[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 74 (Tuesday, June 3, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H3235-H3238]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
HOOPA VALLEY RESERVATION SOUTH BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT ACT
Mrs. CHENOWETH. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 79) to provide for the conveyance of certain land in the Six
Rivers National Forest in the State of California for the benefit of
the Hoopa Valley Tribe, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 79
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Hoopa Valley Reservation
South Boundary Adjustment Act''.
SEC. 2. TRANSFER OF LANDS WITHIN SIX RIVERS NATIONAL FOREST
FOR HOOPA VALLEY TRIBE.
(a) Transfer.--All right, title, and interest in and to the
lands described in subsection (b) shall hereafter be
administered by the Secretary of the Interior and be held in
trust by the United States for the Hoopa Valley Tribe. The
lands are hereby declared part of the Hoopa Valley
Reservation. Upon the inclusion of such lands in the Hoopa
Valley Reservation, Forest Service system roads numbered 8N03
and 7N51 and the Trinity River access road which is a spur
off road numbered 7N51, shall be Indian reservation roads, as
defined in section 101(a) of title 23 of the United States
Code.
(b) Lands Described.--The lands referred to in subsection
(a) are those portions of Townships 7 North and 8 North,
Ranges 5 East and 6 East, Humboldt Meridian, California,
within a boundary beginning at a point on the current south
boundary of the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation, marked and
identified as ``Post H.V.R. No. 8'' on the Plat of the Hoopa
Valley Indian Reservation prepared from a field survey
conducted by C.T. Bissel, Augustus T. Smith, and C.A.
Robinson, Deputy Surveyors, approved by the Surveyor General,
H. Pratt, March 18, 1892, and extending from said point on a
bearing of north 72 degrees 30 minutes east, until
intersecting with a line beginning at a point marked as
``Post H.V.R. No. 3'' on such survey and extending on a
bearing of south 15 degrees 59 minutes east, comprising 2,641
acres more or less.
(c) Boundary Adjustment.--The boundary of the Six Rivers
National Forest in the State of California is hereby adjusted
to exclude the lands to be held in trust for the benefit of
the Hoopa Valley Tribe pursuant to this section.
(d) Survey.--The Secretary of the Interior, acting through
the Bureau of Land Management, shall survey and monument that
portion of the boundary of the Hoopa Valley Reservation
established by the addition of the lands described in
subsection (b).
(e) Settlement of Claims.--The transfer of lands to trust
status under this section extinguishes the following claims
by the Hoopa Valley Tribe:
(1) All claims on land now administered as part of the Six
Rivers National Forest based on the allegation of error in
establishing the boundaries of the Hoopa Valley Reservation,
as those boundaries were configured before the date of the
enactment of this Act.
(2) All claims of failure to pay just compensation for a
taking under the fifth amendment to the United States
Constitution, if such claims are based on activities,
occurring before the date of the enactment of this Act,
related to the lands transferred to trust status under this
section.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
Idaho [Mrs. Chenoweth] and the gentleman from American Samoa [Mr.
Faleomavaega] each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Idaho [Mrs. Chenoweth].
(Mrs. CHENOWETH asked and was given permission to revise and extend
her remarks.)
Mrs. CHENOWETH. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 79, introduced by the gentleman
from California [Mr. Riggs] would transfer 2,641 acres of land to the
Hoopa Valley Tribe of California. This land is currently part of the
Six Rivers National Forest.
The south boundary of the Hoopa Valley Reservation contains a dogleg
and as a result of the 1875 survey that left 2,541 acres out of the 6-
mile square, H.R. 79 would straighten the boundary to reflect what many
believe was the originally intended boundary of the reservation.
Similar legislation was introduced in the 104th Congress, reported by
the Committee on Resources and passed on the House floor, but the
adjournment prevented final action on the bill in the Senate.
On May 8, 1997, the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health
approved this amendment in the nature of a substitute to incorporate
several technical changes recommended by the administration, and on May
21 the Committee on Resources reported the bill with an amendment to
ensure that several Forest Service roads on the lands being transferred
will remain open to the public after the transfer. The roads provide
access to the public campground, the Trinity River and the national
forest land.
