will yield further. they do that now. They do that now. every area. We may be overrun by consultants. but that is done. This does not change anything. The fact Is that the gentlemans insistence that we would confiscate money from EPA is not correct. not under this bill.
Date: 1990-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

If the gentleman will yield further. I would not challenge the gentlemar4. but not from EPA. and then priority is given to applications for projects designed to address health emergency declared to be such by the appropriate Federal or State government agency. so we do not deal with EPA funds in this legislation
Date: 1990-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. this is getting more awkward by the minute. The bureaucracy does not transfer funds in the Government of the United States of America. The Secretaries are allowed discretion in some areas.
Date: 1990-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. again I just want to clarify for the record. because the gentleman is knowledgeable. that there is no district in the United States possibly that has more problems than mine bringing rural water supplies to the border area. The gentleman and I would agree on that. But the fact of the matter is that in actuality. the gentleman made a statement about building buildings and so on. The first thing you do is bring water. Industrial parks. first you bring water. Rural enterprise. first you bring water. A sterile. impotent building out in rural America is not going to do anything. It is not going to make Jobs. The fact is that under this legislation. the local districts or the advisory is going to advise what are the priorities. We already say health is a priority. period. to begin with. The local State agency or advisory committee. Farmers Home is going to decide under their criteria or eventually the Secretary. But water is the beginning. That is what the gentleman from North Carolina and I have worked with together. So this is not water competing with a sterile. impotent building. or water competing with some jobmaking industry. Every industry that comes first must have water and sewage. Otherwise it would not be a viable economic industry. You cannot have a building without the utilities that are needed for the people that are going to work there. So the priority has. is. and will continue to be water. Otherwise you do not have any industrial development.
Date: 1990-03-15
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman. I do this for two purposes: First. that Information and debate on the amendment just adopted was inaccurate In some points. misrepresented in other points. We feel that the membership was not fully enlightened as to the impact of the amendment. Therefore. I feel that we owe an obligation to the membership that accurate information be presented to them. The second point is that the leadership had asked us. if at all possible. that we rise by 3 today. That time having passed and because of the need to further edify the Members as to the accuracy of the legislation. I think that It would be better if we delay this to another time. Accordingly. Mr. Chairman. I move that the Committee do now rise.
Date: 1990-03-21
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. let me first commend the chairman of the committee. the gentleman from Illinois . the subcommittee chairman. the gentleman from Pennsylvania . the ranking minority member. the gentlewoman from Nevada [Mrs. VucANovcHJ. and all the members of the Committee on House Administration and the Subcommittee on Accounts for the excellent work they have done in this endeavor. We on the Committee on Agriculture have always been very frugal. We have been responsible. and we have always leveled with the committee and given them the amounts that we felt we rightfully needed to perform our work. I must say at this point that we are exceedingly elated at the kindness and generosity of the committee. but beyond that. I appreciate the responsible way in which they acted. allowing the committees to do their work and allowing us to fulfill our responsibilities in the Committee on Agriculture. We are now doing the farm bill. we are doing rural development. we have to do CFDC. and we are doing seafood inspection. We are doing legislation on environmental issues such as on pesticides. We are doing food safety. All of those need adequate staffs and need the necessary consultants at times. We are able to do this by the assistance of the funding that we get from this committee. So our commitment is to continue working with the chairman of the committee and with the members of his committee to do the best possible job that we can with the funds that they allow us. If. as we have always done before. there should be some reason we are able to save. we will come and tell the committee that we have saved and will do what we can to help them with their very difficult task. Mr. Speaker. I must commend the committee chairman again for the excellent bipartisan way in which he has handled the committee. giving us the opportunity to follow what they have Aarch 21. 1990 done as we fulfill our responsibilities in our own committee.
Date: 1990-03-22
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the Committee amendment in the nature of a substitute be printed in the RECORD and open to amend-. ment at any point.
Date: 1990-03-22
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. let me mention at the outset that the leadership has requested our cooperation and has asked that we conclude this measure by 3 oclock. It is our Intention to do so. This amendment is part of the effort to expedite the matter. As most of the Members recall. there was debate on an amendment offered by our distinguished colleague. the gentleman from North Carolina . and that amendment was adopted by the House. This indicated that there was a division not only within the committee but within the Membership of the House. In an effort to conciliate the differences and to arrive at some degree of compromise. I consulted our distinguished colleague. the chairman of the subcommittee. the gentleman from Oklahoma . our distinguished ranking minority member of the subcommittee. the gentleman from Missouri . and our distinguished colleague. the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. RosE]. and all of them were very amenable and very cooperative. We discussed diligently the issue to arrive at a compromise satisfactory to all the parties. In discussing this matter with Members from other States and other areas who had questions on this issue. we find that this appears to satisfy the greater majority of those who had any concern about the amendment. Mr. Chairman. again I want to reiterate my appreciation and commendation to the subcommittee chairman. the gentleman from Oklahoma . our ranking minority member. the gentleman from Missouri . and our colleague. the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. RosEi. Mr. Chairman. I include the following letter of March 14. 1990 addressed to me:
Date: 1990-03-22
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma . Mr. Chairman. again let me express my very sincere appreciation and commendation to the gentleman from North Carolina for his cooperation and his interest in promoting the rural legislation. Mr. Chairman. I am happy at this time to yield to my colleague. the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. RosE].
