Henry Bonilla

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from San Antonio for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, this is a Nation founded on rules and laws. We are a young country, but we are the greatest that has ever existed. America is strong and gets stronger because we are passionate about our laws, of which no one is above. If one is a mayor, a police officer, a Senator or a President, one must obey the law, just like any other citizen. American law and our system of justice relies on truth, truth presented by witnesses sworn before God. Those who have appeared before grand juries in this country know it is a daunting experience, knowing that if you stumble, if you lie, you could commit perjury and maybe wind up in jail. Thousands of Americans have been prosecuted and have criminal records because they perjured themselves like the President. The President's own Justice Department regularly prosecutes Americans for perjury, and yes, they are prosecuted for perjury in cases of sexual harassment. We are not talking politics here. In politics, a President may lie to the American people on television, in town meetings, and even in political ads. I think that is wrong, and so do most of my colleagues. But that is not against the law and that is not a reason to impeach. Voters are the ultimate judges in those cases. But here we are talking about the law. As we search our conscience today to cast our votes, let us remember the rules and laws on which our Nation was founded. No one is above the law. Let us vote to uphold that American principle today.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4567, the Medicare Home Health Care and Veterans Health Care Improvement Act of 1998. This bill provides additional resources for health care for the heroic men and women who are our nation's veterans. However, this bill falls far short of improving the situation that home health care agencies are facing. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 directed the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) to develop a prospective payment system of reimbursement for home health care agencies by 1999. In the meantime, HCFA developed an interim payment system designed to help health care agencies' transition to a prospective payment system. Unfortunately, this system has jeopardized the health care for many of our most vulnerable citizens and has put many hard-working agencies out of business. In August, the HCFA told Congress that it will not follow the law and develop the prospective payment system. Due to HCFA's inaction, Congress was forced to quickly develop an interim payment system to keep home health care afloat until HCFA can get its act together. While the bill we are voting on today takes one step forward in that fix, we still have a long way to go. As we face the last days of this congressional session, I am disappointed that we are faced with a ``take it or leave it'' situation. However, I am supporting today's measure because a little help is better than no help. I am confident that this Congress will continue to have home health reform as its top priority when it returns next year.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule and of this legislation that is a result of a lot of hard work between both sides on this committee. The gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young) and the gentleman from Utah (Chairman Hansen) have done an outstanding job in moving this legislation forward. This bill contains, as the chairman alluded to earlier, many stories out in the heartland that will result in positive changes in communities affecting National Parks all over the country. It is a good bipartisan bill, and every Member of Congress that is affected by this bill has a good story to tell about the changes that would result when this legislation passes. I will just highlight briefly what will happen in my congressional district. There is a piece of land that the owners would like to donate to the Fort Davis National Historic Site. And there are other bills as well that have other local significance, and these changes should not fall prey to partisan politics. In my part of the country, the bill would permit a simple 16-acre expansion of the Fort Davis historical site. This legislation is necessary because the original legislation limited the historic site to 460 acres. Fort Davis is located in the heart of west Texas, a wonderful part of the country nestled in an area that is very scenic in its own rough and rugged way. I am proud to represent this area, and I would like to invite my colleagues to visit this area any time they are passing through my State. That entire area of the State is the most popular tourist attraction in the State of Texas now. The fort was a key post in the defense of west Texas and thus played a major role in this region's history. From 1854 to 1891, troops at the post guarded immigrants, freighters, and stage coaches on the San Antonio-El Paso Road. Fort Davis is the best remaining example in the Southwest of the typical post-Civil War frontier fort. The post has extensive surviving structures and ruins. The particular parcel of land that would be added is known as Sleeping Lion Mountain. This land overlooks the park's historic landmarks. It is adjacent to the park's southern boundary, and I believe that the inclusion of this tract of land into the site would ensure the visual and historic integrity for this State and national treasure. The land is slated to be donated to the National Park Service by the Conservation Fund. The land has been purchased by the Conservation Fund. They secured the funds from several private foundations to purchase this land. The purchase of the land was completed in April, and they are simply waiting for