[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 6 (Wednesday, February 4, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H247-H278]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               RONALD REAGAN WASHINGTON NATIONAL AIRPORT

  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 344 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 344

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule 
     XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 2625) to redesignate Washington National 
     Airport as ``Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport''. The 
     first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. General 
     debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one 
     hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Transportation 
     and Infrastructure. After general debate the bill shall be 
     considered for amendment under the five-minute rule for a 
     period not to exceed two hours. It shall be in order to 
     consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment 
     under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute recommended by the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure now printed in the bill. The committee 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered 
     as read. During consideration of the bill for amendment, the 
     Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may accord priority in 
     recognition on the basis of whether the Member offering an 
     amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of the 
     Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 6 
     of rule XXIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as 
     read. The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may: (1) 
     postpone until a time during further consideration in the 
     Committee of the Whole a request for a recorded vote on any 
     amendment; and (2) reduce to five minutes the minimum time 
     for electronic voting on any postponed question that follows 
     another electronic vote without intervening business, 
     provided that the minimum time for electronic voting on the 
     first in any series of questions shall be fifteen minutes. At 
     the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the 
     Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with 
     such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may 
     demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted 
     in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and 
     amendments thereto to final passage without intervening 
     motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
     instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) is 
recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley), 
pending which I yield myself such time as I might consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 344 is a modified open rule providing 
for consideration of H.R. 2625, the Ronald Reagan National Airport 
bill.
  The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and 
controlled by the chairman and the ranking member of the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure. The rule also provides a 2-hour 
overall limitation on the amendment process.
  The rule also makes in order the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure amendment in the nature of a substitute as an original 
bill for the purpose of amendment, which shall be considered as read.
  The rule additionally authorizes the Chair to accord priority in 
recognition to Members who have preprinted their amendments in the 
Congressional Record, and it allows the chairman of the Committee of 
the Whole to postpone votes during consideration of the bill and reduce 
voting time to 5 minutes on a postponed question if the vote follows a 
15-minute vote.
  And, finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit.
  Mr. Speaker, this rule strikes an appropriate balance between the 
majority's interest in moving its legislation through the House 
expeditiously and the minority's interest in being allowed to offer 
amendments to the bill. An overall time limitation in this case seemed 
to be a fair way for the Committee on Rules to address both sides' 
interest in the legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, we are here today to honor Ronald Reagan through the 
passage of a bill to rename National Airport the Ronald Reagan National 
Airport. Why should we bestow this honor on President Ronald Reagan?
  As far as I am concerned, Mr. Speaker, we cannot honor Ronald Reagan 
enough. His leadership brought prosperity and pride back to America and 
freedom to much of the rest of the world, and I will discuss that maybe 
perhaps a little bit later in the debate.
  Mr. Speaker, in order to fully appreciate President Reagan's lasting 
impact and the rationale for naming the airport, let me remind Members 
of the world landscape when he took office back in 1980, and I was here 
then. In 1981, the Soviet Union was continuing a massive arms buildup 
and attempting to spread its hegemony into Afghanistan. They had 
invaded Afghanistan back in 1979. Eastern Europe suffered under the 
boot of totalitarian regimes, and the Berlin Wall scarred the face of 
Europe, enslaving millions and millions of people.
  In America, we were experiencing something called ``stagflation.'' I 
just wonder if many of my colleagues can remember back that far. That 
dreadful combination of unconscionable 13 percent inflation. Can we 
imagine what that did to senior citizens living on a fixed income? 
Thirteen percent annual inflation and interest rates of 22 percent, and 
24 percent prime if one happened to be a small businessman like I was, 
borrowing money to keep our businesses going and paying 24 percent 
interest. That brought on a recession, my colleagues, that created 
massive unemployment in almost every industry in America. And that was 
back in 1980, before President Reagan took office.
  In fact, our country's morale was so low that then President Carter 
even declared the American people to be in a state of malaise. Imagine 
that, we proud Americans being in a state of malaise. But President 
Reagan saw the moral and financial flaws inherent in that Soviet system 
that was enslaving half the world population. He had the courage to 
call communism by its rightful name, the Evil Empire, and insist on 
human rights and proper treatment of human beings, dissidents, behind 
the Iron Curtain.
  And his peace through strength policies, Mr. Speaker, ultimately 
resulted in the collapse of the Soviet Union and freedom for the 
captured nations of Eastern Europe so that today, instead of deadly 
atheistic communism spreading its tentacles throughout this world, we 
now have democracy breaking out all over the world, and these people 
now have sovereign nations to live in and they enjoy the freedoms that 
we have enjoyed for so many years now.
  Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs all 
during President Reagan's two terms, it was a great honor for me to 
support President Reagan's foreign policies here in the House and on 
the floor of Congress. It makes me so proud to know that those policies 
for which President Reagan was berated at the time have led to an 
explosion of that freedom I just talked about of democracy and 
prosperity all around this globe and in this country of ours.
  Domestically, President Reagan's economic policies not only pulled 
this

[[Page H248]]

country out of that stagflation I talked about, but they created 
economic benefits for everyone, for all of our citizens. Nineteen 
million new jobs were created. Incomes grew at all levels. New 
industries and technologies flourished and exploded. Exports exploded 
around this world.
  In fact, a recent survey of leading American businessmen, and I hope 
Members will listen to this, a survey of leading American businessmen 
attributed today's strong economy precisely to the Reaganomics that was 
laid out during the 1980s right here on the floor of this Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, Ronald Reagan's views and his ideas, once considered 
conservative, now occupy the center, the mainstream, of American 
politics, and it is represented here in this Congress in the House and 
Senate today. President Reagan's vision of a smaller government and 
individual responsibility are still embraced by the American people 
even more so today, and that is really what we Republicans are fighting 
for on the floor of this Congress every single day.
  And, finally, Mr. Speaker, Ronald Reagan set a moral tone for this 
country that would always bring out the best in us as individual 
Americans and as a Nation as a whole. He would speak to the Nation 
plainly and convincingly about complicated subjects and he trusted in 
the judgment of the people, the American people. His words and his 
gestures were always genuine.
  He had such respect for the office of Lincoln and Washington that he 
would never ever put personal gratification above the national 
interests of this country. Let me repeat that. He had such respect for 
the office of Lincoln and Washington that he would never, ever put 
personal gratification above the national interest of this great 
country of ours. Ronald Reagan would never have put himself in a 
situation which might tend to degrade either himself or the esteemed 
office of this Presidency. That is why he was such a great President.
  Mr. Speaker, passage of this rule will bring us one step closer to 
voting on a bill to honor one of the greatest Americans that I have 
ever had the privilege of knowing and working with. I urge all of my 
colleagues to come over here and participate in this next 3 hours of 
debate to pay long-lasting tribute to this great American, Ronald 
Wilson Reagan.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my dear friend and colleague, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon), for yielding me the customary 
half-hour, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I know and I realize that there may be a lot of people 
in this country who think Washington National Airport should be named 
after President Reagan, but I daresay very few of them live in the 
area.
  For that reason, Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this 
restrictive rule. Because in 1986 there was a bill in which the Federal 
Government ceded responsibility for managing this airport to the 
Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority. That bill was signed into 
law by none other than President Ronald Reagan. Because, Mr. Speaker, 
President Reagan was a big believer in giving local government more 
control and the Federal Government less control.
  In fact, Mr. Speaker, President Reagan himself said, and I quote, 
this is a quote:

       In many respects the Federal Government is still operating 
     on the outdated and, if I may say so, arrogant assumption 
     that the States just can't manage their own affairs.

  But this bill is a complete contradiction of the very philosophy of 
Ronald Reagan himself. This bill takes a local airport name and says 
the Federal Government has decided to change the name of this airport 
despite nearly unanimous local opposition. And I want to add also, Mr. 
Speaker, that this airport does have a name. It is Washington National 
Airport, named for our first President, George Washington, who lived 
just a stone's throw away from where the airport currently stands.
  The Federal Government has already named the second largest building 
in Washington after Ronald Reagan, the Ronald Reagan Trade Center. And 
as far as I am concerned, they can name the largest building in the 
D.C. area after Ronald Reagan, the Pentagon. It does not have a name. 
Let us make it the Ronald Reagan Peace Clinic.
  Mr. Speaker, President Reagan had a profound impact on our country. 
He was one of the greatest proponents of freedom worldwide. My 
opposition in renaming the airport has nothing to do with my respect 
for the former President but, rather, my belief that we should honor 
his ideas as well as his name.
  Yesterday afternoon in the Committee on Rules we heard from local 
representatives, Democrats and Republicans alike. These are the people 
who speak for this area. These are the people who can speak for the 
people who live around the airport. Mr. Speaker, every one of them, 
every one of them asked that the airport not be renamed but remain 
Washington National Airport after our first President, George 
Washington.

                              {time}  1045

  But today it looks like my Republican colleagues are going to 
continue despite strong local opposition and despite the very 
principles Ronald Reagan himself stood for.
  My dear friend, my colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Solomon), said this bill will honor President Ronald Reagan. That is 
true. But, Mr. Speaker, this bill will dishonor President George 
Washington.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose the rule. This imposes a 2-hour time 
cap on a partisan bill, which we have nothing but time around here, and 
it does not do anything to credit the memory of a great president, 
Ronald Reagan.
  Mr. Speaker, may I inquire from my dear friend how many speakers he 
has remaining?
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, we have a 
number of speakers; but, at the present time, none of them are on the 
floor.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar).
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, it is a great puzzlement to me why the Committee on 
Rules chose to have, in a sense, an open rule on amendments and a 
closed rule on the time in which to consider the amendments and the 
votes thereon.
  I indicated yesterday to the Committee on Rules that I did not expect 
more than three amendments to be offered but that we did expect to have 
some time for debate. I did not expect that we would be constrained 
given the very light schedule that there is today. But I did expect 
that we would have an opportunity to discuss at some length, not ad 
nauseam; and I did indicate that I had worked diligently to deflect a 
number of amendments that I thought would be dilatory and to reserve 
those amendments to only those that were necessary.
  Unfortunately, we are operating under a very restrictive rule; and we 
will limit the number of amendments. But I hope that, within the time, 
we will also have adequate discussion of the issue at hand.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman knows, I have great 
respect for him. I served on his committee as much as 20 years ago. He 
was a good Member in those days, and he is a good Member today. But I 
just have to take exception with him talking about a closed rule, a 
restrictive rule.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I did not say ``closed.'' I said, ``restrictive.''
  Mr. SOLOMON. No, my colleague said, ``closed.''
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Closed as to time.
  Mr. SOLOMON. But forget about that. The truth is the gentleman did 
say there were only a couple of amendments that might be offered. As a 
matter of fact, several of them were withdrawn I think by the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Moran) when he was upstairs. And in order to try to 
schedule the schedule for today, and we have another open rule coming 
up after this one, I felt that 2 hours was ample time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sununu). The time of the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) has expired.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Minnesota and ask if he would yield to me.

[[Page H249]]

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman knows that, under the Rules 
of the House, that if my colleague or his counterpart, the other 
respected Member, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) feel 
that additional time is needed, I am sure I would agree and I am sure 
he would agree that we might want to extend that time a little bit.
  So we are not trying to cut anyone off at all. I want the gentleman 
to know that.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I greatly appreciate that. That is a very grand 
gesture, and I appreciate that very much.
  I will return just briefly, if I have additional time, to summarize 
my concern about the bill at hand.
  Of course, we will debate it on its merits later. But it is not 
appropriate for the Congress to intercede in a jurisdictional matter 
where we have given authority to a local airport entity with full 
power, full authority, over the Dulles and National airports to then 
take back some of that power and say we will arrogate onto ourselves 
the authority to name this airport, not only to name it but to take off 
a good name that it already has and to replace another name. That is my 
principal objection.
  Never in the history of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure or its predecessor, named Public Works Committee, did we 
take a name of a building and replace it with another name.
  Washington National already has a name. It is good enough for the 
country. It has been good enough since 1940. It ought to be good enough 
for the next 50 years or the next millennium.
  We should not be in the business of renaming facilities. If this 
precedent is followed, then woe be to any other building that the 
Federal Government has funded or any other airport that has received 
Federal airport improvement funds anywhere in the Nation as this 
Congress is setting a precedent today that we can come in and take 
names off buildings and place other names on them. That is not 
appropriate.
  If this building were rising fresh out of the ground, if there had 
not been a Washington National Airport, I would have no objection to 
naming it for whomever the Majority chose to name it. But I certainly 
object to taking the name Washington National off that airport and 
replacing it with another name.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from New York still does not 
have any speakers?
  Mr. SOLOMON. I do. But I think you want to yield the time.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Why do you not give the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Traficant) the time then?
  Mr. SOLOMON. I do not have as much time as he wants. So, I think he 
is a good Democrat on your side of the aisle. The gentleman from 
Massachusetts ought to yield him some time; and I will, too.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. He only needs a couple minutes. Why not give him a 
couple minutes?
  Mr. SOLOMON. I am friendly today. I am glad to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant). He is one of the most respected 
Members on the gentleman's side of the aisle. I will always yield him 2 
minutes.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the rule and support 
the bill. How much time do I have?
  Mr. SOLOMON. I yield the gentleman 3 minutes.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I wish the gentleman from New York would 
make up his mind.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I question many of the economic policies, 
like many Democrats. And we can take a look at Ronald Reagan as any 
other president, and we can question many things. But I think we have 
to give the Gipper his due here today.
  Ronald Reagan, probably more than any other single individual, was 
responsible for correctly identifying the Soviet Union as the big bad 
bear, for pressing communism around the world, and for challenging the 
people of the free world to really actually tear down the Berlin Wall. 
And, more than any other individual, Ronald Reagan is to be credited 
with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the demise almost of communism, 
and the dismantling of the Berlin Wall.
  Now I do agree with the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley), 
whether he was serious about it or not, and he is a great Member, that, 
honestly, we probably should name the Pentagon after this fearless 
leader. But the Republican party wants to honor their great president, 
and it is a lesson that maybe the Democrats should learn from it. I 
believe that I will support that because he was a great president, and 
I will vote for the rule, and I will vote for the bill.
  But I want to say this to the Republican party. There are many 
Democrats that want the legacy of Robert Kennedy remembered with a 
significant naming in this District; and since RFK has become now a 
suburban stadium, there is no real present honoring that legacy.
  Now the Union Station has a lot of private interests, but I believe 
we could look at that and talk to those interests, and I think we 
should look at some other buildings in this district. So I am not 
talking about any deal being made here. I support the naming of the 
National Airport, the local interests notwithstanding. This is a 
national airport.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. TRAFICANT. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I would just like to ask the gentleman if, during his 
years as chairman of the Public Buildings and Grounds Subcommittee, in 
his years as Ranking Minority Member on that subcommittee, if he 
presided over a bill naming in which we took the name off a building 
and put another name on? Did we ever rename a building?
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, no, this was not in 
my jurisdiction. And when we look at J. Edgar Hoover, I think the 
Democrats should have taken some action when we were in charge.
  So all I am going to say is I support this. I believe President 
Reagan did a great job in dismantling communism, and I will vote for 
the rule.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. TRAFICANT. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say, speaking as a 
former John F. Kennedy Democrat, which I was and so was Ronald Reagan, 
we support what my colleague has just asked for; and we would like to 
help him with Robert F. Kennedy in the future.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. We will be doing that. I thank the gentleman very 
much.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I just had a thought. I was thinking maybe 
10 or 15 years into the future, when there is a beautiful edifice in 
New York named after the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon), then 
maybe 20 years later than that someone says, take that name down and 
let us put up another name, what a terrible travesty that would be.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Moran).
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley), Ranking Member of the Committee on Rules, 
for making the important points that need to be made so eloquently, as 
well as the Ranking Member of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure. (Mr. Oberstar.)
  I want to say to the chairman of the Committee on Rules that my 
opposition to this bill in no way implies a lack of sympathy for the 
health condition of our former president. It is not a criticism of his 
policies. In fact, it is just the opposite. My opposition is completely 
consistent with his philosophy. Our hearts do go out to the Reagan 
family. We want a fitting memorial for President Reagan.
  But I strongly oppose this bill. I bitterly oppose it because it is 
an arrogant abuse of power, and it stands in direct contradiction to 
everything that President Reagan stood for.
  Arlington County, where the airport is located, is opposed to this. 
The City of Alexandria, which is directly contiguous to the airport, 
voted unanimously in opposition to this. The Greater Washington Board 
of Trade, which represents the business community in the Washington 
Metropolitan Area, is opposed to this. It is going to cost them 
millions of dollars to change all their

[[Page H250]]

advertising material. Why can we not respect the wishes of local 
government and the small businesses in the area.
  It needs to be emphasized that, in 1986, it was President Reagan who 
signed the legislation that turned over the authority of this airport 
to a regional authority that would then be responsible for making these 
decisions. Why should we not now defer to them? Why would we impose our 
will upon the very organization that President Reagan created?
  It is wrong that we do this today. It is wrong to strip George 
Washington's name from our national airport.
  Many of my colleagues may not be aware of the fact that Franklin 
Roosevelt, when this airport was commissioned, told the architects he 
wanted the main terminal to look like Mount Vernon. It was clear that 
this was to memorialize George Washington. His adopted son owned the 
land. There is no precedent for this, stripping a former president's 
name and imposing another president.
  The only explanation can be a partisan political one. And this should 
not be partisan. In fact, in many ways it dishonors President Reagan's 
legacy to be subjecting he and his family to this kind of contentious 
debate, to be doing something that is so contrary to what he believed 
in. This should not be done.
  And one of the people that has explained why it should not be done is 
the first Republican governor of Virginia, Governor Linwood Holton, who 
was the first chair of this airport authority. Governor Holton has 
written a letter. We have that letter. He urges us in the strongest 
terms, do not do this.

                              {time}  1100

  It is completely contrary to what President Reagan stood for.
  We will have a number of amendments that will seek to make a bad bill 
a little bit more palatable. One would defer this renaming decision to 
the Washington Airport Authority. Another would say that until we have 
enough money to reimburse the businesses and the public bodies that are 
going to incur substantial expenses because of this, we should not do 
it.
  President Reagan is being honored in appropriate ways. We have an 
$800 million Federal Trade Center. Outside of the Pentagon, this is the 
largest Federal building in the world. It is going to be named after 
President Reagan in just a few weeks. We are going to name the next 
Nimitz class aircraft carrier after President Reagan. We have got a 
courthouse in California named after President Reagan. There are going 
to be a lot of things named after President Reagan.
  I am not sure that this idea that was in Time Magazine that we ought 
to carve his face in Mount Rushmore is not going to be an even more 
contentious issue, but there are sure going to be lots of opportunities 
to honor President Reagan, appropriate non-partisan opportunities. This 
is not an appropriate opportunity.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Solomon), are his speakers reassessing their position on this 
bill?
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, one of the 
real pleasures of serving on the Committee on Rules is having the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) as my counterpart, as the 
ranking member, because the gentleman always makes my day, as Ronald 
Reagan used to say.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. I hope they do not make it the same way they made Clint 
Eastwood's day.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am surprised at the opposition from my friend the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley), because there was a speaker 
of this House named Thomas ``Tip'' O'Neill, and he was one of the most 
loved speakers we have ever had, even though he was tough and he once 
broke a gavel yelling at me from the Chair up there one day.
  But let me just say that we have heard people say, well, you know, 
this goes against Reaganomics and all President Reagan wanted to do.
  I was just going to ask the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Moakley), how did he and all of the other Members that have spoken here 
today vote when we wanted to reform welfare, return welfare back to the 
States and back to the counties, so that we could make able-bodied 
people work for their welfare checks? How did they vote when we changed 
the whole concept of doing away with categorical aid grants for 
education; in other words, where we were telling local school boards 
how to educate their children, we here in Washington? We changed all of 
that, converted it to block grants, gave it to the States, and mandated 
that 80 percent of those funds go right on to the local school 
districts. That is Reaganomics.
  So when we talk about what we are doing here, I just have to question 
a little bit the complaint about Washington National Airport, because, 
as the gentleman knows, and I will read from this document, according 
to the National Park Service, in 1927 a joint airport committee voted 
to approve a site for a new municipal airport for the Nation's capital. 
It chose Gravely Point, a shallow water area on the west bank of the 
Potomac across from Hains Point, 4.5 miles south of Washington, D.C. 
This was designed to replace, listen to this, the Washington Hoover 
Airport, which was located over where the Pentagon is today.
  At first the proposed airport was referred to as the Gravely Point 
Airport project. However, over time it came to be known as the National 
Airport. There does not seem to be any precise moment or action that 
can be cited for the name change. Nevertheless, the name National 
Airport was appearing on documents as early as 1938.
  Then in 1940, when legislation was finally passed on this floor, they 
named it Washington National Airport, after the City of Washington, 
after the District of Columbia. So it is not that we are deleting one 
name and adding another.
  As a matter of fact, I do not have any strong opposition to naming it 
the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. There may be an 
amendment on the floor here dealing with that. We will cross that 
bridge when we come to it.
  Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to make clear that the gentleman ought to 
be singing the accolades of Ronald Wilson Reagan, the same way our good 
friend Tip O'Neill would if he were on this floor today.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's explanation, but I do not 
know what he was explaining. All we are talking about here is naming an 
airport. I have the greatest respect for my colleague's greatest 
friends and idol, Ronald Reagan. I have great respect. The matter here 
is taking one President's name off a building and putting another 
President's on it. It is a bad precedent. Who knows where it is going 
to stop?
  I would hate to think that the party in power is going to rename 
every Federal Building in honor of their heroes and take down the 
minority's names. It just does not make sense.
  Ronald Reagan, in his own statements that I quoted, would be the last 
one in the world that would want to take someone else's name off a 
building and put his name on it. He would be the last one in the world 
that would want a congressional action to name a local airport, against 
the wishes, against the desires of the people who sit on the board. 
Nobody who represents that district was even asked. They read about it 
in the newspaper. This is no way to legislate.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to vote against the previous question. If 
the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the 
rule that will remove the 2-hour time limitation on the amendments and 
will also provide that the IRS reform bill be added to this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, as you know, the measure passed the House last spring by 
an overwhelming vote of 426 to 4. What greater tribute could we pay to 
President Ronald Reagan than this IRS amendment?
  The Senate has yet to consider this bill, but by adding the House-
passed bill to the measure, we can give the Senate a much-needed push 
to take up the IRS reform.
  Mr. Speaker, so I urge Members to vote no on the previous question so 
we can add the bipartisan IRS reform bill, H.R. 2625.
  Mr. Speaker, I include the following for the Record.

