[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 106 (Thursday, July 18, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1316]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 TREASURY, POSTAL SERVICE, AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                                  1997

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                          HON. CARDISS COLLINS

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 17, 1996

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3756) making 
     appropriations for the Treasury Department, the U.S. Postal 
     Service, the Executive Office of the President, and certain 
     independent agencies, for the fiscal year ending September 
     30, 1997, and for other purposes:

  Mrs. COLLINS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, here we go again, get ready, 
the Gingrich-Armey Republicans had so much fun last year--shutting down 
the Government, causing insecurity for the American people, and down-
right scaring the hard-working citizens in every district about the 
ability of the Federal Government to keep operating--that the Gingrich-
Armey Republicans are trying to do it all over again. The one-sided, 
Republican partisan drafted Federal appropriations bill is being shoved 
down the throats of the President and the American people. What will 
happen? Well, if the bill is unacceptable to the President in his 
analysis of what is best for the American people, he will veto it.
  Mr. Speaker, it isn't rocket science to understand what is 
unacceptable about this bill. In H.R. 3756, Treasury-Postal 
Appropriations for Fiscal Year 1997 the Gingrich Republicans provide 
$23.3 billion for the Treasury Department, U.S. Postal Service, and 
various offices of the Executive Office of the President. Sure, that's 
a lot of money, a billion here and a billion there, pretty soon begins 
to look like real money--but this funding level is $1.3 billion less 
than recommended by the administration, you know, the one that is 
responsible to the American people for the delivery of services and 
programs under the jurisdiction of those Federal agencies.
  One provision in this legislation is similar to a bill I have 
introduced to provide a permanent solution to the issue of FBI 
background checks. However, the Gingrich provision doesn't go far 
enough. Recent hearings held by the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight, of which I am the ranking minority member, revealed a 
longstanding, apparently open system with a lack of adequate 
protections over these kinds of sensitive records. We also learned that 
when Presidents leave office, they take these files with them to their 
Presidential libraries, where the protections are just as weak, or 
nonexistent.
  The Clinton White House and the FBI, to their credit, have made some 
significant internal changes to make sure this type of mistake cannot 
happen again. We need to ensure, however, that future White Houses 
continue to provide adequate protection to these records. That is why I 
introduced the Background Security Records Act of 1996, H.R. 3785, to 
guarantee that these most sensitive and private records are protected, 
to tighten restrictions on how these records are obtained and treated, 
and to make accountable high-ranking FBI and White House officials for 
their protection.
  My Background Security Records Act of 1996 would do four things: 
First, it would send back to the FBI the security records of 
individuals no longer at the White House; second, it would require the 
written permission of the individual whose record is requested from the 
FBI before the FBI could send it to the White House; third, the bill 
would extend the criminal sanctions of the Privacy Act to the misuse of 
these records; and fourth, it would require the Secret Service to 
develop accurate lists of individuals in need of access to the White 
House. My bill goes even farther than the provisions in this 
appropriations bill that don't really accomplish what is needed, the 
appropriations' bill provision just gives token attention to the issue.
  In slashing the President's request for appropriations, the Gingrich 
Republicans attempt to dictate Federal administrative reorganization. 
For instance, by a number of tactics, the Republicans are trying to 
give the Department of Defense the responsibility of modernizing the 
Internal Revenue Services' computer and information technology. Come 
on. Are the Republicans' special interest defense contractors so out of 
work that we have to turn over the IRS to them? Mr. Speaker, I object.
  If that's not enough, those same Republican extremists who want to 
shrink Federal Government as long as it only cuts education, cuts 
social services, and cuts housing or other programs designed to provide 
a bridge to self-sufficiency for the middle- and low-income Americans, 
not the Gingrich Republicans' special interest fat-cats--now that same 
party wants to tie the purse strings of this administration on things 
that they, Gingrich Republicans, can't tie up on a straight up-and-down 
vote during a public debate. I think it's particularly funny that the 
Gingrich Republicans apparently think the American people are so dumb 
that they can't see this as a ``tax reform'' effort to further erode 
the ability of the IRS to administer and enforce tax collection.
  Of all the appropriations bills, perhaps this one should be the most 
responsive to the request of a President, any President. But this 
Gingrich Republican bill denies President Clinton the ability to manage 
his own house, the Executive Office of the President. Does it make 
sense for any opposition party to be able to dictate to a sitting 
President how that President runs his or her own Government house? That 
is a strictly partisan attack on a Democratic Presidency.
  Come on, even the Gingrich-Armey Republicans can't believe the 
American people are that dumb. I urge my colleagues to reject this 
appropriations bill.

                          ____________________