Mr. Speaker, I thank all involved on both sides of the aisle for
working with me, the gentleman from California [Mr. Riggs], and the
Hoopa Valley Tribe to develop language that everyone can agree on on
H.R. 79. Additionally I would like to thank my colleagues, especially
the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hinchey], the subcommittee ranking
member, the gentleman from California [Mr. Doolittle], and the
gentleman from Colorado [Mr. McInnis] for their assistance with passage
of these four bills.
So I urge this bill's passage, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
(Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, as mentioned earlier by the chairman
of the subcommittee, the gentlewoman from Idaho [Mrs. Chenoweth], this
legislation was introduced by the gentleman from California [Mr. Riggs]
and a similar piece of legislation was also introduced by Senator Boxer
of California.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 79 would transfer almost 2,640 acres of land
currently within the Six Rivers National Forest in California to the
Hoopa Valley Tribe to be held in trust for the tribe. This language
includes an operating campground that is adjacent to the southern
boundary of the reservation. There is question as to whether or not
this land was intended to be part of the original reservation
boundaries, but by looking at a map of the area one can conclude that
may have been the case.
{time} 1530
Regardless, the Forest Service has testified that it supports this
transfer and believes that the tribe has the resources and expertise to
effectively manage the area.
In fact, the Hoopa Valley Tribe is well-known as environmentally
sensitive toward the stewards of their land. The tribe operates under a
forest management plan which was adopted for the years 1994 through the
year 2003. This management plan was developed with the collaboration of
the World Wildlife Fund. In March of this year, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service issued a biological opinion finding that the Hoopa
forest management plan would not jeopardize the northern spotted owl or
any of the other listed endangered species.
Attached to my statement, Mr. Speaker, I include two letters from the
tribe's representative. The first is to the office of the Secretary of
the Interior, and the second is to Mr. James Lyons, the Under Secretary
for Natural Resources and Environment at the Department of Agriculture.
These letters explain the tribe's forest management plan and how we can
expect the transfer of lands to be managed.
H.R. 79 makes clear that the roads within this area will be made part
of the Indian reservation roads system within the Bureau of Indian
Affairs assuring public access through the area and to the Trinity
River.
I would like to thank the gentlewoman from Idaho [Mrs. Chenoweth] and
her staff for working with Democrats on this side of the aisle and for
bringing to the floor this legislation for consideration. I hope that
this will benefit the Hoopa Valley Tribe in the future, and I ask my
colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I include the following letters for the Record:
[[Page H3236]]
Hall, Estill, Hardwick, Gable, Golden & Nelson, P.C.,
Attorneys at Law,
Washington, DC, April 15, 1997.
Re H.R. 79 Hoopa Reservation boundary adjustment.
Heather Sibbison, Esq.,
Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior,
Washington, DC.
Dear Heather: Attached is a letter to Agriculture
Department Under Secretary James Lyons regarding the Hoopa
Valley Reservation boundary adjustment legislation. It is in
response to a draft proposal (also attached) from the Forest
Service to amend H.R. 79. As the letter explains, the Hoopa
Valley Tribe strongly disagrees with the proposed amendments.
Also attached is Resource Committee Chairman Don Young's
March 11 letter to T.J. Glauthier at OMB offering to move
expeditiously on the bill. This followed Chairman Young's
February 10 letter to Secretary Babbitt with the Committee's
routine request for a bill report. In addition to those
letters is T.J. Glauthier's October 2, 1996, letter to the
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs clearing the bill for
passage in the 104th Congress.
Please consider the following as you evaluate H.R. 79: The
bill would transfer 2641 acres from the Forest Service in
trust to the Tribe; Prior Forest Service sales harvested 915
acres of that total; and Under the Tribe's Forest Management
Plan (FMP) (which has received a non-jeopardy biological
opinion from the Fish and Wildlife Service as to any listed
species, including the northern spotted owl).
Approximately 620 acres will be protected by the FMP's
stream side protection zones (Class 1: 400 feet; Class 2: 200
feet; Class 3, 100); 330 acres will be subject to the FMP's
wild and scenic river designation; 310 acres will be in the
Trinity view shed; and 102 acres will be in northern spotted
owl activity zones.