Previous Question for Rule on H.R. 2625: Ronald Reagan National Airport

       Text: Strike all after the resolving clause and insert in 
     lieu thereof the following:

[[Page H251]]

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule 
     XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the State of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 2625) to redesignate Washington National 
     airport as ``Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport''. The 
     first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. General 
     debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one 
     hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Transportation 
     and Infrastructure. After general debate the bill shall be 
     considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall 
     be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose 
     of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure now printed in the bill. 
     The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall 
     be considered as read. During consideration of the bill for 
     amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may 
     accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the 
     Member offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in 
     the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that 
     purpose in clause 6 of rule XXIII. Amendments so printed 
     shall be considered as read. The chairman of the Committee of 
     the Whole may: (1) postpone until a time during further 
     consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request for a 
     recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) reduce to five 
     minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any 
     postponed question that follows another electronic vote 
     without intervening business, provided that the minimum time 
     for electronic voting on the first in any series of questions 
     shall be 15 minutes. At the conclusion of consideration of 
     the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report 
     the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 
     adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House 
     on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the 
     bill or to the Committee amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute. The previous question shall be considered as 
     ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
     without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with 
     or without instructions.
       Sec. 2. In the engrossment of H.R. 2625, the Clerk shall: 
     (1) add the text of H.R. 2676, as passed by the House, as new 
     matter at the end of H.R. 2625; (2) conform the title of H.R. 
     2625 to reflect the addition of the text of H.R. 2676 to the 
     engrossment; (3) assign appropriate designations to 
     provisions within the engrossment; and (4) conform provisions 
     for short titles within the engrossment.


        the vote on the previous question: what it really means

       This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous 
     question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. 
     A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote 
     against the Republican majority agenda and a vote to allow 
     the opposition, at least for the moment, to offer an 
     alternative plan. It is a vote about what the House should be 
     debating.
       Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of 
     Representatives, (VI, 308-311) describes the vote on the 
     previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or 
     control the consideration of the subject before the House 
     being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous 
     question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the 
     subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling 
     of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the 
     House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes 
     the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to 
     offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the 
     majority party offered a role resolution. The House defeated 
     the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to 
     a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to 
     recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said: 
     ``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman 
     from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to 
     yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first 
     recognition.''
       Because the vote today may look bad for the Republican 
     majority they will say ``the vote on the previous question is 
     simply a vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on 
     adopting the resolution . . . [and] has no substantive 
     legislative or policy implications whatsoever.'' But that is 
     not what they have always said. Listen to the Republican 
     Leadership Manual on the Legislative Process in the United 
     States House of Representatives, (6th edition, page 135). 
     Here's how the Republicans describe the previous question 
     vote in their own manual: ``Although it is generally not 
     possible to amend the rule because the majority Member 
     controlling the time will not yield for the purpose of 
     offering an amendment, the same result may be achieved by 
     voting down the previous question on the rule . . . When the 
     motion for the previous question is defeated, control of the 
     time passes to the Member who led the opposition to ordering 
     the previous question. That Member, because he then controls 
     the time, may offer an amendment to the title, or yield for 
     the purpose of amendment.''
       Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. House of Representatives, 
     the subchapter titled ``Amending Special Rules'' states: ``a 
     refusal to order the previous question on such a rule [a 
     special rule reported from the Committee on Rules] opens the 
     resolution to amendment and further debate.'' (Chapter 21, 
     section 21.2) Section 21.3 continues: ``Upon rejection of the 
     motion for the previous question on a resolution reported 
     from the Committee on Rules, control shifts to the Member 
     leading the opposition to the previous question, who may 
     offer a proper amendment or motion and who controls the time 
     for debate thereon.''
       The vote on the previous question on a role does have 
     substantive policy implications. It is one of the only 
     available tools for those who oppose the Republican 
     majority's agenda to offer an alternative plan.

  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my dear friend, the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Cardin).
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend, the gentleman 
from Massachusetts, for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this request that we reject the 
previous question so that we can have made in order H.R. 2676, the IRS 
Restructuring Act of 1997 and be able to bring that up and include it 
in this bill.
  H.R. 2676 is a bill that is very important. It is one of the highest 
priorities, I think, of this Congress. I want to congratulate both the 
Democratic and Republican leadership in this body, because we made it a 
truly bipartisan bill.
  The Speaker, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Archer), the gentleman 
from Ohio (Mr. Portman), the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt), 
the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Coyne), and others, worked 
together so that we in this House could pass by an overwhelming 
majority the IRS Restructuring Act of 1997.
  It is important for us to act now. Tax season is coming up shortly. 
We need to act before April 15 so that the reforms can take effect 
immediately.
  President Clinton has urged the Congress to act, and Secretary Rubin 
has worked with us on this important legislation. It provides for a 
reform in the administration of the IRS by creating an outside 
oversight board. It provides for taxpayer bill of rights and makes it 
easier for electronic filing. It simplifies the Congressional oversight 
function. In short, it will be the first major reform of the IRS in 
over a half a century.
  Mr. Speaker, it is important that we act now. By defeating the 
previous question, we have a chance so that the other body can follow 
the lead of this body and act now on IRS reform.
  Since the House passed this bill, we have continued to learn about 
abuses in the IRS. Charles Rossotti, the new Commissioner, has embarked 
on an ambitious plan to reorganize the IRS, but he needs the tools 
provided in this legislation in order to complete the job.
  Mr. Speaker, I agree with the ranking member: Nothing could be more 
fitting than for Ronald Reagan to be associated with this historic 
legislation to reform the IRS. I urge my colleagues to reject the 
previous question so we can move this legislation forward and give the 
other body a chance to do what this body has done.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I was surprised to hear my good friend the gentleman 
from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) talk about breaking the rules of the House, 
because the gentleman is known as a person who obeys the rules of the 
House. As a matter of fact, he helps us keep the House in order quite 
often. But the gentleman knows that an amendment making in order an IRS 
debate is not in order, it is not germane, and cannot be added to it, 
regardless of whether you defeat the previous question or not. We might 
as well add the Superfund to it, or we could add cloning. We could do a 
lot of things. But we have rules, and we have to obey them.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, we know it is also nongermane, but we know of the 
gentleman's love for Ronald Reagan. We felt, because of that, the 
gentleman would allow this amendment to be placed on this bill.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, as early as this morning, I spoke to Senator Bill Roth 
from Delaware, who has the IRS bill in his committee. They are moving 
that bill and it is going to become law. We are going to make it a lot 
easier for the

[[Page H252]]

taxpayers of this Nation to obey the law when they are filing their 
income taxes.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman could make it a lot easier by allowing an 
amendment on this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I think we have touched all the pertinent pieces, and I 
would hope that Members would vote no on the previous question so we 
can amend this bill to take away the 2-hour time limitation and also 
put the IRS language in here.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, as a former town mayor in New York, they are called 
supervisors, town supervisors, and county legislator and State 
legislator, I would be the last one to stand up here and try to take 
away home rule, to try to usurp the authority of local governments. But 
let me just lay the facts out here.
  The Congressional Budget Office has stated, and it is in the report 
here, that the cost of complying with this particular mandate, the 
mandate of changing a name, is insignificant. The cost, therefore, 
would be negligible. There is no real cost. I, for one, would be glad 
to work with the Committee on Appropriations and reimburse anyone for 
any cost there might be.
  Mr. Speaker, let me tell you why we are really here. I am also the 
chairman of the NATO observer group, and that is a group of 
parliamentarians here in the House and the Senate that are responsible 
for the expansion of NATO.
  I was in various countries in central Asia, which is really a part of 
Europe, just recently. These are countries that have strange names like 
Uzbekistan, like Kazahkstan, like Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, 
and these people, who were enslaved for decades under this terrible 
philosophy called communism, all came to me as I was walking the 
streets in each one of these cities and each one of these new sovereign 
nations, and, even though they could speak little English at all, they 
all knew the words ``Ronald Reagan,'' and they all gave a thumbs up to 
this great President, because after decades and decades and decades of 
suffering, they were now a free people, they were no longer a captive 
nation. They had their sovereignty, and now they have a chance to enjoy 
what we Americans have enjoyed for all these 200-plus years, the 
ability to live where we want to live, to work where we want to work, 
to worship in the church of our choice, these things we all take for 
granted.
  The rest of the world knows the value of Ronald Reagan and why he was 
a great President. That is why we are attempting to just pay some 
lasting tribute to this great, great American.
  Mr. Speaker, therefore, I would hope all Members would come over here 
and vote for the previous question, vote for the rule, and then come 
over here and vote for this bill. This President deserved it.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sununu). The question is on ordering the 
previous question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  Pursuant to clause 5 of rule XV, the Chair will reduce to a minimum 
of 5 minutes the period of time within which a vote by electronic 
device, if ordered, will be taken on the question of agreeing to the 
resolution.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 227, 
nays 189, not voting 14, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 3]

                               YEAS--227

     Aderholt
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Brady
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Fox
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kim
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moran (KS)
     Morella
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pappas
     Parker
     Paul
     Paxon
     Pease
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Redmond
     Regula
     Riley
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryun
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stump
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NAYS--189

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baesler
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Bentsen
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Cardin
     Carson
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Cummings
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Engel
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fazio
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Goode
     Gordon
     Green
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Holden
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     John
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHale
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith, Adam
     Snyder
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Towns
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Becerra
     Eshoo
     Fattah
     Franks (NJ)
     Gonzalez
     Herger
     Luther
     McCarthy (MO)
     Mollohan
     Payne
     Riggs
     Schiff
     Stokes
     Torres

                              {time}  1134

  Mr. BONIOR, Mr. HEFNER, Ms. KILPATRICK and Ms. DeGETTE changed their 
vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''

[[Page H253]]

  Mr. BILBRAY changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sununu). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.


                          personal explanation

  Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 3, moving the 
previous question, I was unavoidably detained at Washington National 
Airport.
  Had I been present, I would have voted Nay.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. (Mr. Sununu). Pursuant to House Resolution 
344 and rule XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of 
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the 
bill, H.R. 2625.

                              {time}  1136


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 2625) to redesignate Washington National Airport as ``Ronald 
Reagan Washington National Airport,'' with Mr. Combest in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having 
been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), chairman of the 
Committee on International Relations.
  (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Shuster) for yielding. I rise in support of the redesignation of 
the Washington National Airport as the Ronald Reagan National Airport.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 2625, the redesignation of 
the Washington National Airport as the ``Ronald Reagan National 
Airport.'' I wish to thank our colleagues from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Shuster) and from Georgia (Mr. Barr) for bringing this legislation to 
our attention.
  President Reagan's dedication to a safe world, coupled with a strong 
and prosperous America, secured the status of our nation as an 
international leader, and led directly to the economic and political 
successes we have in recent years achieved. The roots of Communism's 
worldwide collapse can be found in the Reagan Administration's 
effective defense strategy, which has as its cornerstone the truism 
that negotiations can take place only from a position of strength.
  It is appropriate that we honor former President Reagan in this 
manner because it was his Administration which transferred, in 1986, 
all Washington airports to a local authority. This ended 45 years of 
inefficient and expensive federal ownership, and opened the door for 
privatization. This, in turn, paved the way for much-needed airport 
modernization projects.
  With Mr. Reagan's 87th birthday occurring on February 6, 1998, it is 
appropriate that we approve this legislation immediately, to make it a 
fitting tribute on a milestone occasion.
  I ask that my colleagues join with me in supporting H.R. 2625 in an 
expeditious manner, as a fitting, appropriate tribute to one of the 
great Americans of all time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  H.R. 2625 was introduced by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr) 
last October 7. This bill would change the name of the Washington 
National Airport to the Ronald Reagan National Airport.
  Ronald Reagan was born on February 6, 1911, and in 1980 was elected 
the 40th President of the United States. This legislation would honor 
President Reagan for his leadership to and for the citizens of the 
United States and all freedom-loving people throughout the world.
  In particular, this bill is designed to honor the President for the 
following accomplishments during his administration:
  President Reagan established fiscal policies that invigorated the 
American economy. As a result of his efforts, growth and investment 
increased while Federal spending, inflation, interest rates, tax rates 
and unemployment decreased.
  When confronted by the former Soviet Union, President Reagan's policy 
of peace through strength restored national security, ensured peace and 
paved the way for the successful end of the Cold War.
  President Reagan's leadership encouraged the rediscovery of the 
values upon which our forefathers founded this Nation. And in 1986, 
President Reagan persuaded Congress to end the inefficiency and expense 
of Federal ownership of National Airport and to transfer the operating 
control to an independent authority, paving the way for long overdue 
airport modernization projects, including construction of the new 
terminal.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge support of this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1145

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  It is clear that the fix is in, the tablet has been handed down from 
atop Mount Gingrich. Republicans are determined to erect a political 
billboard at the entrance to the Nation's capital in honor of their 
hero Ronald Reagan.
  I have no objection to naming something for Ronald Reagan. In fact, I 
supported the naming of the billion-dollar international trade center 
in downtown Washington in honor of Ronald Reagan, just a stone's throw 
from the White House. I sympathize with his family and the condition 
that he finds himself in with Alzheimer's. My dearest aunt suffered 
from and succumbed to Alzheimer's. I know the pain that they are 
experiencing. But that does not justify doing something we have never 
done in the history of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure or its predecessor, the Public Works Committee, and that 
is take a name off a building and put another name on.
  If this structure had no name, there would be no objection on this 
side. But you are taking a good name, the good name of Washington 
National Airport, and taking that off and substituting for it another 
name. That is not right. You are going to leave the word ``national'' 
in. I correct myself. But the title itself is defaced. That is not 
right.
  You are interfering, interceding in the affairs of the airport 
authority itself. That is not right. When Congress created the 
Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority in 1986, the law said this 
airport should be treated like any other airport in the country. The 
transfer law leased the airport to the MWAA for 50 years and gave it 
complete discretion and full power, those words in the lease, to run 
the airport. This takes away complete discretion and full power. It is 
wrong. It should not be done.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. 
Just to make the record clear, I would like to point out to the body 
that in the last Congress, 63 Democrats sponsored legislation, H.R. 
3247, to rename the Herbert Clark Hoover Department of Commerce 
building as the Ron Brown Commerce building and, indeed, my dear, dear 
friend from Minnesota as well as several of our other esteemed 
colleagues on our committee, on the Democratic side of the aisle, 
cosponsored that legislation. So it is a little mystifying to me to 
hear that this is something that has never been attempted before. 
Indeed the very Members who oppose this are Members who attempted to 
remove the name of President Hoover and replace it with the name of Mr. 
Brown.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. 
Duncan), chairman of the Subcommittee on Aviation.
  (Mr. DUNCAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for 
his leadership on this issue. I rise in support of H.R. 2625 and urge 
my colleagues to support it as well.
  Obviously, as the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and 
others have mentioned, President Reagan was one of the most popular and 
most well-respected leaders this Nation has ever

[[Page H254]]

produced. As all of us know, he accomplished many great things during 
his Presidency.
  Washington, D.C., is a city that symbolizes freedom and democracy for 
every American, for many people all over the world. Renaming the 
Washington National Airport as the Ronald Reagan National Airport is a 
fitting tribute to this great American, a man with a vision and a man 
who has done so much for this Nation and for the world.
  In the 2 decades before President Reagan took office, Americans 
suffered oppressively increasing rates of taxation, inflation, 
unemployment and interest rates. It was Ronald Reagan who led this 
Nation out of its economic problems, reducing runaway inflation and 
interest rates to the lowest levels in many years and creating 
prosperity for millions of citizens across this country.
  Mr. Chairman, President Reagan got this Nation back on track. His 
initiatives led to great improvements in all sectors of our economy, 
including the aviation industry. Air passenger traffic increased 
dramatically throughout the Reagan years, and airlines had some of 
their best years as well, both as a result of deregulation and the 
strong economy.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, this is a fitting tribute because flying, 
aviation, airports, flight in general in the final analysis are about 
freedom. They enable people to expand their horizons and accomplish 
things that otherwise would not have been possible. They give people 
the freedom and the ability to go places and do things that make all of 
our lives better.
  In the same way Ronald Reagan's life, his philosophy, his beliefs, 
his actions, if they could be described in one word, that word would be 
freedom. He fought to protect and preserve freedom here at home and to 
expand freedom for people all over this world. In the great Battle Hymn 
of the Republic it says, in the beauty of the lilies Christ was born 
across the sea with a glory in his bosom that transfigures you and me. 
As he died to make men holy, let us live to make men free. Ronald 
Reagan did that. He lived for freedom. He did so much for so many, 
naming this airport after him is a small way to say thank you for all 
that he did.
  I rise in support of H.R. 2625 and urge my colleagues to support it 
as well.
  Obviously, as you and others have mentioned Mr. Chairman, President 
Reagan was one of the most popular and well respected leaders this 
Nation has ever seen.
  As all of us know, he accomplished many great things during his 
presidency.
  Washington, DC is a city that symbolizes freedom and democracy for 
every American and for many people all over the world.
  Renaming the Washington National Airport as the Ronald Reagan 
National Airport is a fitting tribute to this great man--a man with 
vision and a man who has done so much for this Nation and for the 
world.
  In the two decades before President Reagan took office, Americans 
suffered oppressively increased taxation, inflation, unemployment, and 
interest rates.
  It was Ronald Reagan who lead this Nation out of its economic 
problems; reducing runaway inflation and interest rates to the lowest 
levels in years and creating prosperity for many citizens across the 
Country.
  Mr. Chairman, to be direct, President Reagan got this Nation back on 
track. His initiatives led to great improvements in all sectors of our 
economy, including the aviation industry.
  Air passenger traffic increased dramatically throughout the Reagan 
years. And airlines had some of their best years as well. Both a result 
of deregulation and a strong economy.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman 
from North Carolina (Mrs. Clayton).
  Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time 
to me. I wanted to be on record as saying that this makes no sense 
whatsoever. We have a President whose name of this city is very well 
known. It is well known that National Airport is the Washington 
National Airport, named after a President. There is no need to change 
it, spending the money to name it for another President. This is only 
done, only done for partisan reasons. We should have this as a 
bipartisan city, a bipartisan airport. Why is there a need for a change 
in the name? This is the wrong way to go. We should let it stay, by the 
way, bipartisan to object to this. Both Republicans and the Democrats 
on the National Airport said this is the wrong way to go. I will vote 
against this and urge my colleagues to vote against it.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this well meaning, but ill-
conceived legislation.
  It is appropriate to honor past Presidents. And, we have done so with 
President Reagan.
  We have named a federal courthouse in California after him--we have 
named the brand new building at the Federal Triangle in Washington, DC, 
after President Reagan--and, the newest aircraft carrier will be named 
the U.S.S. Ronald Reagan.
  In addition, President Reagan has been honored in states and cities 
across America by hospitals, bridges, highways and other constructions 
that bear his name.
  I would say to my friends on the other side of the aisle that this is 
a matter that should be left to local authorities.
  Congress should not impose its will on the Airport Authority that 
manages National Airport.
  Members from other states should not override the views of 
Congressman Moran, in whose District the Airport is located, and 
Congresswoman Norton, whose constituents are affected by this decision.
  We either support the right of state and local governments or we 
don't.
  And, while there is some debate over whether the Airport was named 
after our first President, George Washington, it would seem important 
to maintain that name because of its historical value.
  I am aware also that a change in the name of the Airport will have an 
adverse economic impact on many merchants who will suffer great losses 
as a result.
  It is for these reasons that I urge my colleagues to do the 
responsible thing on this Bill--vote for order, history and fairness 
and against chaos, confusion and disarray--vote against this Bill.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I would like to set the facts of the record straight. If indeed this 
bill has been made partisan, it is only because our friends on the 
other side choose to make a naming bill partisan.
  Let me share with the body the facts in the previous Congresses. In 
the 100th Congress, two-thirds of the naming bills were named by 
Democrats, and we Republicans supported it. In the 101st Congress, two-
thirds of the naming bills were for Democrats, and we Republicans 
supported it. In the 102d Congress, 60 percent of the naming bills were 
for Democrats, and we Republicans supported it. In the 103d Congress, 
66 were named for Democrats, and we Republicans supported it. And in 
the 104th Congress, a Congress controlled by Republicans, two-thirds of 
the naming bills were for Democrats, and we Republicans supported it. 
And in the 105th Congress, thus far, two-thirds, again, the 105th 
Congress, a Republican-controlled Congress, two-thirds of the naming 
bills were for Democrats. We Republicans supported it. And indeed, when 
Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall died, we cooperated in a naming 
in his honor in 2 days. He was not even buried when we acted promptly 
to cooperate on a bipartisan basis.
  So indeed if there is partisanship here, the record of the past 
several Congresses shows that in naming bills, we Republicans have 
cooperated. And if there is partisanship, it is because our friends on 
the other side choose to make it so.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 
Barr).
  Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the chairman 
of the committee for his stewardship and leadership on moving this 
piece of legislation through the committee so that it comes before this 
great body today to vote on.
  Mr. Chairman, it is somewhat disappointing that constantly there are 
those who find partisanship and rail against something on partisan 
reasons when in fact those things have nothing to do with partisanship. 
This is one of those bills. This bill is simply one of a number of 
efforts that Congress undertakes on a bipartisan basis year in and year 
out, as the chairman just indicated, to recognize great Americans for 
their role in shaping American history by naming public buildings and 
public facilities, and National Airport is a

