Dave Obey

Mr. OBEY

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee]. (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Pelosi].

Mr. OBEY

Mr. OBEY. I thank the gentleman. I do not want to impose on his time. I would simply ask unanimous consent that the remarks I made about our good friend, Tom Bevill, when we considered the energy and water appropriations bill be incorporated in my remarks at this point in the Record and to simply say again, Tom, how much I have enjoyed the opportunity to serve with you and how grateful we are for the service you have given the country. And I want to say to Glen that you have, I think, performed tremendous service in this institution with good humor and with grace, with understanding of other people's points of view and with deep commitment to the things that you believe in. That is what makes this country strong, and that is what makes this institution what it is supposed to be, and I thank you both for your service here.

Mr. OBEY

Mr. OBEY. I thank the gentleman. I do not want to impose on his time. I would simply ask unanimous consent that the remarks I made about our good friend, Tom Bevill, when we considered the energy and water appropriations bill be incorporated in my remarks at this point in the Record and to simply say again, Tom, how much I have enjoyed the opportunity to serve with you and how grateful we are for the service you have given the country. And I want to say to Glen that you have, I think, performed tremendous service in this institution with good humor and with grace, with understanding of other people's points of view and with deep commitment to the things that you believe in. That is what makes this country strong, and that is what makes this institution what it is supposed to be, and I thank you both for your service here.

Mr. OBEY

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I will not take as much time as the gentleman has yielded, but I simply want to take this time to urge support for this bill. Mr. Speaker, I think it is a reasonably good bill in terms of meeting the country's transportation needs. I think it has been worked out in a very reasonable fashion. I think we need to move on and pass the bill. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Wolf] and the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Coleman] for their work on it. I am also happy with the allocation of the highway funds for a number of States, including my own. Let me also say that this will be the last time that the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Coleman] will be handling the bill for our side because of his ill-advised decision to retire. Let me simply say that I know the House will miss him. I certainly will miss him. Mr. Speaker, I think he has demonstrated in the years that he has served in this House that he cares very deeply about the people and the district he represents. I think he has also demonstrated a passionate commitment to the needs of people in this society who most need our help. I think he has always dealt with every Member of this House with absolute total honesty and frankness. Mr. Speaker, it takes about a second-and-a-half to figure out where Ron Coleman is coming from on an issue. That is the way it ought to be with human beings, especially in this profession. And I want to thank the gentleman for his service to the country, I want to thank him for the many contributions he has made to this institution, and I want to thank both the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Wolf] and the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Coleman] for the good job that they have done on this bill.

Mr. OBEY

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I would urge that the gentleman withhold that request. I do not personally have an objection to its being filed, I support the bill, but I have been informed by our leadership that another committee does, and absent their presence, I would feel obligated to object if the motion is made at this time.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, it had been cleared as far as the committee is concerned, but we were just informed by our leadership that there is a problem with another committee.

Mr. OBEY

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I take this time for two purposes, first of all of all to explain that at the proper time I will have a motion to recommit at the desk, and I am offering it essentially for three reasons. First of all, on the overall spending question, this bill is $646 million above last year. I personally find it difficult to explain that when we compare it to the spending level which is being provided in other bills for programs which affect the needs of desperately needy children. Second, I support adequate funds for cleanup of our nuclear weapons sites and programs, and to assist the former Soviet Union in its efforts to secure nuclear material and clean up unsafe nuclear power plants, and the bill provides for these programs. I congratulate the committee for it. But I do not believe that it is rational that we continue to increase funds for nuclear weapons production in the wake of the end of the cold war. Third, this bill contains $38 million for the advanced light water reactor program. Members may recall theHouse bill contained $17 million. The Senate bill contained $22 million. Those amounts have been added together to continue this corporate welfare program for the nuclear industry. These funds will go to large corporations to assist them in licensing new nuclear power plants which will never be built. There are several other reasons that I have concerns about this bill, as well, and that is why I will be offering a straight motion to recommit with no instructions. Having said that, I would like to spend the rest of my time commenting on the two gentlemen who brought this bill to us today. If you took a poll of this House and asked Members to name the two most decent Members of theHouse, I would be very surprised if the name of John Myers and the name of Tom Bevill will not wind up at the very top of the list. There are two kinds of people in public life, just like there are two kinds of people in private endeavors. There are angle players and then there are problem solvers. I think anybody who knows these two gentleman knows that they fall into the latter category. I have watched both of them for as long as I have had the privilege to serve in this institution, and I have never once seen either one of them in any way bring dishonor to this House or the constituents who were wise enough to elect them as many times as they elected them. This House will suffer from their departure. We respect their decision to retire, but I think that whether John was speaking on the Republican side of the aisle or Tom on the Democratic side of the aisle, you could never tell which was which, had you seen them deal with the substance of the bill. We have various responsibilities in our efforts to serve our constituents in this place. Sometimes those responsibilities are complementary and sometimes they are conflicting. We have responsibilities to country, responsibilities to this institution, responsibilities to our political parties, to our districts, to our constituents, and to our principles. I have seen both of these gentlemen meet those responsibilities in the highest possible fashion, in the way that brings the greatest honor to this institution and to the country that this institution tries to serve. I consider it a personal privilege to have served with both of them, and I think every Member who knows them feels the same way. I wish them both everything good that can happen in life when they leave here, and thank them on behalf of the Members of this House for their service.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.