The portion of the 2641 acres designated as Late
Successional reserve in the President's Forest Plan totals
1264 acres. By restoring the land to the Hoopa Valley
Reservation and placing it under the Hoopa FMP, 1362 acres
will be protected; that is, more than would be protected by
the Late Successional Reserve designation in the President's
Forest Plan. If you have any questions about this, please
give me a call.
Sincerely,
Joseph R. Membrino.
____
Hall, Estill, Hardwick, Gable, Golden & Nelson, P.C.,
Attorneys at Law,
Washington, DC, April 4, 1997.
Re H.R. 79--Hoopa Valley Reservation south boundary
adjustment.
Hon. James R. Lyons,
Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment,
Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.
Dear Under Secretary Lyons: Following my conversation with
you and Director of Lands Eleanor Towns on March 11, Director
Towns forwarded to me a draft regarding five points she asked
be considered in the review of H.R. 79. After consultation
with the Hoopa Valley Tribal Council, I have been authorized
to report the Tribe's response.
1. reservation status
The Tribe agrees with you and Director Towns that the land
subject to H.R. 79 is to be made part of the Hoopa Valley
Reservation and held in trust by the United States. It has
always been the Tribe's position that the land be part of the
reservation.
Director Towns stated that the reason for the proposed
change in the text of the bill--by which she would add the
phrase ``acting through the Secretary of the Interior''--is
to ensure that the Forest Service would have no trust
responsibility for the land following its transfer to the
reservation. That intent is contrary to federal law and
administration policy.
The United States, not individual federal agencies, is the
trustee of Indian reservation land. Thus, while direct
administration of the federal trust responsibility for the
Hoopa Valley Reservation may reside with the Secretary of the
Interior, the Forest Service nevertheless is subject to the
federal trust responsibility and is obligated to conduct its
affairs accordingly. As you know, President Clinton
emphasized his Administration's commitment to the federal
trust relationship in his Memorandum on Government-to-
Government Relations With Native American Tribal Governments
(April 29, 1994, 59 Fed. Reg. 22951). Among other things the
President directed that ``Each executive department and
agency shall assess the impact of Federal government plans,
projects, programs, and activities on tribal trust resources
and assure that tribal government rights and concerns are
considered during the development of such plans, projects,
programs, and activities.'' We do not believe that the
proposed departure from H.R. 79's use of the standard
legislative phrase for holding land in trust can be
reconciled with the President's directive and request that it
be withdrawn.
2. boundary adjustment
On page 4 of Director Towns statement on H.R. 2710, the
bill introduced in the 104th Congress on this matter, she
states that ``the National Forest boundary would need to be
statutorily adjusted to exclude the lands transferred . . .
.'' Statement of Eleanor Towns before the Committee on
Resources Subcommittee on Native American and Insular Affairs
(July 17, 1997). The Committee responded by amending the bill
to include the statement: ``The boundary of the Six Rivers
National Forest shall be adjusted to exclude the lands to be
held in trust for the benefit of the Hoopa Valley Tribe
pursuant to this section.'' House Report No. 762, 104th
Cong., 2d Sess. 2 (September 4, 1996). The draft comments
from the Forest Service forwarded to us now refer to
alleviating the need ``for an administrative boundary
adjustment'' by further amending H.R. 79 to read that the
boundary ``is hereby adjusted'' instead of ``shall be
adjusted.'' This proposal additional amendment appears to us
unnecessary; a distinction without a difference. In any
event, the Forest Service gives no indication that an
administrative adjustment based on the mandate in H.R. 79
would be burdensome, complex or anything other than a
routine, ministerial action. It makes no sense to burden the
legislative process with a cosmetic amendment.