us to act. In fact, they have been waiting for a long time for us to act. Madam Speaker, this park expansion has the blessing of the local community and is supported by the Texas Historical Commission. This is a simple piece of legislation that allows for a minor park expansion. And reflecting on the story that I just told, Madam Speaker, there are countless others around the country that could be told about a positive change in their community and their national parks that could result in something good for the communities that these communities are crying out for. Madam Speaker, I commend the gentleman from Utah (Chairman Hansen) and the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young), as well as the gentleman from New York (Chairman Solomon), my friend who is sitting to my right, and also the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis) who has worked hard on this rule and on this legislation.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I proudly represent the ``Cactus Capital of Texas.'' The Cactus Capital is located in Sanderson. The residents of Sanderson and Terrell County are equally proud of this designation as they come together on October 10, 1998 to celebrate the first Prickly Pear Pachanga. Just ask any Texan and they will tell you that Texas is a unique state with a rich culture and heritage. Each region has special characteristics and for Terrell County this would be the cacti. More than 100 species of cacti grow in Texas, more than any other state. The cacti is known for growing in extreme drought and heat conditions. It is a tough plant that grows in a tough region and I believe it is only fitting that this plant is honored by West Texans. The citizens of Terrell County should be commended for hosting the Prickly Pear Pachanga. There is nothing that represents Texas better than friends, neighbors and a community coming together to celebrate. I encourage all Americans to come to Sanderson to attend the festival so they will be able to partake of good fellowship, food and family fun.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, on August 23, 1998, the residents of Del Rio and other Texas border communities were hit with a devastating flood caused by Tropical Storm Charley. Nine people lost their lives. Five people are still missing. Over 600 families lost their homes and all their worldly possessions. The entire area lost a notion of security that can never be recovered. The town will never be the same. Perhaps the only good to come from this tragic situation is the story of a ravaged community coming together to rebuild lives. In this story four true heroes took the lead to restore peace and harmony in the grief-stricken town. Department of Public Safety Troopers, Joe Frank Martinez, Jimmey Granato and Robert ``Cinco'' Clark and Judge Dorothy Weddle emerged as heroes that set an example for us all. From the moment the realization of disaster hit, these four took the lead in the search for the missing persons. They went above and beyond the call of duty, working days and nights for two weeks straight--all for the unselfish purpose of helping families reunite with lost ones. Officers Martinez, Granato and Clark started with a list of approximately 267 missing persons and used every resource available to track down these people. After poring over phone books utility bills, social security and drivers' license records, these dedicated officers went from door to door in their diligent search for the missing. Through their tireless efforts, these men were able to reduce the missing people list from 267 to five. Had it not been for their initiative, the missing list would not be down to what it is today. Unfortunately, the search did not always end with a joyous reunion. All too often, the hunt ended with yet another casualty added to the death toll. Judge Dorothy Weddle notified and comforted families of the deceased so they could focus on more important things than bureaucratic procedures. She provided support to families when they needed it most. I would like to commend these four people for their leadership, their dedication, and most of all, their tireless efforts to help others. Their endeavors will always be remembered by those whose lives they touched and by those families they helped to reunite. They helped to restore harmony to a town wracked by disaster.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I grew up in a neighborhood where over 90 percent of the people growing up in my neighborhood and in my school district spoke Spanish as their first language. I thank my lucky stars every day that my mother had the wisdom at the time to teach me and my two brothers and two sisters English when we were very young so that we would be better prepared for school and better prepared to achieve other goals in our lives. Back then, there was no bilingual education. I understand that, over the years, bilingual education has helped many students in this country. But somehow the situation that we have now has gotten out of control in some areas with too much Federal control. That is why I applaud the gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs) for his effort today in trying to return more power to the people in neighborhoods across this country where it belongs so that parents and administrators and teachers can decide for themselves what is right for the curriculum in their own neighborhoods. My amendment specifically addresses a portion of the bill of the gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs) that addresses any national testing. My amendment would eliminate any effort of national testing undertaken as part of this reform. In my view, after this amendment is passed, if it is passed, the bill would be an excellent bill to move forward on because it