[[Page H255]]

public national facility, after those great Americans.
  When we vote in the Congress, year after year to name Federal 
facilities and Federal buildings after Democrats, Republicans and 
Independents and those not affiliated necessarily with any political 
party, we do so because the people of this country want their heritage 
to be remembered and monumentalized on our public buildings. When we in 
the Congress have voted in the past to name a particular Federal 
facility or building after a particular person, I doubt that any of us 
vote in favor of those votes, for those votes because we agree with 
every single policy or every single pronouncement that those 
individuals have made during the course of their public career. They 
are recognized through legislation such as this, not for any one 
particular vote, not because every one of us agrees with everything 
that they did, but because they have contributed in some form or 
fashion in a significant way to the overall history and running of this 
great Nation.
  I do not think that there are anybody but the most extreme partisans 
who could with a straight face fail to put Ronald Reagan in that 
category. I think it is entirely appropriate and clearly within the 
purview of this United States Congress to name a Federal facility which 
we, the people of this country, not of any particular State, own and 
have a stewardship relationship in running that facility.
  It is not that there is anything sacrosanct about any name. The name 
of National Airport in Washington has been changed in the past. Other 
Federal facilities have had their name changed as new people, new 
American heroes have come on the scene and for which the order of the 
day is to recognize them.
  I think it is entirely appropriate that we in this Nation's capital, 
we the Representatives of the people of this country today seek to 
honor on the eve of his birthday one of the great Presidents of this 
country's history. I would urge all of my colleagues to put aside any 
sort of partisanship that they may feel. We are not asking them today 
to vote for this resolution, for this piece of legislation because they 
agree with everything that President Reagan did, although I do think he 
was a great President. There are others who may not place him in that 
high category, but I do not think that that means that they have the 
right to simply vote against it because they may disagree with 
something that he said or did. The same as we on this side did not vote 
against naming Federal facilities after persons on the other side of 
the aisle simply because we may have disagreed with something that they 
said or did.
  The history, the legacy, of Ronald Reagan will far outlive our great 
leader. It is a legacy that future generations can know and enjoy and 
bear the fruits of because of the work that he did in ending the Cold 
War, in bringing pride back to these United States of America.
  I think that all of us also feel a sense of pride as this name change 
goes forward and our national airport, which, again, I would like to 
stress, Mr. Chairman, is owned by the people of this country, it is not 
a State facility, it is run, leased to a local facility. That is 
something that Ronald Reagan believed in, but naming this national 
airport after Ronald Reagan does not take away from the ability of that 
airport authority to run the airport as it was intended to do.
  Those that make that claim are simply making a specious claim in 
order to disguise the fact that they just do not want to name an 
airport after Ronald Reagan. If there are some folks that believe that 
in their heart, and their constituents want them to do that, that is 
one thing, but to come up with arguments that this airport is not a 
Federal facility, that the Federal Government through congressional 
mandate does not have every single right to name this airport, as we 
the people, through our representatives feel free and feel fit to do, 
is inappropriate.
  I would prefer to see the debate stay exactly where it ought to be, 
and that is a legitimate exercise of limited congressional authority to 
name Federal facilities owned by the Federal Government on behalf of 
the people of this country, this entire country, not any particular 
State or region, on behalf of and in recognition of great national 
leaders, of which Ronald Reagan clearly is.
  This legislation has the very clear support of his family, as he 
enters his twilight years. We know he is very ill, and I think there 
would be no more fitting tribute than to pass this legislation today 
and rename National Airport after Ronald Reagan.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman 
from Florida (Ms. Brown).
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, first of all, as a member of the 
Subcommittee on Aviation, let me say that it is inappropriate that we 
reported this bill out without a hearing or a markup in subcommittee. 
This is an important decision we are making today, and I urge my 
colleagues to consider all of the information. Naming National Airport 
after President Ronald Reagan is unnecessary government intervention 
and duplication, and, in addition, he is not known for being a champion 
of aviation policy. Quite the contrary, his aviation policies were 
often divisive and controversial. Although we differ on political 
views, I do respect him as the President.
  First of all, as a member of the aviation subcommittee, let me say 
that it is inappropriate that we reported this bill without hearings or 
a markup in subcommittee. This is a very important decision we are 
making today, and I urge my colleagues to consider all the information.
  I hate to be put in the position like this, when we are pressured to 
vote on an important issue that will be costly, involves wrongful 
government intervention into local business, and renames a public 
facility--something we have never done before, when President Reagan is 
ill. This is not the time or place for this discussion.
  I will not enter into a partisan debate on this issue. I think the 
simple facts speak for themselves. We have already honored President 
Reagan for his achievements. Many credit him for bringing an end to the 
Cold War, and I think it is fitting that there is an Aircraft Carrier 
to be named in his honor, as America's defense buildup helped bring an 
end to the Cold War.
  Additionally, we have honored him again by naming the largest Federal 
building outside of the Pentagon after President Reagan. This building 
which completes the Federal Triangle project is just a few blocks from 
the White House, and in plain view to the millions of tourists that 
come to Washington every year.
  And in President Reagan's home state of California, a Federal 
courthouse bears his name. This is an addition to countless other 
roads, bridges, and buildings that have been named after him across the 
country. Naming National Airport after President Reagan is unnecessary 
government intervention and duplication. And additionally he is not 
known for being a champion of aviation policy. Quite the contrary, his 
aviation policies were often divisive and controversial.
  Although we differ in political views, I do respect him as a 
President; however, I truly feel he has been honored, and in many ways 
unlike any other President, in terms of the number of honors to him in 
the short period of time since he has left office.
  Let us stop the politics and move on to real business. I urge my 
colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood), now 
controlling the time of the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), 
has 17 minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. 
Oberstar) has 27 minutes remaining.

                              {time}  1200

  Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
New York (Mrs. Kelly).
  Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, as a cosponsor of this bill, I rise today 
in strong support of this measure to honor President Ronald Reagan with 
this designation.
  Much has been said about the redesignation of the airport which 
received the title Washington National, contrary to the insistence of 
the other side of the aisle, not directly because of George 
Washington's legacy but because of the name of our Nation's capital. We 
have always acted in a bipartisan manner on such bills, until now, when 
the Democrats, not the Republicans, have decided to be partisan on this 
matter.
  I would like to address the importance of the Reagan years. I hope 
that all of us will remember the anxiety of the Cold War and pay homage 
to the man who put our fears to rest. Please support this bill.
  President Reagan once stated that through his policies he hoped to 
``foster

[[Page H256]]

the infrastructure of democracy''. We foster and measure our Presidents 
by the fruition of their promises; and by that high standard, President 
Reagan has been proven a champion of foreign policy. He deserves this 
designation and he deserves our utmost respect.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Moran).
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, several things need to be 
clarified. This airport clearly was named in honor of George 
Washington, and anyone suggesting that it is only referring to 
Washington, D.C., should ask themselves who they think Washington, D.C. 
was named after; Bugs Bunny?
  It is obvious that George Washington is honored here. In fact, the 
land was owned by George Washington's adopted son.
  There is a lot of history. We are going to share that with Members. 
The main thing we need to emphasize here is this is directly contrary 
to Ronald Reagan's legacy. Ronald Reagan signed the legislation giving 
local control. Respect that local control.
  Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Washington (Ms. Dunn).
  Ms. DUNN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  I am proud to be here to talk in favor of naming Washington National 
Airport after Ronald Reagan. He was my President. I knew him, I admired 
him, I loved him. I worked with him as state party chairman in the 
State of Washington for all of those first years during the Reagan 
administration, the 8 years.
  And I remember my fondest memory of Ronald Reagan was when he came to 
Seattle in 1989, after he had left the Presidency and his Vice 
President, George Bush, had become President and he did a little 
meeting with some of the folks that cared a lot about Ronald Reagan. 
There were people who had been with him over the years from when he was 
first a movie actor, from when he ran for governor of California, from 
when he ran for the Presidency in 1976 and then again in 1980. And it 
was my joy that day to introduce him and to have the opportunity to 
thank Ronald Reagan for everything that he did for us.
  It was the last time I talked to him in private, but that was such an 
overwhelming sense of support in that room, all the personal 
connections in that room and the opportunity to say thank you, Mr. 
President, for getting rid of the potential threat from the Soviet 
Union, for standing strong for our Nation, for its principles, for 
everything that we believe in, and for leaving a legacy of decency in 
the White House, for setting us up to be able to compliment him now 
years later after he was the President.
  I think this is the proper, the fair, the appropriate thing to do. 
And, Mr. Chairman, in my household, I have a son named Reagan. He was 9 
years old when the Reagan he was named after became President. So, 
indeed, he waited a long time to be named after a President, but I 
think compared to the naming of a son, an airport is very small indeed.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  History judges Presidents over time. People love Presidents in real 
time, and millions clearly love Ronald Reagan today. Monuments spring 
up all over America. They always spring from the ground up. That way we 
assure consensus and comity and dignity surrounding the process.
  There is a pragmatic reason for this, as well and that is because we 
seek to honor the person, not to have a quarrel among ourselves. If we 
do, we overwhelm the honor with contention and embarrass the person and 
the family. That is why naming bills in this House are always done by 
consensus, first within State delegations and then always on a 
bipartisan basis.
  H.R. 2625 breaks the time honored tradition of the House in moving 
forward a bill that does not have the necessary consensus.
  The other value, besides consensus, that has always been honored in 
naming bills is local control. This is the second time that local 
control has been violated in the name of President Reagan. The first 
time was the Ronald Reagan Building located in my district. It was my 
project. I worked harder on it than any other Member. I was not 
consulted on the name. Out of respect for President Reagan, I did not 
raise an objection.
  Now, we have the second instance of no respect, this time for the 
entire region. D.C. is one of three jurisdictions on the regional 
authority. So is the Federal Government on the regional authority. 
Congress has been glad to have the authority pay for the magnificent 
new terminal. Congress is glad, however, as well, to intervene at every 
whim.
  There have been two Supreme Court lawsuits. Both of them Congress 
lost when Congress wanted to intervene whenever it wanted to do 
something. The lease says full power and dominion and complete 
discretion go to the regional authority.
  What we are doing now is going to get us another lawsuit. President 
Reagan deserves much better than that.
  There have been a number of great Presidents. History may one day say 
that Ronald Reagan is one of them, but only one President's name 
belongs on the airport that is the gateway to the Nation's capital. 
That is the President whom Congress named the capital itself for.
  There is no partisanship, no division of the House surrounding George 
Washington's name. We would not remove his name from this city. I ask 
this House please do not remove George Washington's name from our 
airport.
  Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire of the Chair the time 
remaining on both sides?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) has 23\1/2\ 
minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood) has 14 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Dingell).
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, this is a most extraordinary event. We 
are, without any hearings whatsoever, naming an airport after a 
President in opposition to the wishes of the people in the area.
  The most remarkable thing is that we are taking an airport named 
after the first President of the United States, one of the greatest of 
Americans living and dead in the entire history of the country, but who 
is apparently not appreciated sufficiently to allow that airport to be 
named after him.
  As a young boy I knew the man who built that airport. He was a 
Virginian, a student of history, and he was a man who was determined 
that he would name that airport after one of the greatest Americans of 
our history, Clinton M. Hester. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, when he made 
the inaugural speech with regard to that particular airport's 
dedication, mentioned President Washington not once but twice. 
Washington lived just down the road and owned lands around that 
airport.
  The extraordinary thing about the whole business is, however, that we 
are naming an airport which was given by the Federal Government on a 
long-term lease to an authority. We literally have no ability and no 
authority and no control over that land, because it was planned when we 
gave that land to the authority that they would have entire control 
over the function and operation of that airport in all its particulars.
  We are removing the name of our greatest President from that airport. 
We are adding another President. I think it is fine that we should 
honor President Reagan. He is and was a great man. But I do not believe 
that this is a suitable honor for him. It raises a controversy which, 
very frankly, besmirches his name, which stands in the way of carrying 
out the intention of the original creators of that airport, and which 
leaves us in a situation where we are doing something that we really do 
not have the authority to do.
  If something needs to be named after President Reagan, let us search 
for it and let us come about it in a bipartisan way. The Democrats 
stand ready to assist in that kind of undertaking.
  Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
to

[[Page H257]]

address the issue of whether, in fact, the airport is named after 
George Washington.
  The current official name of the airport is Washington National 
Airport, not George Washington National Airport. The Washington is in 
the name to indicate the market in the airport service. The name in the 
bill, Ronald Reagan National Airport, is consistent with the approach 
taken by other airports named after Presidents.
  For example, there is the John F. Kennedy, JFK, International Airport 
in New York. I wonder what the public outcry was when that airport was 
renamed. It would be interesting to check that.
  Also, there is the George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston. 
Nobody thinks that name change slighted Sam Houston. I wonder what the 
public outcry was when that airport was renamed.
  Concerns that the name chosen for this airport would somehow 
denigrate the memory of George Washington are, quite frankly, without 
foundation. The term ``Washington'' was included in the 1940 name of 
the airport to indicate the market the airport served; that is, 
Washington, D.C. The term ``Washington'' included in the name of the 
other two local airports was not to honor the man but to indicate the 
market.
  For example, Public Law 98-510 in 1984 named Dulles International 
Airport the Washington Dulles International Airport. I do not believe 
there was a big outcry when that airport was named, but it would be 
interesting to check the record. The purpose of this renaming was not 
to minimize the contribution of John Foster Dulles but to indicate to 
passengers that Dulles serves the Washington market.
  And I know it is going to be hard to refute this, because I am sure 
my colleague does not have the evidence to go back and look at the 
record to see what kind of public outcry there was, but in any event 
the gentleman may use his time when I am finished.
  Similarly Baltimore Washington International Airport, BWI, was given 
that name not to honor Lord Baltimore and George Washington but, 
rather, to indicate to passengers that that airport served both 
Baltimore and Washington, D.C.
  The Reagan International Airport, with its close proximity to 
Washington, D.C., is now so closely associated with the Nation's 
capital that there is no real need to continue to include 
``Washington'' in the title.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Would the gentleman from Illinois, with his very carefully researched 
and closely reasoned presentation acknowledge that the namings that he 
cited of airports, or renamings, were not done by the United States 
Congress except for Dulles?
  Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. LaHOOD. Dulles was.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. They were not done by the United States Congress.
  Mr. LaHOOD. Dulles was.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I made that exception. But the others were not done by 
the United States Congress.
  The gentleman from Illinois would embrace, then, given this scenario 
he just presented, would embrace an act of Congress to rename O'Hare 
Airport? Would the gentleman embrace that idea?
  Mr. LaHOOD. If we could name it after Mayor Daley or Governor 
Thompson or somebody like that, I certainly think the people of 
Illinois would----
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Would the gentleman be happy to have the U.S. Congress 
do that?
  Mr. LaHOOD. It is not a Federal facility.

                              {time}  1215

  Mr. OBERSTAR. That is the distinction. My colleague draws false 
distinctions when talking about naming an airport in Houston for former 
President Bush. That was done by local authority. That is the whole 
point. We gave authority to the Metropolitan Washington Airport 
Authority full power over the airport. We should not take over their 
authority and rename an airport.
  Our Chairman referenced the legislation to name the Commerce 
Department building. Former Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown died in a 
tragedy in Bosnia in early April, 1996. Our colleague, the gentleman 
from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), introduced on April 15 a bill to name 
the Commerce Department for Ron Brown. My name was listed as a 
cosponsor.
  Later, I asked our staff to review this issue before it should come 
up in our committee. We found that the Commerce Department already had 
a name. I was not aware of it. I did not know that it was named for 
former President Herbert Hoover.
  I ruled against bringing up that bill, against moving that bill in 
our committee. Instead, our colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Rangel), introduced on May 30, 1996, a bill to name a courthouse in New 
York for Ron Brown, which I felt was more appropriate. I did not want 
to initiate a procedure in our committee where we would rename a 
building. That is what this issue is all about, about renaming.
  And the matter of Dulles renaming was done before we transferred 
authority to the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority. It was 
still fully within the power of the Congress to rename that airport, 
which was done in order to avoid confusion of names for airports. And I 
do not need to go into it any further, but that was done before we 
created the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority. So, again, it 
was not a matter of intrusion into local affairs.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Kingston).
  Mr. KINGSTON. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Today, Mr. Chairman, we are seeing a little bitterness from people 
who should not be bitter, we are seeing partisanship and pettiness from 
people who should not exhibit partisanship and pettiness, and we 
certainly are seeing a lot of silliness and gamesmanship when people 
say that we are changing this name of the airport from George 
Washington.
  I go to the National Airport every single week twice. I have never 
see any bust or any reference whatsoever to the great George 
Washington. Let us get away from that silliness. The real matter is 
partisan politics.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KINGSTON. I will be glad to yield on the gentleman's time.
  We can talk about the Reagan record, reducing inflation. We can talk 
about unemployment going down, the creation of 18 million new jobs, 
economic turnaround, interest rates falling, the demise of the Soviet 
Union, the rise of the American military and international prestige.
  We can talk about the Reagan spending programs, the fact that seven 
out of eight of his budgets that he submitted to the Democratic-
controlled Congress were actually increased, that if we had kept as a 
Congress with the Reagan budgets, he would have left office with over 
$100 billion in surplus. Now, we can talk about his strong economic 
legacy.
  But I want to speak to you, Mr. Chairman, about Reagan the man. I am 
a baby-boomer. I was raised during the Watergate era and then Gerald 
Ford and Jimmy Carter and the Iran hostage situation. And do you know 
what? Speaking as a young American, we did not have that much to look 
up to, particularly out of Washington.
  But when Ronald Reagan came to the scene, I can tell my colleagues 
that, as a youngster, younger than I am now, in my late 20s, we had 
somebody to look up to.
  My wife said, ``Isn't he wonderful? He is like a king, somebody you 
can really respect and follow.'' Then I said to her one day, I said, 
``Libby, you know what, you like Ronald Reagan'' she kept on going on 
and on and on, ``You like Ronald Reagan better than you like me.'' And 
she said, ``Yes. But I like you better than I like George Bush.'' So I 
had to take it any way I could get it.
  The man, as president, brought dignity, honor, respect and optimism 
to the White House and to the streets of America. He wrote my wife's 
grandfather, Basil Morris, while in his 80s, a birthday letter. And Mr. 
Morris wrote