Date: 1990-03-22
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I thank the gentleman from North Carolina . Let me just state that any interpretation of my comments at the end that would indicate any disrespect or any accusation against Members. that was not my intention then. and it is not my intention now. Unfortunately. there had been information from within and without this House that did not fully apprise the Members of the impact of this. But I think that has now been put to rest. It never will be my intention and it never has been my intention in all the years I have been a Member of this Congress to attribute to any Member any such thing.
Date: 1990-03-22
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I thank the gentleman from Arkansas . Mr. Chairman. the gentleman can rest assured of our continued cooperation and our effort to continue working in this respect with all the Members who basically have at heart the interest of what we are trying todo for rural America.
Date: 1990-03-22
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. this is a technical amendment which corrects typographical errors. et cetera. and I would hope that my colleagues would approve it.
Date: 1990-03-22
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman. in keeping with our commitment with the leaders I will be very brief. but I just wanted to show the Members. as graphically as I can. what this bill Is all about. I have here a photograph that was taken in my congressional district. My colleagues can see a little boy on a brokendown bicycle with a smile on his face. They can see the shacks behind them. There is one REA light pole. There is no water. There is no drainage. There is no sewerage. There is no pavement. Mr. Chairman. this is what this bill is all about.
Date: 1990-03-22
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. under the rule. would it be permissible for a Member to ask unanimous consent to introduce the amendment printed in the RECORD by another Member?
Date: 1990-03-22
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that. in the engrossment of the bill . the clerk be authorized to correct the table of contents. section numbers. punctuation. citations. and cross references and to make such other technical and conforming changes as may be necessary to reflect the actions of the House in amending the bill.
Date: 1990-03-22
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 H.R. 3581. the bill just passed.
Date: 1990-03-27
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill to enable producers of soybeans to develop. finance. and carry out a nationally coordinated program for soybean promotion. research. and consumer information. and for other purposes. as amended.
Date: 1990-03-27
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 H.R. 2209. the bill just considered.
Date: 1990-03-27
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent to call up the Senate bill to improve the economic. community. and educational wellbeing of rural America. and for other purposes. and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
Date: 1990-03-27
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. first. let me state this has been cleared with the minority. and all of us are in agreement. but an explanation to my distinguished colleague and my other colleagues in the House is that we passed the rural development legislation last week. What we are doing here is taking the Senate bill and Inserting in lieu thereof the Housepassed version and sending it back to the Senate.
Date: 1990-03-27
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

If the gentleman will yield further. yes. and it will then be up to the Senate whether to decide to have a conference.
Date: 1990-03-27
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. as I - explained the procedure. the Senate earlier passed a rural development bill. We then passed our version here in the House. H.R. 3581. What we are doing here today is striking all after the enacting clause in the Senate bill. inserting in lieu thereofthe text of H.R. 3581. It now goes to the Senate. The Senate may accept it as we have forwarded it to them. or they have the option of asking for a conference.
Date: 1990-03-27
Speaker: THOMAS A. LUKEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker. the gentleman from North Carolina has raised an important issue. Both the bill itself and our committees report indicate that the bill is only directed at transportation practices which pose an unreasonable danger to human and animal health. I would like to read a couple of brief excerpts from the committee report on the bill which makes this point clear: The committee does not intend to disrupt safe and reasonable transportation practices. The committee believes that in the vast majority of cases. the regulations will relate to the bulk transportation of products covered under the bill. The committee recognizes that there are a variety of current transportation practices * . that present minimal risks because the products involved are packaged adequately or otherwise are isolated sufficiently to minimize or prevent adulteration. For example. grocery and beverage operations frequently haul food products from distribution points to wholesale or retail locations. Packaged nonfood products may also be transported at the same time. but pose no significant thret If packaging standards are
Date: 1990-03-27
Speaker: THOMAS A. LUKEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. the gentleman from Washington has contributed significantly to this legislation in working toward its present posture here. which is on the verge of enactment.