would go even one step further in taking Federal control away from local school districts. The requirement for Federally mandated testing is now part of this bill. My understanding is the gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs) is accepting my amendment to give States, and not Washington bureaucrats, content with the status quo and know-how, and let the locals decide how to administer tests. This bill is about moving from the status quo in bilingual education toward real opportunity for students. This bill does not abolish bilingual education. I hope that we do not get sidetracked in rhetoric among some Members here that somehow this is an attack on bilingual education. Bilingual education can still serve a purpose in this country, but, again, it should be administered by the people in communities to serve their children as they see fit. This bill gives American students the chance they deserve to achieve the American dream. Again, I looked at the students that I grew up with in the south side of San Antonio and notice that those who were given the choice of learning English as quickly as possible tended to be those who achieved faster. We have had revolutions in some parts of the country, some in California and other parts in the west from parents who want to have that local control and would like to have a say in whether or not their kids are part of a bilingual education program. That is what this bill tries to do, to give them a helping hand in establishing that parental decision and choice about their own children's education. Again, my amendment simply deals with any effort to impose any kind of national testing related to bilingual education, and I would hope that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle would support my amendment.

Mr. BONILLA. I am happy to yield to the gentleman from Missouri.

Mr. BONILLA. I appreciate the support of the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay), my friend, of my amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) for yielding. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and in support of the Guadalupe-Hidalgo Treaty Land Claims Act. I want to commend my colleague the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Redmond) for bringing this important matter to the attention of Congress. It is a remarkable accomplishment on his part, especially as a freshman Member of this body. This bill rights a wrong, Madam Speaker. After annexing New Mexico from Mexico, our government failed to honor the commitments it made in the Treaty of 1848 to respect the property rights of landowners. Many Mexicans who became American citizens as a result of the treaty lost all right and title to much of their lands. This bill takes the first step to right this wrong that was committed by the Government. It restores land the Federal Government had taken from individuals. This is a property rights issue in its most pure and simple form. Citizens should be compensated for property that is wrongfully taken from them. The bill also protects the property rights of current landowners in New Mexico. Any compensation to affected parties will come from Federal lands. This bill has been carefully crafted and will not allow for Federal land to be handed to any person who simply asks for it. The bill sets up a commission and any claims have to be presented to the commission and the legal claim must be proven. Then the commission will make recommendations to Congress for final consideration. The bill lays out a fair process for all claims to be heard. This legislation represents what is best about America: fairness, equality, and opportunity. It seeks to right the wrongs of the past. It says the rule of law will prevail and prevail over us all equally. I cannot count the number of times I have stood before my colleagues on the House floor and argued for property rights of landowners across this country. I stand here again in support of property rights and encourage my colleagues to do the same and support this important piece of legislation. Once again, I want to commend my friend the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Redmond) for working so diligently to ensure this bill is considered by Congress. He has worked every day since he has been elected to support this issue that is supported strongly by people in his congressional district and from areas that are outside his congressional district as well. It is very important to New Mexicans that we pass this rule and this bill, and I hope that the rest of my colleagues see fit to vote for the rule and for the bill.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 1759, legislation granting a federal charter to the American GI Forum (AGIF). This legislation is identical to H.R. 3843, a bill introduced by my colleague Mr. Rodriguez and myself, and worthy of all our support. The Senate passed S. 1759 last week and it is up to us to pass it today so that it becomes law. It is particularly fitting that we are approving this legislation this Congress, as this year the GI Forum is celebrating its 50th anniversary. The American GI Forum was founded by the late Dr. Hector P. Garcia on March 26, 1948, in Corpus Christi. Today, the GI Forum has 500 chapters and over 100,000 members. The GI Forum is the largest national veterans service organization without a federal charter. It is only fitting that this patriotic family organization receive recognition with a federal charter. The GI Forum members have earned this special recognition through their sacrifices on behalf of America. I commend the Senate for passing this legislation and urge all my colleagues to join me in voting for this important bill. The American GI Forum is an institution in Texas and the Hispanic community. This bipartisan bill provides a means for this Congress to recognize the service of more than 1,000,000 Hispanic veterans. Let's take this opportunity to provide GI Forum the recognition it deserves. Please join me in voting for S. 1759.