[[Page H258]]

him back and said, ``You have restored the prestige of what it means to 
be the president of the United States.'' And I think that those words, 
coming from an octogenarian, means so much and speaks so loudly.
  I will close with this line. There were a lot of difficulties. Was 
Reagan the perfect president? No, he was not the perfect president. Is 
Bill Clinton? No. Was George Bush? No. Jimmy Carter? No. Was George 
Washington? No. I do not know that we will ever have the perfect 
president. But one thing that Ronald Reagan taught us is that we can 
all be optimistic and look forward without fear of tomorrow because, 
and I quote, ``After all, we are Americans.''
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Hefner).
  Mr. HEFNER. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to remind my friend, the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston), that he is kind of rewriting 
history here.
  All the years Ronald Reagan was here, he sent a budget up, he never 
offered but two of those budgets. He never offered them for a vote. And 
one of them got one vote, and one of them got, I believe, 37 votes. So 
he did not produce a balanced budget, and we ran up $3 trillion of new 
debt. To me, the gentleman is rewriting history.
  Those of us that served on the Defense Subcommittee had a little bit 
to do with the Cold War coming to an end and building up the Armed 
Forces in this country. So the gentleman should not rewrite history on 
the floor during this debate.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, what is the time split remaining?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) has 17\1/2\ 
minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) 
has 8 minutes remaining.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Moran).
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, the first thing that needs to be 
made clear is that, just as Washington, D.C., is named after George 
Washington, Washington National Airport is named after George 
Washington.
  I know that Ronald Reagan would not want us doing this. He would know 
that the main terminal at Washington National Airport is designed after 
Mount Vernon. He would know that. He would know that Washington 
National Airport is located on the very land that George Washington's 
adopted son owned. He would know the history behind this.
  He would also know that it is unprecedented to rename a facility in a 
district of a Member that opposes it. He would know why that Member 
opposes it. Because he would respect the fact that the County of 
Arlington, the City of Alexandria both have informed the Congress that 
they are opposed to it. He would respect the fact that the Washington 
business community has written to us their opposition to doing this. He 
would know that the local community does not want this name change 
because it respects George Washington. And our community, the community 
I represent, does not want to dishonor Ronald Reagan by doing this, and 
it certainly does not want to dishonor George Washington.
  We know there are better ways, more appropriate ways, to honor Ronald 
Reagan. This is not an appropriate way to do it. There are many other 
ways.
  But the irony of this, that it was Ronald Reagan that signed the very 
legislation in 1986 to seed over local control, is completely 
consistent with his philosophy of devolving power to local and State 
governments.
  Ronald Reagan signed that legislation. That legislation epitomizes 
what he was all about. And what an irony, what a dishonor to then turn 
around and act so contrary to that legislation.
  He would also recognize that the first Republican State-wide official 
in the Commonwealth of Virginia has written this body stating his 
opposition to this legislation. Governor Linwood Holton, who certainly 
respects Ronald Reagan but fully understands why this should not be 
done and not just for the financial cost. He understands the history of 
Virginia. He understands the background of Washington National Airport 
and of the local control. He understands what Ronald Reagan stood for.
  I wish more Members of this body did understand that and respected 
it. Let us find a way to honor Ronald Reagan's memory that is 
consistent with Ronald Reagan's philosophy, that is consistent with the 
legislation establishing Washington National Airport, and is certainly 
consistent with the history behind its name.
  Washington National Airport is a facility we can all be proud of. We 
will not be as proud of a facility that is renamed after another 
president against the wishes of the local community. It should not be 
done. It is an arrogant abuse of power.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Filner).
  Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking Member.
  Well, Mr. Chairman, there they go again. The Majority is again 
sacrificing commonly accepted rules, practices, traditions, and even 
their own sacred mantras to meet their own partisan needs of the 
moment.
  The self-proclaimed party of family values now seeks to strip the 
name of America's founding father, George Washington, from the airport 
that serves the capital city, also named in his honor. The 
Congressional Majority that only 3 years ago legislated a prohibition 
on unfunded mandates now blindly ignores the unfunded costs imposed on 
the Metropolitan Washington Airport's Authority and other local 
jurisdictions.
  The Majority that purports to favor low local control and coined the 
word ``devolution'' now dismisses any notion of local control. They 
disregard the opinions and wishes of our colleagues who represent the 
airport, as well as the local airport authority, which itself was 
created by legislation that Mr. Reagan signed.
  The mantra of a smaller, less intrusive government is conveniently 
forgotten again as the heavy arm of Congress reaches out to impose its 
big government will by edict. Forgotten too are the accepted practices 
of not renaming structures, of seeking bipartisan support for naming 
efforts and of not naming structures of people who are still living. It 
is all another case of ``Do as I say, not as I do,'' Mr. Chairman. The 
rules do not suit the Majority, so the Majority is changing the rules.
  Yes, I believe that we should have a suitable memorial to Mr. Reagan. 
We have it in the $800 million Ronald Reagan Building in the 
International Trade Center. We have it in the future $4.5 billion 
U.S.S. Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier, the Ronald Reagan Courthouse in 
Santa Ana, California, the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, and a 
dozen other sites throughout the Nation.
  We in California remember Governor Reagan's famous phrase, ``If 
you've seen one redwood tree, you've seen them all.'' I say, in 
paraphrase, ``If you've seen one Ronald Reagan memorial, you've seen 
them all.''
  We should not cut the redwoods. We should not cut Washington out of 
Washington National Airport. I will follow our accepted procedures, 
honor America's founding father, President George Washington, vote to 
keep his name on Washington National Airport.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) has 8 
minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) has 
12\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. McIntosh).
  Mr. McINTOSH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the Chairman.
  I had the privilege of working for Ronald Reagan in the last 2 years 
of his administration, first at the Justice Department and then in the 
White House as a special assistant to the President. Ronald Reagan is, 
in my estimation, the greatest president in our times. He came in 
fighting big government. In fact, he noticed that the government in 
Washington had the notion that, if it moves, tax it. If it keeps 
moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.
  But things would be quite different under Ronald Reagan. His 
administration was an administration of ideas and one idea in 
particular, that freedom should be the watchword of our policies at 
home and abroad. He believed that the explosive growth of government in 
the 20th century was depriving Americans of the freedom to keep more of

[[Page H259]]

their hard-earned money and to make decisions for them and their 
family, and he believed that abroad the rise of communism was the 
biggest threat to freedom that we have seen in the history of the 
world.
  He set about correcting both of those problems. He reined in big 
government in Washington; and he marshalled the coalition that had won 
the Second World War to win the Cold War and defeat communism in our 
lifetime, something that people did not believe could be done when he 
came to Washington in 1980; and we were all celebrating at the end of 
that decade after his presidency brought about the collapse of the 
Berlin Wall and the resurrection of freedom throughout eastern Europe 
and the former Soviet Union.

                              {time}  1230

  Well, today we see a world that is free of communism, but we still 
have the vestiges of big government in Washington. Many of us would 
like to see this airport named after Ronald Reagan so that those 
passengers traveling to our Nation's capital would be reminded of his 
call to freedom at home and abroad, and that that reminder would greet 
us every time we entered into this city.
  I support the chairman's resolution. I think it is the best thing we 
can do to remind America that Ronald Reagan stood for freedom, that 
freedom is a battle we must always engage to preserve, and that we will 
not let that flame die here in Washington after his departure.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, it has been referenced by several Members on the other 
side that opposition on our side is partisan-based, partisan-motivated, 
we are upset because this airport is to be named for Ronald Reagan.
  It is not the Democrats who initiated the partisanship. In the ``This 
Week'' show on ABC television, conservative columnist and commentator 
George Will was the one who said if the renaming proposal is adopted, 
Washington passengers ``would fly out of two airports; one named for 
John Foster Dulles and the other after Ronald Reagan, and that is an 
ideologically perfect choice.''
  On the same program, his fellow conservative, Bill Kristol, remarked 
that naming the airport after Ronald Reagan is ``especially worth it, 
because it will so annoy people like George Stephanopoulos.''
  Those are partisan remarks. We did not initiate them. Opposition on 
our side is not to naming something for Ronald Reagan, but it is to 
taking a name off an already-named structure and renaming it.
  As I said earlier, my good friend from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) was 
out of the room, I vigorously directed our staff not to ask for 
movement on the Ron Brown Commerce Department naming when I learned 
that the building had already been named for Herbert Hoover. I did not 
know that at the time my name was added to the bill that was introduced 
in rush after Ronald Brown's death, and instead we sought another 
building to be named for Ron Brown. The chairman very graciously and 
with great skill moved that legislation through our committee and 
through the House, and we greatly appreciate that. But I want to 
emphasize, once we learned that the Commerce Department building had a 
name, said we should not be in the business of renaming. That applies 
today to this bill, and to this airport.
  Mr. Chairman, again, no other airport in the country would we dare to 
name or rename since other airports are already under the authority of 
local governments.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey), the distinguished majority leader.
  Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
  Mr. Chairman, in 1978 or 1979, I was driving home late one evening 
from a course I was teaching, and I listened to the President of the 
United States talk about America in malaise. The Nation was baffled 
with stagflation. It seemed as though the Soviet empire was a threat to 
every corner of the world. It seemed as though we were not able to 
cope, not only with our own domestic problems, but with the world 
situation. It seemed, in fact, that maybe we were destined to be a 
Nation in despair.
  Then, all of a sudden, we saw a new shining voice of optimism emerge 
on the American scene, a person who had so much confidence, so much 
hope for this country, so much appreciation for the quality of the 
American people and so much dedication to the fundamental principles of 
personal freedom and responsibility, that he reached out and he lifted 
us up. That person was Ronald Reagan.
  I must say that during the 1970s, I even thought maybe I would move 
to another country just to find more freedom, and when Ronald Reagan 
came on the scene, I drew hope, I drew from him encouragement.
  I dared again to believe in America and the greatness of this great 
land, and when he came to Washington, D.C., as the President of this 
land, he stood and delivered. In the first 2 years he whipped 
inflation, a problem of economics that had baffled seven Presidents 
before him. He got this Nation on a new standing of prosperity and 
growth, price stability, that in fact it stands unto this day, and he 
broke down the Soviet empire and tore down that wall.
  He has been and he is today a shining example of goodness, a 
reflection of the fundamental goodness of the American people. We want 
to honor that. We want to appreciate that. We think it is little enough 
to ask.
  It is a confusing thing in Washington, D.C. The question is, is 
something that is named after George Washington the President or 
Washington the city, but not so confusing. We talk about the George 
Washington monument. We talk about the George Washington Parkway. We 
make the distinction. Washington National was not understood to be 
George Washington National, it was Washington National after the city.
  I get on a plane at what is today Washington National and I drive to 
Dallas, and on my way home I drive on the LBJ Freeway. Now, I could 
probably take some umbrage at that, but to many people in America, LBJ 
was a great President; not to me, but they have the right to honor a 
man who served as President of this great land. I go to Fort Worth and 
I drive on the Jim Wright Freeway. Again, they have the right to honor 
him. It would seem to me the fundamental standards of decency and 
respect should accommodate that we have a right to honor Ronald Reagan.
  I will tell you, Mr. Chairman, I travel a lot in this country. I have 
to tell you, I do not believe that you can find in America today a more 
loved American than Ronald Reagan. I want to honor Ronald Reagan for 
the example of goodness, faith, confidence in this Nation, appreciation 
for and confidence of this Nation's people that he has always been. I 
want to get on an airplane at Ronald Reagan Airport. I want to be 
reminded of his greatness, and by so being reminded of the greatness of 
these people of this great land.
  And when I get off the airplane on the other end, having had the 3 
hours to reminisce in my mind about the greatness of Ronald Reagan, I 
will be content to drive home on LBJ Freeway, with an understanding 
that we are able to get beyond politics, we are able to be decent and 
respectful, and we are willing to accept that everybody in America has 
a right, I believe a duty, certainly should have the opportunity, with 
honor, dignity and respect, to honor those people we believe to have 
been great people that served this Nation well.
  Mr. Chairman, I would encourage everybody, show that standard of 
decency, respect, appreciation and good sportsmanship, and vote yes on 
this measure.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Chairman, speaker after speaker on the other side has come to the 
floor and said this airport was not named after George Washington. 
Goodness gracious me, that is splitting hairs with the finest 
theological, philosophical razor that you can find.
  For whom is the City of Washington named? Joe Washington, who played 
football for the Washington Redskins? Or for Harold Washington, the 
former mayor of Chicago?
  It was named the City of Washington, was named for our first 
President.

[[Page H260]]

 When the name ``Washington'' was added to this airport, it was 
obviously done with the name of our great first President, Father of 
the Country in mind. Good heavens, stop denying your patrimony. That is 
just silliness.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Oregon 
(Mr. DeFazio).
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
time.
  It is extraordinary to me that we are engaged in a debate here today 
where the majority party is going to break a sacred lease with local 
government and violate one of the principles of Ronald Reagan's tenure 
in office, which is local control, to remove things from the awesome 
bureaucracy of Washington, D.C. and get them back down to the local 
level.
  It was Ronald Reagan who signed the agreement which gave the compact 
to the District of Columbia and the State of Virginia, and it is an 
extraordinary document. It is one of the most comprehensive lease 
agreements you have ever seen. And actually he was right, because they 
have done things that I am sure the Federal Government and Congress 
never could have done in terms of developing that beautiful terminal at 
Washington National Airport. The investment that has gone in there 
would not have gone forward had it remained totally under Federal 
control, given the lack of interest in this Congress, which is also a 
scandal, in the infrastructure of this country.
  But back to the issue at hand: This legislation would preempt, 
probably illegally and probably actually is doomed to lose in court 
should it be challenged, the authority, the full authority, the full 
control, the dominion, for the use, the development of this airport, 
extraordinary terms in a 50-year lease. Fifty-year leases are akin to 
ownership. In the courts they are interpreted that way. And yet 
Congress now is going to wade back in, the Republican majority, in 
order to rush through something for Ronald Reagan's birthday. They 
cannot wait for the Nimitz class aircraft carrier. They can't be happy 
with the largest Federal building in the world outside of the Pentagon. 
And we could rename the Pentagon, if they so chose, and I would 
probably support that.
  Mr. Chairman, to preempt the name of George Washington, the Father of 
the Country, the first President, from this airport, it is 
extraordinary to not only violate the principles set down by Ronald 
Reagan, that is local control, local authority, a legal and binding 
contract and lease agreement signed by Ronald Reagan, endorsed by the 
Congress, which now Congress is attempting to usurp, and to remove the 
name from the airport of the Father of our Country, the first President 
of our country. It is extraordinary, and it is no way to honor Ronald 
Reagan or his principles, despite our many disagreements. I think this 
is a disservice to your greatest living President.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, my route to Congress was from State and local 
government. One of the legacies that I think is indisputable for 
President Reagan is that he focused more perhaps than any American 
President the attention of governance on the State and local level, his 
assertion that big government at the Federal level is not necessarily 
the best approach to solving our problems.
  I think history will note that this will be one of his most important 
and lasting legacies, refashioning partnerships with local governments.
  I can think of no more bizarre way to recognize President Reagan than 
to undercut that important part of his legacy when we have a 
designation of an airport, over the objection of the local business 
community, over the objection of the local airport authority, and where 
the Congress itself has no ability to go out and change the signs, to 
say Ronald Reagan Airport.
  We had our distinguished committee counsel explain that what we could 
do is simply withhold passenger landing fees and other Federal funds. 
We could basically force the local authority to bend to the will of the 
United States Congress, and in the alternative force them to put at 
risk the safe and orderly administration of that airport.
  Think about that extraordinary response.

                              {time}  1245

  I have no doubt in my mind that if Ronald Reagan were President and a 
Congress came forward with a proposal like this that would thwart the 
will of the local community, establish a precedent that would allow the 
renaming of any airport in America; for instance, the John Wayne 
Airport, this principle could allow the John Wayne Airport to be 
renamed the Jane Fonda Airport by withholding the same revenue stream, 
force them to comply with the will.
  I think this is an embarrassment to our former President. I think it 
is actually the wrong way to go, and I hope that the Congress will not 
follow this path in a way that I think has a very dangerous precedent 
in the long term.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon).
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for 
yielding me this time.
  I rise in support of naming the airport after Ronald Reagan. I was a 
medical student in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and I remember 20 
percent inflation rates, I remember no job creation, I remember my wife 
and I wondering what kind of future we were going to have. Then I 
remember Ronald Reagan getting elected and things really beginning to 
turn around, and I also remember the defense bill that he wanted to 
pursue which ultimately led to the end of the Cold War, and every step 
of the way there was opposition, opposition, how his policies were 
wrong.
  He created prosperity in this country, and in my opinion, he is one 
of the greatest Presidents that this country has ever seen. It is 
fitting and proper for us to name this airport after him, and 
considering all of the opposition he got during his career, it is not 
surprising to me at all that this simple act is indeed opposed as well. 
It is because the people who oppose it will never recognize the fact 
that his policies were good for this country and the people loved him, 
and we are living today in the prosperity and the benefits still, 
created by Ronald Reagan.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to come back to the point about the name 
that the airport of our Nation's Capital bears. I said earlier, it is 
splitting hairs to try to say it is not named after our first 
President. It bears the name of the city that bears his name. It is 
clear that George Washington was in the mind of those who built and 
named this airport.
  I have a copy of the brochure that was printed at the occasion of the 
opening of National Airport in 1941. It is replete with references to 
our first President. Let me just quote:

       From the highest point within the airport, George 
     Washington might well have chosen the site for the Capitol to 
     be amidst the meadows and low hills at his feet across the 
     river.
  Again and again, throughout this brochure, there are references to 
our first President.

       Another stratum of American history is about to be laid 
     along the banks of the Potomac. The powerful figures in 
     history will land here on land that knew the tread of 
     Washington's horse as he campaigned for freedom, governed his 
     country and managed his farms.

  It is splitting hairs.
  Look, this debate is not about the greatness of Ronald Reagan or his 
place in history. That will be secured by future historians. That will 
be secured by the value of his deeds, his actions as President, the 
legislation that he championed.
  This airport has a good name. Let us find something else. Let us 
build a monument to Ronald Reagan in our Nation's capital, build it on 
ground at the National Airport, but let us not take a name, let us not 
be like the Evil Empire that Ronald Reagan so despised and so opposed 
and take names off and put other names on, depending on who is in favor 
or who is out of favor.
  That is not the American way. That is not the way of this Congress. 
That is not appropriate. Go out into greater America, as I have been 
just recently in my district and hear what average folks say. They say, 
this is silly. This is trivial. There are better things to do in the 
Congress than to go about changing names and renaming.

[[Page H261]]

  I am sorry we are here to do this. It does not serve Ronald Reagan's 
name well, his place in history well, to take a name off and replace it 
with his. I wish the majority were pursuing a different course.
  As in the case of the Ronald Reagan International Trade Building, I 
was glad to support it, and if there is some other structure they want 
to name or build in his honor, I would support it. But not this, not 
this action, not at this time in history, not this airport.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I would like to make several closing points. It is a fact that the 
Federal Government owns this airport, which makes it quite different 
from other airports around the country. So to suggest that we could 
rename the John Wayne Airport is something entirely different, since we 
do not own the John Wayne Airport.
  Secondly, with regard to the fact, and I think it is very clear, that 
the name Washington represents a market area. If it does not represent 
a market area, then I suppose The Washington Post should change their 
name to the George Washington Post, or the Washington Times to the 
George Washington Times, or the Washington Redskins to the George 
Washington Redskins.
  Beyond that, in Houston the airport was not named for Sam Houston; it 
was named for the market area, and it has changed from the Houston 
Airport to the George Bush Airport.
  Indeed, we have taken names off buildings. When our friends were in 
control of this House, they chose, and we supported it, to take the 
Lincoln Federal Building and change it to the Robert V. Denney Federal 
Building in Nebraska, and likewise, to take the Quincy Post Office in 
Massachusetts and change it to the James A. Burke Post Office in 
Massachusetts. These are minor points, but they have been brought up by 
our friends, and so I think they need to be addressed.
  Perhaps the most crucial point, however, is that in the past several 
Congresses, when our friends were in control of the Congress, two-
thirds of all of the naming bills were for Democrats, and we 
Republicans supported them. Even more significantly, in the 104th 
Congress, which the Republicans controlled, and in the 105th Congress, 
which the Republicans controlled, two-thirds of the naming bills 
continued to be for Democrats, and we Republicans supported it.
  So we believe that it is quite proper for us to honor a President in 
this fashion who happens to be a Republican President, and just as we 
have supported our Democrat colleagues in the past on a bipartisan 
basis, we are disappointed that our colleagues have chosen not to 
support us on this matter and to make it a partisan issue. 
Nevertheless, so be it.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of honoring a 
great President, Ronald Reagan.
  Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, today I rise to voice my 
concern about an issue of fiscal responsibility. The proposal to rename 
Washington National Airport for former President Reagan, while an 
attempt to honor a revered leader of this country, is an unfunded 
mandate on the state and local governments of Virginia as well as the 
businesses of this region. Public Law #104-4, enacted by the 104th 
Congress, which I cosponsored, prohibits the federal government from 
imposing requirements on state and local governments without adequate 
funds to carry out the order. The enactment of this legislation without 
a guarantee of federal funds to pay for it violates the intent of the 
law.
  The cost of this mandate will effect the federal government as well 
as state and local governments and the regional airport authority. It 
is estimated to run in the millions of dollar when one considers all of 
the revisions which will have to be made to our air traffic control 
system, airline schedules, computer programs, baggage tags and other 
preprinted items, and the cost of changing the road signs leading to 
and around the airport and numerous other related activities. The State 
of Virginia estimates that changing the road signs alone will cost 
$60,000.
  In addition to the costs, the action of revising a previously named 
facility is without precedent and the general practice of the House to 
consult with the Members who represent the affected facility before 
moving forward is being ignored. Mr. Moran and other members from the 
Washington area are opposed to this renaming and support the decision-
making authority that a previous Congress gave to the Washington 
Metropolitan Airports Authority. We should reject this measure as it is 
an action that may set us on a course for a number of name changes to 
existing buildings across the country to honor various icons of either 
party. We should respect the precedent of consultation with Members of 
affected areas and maintain the practice of honoring distinguished 
Americans without partisan debate.
  The Federal Aviation Administration has stated that such a change 
needs ``strong and documented justification, primarily concerning air 
safety,'' because of its recognition of the costs to the system of 
making such a change. Mr. Chairman, today we need to ask ourselves if 
the benefits of changing the name of an airport from one former 
President to another outweigh the costs, and whether this is the best 
way to honor the principal of federalism for which former President 
Reagan stood firmly. I believe that it is important to remember as we 
enter into this era of intergovernmental cooperation and budget balance 
the restraint which brought us to this point of fiscal responsibility.
  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 2625, a 
bill to rename Washington National Airport as ``Ronald Reagan National 
Airport.'' I have no problem naming a government building after 
President Reagan. I believe we should honor him for the many things he 
accomplished as our President. I have a problem with renaming an 
airport that was built as a monument to our first President, George 
Washington.
  The Congress has a long-standing policy against renaming buildings. 
Washington National Airport was named when it opened in 1941. It is 
named ``National'' because it serves the capital of our nation and 
``Washington'' in honor of our first President.
  In addition, I believe it is an insult to the Reagan legacy of local 
control for this body to impose this legislation on a local government 
body that has made it quite clear that they oppose this legislation. 
This bill is an unfunded mandate--both on the local government, and on 
the local businesses who will be forced to spend hundreds of thousands 
of dollars to make the changes necessary to accommodate a new name for 
this airport.
  My final--and perhaps most important--objection to this legislation 
is the fact that none of our constituents will benefit from it. Yet, in 
the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on which I sit, we 
debated this issue for three hours. Prior to that meeting, the 
Democratic Caucus spent an hour and the Republican Caucus probably 
spent a comparable amount of time debating the legislation. My 
constituents did not send me to Congress to spend this much time 
working on an issue that is of no consequence to the great majority of 
Americans.
  I believe it is appropriate for the Congress to name federal 
buildings in honor of great American leaders. I have no problem with 
naming an unnamed federal building after President Reagan. I have no 
problem with naming an unnamed federal building after any great 
American leader. Building namings are typically routine matters that 
pass through our committee without discussion and pass the House under 
suspension of the rules. When any building-naming legislation is 
debated for this long and with this much objection, we must think twice 
about whether that legislation is really worthwhile. My colleagues, I 
submit to you that this particular proposal is not worthwhile.
  Mr. Speaker, we should honor the Reagan legacy. We should name 
buildings in his honor. But we should not insult that legacy by 
imposing our will upon a local government that has made it quite clear 
that they do not want this name change.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART, Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 2625, 
a bill to redesignate Washington National Airport as the ``Ronald 
Reagan National Airport''.
  What is the standard we use to judge our Presidents? How do we 
appropriately honor