Date: 1990-03-27
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of the rule for H.R. 3847. As a chairman of a committee that shares jurisdiction over portions of the bill. I had originally planned to offer amendments to the bill regarding issues over which I had concerns. Because of some confusion. they are not included in the rule today. However. after consulting with Chairman CONYR.S I have decided that these concerns can be addressed later in the legislative process. I would also like to include in the RECORD a letter which we received from the Committee on Government Operations. I appreciate the Committee on Government Operations willingness to address these issues and look forward to working with the committee in the future on matters of mutual concern.
Date: 1990-03-28
Speaker: THOMAS A. LUKEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

I am ments public affairs functions. Why are they (6: happy to yield to the gentleman from paying exorbitant fees to a contractor when year Michigan. . civil servants can and should be performing Und
Date: 1990-03-28
Speaker: THOMAS A. LUKEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. support this amendment. nifli Chairman. in view of that. I will abbre- The CHAIRMAN. The question is on Dep viate any further remarks. the amendment offered by the gentle- prot I thank the chairman for supporting man from Ohio (Mr. THOMAS A. M this amendment. I believe that it is to- LUKENI. the tally consistent with. and spells out. The amendment was agreed to. una helps out. to make it clear. because AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MRS. LOWEY mei when we are adopting- regulations. or NEW YORK ed i when we are giving governmental au- Mrs. LOWEY of New York. Mr. T thority to carry out regulations. the Chairman. I offer an amendment. to clearer they are. the more binding The Clerk read as follows: fro they are. the more likely they are to Amendment offered by Mrs. LowEY of-. T be enforced. New York: (1
Date: 1990-03-30
Speaker: RICH HARR (democrat)
Chamber: S

Homestake Mining Land Division. Lead. SD. DEAR RICH: I would like to express my appreciation for the tour of the proposed land exchange areas conducted by the Homestake Land Management Division. As chairman of the Public Land Committee for the S.D. Wildlife Federation I feel that the proposed exchange of Homestake Land in the Black Hills to the U.S. Forest Service for Forest Service Lands in Colorado. is a good proposal. The presentation of the proposed exchange yourself and Jim Wainwright. including the flight over the proposed areas and the tour by vehicle. helped clarify the value of these areas to the public. Several values are apparent and include valuable deer winter range and wildlife habitat high quality trout fisheries. as well as aesthetic natural beauty. (Spearfish Canyon). We feel this exchange would be beneficial from a national standpoint as well as for South Dakota because of the numbers of people who come to the Black Hills from many other states to enjoy the recreational and scenic values. We will encourage the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate to act favorably on this proposal. Sincerely.
Date: 1990-04-02
Speaker: TIMOTHY J. METHOD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Assistant Commissioner Office of Air Management. Indiana Department of Environmental Management. Indianapolis. IN. DEAR MR. METHOD: The purpose of this letter is to comment on the permit proposed by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) for Northern Indiana Public Service Companys (NIPSCO) Bailly generating station. The permit provides for the construction of an air pollution control device and directly related improvements under the Clean Coal Technology (CCT) program. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agrees with the determination by IDEM that the State and EPA rules for prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and new source performance standards (NSPS) are not intended to apply to the CCT project at Bailly. In other words. the project should not be considered a "major modification" under new source review (NSR) or a "modification" as set forth under NSPS provided certain requirements are met. In a separate but related issue. EPA also agrees with the determination by IDEM that the addition of a diesel generator as a backup power supply to the scrubber to be installed at Bailly is not a major modification if the limits on operating the generator agreed to by NIPSCO are federally enforceable.
Date: 1990-04-03
Speaker: TIMOTHY J. METHOD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Assistant Commissioner. Office of Air Management. Indiana Department of Environmental Management. Indianapolis. IN. DEAR MR. METHOD: The purpose of this letter is to comment on the permit proposed by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) for Northern Indiana Public Service Companys (NIPSCO) Bailly generating station. The permit provides for the construction of an air pollution control device and directly related improvements under the Clean Coal Technology (CCT) program. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agrees with the determination by IDEM that the State and EPA rules for prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and new source performance standards (NSPS) are not intended to apply to the CCT project at Bailly. In other words. the project should not be considered a "major modification" under new source review (NSR) or a "modification" as set forth under NSPS provided certain requirements are met. In a separate but related issue. EPA also agrees with the determination by IDEM that the addition of a diesel generator as a backup power supply to the scrubber to be installed at Bailly is not a major modification if the limits on operating the generator agreed to by NIPSCO are federally enforceable.