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. This is a very important piece of legislation. I rise in strong support today. I just returned from Texas a little over an hour ago, Mr. Speaker, where we have had in south Texas the 34th day of triple-digit temperatures which has broken another record. Farmers and ranchers all over Texas and throughout the Southwest are being hit hard by this drought which is part of a one-two punch, the other being the falling commodity prices. There is no area harder hit right now than south Texas, although they are feeling it all across the State. This bill in the simplest of terms for those who are not in agriculture would be like when you were younger or you were struggling at some point in your life and you needed a little advance money on your paycheck and you asked the boss or the appropriate authorities, can I just have a little advance and I think it will get me through this tough time. It is not going to solve anyone's financial problems long-term nor is it going to make it rain, but it is going to provide that necessary capital to get through a very difficult time this fall. The situation is very critical in Texas now. There are burned-up fields, no grass for livestock to graze on, aflatoxin has hit the corn crop very hard. We all understand that the only long-term solution to this is to have more rain. This is the most powerful city on earth, Mr. Speaker, but there is not a person in this city who can make it rain. We must, as we all know, appeal to a higher authority for that long term. All of Texas has experienced less than 25 percent of normal rainfall for April through June and temperatures topped out above the century mark nearly the entire month of July across the State. Until the rain comes, these early payments are a first step in helping farmers get through this difficult time. I have committed to my colleagues on the Committee on Agriculture and the agriculture appropriations subcommittee to continue to work on this issue and develop a plan to provide assistance to our farmers and ranchers. As Americans we enjoy the world's cheapest, safest and most abundant food supply. I hope every farmer out there understands that there is not a day that goes by that Members on both sides of the aisle, both Democrats and Republicans, are thinking about our constituents out there and desperately trying to come up with more solutions to help them get through this very difficult time. I certainly appreciate all the members of the Committee on Agriculture, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Smith) our chairman and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) the ranking member and all the committee members who are working side by side to help in this very, very critical situation.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation. I would like to thank Chairman Young for his cooperation and assistance in moving this bill through his committee. Fort Davis is located in the heart of West Texas, nestled in an area that is very scenic in its own rough and rugged way. I am very proud to represent this area, and I would invite my colleagues to visit the area to see the beauty for yourself. The fort was a key post in the defense of West Texas and thus played a major role in this region's history. From 1854 to 1891, troops at the post guarded immigrants, freighters and stagecoaches on the San Antonio-El Paso road. Fort Davis is the best remaining example in the Southwest of the typical post-Civil War frontier fort. The post has extensive surviving structures and ruins. My bill would permit a simple 16 acre expansion of the historical site. This legislation is necessary because the original legislation limited the historic site to 460 acres. The particular parcel of land that would be added to the site is known as Sleeping Lion Mountain. This land overlooks the park's historic landmarks. The land is slated to be donated to the National Park Service by the Conservation Fund. The land has been purchased by the Conservation Fund. They secured the funds from several private foundations to purchase the land. The purchase of the land was completed in April and they are simply waiting for us to act. The tract is adjacent to the fort's southern boundary and I believe that the inclusion of this tract of land into the site would ensure the visual and historic integrity for this state and national treasure. This park expansion has the blessing of the local community and is also supported by the Texas Historical Commission. As you can see this is a simple piece of legislation to allow for a minor park expansion. This would allow us to preserve a very important piece of our heritage and history in West Texas.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I appreciate the comments of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry). I would also concur; my kids sleep in those baggy T-shirts as well.