[[Page H262]]

those men who have served our great nation and the office of the 
Presidency with great distinction, courage, honor, and vision? In this 
city, which is already graced with so many memorials of marble, 
granite, and bronze, to men and women who have loved freedom more than 
life and their country more than self--how can we best remember and 
celebrate the service rendered to these United States and to those 
dedicated to the cause of freedom throughout the world by President 
Ronald W. Reagan?
  President Reagan represents the spirit that has made America strong. 
He began his eight years in office at a time when America appeared to 
be on the ebb--economically and militarily demoralized. But for 
President Reagan--it was morning in America. America during the Reagan 
years was an America of hopes fulfilled and a place where dreams came 
true. Reagan's America was to be a Shining City on a Hill--shining the 
light of freedom for all peoples throughout the world. This was his 
vision, a vision from which he never wavered.
  In a speech given in 1964, President Reagan responded to his 
detractors, to those who said that only bigger and more powerful 
governments could provide security despite the price of freedom. He 
said:

       They say the world has become too complex for simple 
     answers. They are wrong. There are no easy answers, but there 
     are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we 
     know is morally right. . . . You and I have a rendezvous with 
     destiny. We will preserve for our children the last best hope 
     of man on earth or we will sentence them to take the first 
     step into a thousand years of darkness.

  Throughout his life, President Reagan has fought against tyranny and 
oppression--against that thousand years of darkness. He did not shy 
back from calling the Communist Soviet Union an Evil Empire; He did not 
hesitate to support those freedom-fighters who were engaged in battle 
against tyranny; He fought back relentlessly against every attack 
against America's people and her interests.
  His moral courage and his conviction that America should be the 
example for all who would desire freedom to pursue life, liberty and 
happiness never failed and he is an example to all Americans. Around 
the world today, we are harvesting the benefits of that vision and hard 
labor as more and more nations around the world are turning from 
tyranny and oppression to democracy and justice.
  I still share President Reagan's vision of America as a Shining City 
on a Hill shining its light of freedom around the world. It is only 
fitting that we honor the lifetime and legacy of this great American 
hero by reminding all that travel through our National Airport, a major 
gateway into this Capitol city, of his unwavering service and strength 
of vision. As long as freedom is our watchword and liberty our call to 
arms, America will continue to so shine its light into the world for 
all to see.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I must reluctantly 
oppose HR 2625, the renaming of Washington National Airport for one of 
our former Presidents of the United States Ronald Reagan. I find it 
inappropriate that the forces of self interest are using public 
sympathy of an ailing President as a justification for their own 
efforts which are misguided and mystifying to me. Washington National 
Airport already has an appropriate name, which was given to the airport 
when it opened in 1941. The word ``National'' is appropriate 
considering we live in the Capital of this Nation. The airport does not 
belong to the memory and ideology of one man or political party but it 
belongs to all citizens of the United States, regardless of party 
affiliation. We also need to remember that Washington Dulles 
International is already named after a Republican official. We have 
enough names in this city to pay homage to both Democrats and 
Republicans.
  Some say that during the era of President Reagan, safety took a back 
seat to economics. After all, one of President Reagan's most 
controversial decisions was to fire air traffic controllers in 1981 and 
he prevented them from reapplying for their jobs. We also need to 
realize that as a Congress, it would be disrespectful to go against the 
wishes of the Member who represents that airport and who is opposed to 
this renaming bill.
  Finally Mr. Chairman, I would like my colleagues to know that I am 
not here to undermine the Reagan Era, for after all he was the leader 
of this country at one time. But as a Congress we need to take a stand 
on renaming buildings, airports and monuments in order to fulfill 
political favors.
  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my opposition to 
House Resolution 2625, a bill that would change the name of Washington 
National Airport to ``Ronald Reagan National Airport.'' With all due 
respect to the former President, it is no secret that there was no love 
lost between President Reagan and this city. Over and over again, he 
stated emphatically that he did not hold this city in high regard. He 
was proud to call himself anti-Washington.
  Clearly, when visitors arrive in their Nation's Capital, it is only 
appropriate the airport don the name of our Nation's first President. 
It would be inappropriate to name this airport after the man who in 
1981, fired over 11,000 air traffic controllers and deprived the 
aviation industry of years of expertise and experience. The negative 
effects of President Reagan's actions are still visible today.
  Evidently, I am not the only one who has these sentiments. My 
colleague, Mr. Morgan, the Greater Washington Board of Trade, and both 
Arlington County and the city of Alexandria are officially opposed to 
H.R. 2625. Generally speaking, naming bills are enacted with the 
consent of the Member or community in which the building is located. I 
would support an amendment that requires the approval of local 
officials before an official name change takes effect. This partisan 
attempt to force a federally unfunded mandate onto a local community, 
as well as the city as a whole, contradicts President Reagan's own 
philosophies.
  In addition, President Reagan has already been honored by having his 
name on a bridge in Illinois, a boulevard in New York, a beltway in 
Ohio, and a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier which is to be christened 
in 2000. Not to be forgotten is the 3.1 million square foot, $818 
million Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center which is 
located here in Washington, DC, only a few miles from the airport.
  For better or for worse, I will concede that President Reagan was an 
influential President in our Nation's history, but there are many 
alternatives that could be considered to honor his accomplishments, as 
well as his name. Unfortunately, these alternatives are not being 
considered by the proponents of this bill. Therefore, I urge you to 
join me in opposition of H.R. 2625.
  Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Chairman, today's debate is not about whether there 
will be a monument to Ronald Reagan's Presidency; there are several, 
and there will likely be more. The largest Federal building in 
Washington bears his name, as does the newest Nimitz-class carrier in 
the Navy's fleet.
  Mr. Reagan was committed to, and perhaps best remembered for, keeping 
the Federal Government out of local affairs. That's what makes the 
renaming of this airport, over vociferous local opposition, so 
inappropriate.
  Mr. Reagan signed the bill in 1986 that put Washington National 
Airport under local control. Today, the Federal Government no more 
controls Washington National Airport than it does the airports in 
Denver or Los Angeles.
  Denver International Airport, like most major airports, was built 
with substantial help from the Federal Government but is operated by a 
local authority, accountable to the people it serves. If Congress were 
to attempt to rename Denver's DIA after former President Eisenhower, or 
LAX after John Denver, I suspect most here would adamantly oppose 
overriding local control. And the most devoted supporters of former 
President Reagan's belief in local control would lead the charge.
  Yet that's the precedent we would set today by passing this bill. It 
stands for the absurd proposition that any airport can be renamed, 
without regard to local opinion.
  Congress make a commitment to local control of Washington National 
Airport in 1986 under the Ronald Reagan administration. It would do no 
justice to his legacy to go back on that commitment now.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, while I have a great respect for Ronald 
Reagan and what he was able to accomplish during his tenure in the 
White House, I strongly disagree with the proposal to rename Washington 
National Airport the Ronald Reagan National Airport.
  Over the years, this body has named many buildings and public 
facilities for past presidents, including the new Ronald Reagan Trade 
Center in Washington, DC. However, to my knowledge we have never 
renamed a building, let alone an airport. To replace the name given to 
Washington National Airport--clearly named after the first president 
and founding father of our country, George Washington--with another 
president sets a terrible precedent.
  There is overwhelming local opposition to renaming Washington 
National Airport. To do so is contradictory to the Republican 
philosophy that the Federal Government should stay out of local 
matters. The Airport Authority, which was granted control of 
Washington's two airports in 1986, does not support this name change. 
Representative Jim Moran, who represents the district in which 
Washington National is located, opposes the redesignation as do many of 
his constituents in the airport's community. Further, the County of 
Arlington and the Greater Washington Board of Trade both oppose 
changing the name.
  This attempt to rename Washington National Airport does not serve 
Ronald Reagan well. I cannot support this bill and I urge my colleagues 
to join me in voting against it.
  Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the 
legislation before us

[[Page H263]]

today, H.R. 2625, a bill that would rename Washington National Airport 
to the Ronald Reagan National Airport. This legislation usurps local 
authority, betrays the legacy of President Reagan, and would be an 
unfunded mandate to the hundreds of businesses located in Arlington, 
VA.
  As a former State Representative for the State of Michigan and a 
current Member of Congress, I respect the position and office of the 
President. I also sympathize with the struggle that former President 
Reagan and his wife, Nancy, have shown with former President Reagan's 
challenge with Alzheimer's Disease. President Reagan and his family 
have my personal prayers and hope in battling this debilitating and 
destructive disease. I want to make it unequivocally clear that my 
opposition to this legislation is regarding its impact upon our tax 
payers, not because of any ill will toward the former President or his 
family.
  I oppose this bill for many of the same reasons delineated in the 
committee report that accompanies H.R. 2625:
  I. Renaming Washington National Airport would be against the wishes 
of the locality in which it is located, and is directly opposite the 
emphasis upon local control that was the fulcrum of President Reagan's 
philosophy. Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA), the Member of Congress in 
whose district National Airport resides, Arlington County, VA, the City 
of Arlington, the Greater Washington Board of Trade, and former 
Virginia Governor Linwood Holton, the former Chairman of the Washington 
Airport Authority and the first Republican elected to statewide office 
in Virginia since the Reconstruction, opposes this legislation.
  II. Renaming Washington National Airport would be against Federal 
precedents. Congress has never changed the name of a facility which 
already has a name. This policy has been followed by Democrats and 
Republicans alike. For example, the Department of Commerce building was 
not renamed when the late Secretary Ronald H. Brown died in the line of 
duty to his country. If this bill is adopted, all of our national 
monuments: the Washington Monument, Mount Rushmore, and numerous other 
buildings and edifices--might be renamed as well. To rename a building 
or edifice that has already been designated is a disgrace to the former 
honoree and the current honoree.
  III. Renaming Washington National Airport is particularly puzzling 
because of his aviation policies. It is particularly ironic that an 
airport would be selected to be named after former President Reagan, as 
it was President Reagan who fired over 11,000 air traffic controllers 
after they want on strike in 1981, and then went on to prevent them 
from reapplying for their jobs far beyond any reasonable period of 
punishment. This overt union-busting tactic did little to improve the 
safety or security of our Nation's airways, and destroyed the financial 
well-being and livelihood of thousands of families across the Nation.
  IV. Renaming Washington National Airport is not necessary to honor 
former President Reagan. President Reagan has been honored with the 
$800 million International Trade Center in Washington, DC, the largest 
Federal building other than the Pentagon; by a Federal court house in 
California; and the newest Nimitz-class carrier in the Navy's fleet. It 
should be noted that construction on George Washington's monument did 
not begin until 49 years after his death; President Lincoln was not 
honored with a memorial until 44 years after his assassination, and the 
Jefferson and Roosevelt memorials were not complete until 134 and 52 
years after their respective deaths.
  President Reagan has already been honored. President Reagan will 
continue to be honored--but, he should be honored in a manner that is 
appropriate with his legacy of less Federal intervention in local 
affairs and no unfunded mandates on municipalities. The cost of this 
legislation could perhaps be better used to improve Michigan's roads 
and bridges, provide safer and affordable home health care to our 
seniors, or provide more before- and after-school programs for our 
youth. While I sincerely respect the position of the Presidency, I must 
oppose this legislation and will vote against it on final passage.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to oppose the removal of the 
name of the father of our country from Washington National Airport. 
While there are many people in American history deserving of 
recognition in their role in the development of our country, I do not 
believe that any of them made a larger contribution than our first 
President, a great patriot, George Washington.
  Let us forget for just a moment that Washington National Airport is 
named for the father of our country, but instead for someone who won 
the ``what are we going to name our airport lottery.'' Even in that 
situation, do we really want to follow the old Soviet Union model where 
we change the names of our cities and landmarks depending on the whims 
of whomever is in power? St. Petersburg which became Volgograd which 
became Leningrad and then became once more St. Petersburg. I don't 
think anyone on the other side of the aisle would appreciate it if, 
when Democrats regain control of the Congress we change the name of the 
Ronald Reagan Federal Building downtown to the Franklin Delano 
Roosevelt Federal building.
  I would like to ask my colleague on the other side of the aisle why 
they would deny George Washington an airport? No one on this side of 
the aisle denied Ronald Reagan his landmark by naming the largest 
federal building in Washington, DC, after our former President. No one 
objected. The building did not yet have a name. Why is it that you want 
to deny George Washington his due?
  Again, forgetting for a moment who this airport is named after, the 
name ``Washington National Airport'' is easily recognizable to shippers 
and tourists alike. When people come to our nation's capitol they see 
the name of the City they have come to visit. They see Washington and 
know they are in our nation's capital. Changing the name would cost the 
Airport Authority millions of dollars to change signs and pamphlets. 
Additionally, it would go against the wishes of the people of the 
region who provided the main support for Washington National Airport. 
These people are proud of the name of their airport, they are proud to 
be the gateway to our nation's capital.
  Ronald Reagan's legacy will be decided by history, and monuments to 
that legacy should not come at the expense of the wishes and desires of 
the local community and especially not at the expense of our first 
President, George Washington.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule for 2 hours. The amendment in the nature of a 
substitute printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill 
for the purpose of amendment under the 5-minute rule and shall be 
considered read.
  The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is 
as follows:

                               H.R. 2625

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION.

       The airport described in the Act entitled ``An Act to 
     provide for the administration of the Washington National 
     Airport, and for other purposes'', approved June 29, 1940 
     (Chapter 444; 54 Stat. 686), and known as the Washington 
     National Airport, shall hereafter be known and designated as 
     the ``Ronald Reagan National Airport''.

     SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

       (a) In General.--(1) The following provisions of law are 
     amended by striking ``Washington National Airport'' each 
     place it appears and inserting ``Ronald Reagan National 
     Airport'':
       (A) Section 1(b) of the Act of June 29, 1940 (Chapter 444; 
     54 Stat. 686).
       (B) Sections 106 and 107 of the Act of October 31, 1945 
     (Chapter 443; 59 Stat. 553).
       (C) Section 41714 of title 49, United States Code.
       (D) Chapter 491 of title 49, United States Code.
       (2) Section 41714(d) of title 49, United States Code, is 
     amended in the subsection heading by striking ``Washington 
     National Airport'' and inserting ``Ronald Reagan National 
     Airport''.
       (b) Other References.--Any reference in a law, map, 
     regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 
     States to the Washington National Airport shall be deemed to 
     be a reference to the ``Ronald Reagan National Airport''.

  The CHAIRMAN. During consideration of the bill for amendment, the 
Chair may accord priority in recognition to a Member offering an 
amendment that he has printed in the designated place in the 
Congressional Record. Those amendments shall be considered as read.
  The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone a request for 
a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to a minimum of 5 
minutes the time for voting on any postponed question that immediately 
follows another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first 
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
  Are there amendments to the bill?


            Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Davis of Virginia

  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

       The text of the amendment is as follows:
       Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Davis of Virginia:
       Page 3, after line 23, insert the following:

     SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       This Act shall take effect on the date that the Secretary 
     of Transportation secures the consent of the Metropolitan 
     Washington Airports Authority for the redesignation made by 
     section 1.

[[Page H264]]

  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is offered by 
myself, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Moran), and the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella). 
It is bipartisan.
  This amendment simply says that the act will take effect on the date 
that the Secretary of Transportation secures the consent of the 
Washington Metropolitan Airport Authority for the redesignation. 
Congress would go ahead and redesignate it, but we would ask the 
authority to share in that decision-making.
  Let me explain to this body, I am a great fan of President Reagan's. 
I was his cochairman in Fairfax County, my county, in 1976, when he 
opposed the sitting Republican President, and in 1980. I was a delegate 
to various State and county conventions for Ronald Reagan in 1976, 1980 
and 1984. His picture adorns the wall in my office. I believe he was a 
great President. I think he is worthy of great recognition.
  But the good news and the bad news in this debate reminds me of a 
story of a man coming up for a dinner and saying, the good news is we 
have voted to make you man of the year; the bad news is it was a 5-to-4 
vote. Ronald Reagan deserves more than a 5-to-4 vote. He deserves a 
mandate. We are not getting that here, we are not getting that in 
Congress the way this has developed, unfortunately.
  Ronald Reagan stood for and warranted and recognized that localities 
should have control of this airport. Look at what Ronald Reagan's 
vision of a Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority, the legislation 
he signed in 1986, has done. If my colleagues have been out to Dulles 
and looked at the terminals out there and looked at the renovations 
that have been done, that would not have been completed if the Federal 
Government still owned and operated this airport. But under the 
leadership of the airport authority, under their bonding capacity, 
those renovations have been made and Dulles is now an international 
airport, and a model for international airports across the world.
  Look at the new terminal at National. If there is one indicia of the 
legacy of Ronald Reagan, it is that terminal there at National Airport, 
which is new, it is modern, and it is a result of Ronald Reagan's work 
and legacy when he signed that legislation and gave control of the 
airport to the airport authority. That work would not have been done 
had it gone through the Federal appropriation process with the controls 
and the conflicts in terms of where the dollars are spent. So there is 
a Ronald Reagan legacy at National Airport.
  This amendment simply allows the local airport authority, created by 
Ronald Reagan, signed into law by the President in 1986, to share in 
the renaming of this airport. This is not a partisan Republican, such 
as former Governor Linwood Holton, the first Republican governor of the 
Commonwealth of Virginia, supported this amendment. A number of Reagan 
members of his administration serve on that authority and advisory and 
support this amendment and believe that Ronald Reagan would want local 
control honored in the renaming of any airport that he was involved in 
in creating that authority.
  The airport authority has had 2 lawsuits against this Congress when 
we tried to intervene our mandate onto their authority. As the 
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) noted earlier, 
we lost both of them. What a terrible tragedy it would be if we were to 
pass this, if we were to be sued and lose this and have it overturned 
in court because of some judicial interpretation, and both of those 
earlier suits went to the U.S. Supreme Court. They were not just lower 
level cases.
  Ronald Reagan deserves better than this. He was a great man. He 
deserves a mandate, not a sharply partisan debate, which is the way 
this has unfolded, unfortunately.
  This amendment is not about the history of the airport. This region 
was originally the Washington Hoover Airport, where the Pentagon is, 
and it was the Gravely Point project; it developed from there into the 
National Airport and then later the Washington National Airport. It has 
a long history. This is not about Ronald Reagan's legacy, which is a 
legacy I think historians will treat very kindly: A President who 
presided over the demise of the Cold War, the falling of the Iron 
Curtain; a time of great prosperity, and who signed the Airport 
Authority Act into law in 1986, a landmark decision that helped make 
this the airport it is.
  This amendment is about a principle that he stood for and believed 
in, and that I believe is local control. I think we not only violate 
local control, we violate the principles he stood for if we try to 
impose from Congress, without consultation and the approval of that 
local airport authority, which is chaired by a Republican, I might add, 
to have them participate in the process.
  I would ask for approval of this amendment, Mr. Chairman. I think 
that this is the way to go. A lot of Members over here are wondering if 
this is the appropriate legacy, but no one here wants to vote against 
somebody who we consider to be a great President, and this I think 
allows the localities to share in this decision-making, as it should 
be, and I think as he would want it if he were here speaking. So I ask 
for approval of this amendment.