3. reservation of easements
The proposal to reserve easements in the land for Forest
Service roads 8N03 and 7N51 is not acceptable. First, the
land on which the roads are located was always understood to
be the Tribe's. Director Towns and you both stated that your
objective is to have this land have the same status as the
rest of the Hoopa Valley Reservation. The purpose of H.R. 79
is to eliminate a physical dogleg in the reservation
boundary. It does not advance the ball to substitute a
jurisdictional dogleg for a physical one. Second, Director
Towns states that the Tribe's history of providing access
across its roads to the non-Indian community whose land would
otherwise be inaccessible for timber harvest, recreation,
cattle grazing and other uses cannot be considered precedent
for how the Tribe will manage the land to be transferred by
H.R. 79. That charge is unsupported and unsupportable. The
Tribe is baffled, to say the least, by the idea that it would
spite landowners in the Six Rivers community by shutting down
access to adjacent lands once it obtains jurisdiction over
the two roads. We do not know the source of this speculation
and have had a very different impression from the local
Forest Service personnel. On April 3, the Hoopa Valley Tribe
hosted a meeting of the interagency advisory committee for
the President's Northwest Forest Plan. At that meeting,
Six Rivers Forest Supervisor Martha Kettelle said that she
supports the transfer proposed in H.R. 79 and will work
with the Tribe upon enactment to build the Service's
government-to-government relationship with the Tribe on
cooperative access to the roads affected by the transfer.
At the end of the day, the proposal to reserve easements,
and the speculation underlying it, cannot be reconciled
with President Clinton's memorandum on government-to-
government relationships referred to above in which he
instructed government agencies undertaking activities
affecting tribal rights or trust resources to implement
them in a ``knowledgeable, sensitive manner respectful of
tribal sovereignty.''
4. management consistent with the president's northwest forest plan
The Hoopa Valley Tribe has adopted a Forest Management Plan
for the period 1994-2003 (Tribal Resolution 94-19, April 20,
1994) (Hoopa FMP). The Hoopa FMP's development was in part
guided by the principles that emerged from the Tribe's
collaboration with the World Wildlife Fund in development of
an integrated resources management approach to reservation
resources. The Hoopa FMP accounts for endangered and
threatened species listed pursuant to the Endangered Species
Act. The Tribe identified 5 plant and animal species listed
under the act that are present, or suspected to occur, on the
Hoopa Valley Reservation including the Northern Spotted Owl.
The Hoopa FMP's minimum management requirement for listed
species includes abiding by 50 C.F.R. Part 17 which sets
forth the requirements established by the United States Fish
and Wildlife Service for ``surveying, submission of
biological assessments on all proposed actions, receiving
biological opinions on all proposed actions, and abiding by
recovery plans if in effect.'' Hoopa FMP at 26. With specific
regard to the spotted owl, the Hoopa FMP provides:
Meet surveying requirements of the USFWS accepted protocol
(March 7, 1991 revised March 17, 1992 and any subsequent
revisions). Complete biological assessments including
mitigations which address the USFWS past conservation
recommendations and any seasonal restrictions necessary then
submit to USFWS. If conservation recommendations are not
included in a project's planning documents then justify their
exclusion in the biological assessment. General timber sale
planning will include no harvest of 70 acre owl activity
centers unless a Habitat Conservation Plan or other mechanism
has been completed and accepted by the USFWS which allows
such harvest. Allow no disruptive harvest related activities,
such as but not limited to, any harvest activity, road
building, tractor piling, burning, thin and release, etc.
within 0.25 mile of known activity centers during the
breeding season (Feb. 1 to Aug. 1 each year) or until the
pair has been determined to be not nesting, or the nesting
attempt has failed. Receive biological opinion from USFWS and
assure that all guidelines, mitigations and conservation
recommendations from the biological assessment (BA) and
biological opinion (BO) are adhered to during the
implementation of the project--Hoopa FMP at 26-27.
[[Page H3237]]
On January 10, 1997, the Hoopa Valley Tribe and the Bureau
of Indian Affairs requested the Fish and Wildlife Service
pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act to engage
in a formal consultation to develop a biological opinion on
the Hoopa FMP and its effects on the five species referred to
above, including the Northern Spotted Owl. By letter of March
12, 1997, the Service transmitted its biological opinion that
the implementation of the Hoopa FMP will not jeopardize the
Northern Spotted Owl or any of the other listed species
(Biological Opinion No. 1-14-97-F-3). This opinion is
consistent with the Tribe's policy of using extraordinary
care in the Hoopa FMP to protect the reservation plant and
wildlife resources. Of course, the land to be transferred by
H.R. 79 will be integrated into the Hoopa FMP.