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I want to make it clear that, to those of who have raised questions about such an effort through this amendment, and I have a 9-year-old boy and a 13-year-old girl, and I know my colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry), has young children as well, this is not a question of being concerned about children. It is about doing the right thing and using the right vehicle to accomplish it. There is not a person in here who is going to stand up and ever object to us doing everything we possibly can to protect our children from any kind of injury or any kind of accident. But the initial effort to try to write law in this bill was deemed inappropriate earlier through a parliamentary ruling because we really had not had a chance to talk about this and figure out what the facts are. I have a letter in my possession dated July 8 of this year from the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission that clearly States an opposition by commissioner Ann Brown who clearly states that the current rules, as they have been changed, should remain and we should not do anything to go back to the way they were before. There have been no burn injuries associated with any snug-fitting garments that we are aware of. Certainly, accidents occur out there and we are not sure of what the causes are in each particular case. But I think that in light of the fact that we have not had hearings on this. I might support this if we had the appropriate hearings and used the appropriate vehicle. But it is like trying to use one of those new Volkswagen beetles to haul a giant cabinet down the highway. It is just the wrong vehicle to use to accomplish a goal. So I would strongly urge my colleagues to let us go through the process and not rush an amendment that Members have not even had a chance to look at. It was presented within the last 15 to 20 minutes and we have just barely gotten around to figuring out what it says exactly. It is the wrong way to write Federal law. We always know that when the Federal Government tries to legislate quickly without really thinking things through, we wind up messing the problem up worse than it was when we started out. That is my concern. Mr. Chairman, I emphasize that none of us in this body with young children, as I have and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) has, would do anything to risk the safety of a child in this country. Our only concern is that we want to do the right thing for the kids and for everyone involved in this issue.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I make the point of order that the provisions of section 423 constitute legislation in an appropriation bill in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI. Clause 2 of rule XXI provides that no amendment to a general appropriations bill shall be in order if changing existing law. The provision contained in section 423 is clearly a change in existing law and is, therefore, in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the bill, and because the chairman and the ranking member are both in favor of the bill, under rule XXVIII I assert my right to be recognized for 20 minutes in opposition to the conference report.

Mr. BONILLA. Then, Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to allow the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes) to also have 10 minutes of my time to control.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I first of all would like to thank the gentleman from Colorado (Chairman Schaefer) and the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Barton) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall), my friend, who were speaking in support of this bill today. They have been most gracious in allowing those who have strong feelings about this conference report to work with them very closely, and I just wanted to express my appreciation for that. The whole idea of having compacts is one that I have no problem with, and I do not think Members generally have a problem with the process of States getting together to decide where waste is going to go. Of course, then, as I stated strongly over and over again for many years now, the problem that I have and other Members who have nearby congressional areas in Texas have, is the threat to the environment in this area, the unstable geology, and also the threat to the economic future of these communities. Quite simply speaking, they do not want it there. Again, I have 20 counties and 13 cities and municipalities on record as opposing this conference report and this whole idea. There is a county in Texas that is very strongly in favor of having this kind of dump in their community and I would gladly work with that community to try to have this dump moved to that area in the future, if that is even a possibility. Though the whole idea of having places to put nuclear waste, low- level radioactive waste is an issue that I understand is very necessary, I know that my colleagues understand how strongly at this point my people feel about this issue, as do I. There is another issue I want to bring up as well. All of us in Texas are going through an incredible drought at this point. The agriculture community is suffering. Local governments are implementing water rationing in some areas. I want to emphasize above all that now should be the time that we understand, as Texans, that any potential threat to water supplies in any community in Texas is something that we should all be concerned about. I do not think any of us have anticipated being at this point in Texas right now with the shortage of water and the unbearable heat that is upon us every day at this time in Texas with no end in sight. So I would appeal to my colleagues in other areas of the State and other parts of the Nation suffering from droughts and heat waves that they could identify with the needs that could occur if the water supplies were threatened by a dump like this in the future. So, I thank my colleagues for working with me on this issue and I ask them, I plead for every citizen in my congressional area who has ever pleaded with me to make their case before this body. I hope that I have made it and I hope that we have had an impact on those who are considering opposing this conference report. The people of West Texas need all the help they can get.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from San Antonio, South Texas (Mr. Rodriguez).