                              {time}  1300

  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I must rise in reluctant but very strong opposition to 
this amendment, because we believe it is simply a circuitous way to 
kill this bill. It is very clear that when we passed the legislation 
creating the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, it was careful 
to transfer only operating, I repeat operating, responsibility to the 
new authority, not ownership. The Federal Government owns the airport 
and, therefore, the Federal Government can rename the airport.
  A change in the name does not affect the airport authority's 
operational abilities. They can still safely and efficiently operate 
the airport whether it is called the Washington National Airport or the 
Ronald Reagan National Airport.
  If it is a concern about financing, the rather insignificant costs of 
changing signs at the airport, the Ronald Reagan Legacy Foundation has 
volunteered to help finance those changes. But, in reality, this is 
really a roundabout way to kill the name change.
  Proponents are well aware that the Washington Post reported that the 
airport board, which has a majority of Democratic appointments on it, 
would vote 6-to-4, a partisan vote, to kill the name change. So that is 
what this amendment really is all about. It is unnecessary and it 
would, in effect, kill the bill.
  The naming of federally owned facilities is uniquely a Federal 
prerogative. That privilege and responsibility should not be abrogated 
by this facility or any other federally owned facility, and I strongly 
oppose the amendment.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, we are a country with a rule of law; and few things are 
more sacred under a rule of law than contracts. I always hate and 
hesitate to disagree with the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Shuster), my esteemed chairman, but I have got to disagree in this 
matter of how the airport was delegated and what authority the Federal 
Government retained.
  It is quite clear. We gave them a 50-year minimum term lease, 
interpreted by most courts as being akin to ownership. We give them 
full power and dominion over and complete discretion in operation and 
development, development, of the airport. Not just operation, but 
development. And they shall have the same proprietary powers and be 
subject to the same restrictions with respect to Federal law as any 
other airport, which goes to some of the earlier arguments.
  We did say this will be treated as any other airport in the United 
States. That is, we are not recognizing nor continuing the Federal 
authority to wade in and change the name or something else that we do 
not like, unless they violate the term of the lease.
  The agreement went on to say that it would not be subject to the 
requirements of any law solely by reason of the retention of the United 
States Government of the fee simple title.
  In paragraph after paragraph, principle after principle, we gave 
control to

[[Page H265]]

a local authority, a local authority that is doing an admirable job in 
improving a facility which was outdated and undersized for current 
demands. They have created a beautiful new gateway to the Nation's 
capital at Washington National.
  But now we are saying, well, we are all for local control, except 
when we disagree with the conclusions reached by majorities of local 
boards. I mean, we are either for it or we are against it. We stand on, 
I believe, no legal ground here.
  If Congress does make this empty gesture today in passing this 
legislation and it becomes law, surely, as Congress has twice before in 
recent history, Congress will lose in the courts. Like it or not, we 
signed a 50-year contract. Contracts are sacred under the Constitution 
in this country. And, as I said earlier, we are also violating the 
spirit of one of the principles with which, and I think Ronald Reagan 
made some good changes in this country, and that is some of the 
movement back from a huge centralized Federal bureaucracy to local 
governments.
  Mr. Chairman, I was a county commissioner at the time; and I agreed 
with the principle that he set forward. I disagreed with the fact that 
he took away all of our revenue-sharing money to carry out some of 
those duties. But I felt the principle was good, that the solutions 
that work in New York do not necessarily work in Springfield and 
Eugene, Oregon; and the Federal Government did not necessarily have the 
best handle on how to solve the problems of Eugene, Oregon, nor the 
people of New York.
  We need here just to rein it in a little bit. Yes, his birthday is 
coming up Friday. But, just think, my colleagues on the other side of 
the aisle have already honored the President by naming the largest, 
newest, most expensive Federal building in the United States of America 
in terms of square feet outside of the Pentagon for Ronald Reagan. 
There is an aircraft carrier which will be launched in the year 2000 
which will be named for Ronald Reagan. There are many other things 
which do not have names which could be named for Ronald Reagan, the B-1 
bomber which he was a great champion of and Star Wars, for instance.
  So I believe that rather than removing the name of the first 
President of our country, usurping the control which we granted by 
sacred contract to a local board, that Congress would be better served 
today to approve this amendment and say if the local board agrees and 
the local communities agree, we will go forward. But if they do not, 
this renaming will not go forward; and Congress will choose, in its 
full authority in cases that are fully clear, fully within our 
dominion, to name other things as the majority so wishes.
  Mr. Chairman, I really want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Davis) for offering this amendment, which I offered in committee; and I 
particularly want to thank the other gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Moran), who actually first brought this issue to my attention and the 
attention of my staff several weeks ago in saying that this was causing 
a local fire storm.
  I mean, this is against the desires of local communities, local 
business, and the duly appointed local authority to whom Congress has 
given local control and dominion. This is not an appropriate tribute. 
This amendment should be adopted; then it becomes an appropriate 
tribute.
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Davis-DeFazio-Moran-Morella 
amendment to H.R. 2625, which would redesignate Washington National 
Airport as the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.
  This amendment would leave the decision to rename Washington National 
Airport with the local Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority where 
it belongs.
  When the Republicans became the majority party during the 104th 
Congress, we came into power on the theme of greater fiscal 
responsibility and more local control. This theme was consistent with 
former President Reagan's philosophy that the Federal Government should 
not carry out responsibilities that could be handled by State and local 
governments.
  In keeping with this philosophy, President Reagan signed the 
legislation that in 1986 transferred control of Washington National 
Airport from the Federal Government to a local authority, the 
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, called MWAA.
  During the first 45 years of National Airport's existence, it was 
owned by the Federal Government and operated by the Federal Aviation 
Administration. There were several attempts to transfer National to 
local control, but none was successful until President Ronald Reagan 
and Transportation Secretary Elizabeth Dole established an advisory 
commission to review the matter.
  It was this advisory commission's report that brought about the 
transfer legislation that created the local authority, made up of 
members appointed by the governors of Maryland and Virginia and the 
Mayor of the District of Columbia.
  Under the auspices of the Federal Government, National Airport was 
deteriorating and losing money. Under the auspices of MWAA, National 
has a new terminal and has undergone major renovation. These have been 
funded without any Federal contributions but with bonds and fund-
raising efforts of the local authority. MWAA has been doing an 
outstanding job, and the airport indeed is the proud gateway to the 
Nation's capital.
  Now, contrary to Mr. Reagan's philosophy, Congress is reaching into 
the affairs of National Airport, instead of leaving the major decisions 
to the local authority.
  I have been very involved in issues regarding National Airport during 
my tenure in Congress. It is our local airport. I pushed for policies 
that would ensure that the airport is safe and a good neighbor to the 
surrounding communities.

  Mr. Chairman, no one ever contacted the local congressional 
delegation about the issue of renaming National Airport. No hearings 
were held. H.R. 2625 has come to the House floor without local input, 
and I think this betrays former President Reagan's legacy.
  Mr. Chairman, I can tell my colleagues, from the phone calls and 
letters to my office, that the local governments oppose renaming 
National Airport. MWAA, the Greater Washington Board of Trade, and the 
Federation of Citizens Associations of the District of Columbia all 
oppose the name change.
  In addition, renaming National would be costly and would hurt small 
businesses in and around the airport. These businesses would have to 
change signs, stationery, and other promotional materials at a 
significant cost. We should not impose this unfunded mandate on local 
businesses and on our local authority. Of course, there would be 
resulting confusion.
  Let me add that there was one flaw in the legislation that 
transferred control of National Airport to a local authority. That flaw 
was the creation of the Congressional Review Board that had oversight 
over all the decisions made by MWAA. The constitutionality of this 
congressional oversight was challenged on two occasions by the local 
community, and the case went all the way to the Supreme Court. Twice, 
the Supreme Court decided that Congress exercised too much power over 
National Airport. In essence, the Supreme Court told Congress to stay 
out of the affairs of the airport and leave the daily operations and 
major decisions to MWAA, the Metropolitan Washington Airports 
Authority.
  So I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Davis-DeFazio-Moran-
Morella amendment.
  Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite 
number of words.
  Mr. Chairman, with all due deference to lawyers and lawyer wannabees, 
a lease is not quite the same as ownership, no matter what the term of 
the lease; and I think that we need to recognize that fact.
  Mr. Chairman, if there are those that simply politically disagree or 
personally disagree with renaming National Airport for President 
Reagan, then fine. But let us do away with some of these arguments that 
are cluttering up what is really going on here. The Federal Government 
owns National Airport. The fact that they have leased it to a local 
authority does not change the fact that the Federal Government owns 
that airport.

[[Page H266]]

  Some have suggested that President Reagan's name be affixed to Dulles 
International Airport. It is not quite the same. Mr. Chairman, 
Washington National Airport, the national airport at Washington, D.C., 
is the only airport in our country that is a national airport. It is 
the national airport. It is the only national airport. It is America's 
airport.
  And as the airport for all of America, not for any locality, it is 
not Virginia's airport. It is not Maryland's airport. It is not 
Pennsylvania's airport. It is not Georgia's airport. It is America's 
airport. It is the airport that serves our Nation's capital. It is the 
only airport that directly serves our Nation's capital, and I believe 
that it is entirely within the prerogative of the United States 
Congress to name that airport as the people of this country through 
their representatives wish it to be named.
  Mr. Chairman, make no mistake about it. This amendment is a killer 
amendment. It would gut and remove what we are trying to do here as 
representatives of the people, for the people, and by the people.
  I urge my colleagues to vote this amendment down, recognizing it for 
what it is, and that is a killer amendment designed to kill this 
legislation and the intent of the legislation. I urge a ``no'' vote on 
this amendment, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, there are those who would like to make this debate and 
passage of this bill a referendum on whether or not we honor and 
respect President Reagan's service to the Nation. So let me say up 
front, while I may not agree with many of President Reagan's policies, 
I honor and respect his committed and dedicated service to his fellow 
citizens. I believe most us here today do feel that way.
  But, unfortunately, this legislation is not about honoring his 
service. It is about honoring his politics. And there is a difference.
  The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr), the sponsor of this 
legislation, supported the bill by saying, quote, ``It is only fit that 
this gateway to the city that still enjoys the Reagan legacy of smaller 
government and lower taxes be named after this American hero.''
  Former Governor Allen of Virginia was quoted in The Washington Post 
as saying, quote, ``He noted with relish that, with the new name, 
generations of lawmakers would be greeted by a memorial to a famous 
opponent of Federal spending.''
  Honoring service is not a controversial matter. Honoring politics is. 
We need look no further than how this legislation is being viewed to 
tell how this effort is perceived.

                              {time}  1315

  It is the proponents of this bill who are doing a disservice to 
President Reagan by using him as a political pawn to forward a 
contemporary agenda. But to be consistent, if the goal is to honor 
President Reagan's politics, then we could at least be presented with a 
bill in keeping with the spirit of his work. This bill does not even do 
that. In fact, it does just the opposite. It would place an unfunded 
mandate on the local airport authority. It takes power and 
decisionmaking away from the local officials who run the airport to 
name it as they see fit. It could add costs to private sector 
operations ranging from airlines to travel agents, but we did not even 
bother to hold a single hearing to find out what these costs might be. 
This bill does not honor the spirit of President Reagan's work. It 
flies in the face of it. It defies everything he stood for, and that is 
why we should adopt this amendment.
  Worse yet, of all the times and of all the places we could choose to 
inject this politics over service rhetoric, using it to rename 
Washington National Airport is the most inappropriate of all. As its 
name says, Washington National Airport belongs to the Nation, to 
everyone, Democrat, Republican, Independent and alike, young and old, 
black and white, rich and poor. It welcomes visitors from around the 
Nation and around the world to our capital, where everyone has a say, 
where all views can be debated, where the majority may govern but the 
minority have rights, too.
  We have already named various institutions for President Reagan. We 
think that those are appropriate. But in this case, we in the minority 
are exercising those rights not to deny President Reagan's honorable 
service, but to affirm that service, not politics, is the criteria and 
the way an entire Nation comes together to honor a leader. This is not 
the way to do it. The amendment should be passed, and in its absence, 
in its failure, the legislation should be defeated.
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words, and I rise in support of the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a bipartisan amendment, and it is in that 
spirit that we usually change names or put names on buildings or 
monuments. It is an amendment that will be supported by some who are 
for the name change and some who are against the name change. This 
amendment is one that Members should rush to the floor to support 
because it simply says that local control should apply here as it does 
everywhere else. In this case local control would mean regional 
control.
  This was the only airport under the control of the U.S. Congress for 
a very long time. The result was that an airport that was a state-of-
the-art airport when it was opened became almost dysfunctional and 
unworthy of being the airport for the Nation's capital. What Congress 
wisely did was to create the Washington Regional Airport Authority, and 
what has emerged, is a beautiful new airport to show for it.
  My colleagues, we simply cannot have it both ways, not under the law. 
This cannot be a regional or local airport when you pay for it and when 
you run it, but a national airport whenever the Congress feels like 
intervening into local affairs. Indeed, to have that kind of back and 
forth, even if it were legally permissible, would be the antithesis of 
local control. It would be arbitrary and capricious, and the courts 
have so found.
  We wrote a lease which gave absolute, total control and discretion to 
the Washington Airports Authority. I assure my colleagues, we did not 
do that out of our great generosity. It was very controversial. 
Congress did not want to give up control of this airport because it 
regarded this as its airport with all of the perks attending that 
status. But Congress was forced to write a lease that gave full 
responsibility to the Washington Regional Airports Authority. And the 
reason it was forced to do so was that the legal status and the 
financial status of the new airport required it. We were simply not 
going to be able to float bonds, for example, at a reasonable rate if 
in fact the marketplace was not sure who was in control and who was 
not. So the words are simply unmistakable; words like ``full 
authority,'' ``complete discretion.'' There are simply no exceptions in 
the law or in the lease.
  My colleagues do not have to believe me. Simply go to two Supreme 
Court decisions which have interpreted this language. The Supreme Court 
has interpreted this language twice. This language is designed to 
protect bondholders. And what will happen if the courts were to allow 
even a name change, intervention to change a name, to rename, is that 
it would send a message in the marketplace that you cannot tell when 
Congress may come in, and, therefore, we would destabilize the legal 
and the financial position of the Washington Regional Airports 
Authority. That is why, Mr. Chairman, this name change is not going to 
withstand another legal attack. What do we need--three Supreme Court 
decisions in order to get it? Congress has already lost twice.
  This is no way to honor a President of the United States who is 
beloved by millions upon millions of Americans. But we are on our way 
not to a name change, we are on our way to a court suit unless this 
amendment passes. This amendment is a common-sense amendment, the kind 
of amendment that those who want this name will support, and the kind 
of amendment that I think could get them this name if they do it the 
right way, the way we have always done it in this House, the way we 
always do it in other locations.
  This amendment leaves us with the only way to honor a President who 
lived for and by local control. I ask Members to support this common-
sense amendment.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite 
number of words.

[[Page H267]]

  Mr. Chairman, the Speaker of this body is in receipt of a letter from 
the chairman of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority that 
indicates that the action that we are about to take is likely illegal. 
I would urge the Speaker to release that letter to the body before we 
do act in an illegal manner. The letter addresses the legal authority 
that the gentlewoman representing the District of Columbia just 
referred to.
  There is substantial cause to uphold the control that was ceded in 
1986 to the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority and compelling 
reason not to take away some part of that controlling authority. It 
does send the signal that not only jeopardizes its bonding authority 
and the ability to implement its other subsequent decisions, but it 
would have precedent in other situations where this Congress has ceded 
authority.
  Speaking of Speaker Gingrich, I would like to quote Speaker Gingrich 
from the Congressional Record of 1986, when the authority was being 
granted to this Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority. The Speaker 
said, ``Tonight we have the chance to get the Federal Government out of 
the business it has no business being in. The very scale and complexity 
of this resolution should remind all of us that managing legitimately 
Federal activities is a big enough job. It is time to allow a regional 
authority to do a regional job, that of managing airports.''
  ``The fact is very simple.'' He goes on to say, ``The Federal 
Government ought not be involved in dictating what regional airports 
ought to be doing.'' He says, ``Do we allow the regional authority to 
both run the airport, getting it away from our attention and not 
cluttering us, or do we allow the regional authority to borrow the 
money, thus not having ourselves burdened?''
  I am not going to take up the body's time, but it is clear from the 
Speaker's quotes as well as the language in the Senate debate, and 
Senator Dole was most explicit, that complete authority was given to 
the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority. We did not retain 
authority to do what is being suggested be done today.
  This has substantial adverse implications. That is why the business 
community is opposed to it. The business community's opposition has no 
political partisan basis. One rental car company told me that if the 
Congress does this, it is going to cost him $200,000. It means that 
they have to change all their promotional materials. It means that the 
airport location is not going to be readily identifiable. Who knows 
where Ronald Reagan Airport is? It is going to take a time for the 
public to figure it out.
  We made the arguments against doing this on the basis of history. I 
think those are compelling arguments. The airport stands on the very 
road that leads to George Washington's home, Mount Vernon. The land was 
owned by George Washington's adopted son. We have a long historical 
relationship, and we can show that. Apparently that does not matter.
  But I think it should matter to the Members when the chairman of the 
committee cites precedent. It is unprecedented to rename a facility or 
to name a facility in the jurisdiction of a Member of this Congress 
when that Member opposes that naming. This Member opposes the action 
that this body is considering. It is unprecedented to do this over the 
wishes of the Member, whether they be Republican or Democrat. In the 
past Democratic Congresses have always respected that custom.
  I have good reason to be opposed to this because my constituency is 
opposed to this. The local governments have opposed this. We have made 
those letters available. They have good reason to be opposed to this. 
Respect the wishes of those local governments. Respect the 
constituencies that I am bound to represent.
  Our opposition is not partisan. In fact, it is wholly consistent with 
President Reagan's philosophy of devolving power to local government. 
If we do this, it will be an arrogant abuse of power. It will be 
partisan. It will be wrong. We should not do this.
  There are plenty of ways to recognize Ronald Reagan appropriately. We 
are going to be doing that very soon when we dedicate the International 
Trade Center, an $800 million Federal building, in his honor. We are 
going to dedicate the next Nimitz class aircraft carrier in Ronald 
Reagan's honor. Those things are appropriate. This is inappropriate.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I know, as I said at the outset, how the vote is going 
to come out on this. This is Republican dogma. And the Republican side 
is going to vote because some order has been passed from on high to 
vote for this name change. But I do want to make the reasoned argument; 
at least reason will be on our side, if not the votes.
  When the compact was entered into pursuant to act of Congress in 1986 
to create the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority, there was very 
clear and specific language in the lease. It is broad. It is 
comprehensive in its scope.
  ``The Airports Authority is authorized to occupy, operate, control 
and use for the term of this lease all land, improvements, buildings, 
fixtures, easements, rights of interest, egress and appurtenances 
thereto belonging, owned by, used or controlled by or assigned to the 
United States of America.''