President Clinton's memorandum on government-to-government
relations states that he is ``strongly committed to building
a more effective day-to-day working relationship reflecting
respect for the rights of self-government due the sovereign
tribal governments.'' In this case the Hoopa Valley Tribe has
embraced that relationship and worked carefully,
professionally, and in the spirit of the federal wildlife
conservation effort for the Northern Spotted Owl and all
species on the Hoopa Valley Reservation. In view of the Fish
and Wildlife Service's conclusion and the President's
memorandum on government-to-government relations, the
proposal to amend the bill is both unnecessary and
inappropriate.
Finally on this point, we note a practical political
consideration. H.R. 79 has been assigned to the Subcommittee
on Forests and Forest Health which is chaired by Rep. Helen
Chenoweth. Her antipathy toward the President's Northwest
Forest Plan is well-known. We are afraid that the proposal to
amend H.R. 79 to require the Tribe to manage the land
pursuant to the President's plan will be seen by opponents of
the Administration as an attempt to use legislation for the
benefit of the Tribe as a subterfuge to have Congress affirm
the President's plan. If the subcommittee makes the
President's plan an issue in H.R. 79, we believe that
politics could overwhelm the merits of H.R. 79 and defeat the
bill.
5. settlement of claims
This provision for claims waiver is unnecessary and, in any
event, over broad. H.R. 79 is not the settlement of a legal
claim. This is a policy matter regarding fair and honorable
dealings between the United States and the Hoopa Valley
Tribe. In addition, the disclaimer refers to events occurring
prior to enactment of H.R. 79 unrelated to the south
boundary. The Tribe wonders why this clause is in the bill;
it would appear to be an attempt to eliminate responsibility
for any latent damage to the land such as might have occurred
from deposition of toxic chemicals or other activities under
the direction of the Forest Service. We know of no such event
having occurred and would like to assume that the Forest
Service has none in mind either. Also, the final proviso
regarding a bar to any compensation for restrictions is
unacceptable. It would strip the Tribe of Fifth Amendment
protection against loss of property rights caused by
Congress' future imposition of land use restrictions that
otherwise would be compensable. Seeking this kind of a
provision in the bill runs counter to the spirit and
substance of the President's memorandum on government-to-
government relations with the Tribe and would put the Tribe
at a disadvantage with respect to all other property owners.
conclusion
I hope you will be persuaded that the Forest Service's
recommendations to amend H.R. 79 are not appropriate. I would
also encourage you to coordinate with the Department of the
Interior on those issues related to the Indian affairs and
fish and wildlife programs raised in the draft. The draft
proposals are not mere details but go to the heart of the
relationship between the Tribe and the United States and the
purpose of H.R. 79. Resources Committee Chairman Don Young
wrote to Associate OMB Director T.J. Glauthier on March 11 in
an extraordinary gesture to move forward expeditiously on
H.R. 79. With this favorable reception in the Congress, there
is every reason to advance the bill without further delay.
Your attention to this is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Joseph R. Membrino.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. CHENOWETH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
California [Mr. Riggs].
Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Idaho [Mrs.
Chenoweth], my very good friend and the distinguished chair of the
Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health, for yielding me this time. I
also want to thank the gentleman from Alaska [Mr. Young], chairman of
the full Committee on Resources, and of course our Democratic
colleagues who both last year and this year worked on a cooperative,
bipartisan basis to help advance this legislation.
Mr. Speaker and colleagues, the bill before us now on the floor under
suspension of the rules, I introduced on January 7 of this year, the
first day of the 105th Congress. It is for me a very high personal
legislative priority, because it would convey to the Hoopa Valley tribe
in Humboldt County, CA, land to restore the tribe's reservation to its
original intended, agreed-upon boundary. This boundary is intended to
be a perfect square.