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield further, the earthquake did cause damage, enough to cause concern out in the West Texas area. And, as the gentleman knows, even though it covers vast distances that community is considered 100 miles up the road. As my friend knows, in that part of Texas, that is, in fact, just up the road.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I just want to remind my friend about the earthquake that struck in West Texas, I believe, if I am not mistaken it was just 2 years ago and there was damage caused. It was not right at this location, but it was not far away, in the Alpine area that, as the gentleman probably knows, is just a few miles away.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, what we are talking about here is a basic fundamental right as Americans that we recognize for generations that has made our country what it is today standing above and beyond any country in the history of this planet; that is, the rights are of those of us in communities to determine our own future and to determine our own destiny and our own communities. Also the right to private property and the right to have that property held sacred to us and that the value and that the use of that property is controlled as long as you are not hurting your neighbors and your friends that are existing adjacent to your property to allow that property to prosper over the years and to use it as you see fit. Those rights have been threatened, Mr. Speaker, by this compact, but more importantly by the State legislature at the turn of the decade that decided, along with Governor Ann Richards, to implement this low level nuclear dump site in the community of Sierra Blanca. The community opposed this strongly. I have the names here, which I will read at a later time, of 20 counties surrounding Sierra Blanca where this site was picked by Governor Richards, former Governor Richards, and the State legislature. We have discussed before, as my friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green) has pointed out, that this issue we are voting on today has no reference at all to the site picked by the State legislature and Governor Richards many years ago. We are simply trying to do the right thing for the people of the community around Sierra Blanca and surrounding counties by trying to stop this thing at the final checkpoint before it is allowed to be implemented. The reasons for the opposition are very simple. There is unstable ground. The geology of the area has been reviewed over and over and, in fact, two administrative law judges who have looked carefully at this situation have determined that the earth is unstable in this area. How would you like it, whether you live in Manhattan or you live in Cleveland or you live in San Francisco or you live in West Texas where earthquakes have occurred, how would you like it if suddenly someone said that right next door they are going to start putting in containers, low level nuclear waste, that might leak out if the ground were unstable enough that it might threaten your property and your water supply and the future of the environment for the children that are growing up in this particular area? So the threat to the environment is real and has, in fact, back home in Texas, been documented by two administrative law judges that are recommending that now in the capital of Austin, the agency in charge of regulating this issue take this into consideration in the strongest way or in fact recommending that this not be accepted. The economic impact tied to the environment is also a very big issue that these administrative law judges have pointed out. So you can see why these two threats to the people of this community would have a huge impact on their ability to govern their own future and their economic growth surrounding the Sierra Blanca area and the counties surrounding that area as well. So we have a chance to do here in the United States Congress what again the State legislature at the turn of the decade and former Governor Ann Richards choose to dump on the people of West Texas, and we are the last hope for the folks of Sierra Blanca and surrounding counties. I have a list here, Mr. Speaker, in case there is any doubt of anyone in this body as to how the folks in West Texas feel about this: El Paso County, Presidio County, Jeff Davis County, Culberson, Val Verde, Webb, Starr, Hidalgo, Cameron, Zapata, Reeves, Brewster, Ward, Sutton, Kimble, Kinney, Crockett, Pecos, Maverick, Ector. We are almost getting started on the entire list of counties in the State of Texas that have passed resolutions, I have the dates here on which they were passed, opposing building this dump that threatens the environment and their local economies. We also have resolutions passed by 13 additional cities, municipalities in this area as well, that are opposed to this. We also have a problem with our neighbors in Mexico whom we have a treaty with to work together on environmental issues, the Treaty of La Paz, that designates clearly that we have to work with folks when it means that their environment ought to be threatened as well. We would not want them dumping nuclear waste within a few miles of the Rio Grande on the Mexican side. They also have expressed to us that they have a concern about this dump being constructed. So I ask my colleagues in this body to oppose this conference report. It is a threat to their rights to control their own destiny, the folks back in Texas, and their communities. It is a threat to their private property rights, and it is something that we have an opportunity again to fix something that the former governor and the State legislature, at the turn of the decade, dumped on the people of West Texas. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.