                              {time}  1330

  Subject to the provisions of this lease, the airport's authority 
shall have, consistent with the 50-year minimum term of this lease, 
full power and dominion over and shall have the same proprietary powers 
and be subject to the same restrictions with respect to Federal law as 
any other airport, except as provided herein.
  The lease also contains what lawyers call a quiet enjoyment clause; 
that the airport's authority shall fully, peaceably and quietly occupy 
in joyful possession of the leased premises without hindrance or 
interference by the Secretary or any other person or entity. That is 
us, the United States Congress.
  The United States, in the grant of authority to MWAA, did not reserve 
the right to change the airport's name, and any such action, in my 
judgment, is patently inconsistent with the broad scope of the lease 
rights that conferred control and full power and dominion over the 
airport.
  In fact, the Congress did attempt to establish authority to interfere 
with or override actions of MWAA that it considered not in the broad 
public interest by creating a control board or an oversight board. On 
two occasions that oversight board was ruled unconstitutional by the 
U.S. Supreme Court. In my service then as chair of the Subcommittee on 
Aviation, I vigorously opposed reestablishing the authority of this 
oversight board. I felt we ought to get rid of it and, indeed, the 
Supreme Court twice ruled that this was an unconstitutional 
interference in executive branch authority.
  So now the question comes up, well, supposing we do pass this 
legislation, it does become law, and the authority chooses not to 
change the name as directed by Congress. In the course of our committee 
markup I asked counsel, well, what authority do we then have? What 
action could we take if the airport authority would not put up new 
signs to reflect the change or other actions to reflect the change?
  It was rather calmly and coolly suggested that Congress could compel 
the authority to change signs by taking away their Federal grants and 
their ability to levy local passenger facility charges to make safety 
and efficiency improvements. Pretty heavy-handed. An astonishing 
ruling. An astonishing arrogance to ourselves of power.
  If carried out to its logical conclusion, that gives this Congress, 
gives our committee, authority to interfere in any airport anywhere in 
America under control of any local government by simply shaking our 
finger at them and saying, change your name, make some other change 
that we want done by an act of Congress or we will take away your 
airport improvement grant money; we will cancel your passenger facility 
charge authority.
  That is an enormous arrogance of power and it opens a dangerous door 
through which none of us would want to tread. This is a dangerous 
precedent.
  The amendment should be adopted; if not, the bill defeated.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.

[[Page H268]]

  Mr. Chairman, evidently the Congress is into the business of naming 
things after people who have nothing whatsoever to do with the 
facilities that are being named after them. I would say that while I 
had great personal affection for President Reagan and served with him, 
I would say that he had about as much to do with Washington National 
Airport as I have to do with an airport in Tibet. I am old-fashioned 
enough to believe that if we are going to name something after 
somebody, we ought to give the name to something with which that person 
is intimately associated.
  So I would simply have a question. Would it not be more appropriate, 
for instance, to name the Bureau of Public Debt the Ronald Reagan 
Bureau of Public Debt? The act of this Congress that has made me more 
angry than any act since I have been here is the action that this 
Congress supinely took in 1981 when it whooped through here, with 
people in both parties voting for it, the Reagan budgets, which took 
the deficit, which had never been higher than $74 billion, up to well 
over $200 billion. It has taken us almost 20 years to dig out from 
under that, with strong efforts on the part of people in both parties 
to accomplish that fact.
  And so I simply make that point to note that there ought to be a 
certain degree of appropriateness, and a certain connection between the 
name of the person and the act, and I think that would be at least as 
appropriate as the action being contemplated both by this amendment and 
by this bill in general.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Davis].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 344, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Davis] 
will be postponed.
  Are there further amendments?


                    Amendment Offered by Ms. Norton

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Ms. Norton: Page 3, after line 23, add 
     the following new section:

     SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE

       This Act shall take effect on the date that the 
     Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority secures funds 
     other than funds from the operating budget of the Authority 
     for all costs of carrying out the redesignation made by 
     section I.

  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, my amendment simply keeps the promise of 
the House that there shall be no unfunded mandates. I do not believe 
that there is any Member of this House who would take exception to this 
amendment.
  The bill itself represents a broken promise: No congressional 
mandates on Federal buildings without local consent. All I am asking is 
that we do not add cost to injury by adding cost to the operating 
budget of the Washington Regional Airport Authority.
  The authority that runs the airport consists of four jurisdictions. 
This authority has not given its consent to this renaming or to 
accepting the cost. Two of the Members are from Maryland, five are from 
Virginia, three are from the District of Columbia, and three are 
Federal appointees. My amendment simply requires that funds outside the 
operating budget be obtained to carry out any renaming.
  Now, those who are for the renaming ought to be the first to vote for 
this amendment; that is, if they have read the Supreme Court decisions 
which have interpreted the language to mean that the Congress cannot, 
in fact, impose its will on any issue at this time. At the very least, 
when this matter goes to court, and I predict that it will, Congress 
will be able to say that it did not add to the operating costs.
  And that is important also to protect the financial position of the 
regional authority. The whole reason for the absolute language in the 
lease is to protect the financial position and the legal posture, and 
also to protect the Congress so that it is clear that the full faith 
and credit of the United States of America is not behind this airport 
at this time; that only bonds floated by this airport stand behind this 
airport.
  My amendment simply says, that is right, we are not imposing on you 
any costs from Federal legislation, nor is there any Federal mandated 
cost, nor would any Federal costs be allowed for my bill. And we do not 
need any Federal costs to be imposed as well. If in fact Ronald 
Reagan's name is to be imposed on the airport from the top down, rather 
than the way it is always done in our country, from the bottom up, then 
certainly no costs should devolve to the local area.
  But, Mr. Chairman, nobody has a shred of evidence of what the costs 
are because we were not given the courtesy of hearings. There is no 
information and no data. We do not know what the cost to government 
would be, governments around the world, the country, and regional. We 
do not know what the cost to the private sector would be. Essentially, 
what the Congress would be saying by passing this bill is, ``It is not 
our cost, so why care?'' Well, I tell my colleagues who does care. The 
business community and the public in this region who will bear those 
costs care.
  There is very substantial injury to this region well beyond cost. 
What is in a name? Well, billions of dollars in real money and in good 
will are in a name. That we must all surely recognize from the fact 
that establishments now sell naming rights and earn millions of dollars 
simply by selling the right to put one's name on a building or on an 
establishment. We in the District of Columbia have just sold the naming 
rights to the wonderful new arena, which I invite Members to partake 
of, downtown. It is called the MCI Arena, not because we like it that 
way but because we got millions of dollars for getting it that way.
  Over time billions of dollars are tied up in the name of the 
Washington National Airport. This is a major tourist region. This is 
the gateway to official Washington, named for the first President of 
the United States.
  My amendment is surely one that the entire House can support. It is 
very short. All it does is to say to the regional folks that the money 
from this is going to come from elsewhere; it is not going to come from 
you. We are sure that those who want the airport renamed, many of them 
from the private sector, if there are costs, would in fact be able to 
raise those costs. There is no partisan content here. I ask for a 
bipartisan vote.
  And, Mr. Chairman, I insert for the Record a letter from the Board of 
Trade opposing this change.


                            Greater Washington Board of Trade,

                                Washington, DC., January 26, 1998.
     Hon. Bud Shuster,
     Chairman, Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, House 
         of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Shuster: On behalf of the Greater Washington 
     Board of Trade, I am writing to express our opposition to 
     H.R. 2625 designed to change the name of Washington National 
     Airport to the ``Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.'' 
     With all due respect to President Reagan, we believe that 
     renaming the airport would be very confusing to air 
     travelers, visitors, and local residents alike.
       If there is a compelling desire to memoralize President 
     Reagan at Washington National Airport, we believe that a more 
     appropriate recognition would be in renaming the new terminal 
     in his honor. The revitalization of the terminal and other 
     improvements can, after all, be traced to activities 
     initiated during his term in office.
       The Greater Washington Board of Trade is the chamber of 
     commerce for the greater Washington region covering Northern 
     Virginia, suburban Maryland, and the District of Columbia. 
     Through the Transportation and Environment Committee, the 
     Board of Trade addresses the needs of our region's 
     transportation infrastructure and the environment.
       Thank you for your consideration in this important matter.
           Sincerely,
                                             Charles A. Dukes, Jr.
                                      Chairman, Transportation and
                                            Environment Committee.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, this is just a last ditch back-door effort to delay 
and, hopefully, kill this legislation. There are several important 
points I think that can be made in response.
  First of all, there is no reason to delay because the cost of making 
this change is insignificant. Now, those are not my words, this is the 
Congressional Budget Office, which estimates that the costs ``would not 
be significant.'' Further, the chairman of the airport

[[Page H269]]

authority stated last year that the cost would be small. Third, it only 
cost the Houston Airport $10,000 to change the name to the George Bush 
Intercontinental Airport. And with National Airport having a budget of 
$259 million, this indeed is significant.
  Beyond that, the Reagan Legacy Project has said that they would be 
willing to help in expenses, if it were necessary. So there is no 
reason to delay this.
  And let me further deal with the issue of no hearings and moving 
quickly. In the 104th Congress we had five naming bills pass that did 
not go through the committee and had no hearings. In the 103rd 
Congress, six did not go through the committee hearings; 102nd 
Congress, three; the 101st Congress, four; the 100th Congress, six.
  In fact, when we named the Thurgood Marshall building, that did not 
even come to committee. That was done directly here on the floor two 
days after Justice Marshall died, before he was even buried. So there 
is enormous evidence to suggest that we are not doing anything here 
unusual at all.
  For all those reasons, I would urge that we defeat this amendment.

                              {time}  1345

  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite 
number of words.
  Mr. Chairman, I am sure that the chairman of the full committee 
recognizes that the CBO estimate of cost only refers to the direct 
costs incurred by the airports authority. It does not include the very 
substantial cost that the small businesses in the private sector would 
incur.
  I got a letter and subsequent phone calls from several companies. But 
one such company, an airport rental firm, estimated that it would cost 
them $200,000 to make this name change. All of their National 
promotional materials have to be changed. And that is not one of the 
largest rental car companies. There are any number of businesses, 
hundreds of businesses, that refer to their location that serve 
Washington National Airport. All of that has to be changed.
  This, in fact, is an unfunded Federal mandate, more so on private 
businesses than on the public entity, the airports authority. But it is 
on both. It is contrary to the legislation that we passed that we would 
not continue to do these unfunded Federal mandates.
  But here we are again. When it suits our purposes, what difference 
does it make what we do to these local businesses? We want our will 
imposed. It is more important to us. They do not live in the area. They 
do not represent the area. So what is it to them?
  Their people, if they care anything, they know about Ronald Reagan. 
They do not know anything about Arlington or Alexandria or the Greater 
Washington Board of Trade's concerns. But that is what Ronald Reagan 
told us. That was part of his philosophy: Respect the wishes of local 
government; respect the wishes of small businesses. And they are going 
to incur very substantial costs.
  I had an amendment that said, well, if we are going to do this, maybe 
we ought to start paying for parking at the airport and put those funds 
in a fund that would reimburse the small businesses for the costs that 
they are going to incur because we chose to impose our will on them.
  Talk about rubbing salt into wounds. They thought they got the 
authority. They have to pay the expense. They issue the bonds. It is 
not Federal money. We get free parking, and then we decide how the 
airport should be named, despite the wishes of the local government.
  Arlington has voted against it, Alexandria, the Greater Washington 
Board of Trade, any number of businesses that expect me to represent 
them and that would expect that this body would have some respect for 
them.
  This is a good amendment. It should pass. It is completely consistent 
with what this Congress is supposed to be all about.
  Certainly, the Republican side of the aisle ought to have some 
respect for small businesses, even if those small businesses do not 
happen to be in their own congressional district. It might even be nice 
if they showed a little respect for the Member who represents that 
district, because that Member would respect the wishes of them if it 
was going to be done in their district. But, no, this has too many 
national political implications, so the heck with it.
  This came about because of a national solicitation for funds by a man 
by the name of Grover Norquist. He set part of this Reagan legacy 
project and then everybody goes along with it.
  It is not right. It is not right to trample on the wishes of local 
government. It is not right to impose these fees on small businesses. 
My colleagues do not know whether they can afford that cost.
  One of these rental car companies said, ``This could drive me out of 
business if I have to change all my promotional materials. I just 
updated them all.'' But what do we care? It is nothing to us. We have 
the power of the purse. We have the power. We can exercise it at will. 
Well, this is an arrogant abuse of power. It should not be done. It is 
wrong, and it creates a precedent that is going to come back to haunt 
us.
  I urge support for the amendment.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to strike the 
requisite number of words.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I object unless the gentleman is 
willing to yield so I can respond.
  Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite 
number of words, and I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Shuster), distinguished member of the committee.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding.
  I simply wanted to make the point that there is nothing in the law 
that requires small businesses to change the signs. If I had a small 
business, I would use my signs and stationery that I had; and when it 
was appropriate and when it ran out, I would then change it. So I would 
expect over time this would occur and, therefore, would not be a 
financial burden on the small businesses.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  I do want to say that I think it would have been appropriate for the 
gentleman's unanimous consent request to be concurred in so that he 
could speak, and I think there was simply a misunderstanding over here 
on our side.
  So far, the costs that this bill will impose on the local airports 
authority are not known. It is conceivable that they will not be 
inconsequential or unsubstantial. The local authority should not be 
required to bear these costs when they have been given no voice in 
change of name.
  Under the amendment pending, the costs do not have to be met by the 
Federal Government since a good deal of the motivation for the name 
change has come from private sources who want to name airports all over 
the country. In fact, it was suggested there ought to be a Ronald 
Reagan Airport named in every State, which raises the possibility we 
could take off from one State and land in another and not know where we 
are, we would always be landing in a Ronald Reagan Airport. But it is 
reasonable to expect that those who are advocating this name change 
should pay for it.
  The CBO statement, which appears in our committee report on the bill, 
suggests its costs are likely to be minimal. It says that if the State 
of Virginia chose to change signs, costs would not exceed $500,000. 
Well, that is $500,000. If they have got a tight budget, that $500,000 
makes it all the more tight.
  I certainly think that someone other than the Washington Metropolitan 
Airports Authority should bear the responsibility and the cost for any 
changes or any costs that may be incurred.
  One that occurs to me is that, as one approaches the old terminal now 
as it is known, across the front of the terminal is the name Washington 
National Airport. It is engraved in stone, has been there since 1941. I 
have heard no discussion of whether it is the intent of this 
legislation to change that name, if we are going to have stonemasons 
come and replace those blocks of stone with others on which Ronald 
Reagan's name is carved, or whether there is the intention to lay 
another block of stone atop what is already there, put the name Ronald 
Reagan on it, and somehow the idea is to have a political billboard 
greeting people as they arrive at our Nation's capital.
  So I am just wondering if there are stonemasons perhaps in the State 
of

[[Page H270]]

Pennsylvania. My good friend, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Shuster), might have some stonemasons there that might want to engage 
in this trade. Or whether the Majority has given any thought to the 
fact that this structure, the terminal building, is on the National 
Register of Historic Places and that to rename it, to change its 
facade, would require great exceptions under the National Historic 
Preservation Act. I do not think any thought has been given to that 
possibility.
  So, as the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) 
proposes, there are costs. We have not thought a great deal about them 
in this rush to name the airport before President Reagan's birthday. We 
certainly, at least, ought to pause to give thought to the costs and 
let those who are proposing this name change bear those costs.
  It is quite a responsibility on small businesses that depend upon the 
airport to have to go and change all of their materials to accommodate 
this name change that we have been hoisting upon the public here for 
very narrow partisan purposes.
  The amendment is a good one. It raises the issue of costs which have 
not been carefully thought through, and it is one that ought to be 
adopted, and I urge support.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  The amendment was rejected.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I move to strike out the last word. Mr. Chairman, 
within the 2 hours allotted for consideration of the bill, how much 
time remains?
  The CHAIRMAN. There is 1 hour remaining.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I intended to ask for a recorded vote on 
the Norton amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. That request comes too late.


            Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Moran of Virginia

  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Moran of Virginia:
       Page 3, line 2, strike ``Ronald Reagan'' and insert 
     ``George Washington''.
       Page 3, line 6, strike ``Ronald Reagan'' and insert 
     ``George Washington''.
       Page 3, lines 17 and 18, strike ``Ronald Reagan'' and 
     insert ``George Washington''.
       Page 3, line 22, strike ``Ronald Reagan'' and insert 
     ``George Washington''.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is reserved.
  The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would clarify the 
name of Washington National Airport since, apparently, there is a great 
deal of misunderstanding. It needs to be recognized, for example, that 
Franklin Roosevelt, in the commissioning of Washington National 
Airport, told the architects that the main terminal was to be designed 
to look like Mt. Vernon, the home of George Washington.
  We can see it from perspective, which is difficult because most of us 
see it when we are right up on top of it and getting out of an 
automobile. If we look at it from the proper perspective, though, we 
can see that that is what the architects did.
  I think it also is important to recognize that this land on which 
Washington National Airport is located was owned by John Park Custis, 
who was George Washington's adopted son, the only surviving son of 
Martha Custis Washington. He owned the property, lived there until his 
death at the battle of Yorktown. He was named to George Washington, 
who, after marrying Martha, treated John P. Custis as his own son.
  Dr. David Stewart, who was then President Washington's physician, 
married J.P. Custis' widow and moved into the Abingdon estate, which is 
where Washington National Airport is located. Dr. Stewart was one of 
the three commissioners supervising the development of the Nation's new 
capital and personally named the city across the river the city of 
Washington and the territory of Columbia. It was clear that it was 
being named after George Washington, that Washington National Airport 
is named after George Washington.

                              {time}  1400

  J.P. Custis' son, George Washington Park Custis, who lived at both 
Abingdon and Mount Vernon, who was adopted by George Washington 
following the death of J.P. Custis, built Arlington House, better known 
as the Custis-Lee Mansion, which later became Arlington Cemetery. He 
was Robert E. Lee's father-in-law. All of this occurred on this land. 
That is why my constituents care so much about retaining the 
identification of Washington National Airport with George Washington.
  There is a lot of history here. Washington National Airport is built 
on the very foundation of Abingdon Plantation. This is where these 
people lived.
  In the promotional material for Washington National Airport, as the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) has referred to, time and again 
they talk about George Washington treading on this land. His family 
owned this land. This was very important to him. That is why it is so 
important to us. He lived on the same road, at the very end of it, at 
Mount Vernon.
  What this amendment would do is to make it clear that this airport is 
named after George Washington, as George Washington National Airport. 
That is the way it should continue to be named.
  Mr. Chairman, I can understand people's respect for Ronald Reagan, 
but, I have to say, this dishonors Ronald Reagan's legacy. This is not 
right, and I know that neither President Reagan nor Mr. Reagan's family 
would want his name to be involved in such a contentious issue.
  My constituents, who want to retain George Washington's name, do not 
want to be involved in any way in dishonoring Mr. Reagan's legacy. They 
do not want this to be such a contentious issue. But they jealously 
guard the name that this airport now has.
  Not only does it honor George Washington, it also identifies where 
the airport is. It is helpful to the people who use the airport. It is 
going to be very confusing if it is renamed. People are not going to 
know where Ronald Reagan Airport is, because it could be anyplace in 
the country. Why would anyone figure it is going to be in Arlington, 
Virginia?
  I think this is the kind of amendment that we should do, to make it 
clear that we will not get into this kind of partisan, contentious 
debate, ever again.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge support for my amendment.