This legislation is virtually identical to House Resolution 2710,
which I sponsored in the last Congress. That bill passed the House by a
voice vote on September 11, 1996. It was then cleared on a bipartisan
basis for unanimous-consent approval by the Senate, and a
representative of the Clinton administration wrote that the President
would sign the bill. However, to my great regret, the Senate adjourned
for the year and for the Congress before the legislation could be acted
upon. Again, that is why I have made this legislation a high priority
for action this year and why I greatly appreciate the help and support
of my colleagues in moving this legislation.
As my colleagues have heard, the bill would transfer to become a
permanent part of the Hoopa Valley Reservation, part of the tribe's
tribal lands, approximately 2,641 acres of land that is now held by the
U.S. Forest Service. For as long as 10,000 years, the Hoopa Valley
Tribe has lived in the Hoopa Valley, beginning their settlement at the
mouth of the Trinity River Canyon. As early as 1851, a proposed treaty
would have established a reservation actually encompassing an area
larger than the present reservation.
Although Congress conveyed 93,000 acres of land to the tribe in the
1800's, the boundary survey excluded over 2,600 acres that belonged to
the tribe at that time. In restoring that land, the 2,600 acres at the
southeast corner of what otherwise would be a 12-mile square, the bill
would eliminate a dogleg in the south boundary in the present
reservation correcting this action.
This irregular dogleg in the boundary was apparently done to
accommodate some non-Indian miners in the area who were pursuing State
claims, and although those claims soon played out and the miners left
the area, this boundary was never changed and this inequity was never
corrected.
The land is administered, as I mentioned, by the Forest Service. It
is part of the Six Rivers National Forest. The original timber on the
parcel was sold off by the end of the 1970's to the benefit of the
Federal Treasury and Federal taxpayers. The area to be transferred
includes Tish-Tang Camp Ground, a Forest Service facility. The Hoopa
Valley Tribe has stated publicly, and I believe that this is a very
firm commitment, that it will continue to operate Tish-Tang as a public
campground. This will be particularly important if budget reductions
necessitate reductions in the Forest Service campground operations and
maintenance.
Furthermore, the tribe has assured that public access to the gravel
bar at Tish-Tang in the Trinity River will continue. This is very
important to local citizens, my constituents in the community of Willow
Creek, which neighbors or borders the reservation. It is also important
to the people who regularly use the river for recreational and business
purposes.
Some minor amendments, Mr. Speaker, have been made to the bill in
committee, and the administration has indicated it can approve the
measure in this form, as the distinguished ranking member indicated.
Mr. Speaker, members of the tribe have long been outstanding stewards
of California's north coast environment, and they have been recognized
for their efforts to help restore fish and wildlife habitat in the
Trinity River Basin. This transfer proposed by this bill would permit
the tribe's long-standing land management and economic development
policies to be extended to the restored lands, the lands to now be
assumed by the tribe.
The boundary should be adjusted to reflect the original intent of
Congress. This is a matter of basic fairness and return to the members
of the tribe what is truly theirs, and I urge my colleagues' approval
of the bill.
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
At this time I would be remiss if I do not express my sense of
commendation to the ranking member of the subcommittee, the gentleman
from New York [Mr. Hinchey] certainly for his
[[Page H3238]]
contributions and his attentiveness to these measures, three measures
previously that we passed and H.R. 79 that is now up for consideration.
I certainly thank the ranking Democrat on this side of the aisle, the
gentleman from California [Mr. Miller].
It is my understanding, Mr. Speaker, that this is the first
opportunity that the gentlewoman from Idaho [Mrs. Chenoweth], the
chairman of the subcommittee, has had to manage these four pieces of
legislation, and I want to add my commendation to the gentlewoman for
her leadership and certainly for successfully bringing these four
pieces of legislation to fruition. Certainly I have a very strong
feeling that it will have the support of our colleagues here on the
floor of the House.
Again, I commend the gentlewoman for her fine leadership in bringing
these pieces of legislation for consideration.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. CHENOWETH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I want to thank the gentleman from American Samoa [Mr. Faleomavaega]
for his fine comments and also thank him for his time and his efforts
in helping our committee be successful in ushering these bills through.
Without his good work, it could not have happened.
I also want to thank the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hinchey], our
ranking minority member, for his good work.
Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from Idaho [Mrs. Chenoweth] that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 79, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________