[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 80 (Tuesday, June 10, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H3647-H3648]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DISASTER ASSISTANCE BILL
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Minge] is recognized for 5 minutes.
(Mr. MINGE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. MINGE. Mr. Speaker, I represent the Second District of Minnesota.
It is a district that contains almost the entire length of Minnesota
River. Minnesota River flows through a broad valley. I think for many,
it is known as
[[Page H3648]]
the Valley of the Jolly Green Giant. It is very productive, it is lush,
and it is noted for the table vegetables that have been grown there
over the past several decades.
In the valley there is a narrow river that winds back and forth and
oxbows and normally is very placid. But occasionally it becomes a
raging torrent. In 1997, this river carried more water than it ever has
since the area was settled, over 100 years ago. The record water levels
resulted in flooding in numerous communities, starting in Ortonville at
the head of the river as it flows out of Big Stone Lake, required the
evacuation of the community of Odessa. Tributaries flooded in Appleton,
Dawson, MN. Montevideo, MN, my home community, was on the evening news
for the first time in the history of the community repeatedly because
of the efforts of the volunteers to try to stop the damage by
sandbagging, building dikes.
Their efforts were successful except for one neighborhood which could
not be saved and could not be diked. Downstream, Granite Falls built
dikes. It was largely spared the ravages of the flood. North Redwood
Falls was affected, however, and a few homes in the community known as
New Ulm. This was all damage that was done, but fortunately we were
spared the ravages of the communities on the Red River of the North.
People in my area felt quite fortunate, by comparison. The
communities pulled together. Thousands of volunteers came from
neighboring towns from the urban areas, and a real spirit of
cooperation and goodwill prevailed. I can tell you that partisanship
was certainly absent in this undertaking.
The people also were impressed with the activities of the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, and the Army Corps of Engineers,
both of which had a very substantial presence, and the National Guard
troops that were mobilized and came in. I held a series of
informational meetings on the disaster programs that were being
established, the ones that were in place. The FEMA officials, the Army
Corps of Engineers, the State agencies, U.S. Department of Agriculture
agencies all came and participated in these meetings.
It appeared that we would have a disaster assistance program that
would both be effective in addressing the needs of the communities and
the residents and would be promptly available. Unfortunately, as the
days wore on, it also emerged that partisanship would be a part of the
picture.
In an effort to pass legislation that the leadership in this body and
the other side of the building knew would be unacceptable to the
President, they begin to beat the drums about how important certain
riders were. And unfortunately, I concluded that what was happening is
that this disaster assistance bill was being hijacked for other
purposes. Proposals that could not be passed separately would not be
accepted by the President were being shoehorned into the disaster
assistance bill in hopes that the President could be brow beaten or
embarrassed into signing them.
Well, we know what happened. The President vetoed the legislation. I
am not here this evening to say that we have to point fingers at the
leadership in the House and the Senate or criticize the President. The
fact of the matter is, all of us knew that this legislation as it left
Congress was on a collision course with the White House.
It is very difficult for me to tell people at home that the political
process is consumed with politics and that we cannot deliver the type
of assistance that has become a consensus package for disaster
assistance. It is awfully difficult for me to explain to people why it
is that controversial riders have to be attached to this legislation. I
cannot explain it. I voted for it. I wanted to see it passed. But it
was unacceptable.
The previous speaker said the money is in the pipeline. Do not worry.
I would just like to briefly point out that although FEMA is well
funded, the community development block grant program for relocation
assistance is hanging in abeyance. People in businesses do not know
what level of relocation assistance will be available, whether it will
be available. Precious construction days are slipping by.
Similarly, the livestock indemnity program is in limbo and a number
of other programs are simply not being addressed. I would like to urge,
I implore the leadership of Congress to promptly send to the President
a clean bill so that we can provide the assistance that has been long
promised and is badly needed by the victims of this flooding in the
upper Midwest.
____________________