Mr. OBEY. Yes, I am, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. OBEY

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, today, I would like to salute two outstanding young women who have been honored with the Girl Scouts of the U.S.A. Gold Award by the Birch Trails Girl Scout Council in my home town Wausau, WI. They are Jessica Thoms and Margaret Stahr. They are being honored for earning the highest achievement award in Girl Scouting. The Girl Scout Gold Award symbolizes outstanding accomplishments in the areas of leadership, community service, career planning, and personal development. Girl Scouts of the U.S.A., an organization serving over 2.6 million girls, has awarded more than 20,000 Girl Scout Gold Awards to Senior Girl Scouts since the inception of the program in 1980. To receive the award, a Girl Scout must fulfill five requirements: earn four interest project patches, earn the Career Exploration pin, earn the Senior Girl Scout Leadership Award project, earn the Senior Girl Scout Challenge, and design and implement a Girl Scout Gold Award project. A plan for fulfilling the requirements of the award is created by the Senior Girl Scout and is carried out through close cooperation between the girl and an adult Girl Scout volunteer. The earning of the Girl Scout Gold Award is a major accomplishment for these young women, and I believe they should receive the public recognition due them for this significant service to their community and their country.

Mr. OBEY

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. OBEY. I thank the gentleman. Since the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Wolf] has accepted the motion, I see no need to debate it. I appreciate the gentleman's position.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct conferees.

Mr. OBEY

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I have been at the center of virtually every effort to reform campaign finance since the day I walked into this institution, but this exercise today is absolutely useless. It is going to produce a useless bill, which is an absolutely fraudulent imitation of real campaign reform. It gives the wealthy an even greater lock on the political system than they have right now. The main issue in campaign finance is simply, how do we change the fact that wealthy people have far too much influence on politics today, whether they give individually or collectively? The existing campaign finance system is beyond repair. It ought to be blown up. What amazes me is that we continue this fiction in this place that somehow elections ought to be handled as a private matter. There is no more public activity in which American citizens engage than electing the leaders who are supposed to help run the country. This is a public responsibility. It should not be financed by the richest private deep-pockets people in this country. That is why the electoral system is virtually owned lock, stock, and barrel by the economic elite in this country, and we are not going to change that until we blow up the existing system. I am against this silly rule because it refused to allow my amendment to be offered which would have banned all private money whatsoever in general elections. It would have eliminated all soft money loopholes. It would have eliminated the fiction that we have something called independent expenditures, which are just another legalized sham to get around the law. It would have imposed limits on what political candidates can spend, and it would have ended the ability of both parties to launder money and get it to their own candidates. It would have financed that by imposing a one-tenth of 1 percent assessment on all corporations who make profits of more than $10 million. It would have created a fund into which individual Americans can voluntarily, I emphasize voluntarily, voluntarily contribute as much money as they choose in order to create a grassroots democracy fund out of which campaigns would be funded on a public basis. The Republican bill that is being brought out here today, for instance, says there ought to be a 50 percent requirement for funds that are raised in a Member's district. What an absolute sham. That means that someone under independent expenditures can spend $100,000 or $200,000 raised outside of a candidate's State. They can go into his district and spend a million bucks if they want to in an independent expenditure, and yet the target of that expenditure is defenseless because he has to limit what he can raise to his own district. What an absolute prescription to give the millionaires and billionaires of this country an opportunity to own the system even more than they do today. It is a disgrace and the Democratic alternative is too weak to do any good. I am against the whole shebang.

Mr. OBEY

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

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I wonder if we might, so that the New York delegation could get to its intended business, if we could dispose of this matter the same way that we disposed of an incident several weeks ago involving the gentleman from Arizona and the gentleman from Wisconsin now speaking, when the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hyde] suggested that it might be resolved by simply an expression of regret to the House by the Member in question that the incident occurred so that we can expunge the Record and return to the normal business of the House.

Mr. OBEY

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I think the gentleman from Indiana needs to clarify that we are going to finish all debate on all amendments.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Salmon].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Minge].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr. Rohrabacher].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds to again correct a statement made by the gentleman from Indiana. It is true that there is a $100 million cap on this program for a 5- year period, but under the authorization no corporation is supposed to receive funding for a period longer than 4 years and under this bill without this amendment would have a 5-year provision to Westinghouse, which is in opposition to the authorization statute. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California [Mr. Royce].