                             Point of Order

  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) 
insist upon his point of order?
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I insist upon my point of order.
  Mr. Chairman, as a preface to making it, I note my good friends on 
the other side, by making this amendment, have totally destroyed their 
argument about cost and lack of hearings, because this is going to cost 
money and this is going to cause hearings.
  My point of order is this: My point of order against the amendment is 
on the ground it violates clause 7 of rule XVI of the rules of the 
House because it is not germane.
  Clause 7 of rule XVI provides that no motion or proposition on a 
subject different from that under consideration shall be considered 
under color of amendment.
  The amendment adds an additional proposition. It is not germane 
because it substitutes a new name. It substitutes George Washington for 
Ronald Reagan. The bill is narrowly limited to a certain name, and the 
substitution of another violates the House rules.
  Also, interestingly, the law establishing the boundary between 
Virginia and D.C. names the airport as the Washington National Airport 
while referring to the adjacent parkway as the George Washington 
Memorial Parkway. This is further proof that the airport is named for 
the metropolitan area and not for the person, and I insist upon my 
point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) wish to be 
heard on the point of order?
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I do.
  Mr. Chairman, in the other body they have named this airport Ronald

[[Page H271]]

Reagan Washington National Airport. The point that I want to make is 
that no one knows, including our very respected, knowledgeable 
parliamentarians, whether the people who named the airport Washington 
National Airport were identifying with the geographical location or 
with the personal identification. That is my point.
  The constituents who use it, in whose district it is located, feel 
that it is named after George Washington, rather than the geographical 
location. But who is to say? I do not know for sure.
  I am sharing my point of view, and this goes directly to the point of 
order. I feel that it is named after George Washington, and so I do not 
see that it would be subject to a point of order simply to clarify 
that. Certainly you do not need to change any signs, when people 
already assume Washington National Airport means George Washington 
National Airport.
  So I do not agree it should be subject to a point of order. I think 
it is entirely in order. I think this clarification is appropriate for 
this body to pass.
  The CHAIRMAN. Do other members seek to be heard on the point of 
order?
  The Chair would rule on the point of order. The gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) makes a point of order that the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) is not germane to 
the bill.
  The bill, H.R. 2625, seeks to redesignate the Washington National 
Airport as the Ronald Reagan National Airport. The bill consists of a 
single individual proposition. It proposes to redesignate a specific 
airport in honor of a specific person.
  The amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) 
seeks to substitute the name ``George Washington'' for the name 
``Ronald Reagan'' in the bill. Clause 7 of rule XVI of the rules of the 
House requires that amendments be germane to the proposition to which 
offered. A general principle of germaneness rule is that one individual 
proposition may not be amended by another individual proposition, even 
though they may be of the same class. This principle is recorded on 
page 619 of the House Rules and Manual. The chair notes a relevant 
ruling on this principle. On February 9, 1910, the House was 
considering a bill providing for the erection of a statue to honor 
General Von Steuben. An amendment was offered to strike the word ``Von 
Steuben'' and insert ``George Washington.'' Speaker Clark ruled that 
the proposition before the House was confined to a statue honoring 
General Von Steuben and that an amendment offering a proposition for 
the erection of a statue of George Washington was not germane. This 
ruling is codified in Cannons Precedents, Volume 8, Section 2955.
  Because the pending text propose proposes a narrow individual 
proposition, the naming of a specific airport for a specific person, 
and the amendment proposes to substitute a separate individual 
proposition, to wit, the naming of that airport for a different person, 
the amendment is not germane.
  While the Chair acknowledges the difference of opinion expressed 
regarding the derivative nature of the current name of the airport, 
nothing in the committee report on the history of the naming of the 
airport, or as a matter of law of which the Chair is aware, indicates 
that the airport is now explicitly named in honor of George Washington. 
In addition, the Chair would note that a relevant statute, the Act of 
October 31, 1945, printed in part on page 10 of the committee report, 
illuminates a distinction between the George Washington Memorial 
Parkway and the Washington National Airport.
  Accordingly, the point of order is sustained.
  Are there further amendments?
  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I am disappointed to know George Washington has been 
overruled by the House Parliamentarian before today. I appreciate my 
friend offering that amendment, and it is not in order.
  Mr. Chairman, I had an amendment that I was going to call up that 
would have at least clarified the Ronald Reagan National Airport, that 
is currently contained in the legislation, and would have made it the 
Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. That would have stopped some 
of the confusion we hear. It would have kept Washington's name in it. 
Whether it demarks the location or a great President and Virginian, I 
am not certain. But as I understand it, there will be opposition on the 
other side to this amendment, so I will not bring it up at this point.
  Am I correct there is to be opposition to that amendment to change it 
from Ronald Reagan National Airport to the Ronald Reagan Washington 
National Airport?
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I would find objection to the gentleman's 
amendment, along the same lines that had been offered by the majority 
to other amendments on this side, that that would be a killer 
amendment. I would also question whether it would be germane in light 
of the erudite ruling just elicited from the Chair.
  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, it is not a 
killer amendment from this side of the aisle's point of view. If you do 
not consider it a killer, we do not consider it a killer amendment. I 
think it does bring some clarification. I have not had a parliamentary 
ruling.
  I would hope, since there is opposition from the other side, and I am 
disappointed to hear that, at least in the conference, we could clarify 
that. If this legislation is going to go through, I think it is very 
important that we keep the name Washington National Airport as a part 
of it. To many it is always going to be known as that. You have the DCA 
designation as it moves through customs and it moves through the 
baggage checks, and to change those, I think, creates a whole series of 
problems that were not contemplated by the bill's authors.
  I would ask the chairman of the committee if he could assure me in 
conference if this is an accommodation that could be reached?
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I would say to my good friend that after 
conferring with our leadership, we indeed were prepared to accept the 
gentleman's amendment. I understand it is precisely the same language 
that is in the Senate. Therefore, it would be my hope and intention to 
accept the Senate's version of the language, which would then conform 
with what the gentleman are attempting to do.
  I regret that our colleagues on the other side have indicated their 
opposition to including the name ``Washington'' in the name of the 
airport.
  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend, and, with 
that, I will not call up the amendment.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I do so to simply explain that I think in opposing the 
proposed but not offered amendment of the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Davis), it would be appropriate to keep faith with the bill that 
emerged from committee, since the chairman in committee had offered a 
substitute for the introduced bill, which substitute struck the name 
``Washington'' from the proposed name of the airport to call it Ronald 
Reagan National Airport instead of Ronald Reagan Washington National 
Airport. If that was the original purpose of the committee in reporting 
this bill, we ought to keep faith with it on the floor and let it go 
its merry way further.
  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I am certain that the chairman 
of the committee appreciates that kind of loyalty to his amendment.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, it is loyalty of the 
greatest and deepest felt sort.
  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. With that kind of bipartisan camaraderie, I 
look forward to working with the gentleman on other issues.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. On other issues, indeed, that do not take over local 
control of airport naming.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  (Mr. HYDE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)

[[Page H272]]

  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I hate to prolong this debate, it has been 
prolonged too long, but there are some things that need to be said 
about the situation we find ourselves in.
  Mr. Chairman, I really feel badly about the fact that this bill is 
going to be voted on and there will be a lot of red lights up there. I 
think the purpose of this bill is to honor a great American President, 
a great American President who is in the evening of his life, and of 
whom can be said more people are walking free in the world today 
because he was our leader for two terms. The very phrase ``free world'' 
owes much to this man whom we seek to honor, but whom we are 
trivializing, and whom this great honor for him has become a victim of 
what really is raw and petty politics.
  ``Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall''; the democratizations of 
central Europe, the unification of Germany, the dissolution of the 
Soviet Union, these are cosmic occurrences in our time and in our 
century that are worthy of recognition.
  And, yes, I think the gentleman in whose district the airport belongs 
has an important role to play, but the airport is a national airport, 
and Ronald Reagan was a national figure, and I think there is something 
beyond the parochialism of a district. I say that with respect, but 
that is how I feel.
  This man, Ronald Reagan, gave this country dignity, he gave it hope, 
he gave it optimism. It was his fervent desire to make this country a 
city on a hill, and he did it. He did it. He made us proud of our chief 
executive, proud of our government, proud of America, and he gave us 
something to look forward to.
  This is simply a small effort to recognize that, and it ought not 
fall victim to petty politics. If Members deny there are petty politics 
involved here, I can only say they are fooling themselves, because 
everybody knows what is the problem here.
  But here is a man deserving of the fullest recognition, especially as 
he is still living, and might in some way learn of what we are doing.

                              {time}  1415

  But to put red lights up there is to me demeaning and sad and 
unfortunate. Let us recognize the man who made America proud.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I have enormous respect and deep affection for my good 
friend from Illinois, the Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary. 
We have agreed on so many issues over the years. I just want to make it 
clear that this is not raw and petty politics. We are not trivializing 
Ronald Reagan's name or his legacy when we oppose the action proposed.
  There was no such suggestion when the Democrats wholeheartedly 
supported the naming, without a murmur of dissent, of the Ronald Reagan 
International Trade building in Washington, D.C. That was quite a 
monument, quite a monument for the President. When it is just a stone's 
throw from the White House, when it is in the heart of what is known as 
Federal Triangle, that is quite a monument. People from all nations 
will come there to discuss trade issues. Significant Federal Government 
agencies will be housed there. Remembering his legacy as workers and 
constituents from around the country come into that building. It is 
quite appropriate.
  The issue is not do we honor Ronald Reagan, but do we take a good 
name off this airport and replace it with another albeit good name, I 
do not think that is appropriate.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman had an opportunity not to take 
the Washington name off of the Washington National Airport, but simply 
to add to it Ronald Reagan, and the gentleman did not like to do that.
  Also, just let me say, the gentleman is quite right. The Reagan 
building such as it is ought to satisfy people. But we have the George 
Washington Parkway, we have the Washington Monument, we have the City 
of Washington, D.C. It would seem to me in the Washington National 
Airport there would be room for a few more letters acknowledging and 
honoring President Reagan.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I would argue also 
that the person who had most to do with National Airport was Franklin 
Delano Roosevelt, who was present at the groundbreaking, who was the 
driving force behind the construction of that airport, who laid the 
cornerstone for this building; who proposed a big ceremony to dedicate 
the newly completed airport, but who, on recommendation of his 
Secretary of Commerce and on his own gut instincts, said, as the 
darkening clouds of war are gathering, it is not a time, an appropriate 
time to have a celebration, and chose not to.
  He was the first President, Franklin Roosevelt, to fly across the 
Atlantic. He convened the international conference that guides aviation 
trade agreements today, the Chicago conference in 1944, in which we 
negotiate trade rights in aviation among all nations of the world. He 
had more to do with aviation, I submit, than President Reagan did, and 
more to do with this airport, but never have we suggested, in the words 
of my good friend, adding a name, which is really changing a name, of 
an airport to add Franklin D. Roosevelt.
  In fact, Franklin Roosevelt wanted for himself only the smallest 
monument, not larger than the size of a desk, a piece of stone some 
place in Washington. That is all he ever asked for. He did not ask to 
have a political billboard greeting people in his name as they came to 
the Nation's capital. That is what is at stake here.
  This name change was not fueled by a popular citizen movement, it 
springs from the Ronald Reagan Legacy Project, a movement begun by 
Americans for Tax Reform. It does not spring from the heart of America.
  Why do we not designate a piece of ground in the Nation's capital to 
be a place where an appropriate memorial to the memory and legacy of 
Ronald Reagan will be erected? I will support that, as we have legacies 
for other Presidents. We waited 50 years to begin construction of the 
Washington Monument. We waited 130-some years to begin construction of 
the Jefferson Memorial. We waited well over 50 years before a memorial 
was built to Franklin Roosevelt's name. I am not sure that he would 
have liked that, frankly. As I said already, he wanted something very 
modest, very, very simple to be remembered by.
  So this is not the appropriate way to honor the legacy of Ronald 
Reagan, and I urge defeat of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there further amendments to the bill?


            Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Moran of Virginia

  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment, Amendment 
No. 6.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. Moran of Virginia:
       Page 3, after line 23, add the following new section:

     SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       This Act shall take effect on the date that the Secretary 
     of Transportation determines that a referendum proposing the 
     redesignation made by section 1 has been approved by the 
     voters of Arlington County, Virginia.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. A point of order is reserved.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, may we have a copy of the amendment?
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, it is at the desk, and it has 
been printed. It was printed last night. It is Amendment No. 6, 
requiring a referendum.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk is endeavoring to distribute copies of the 
amendment.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, it is interesting that a point 
of order was raised before the chairman knew which amendment it was, 
but I assure the gentleman it was printed.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I would say to my friend, I believe that 
is the procedure.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I assume that this is not taken 
off my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is correct.
  The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) is recognized for 5 minutes.

[[Page H273]]

  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I guess I should wait for the 
Chairman to determine whether he wants to continue to raise a point of 
order against it, or reserve a point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) 
reserve a point of order?
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman may wish to exercise that at the 
appropriate time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. I make a point of order, Mr. Chairman.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) may continue.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, as I was saying, I have 2 
amendments left that were filed last night. One of them I will not 
submit. That amendment would have required that the Members of Congress 
and the Senate and the judiciary would have to pay for their own 
parking at Washington National Airport and the receipts would then be 
used to offset the costs of changing this name. I will not do that.
  However, I would like for the Members to consider how my constituents 
feel when they see Members of Congress getting parking for which they 
have to pay, for which Members of Congress do not have to pay, getting 
it closer to the airport than they are able to park. They resent that. 
However, I do not think that this is the way to address that, and I am 
perfectly willing to let that go.
  I do think that Members of this body should give those constituents 
who live in the area where this airport is located, in Arlington 
County, Virginia, the opportunity to be heard on this issue that does 
affect them directly, and in fact, does cost the small businesses that 
work at Washington National Airport a substantial amount of money.
  So what this amendment would do is to simply allow for a referendum; 
it would hold in abeyance our decision with regard to the renaming 
until there is a referendum conducted in Arlington County, Virginia. It 
would be conducted in November so there would be no additional expense, 
and we would hear from the local residents. This is consistent with 
hearing from local people as to how they feel about Federal Government 
directives. That is all this would do. There would be a public 
referendum, as there are already a number of referendums in many 
states, California particularly, and certainly a procedure that the 
other party has embraced in any number of other cases. That would give 
us a real sense of how the people most directly affected by this 
decision feel about it.
  Do not take my word for it. Take the word of the majority. I am 
certainly willing to accept the democratic process. Let us see what the 
Democratic majority feel about it. Certainly both parties are well 
represented in this community. Both parties would have every 
opportunity to make the case. After full consideration, because there 
was not a public hearing on this issue, after full consideration, they 
could then vote through the democratic process, but at least let the 
majority of citizens render a determination whether this is the right 
thing to do, whether this is the way that they choose to honor Ronald 
Reagan. I think this is an appropriate amendment. It is the kind of 
thing that we should do in any number of cases. Before we decide to 
impose our will from on top, let us listen to the local community. Let 
us see what the majority want to do, and let us take that into 
consideration before we make decisions that affect their daily lives.
  So, Mr. Chairman, I would offer this amendment, and I would hope it 
would be accepted by the party in the majority. I would hope that maybe 
this could even set a precedent for this type of thing where it clearly 
is contentious, but where I am purporting to represent the majority. 
Perhaps I do not, and if I do not, then the majority's will is to be 
respected by this body. It is certainly consistent with President 
Reagan's philosophy of devolving power down to local government. That 
is where the rubber should hit the road, that is where the people are 
most directly affected, and that is where they should have the most 
influence over the conduct of our decision-making.
  So I offer the amendment, and I hope it would be made in order. I 
hope that there will not be an objection to this common sense amendment 
that respects local government, respects local communities, respects 
the democratic process.


                             Point of Order

  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) 
insist upon his point of order?
  Mr. SHUSTER. I insist upon my point of order, Mr. Chairman.
  I make the point that indeed, this is an airport owned by the 
national government, not owned by Arlington County. The amendment 
violates clause 7 of rule XVI of the rules of the House because it is 
not germane. Clause 7 of rule XVI provides that no motion or 
proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall 
be considered under color of amendment. The amendment adds an 
additional proposition.
  It is not germane because it adds an unrelated condition. The 
amendment conditions the name change on a referendum by Arlington 
County voters. We would be imposing a new duty on Arlington County, 
which does not own the airport. It currently has no such 
responsibility.
  Mr. Chairman, I insist upon my point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) wish to be 
heard on the point of order?
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I do not want to delay this any 
longer out of respect for my colleagues. I think the point has been 
made. The point has been made on any number of these amendments. I 
would just hope that we would show respect, both for Ronald Reagan's 
legacy to respect the wishes of local governments and local 
communities, whether we agree with them or not, and to respect the 
democratic process of governance. But I will not say any more than 
that. I know Members want to get on and vote and dispatch this bill. I 
obviously object to what it does, both to Ronald Reagan's legacy, what 
it does to a local community and the way that it tramples upon the 
democratic process. I think it is an arrogant abuse of power.
  The CHAIRMAN. If no other Members seek to be heard on the point of 
order, the Chair is prepared to rule.
  The amendment provides that the effective date of the redesignation 
would be delayed pending the approval of a referendum by the voters of 
Arlington County, Virginia.
  Clause 7 of rule XVI of the rules of the House requires that an 
amendment be germane to the proposition to which offered. The 
germaneness rule allows that an amendment delaying the effectiveness of 
proposed legislation can be made to depend on a related contingency. 
The Chair notes a relevant ruling on this principle in the 93rd 
Congress, an amendment proposing to delay the effectiveness of a bill 
pending the enactment of other legislation and requiring actions by 
entities not involved in the administration of the program affected by 
the bill was held not germane. This precedent is recorded in Deschler's 
Precedents, volume 11, chapter 28, section 31.7. In addition, the Chair 
has ruled on at least 2 other occasions that an amendment delaying the 
effectiveness of a bill pending the enactment of State legislation is 
not germane. These precedents are recorded on page 628 of the rules of 
the House Rules and Manual.
  The condition the amendment seeks to impose on the redesignation is 
the approval of a referendum by the voters of Arlington County, 
Virginia, a local entity not responsible for the administration of the 
airport. Requiring the approval of an entity not charged with the 
administration of the airport is not a related condition under existing 
law. As such, an amendment imposing approval by the voters of Arlington 
County, Virginia as a contingency on the redesignation of the airport 
is not germane.
  Accordingly, the point of order is sustained.
  Are there further amendments to the bill?

                              {time}  1430

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I did not engage in a discussion of the point of order 
that was made on the last amendment, but I do want to rise and 
acknowledge two points that have been made on this floor, and there are 
many others.

[[Page H274]]

  One, that a President of the United States deserves high honor. The 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), chairman of the Committee on the 
Judiciary, made that very plain in an all-so-eloquent statement; and I 
agree with that. The President of this Nation, whoever it might be, 
deserves high honor. That includes former President Ronald Reagan, and 
particularly the honor is appropriate at the time of the celebration of 
his birthday.
  At the same time, I raise the other perspective; and this is a 
bipartisan perspective. Members who represent the community in which 
the entity that is sought to be named, both Democrats and Republicans, 
in this instance, have raised some concerns that I think we in the 
United States Congress need to consider. One, the involvement, if you 
will, of the community, so that it is one that is embraced by the 
community.
  It seems that the presentation of this legislation, and maybe the 
lobbyists or the advocates that have pushed this legislation have gone 
somewhat far afield. In fact, they may have gone further than President 
Ronald Reagan may have even encouraged.
  I do recognize that Republicans backing this legislation want to pay 
tribute to someone they honor. It is like trees wanting to celebrate 
sunshine. They view Ronald Reagan as their source of enlightenment. It 
is not my place to debate that.
  However, I think the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), our 
Ranking Member, and other Members are making valid points. Does this 
Congress change the names of buildings that are already named? Does 
Congress name a building in a congressional district against the wishes 
of the Congressperson of that district? These are questions that I 
think are extremely important.
  Do we want to engage in partisan politics and do we not say to the 
American people that, in fact, we have a wonderful and beautiful new 
testament to President Reagan in the new Federal building that is for 
international trade? He was one who stood tall in international 
politics, and this building is an appropriate vehicle by which to honor 
him.
  Mr. Chairman, then there is a more salient issue. I believe this 
debate started some time early afternoon, and my clock tells me it is 
2:30, and we may still be continuing.
  It is my point, Mr. Chairman, that there are other issues, such as 
reforming managed care and getting both better health facilities and 
service for Americans; the Patient Bill of Rights where we can 
reinforce the opportunities of choice between patient and physician; 
the availability of accountability for managed care entities; the need 
for better health in this country. These are issues, I believe, that 
the American people would much rather see us debate than have us debate 
something where we really do not even know what the supporters across 
the country in America might even think of it that support President 
Reagan or anybody around him. We do not even know those facts.
  Here we are raising up something that seems to be divisive that may 
cause, as the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) said, a red light on 
the board.
  I would only offer that it is extremely important that we focus on 
the business of making America a better place. We need reform in health 
care. In managed care, in particular, we need reform. The Patient Bill 
of Rights is extremely important. I am someone who has suffered through 
that with the loss and passing of my father. I know firsthand what 
happens when managed care entities do not properly function and serve 
those who are utilizing its services.
  So, Mr. Chairman, I would certainly say, in closing, that we should 
honor our presidents. We should honor the office. We should honor the 
responsibility. In this instance, however, I think we do a disservice 
by not reflecting upon the desires of the community. Bipartisan 
concerns.
  Republicans and Democrats have risen to this floor for local 
involvement. And, yes, we do not honor the name by bringing forward 
legislation that does not have a clear point in honoring someone who 
has served this country as President Reagan has served.
  Mr. Chairman, I would ask that we find and respect his name by 
honoring him with this wonderful Federal building and saying to the 
American people that we thank him for his leadership and we want to do 
it in the right way, in a way that can be befitting of this Congress 
and the American people.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise because several speakers have talked about this 
being a very partisan issue. I do not really think it is that partisan 
of an issue, and what I am going to say here is what I said not too 
long ago at the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure markup 
of this legislation.
  That is that certainly, from my perspective, I am opposed to the 
renaming of Washington National Airport for Ronald Reagan. Not because 
I oppose Ronald Reagan. In fact, there are a few people on this side of 
the aisle, if any, that supported Ronald Reagan more than I did in the 
6 years that I was here while he was President of the United States. In 
fact, there are some people on the other side of the aisle who were 
here, and still are here, who probably supported Ronald Reagan less 
than I did.
  I remember back when we were debating the situation on Nicaragua and 
the President had a piece of legislation in to give military aid to the 
Contras, and that passed this floor by one vote. Poor Tip O'Neill was 
the Speaker of the House at that time, and he came very close to having 
a heart attack when I voted on behalf of President Reagan and the 
military aid to the Contras. There were numerous other things that I 
supported the President on.
  So I come to this floor today to express to everyone listening that I 
am not opposed to Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan is the only President 
that I served under that I have asked to have a picture taken of, my 
wife and I, Rose Marie, in the Oval Office of the White House. That is 
how enthusiastic I was of Ronald Reagan. I have been a fan of his since 
I first saw him play George Gipp in ``The Knute Rockne Story.''
  But Ronald Reagan's greatest memorial is not an airport or a building 
here in Washington or in other States throughout the Union. His real 
memorial is in, as the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) said, in 
Central Europe, in Eastern Europe, through the former Soviet Union 
where democracy is starting to grow or in some cases democracy has 
already bloomed, where the free markets, where capitalism are taking 
hold.
  Someone said earlier that, because of Ronald Reagan, more people on 
this planet are freer than ever before in the history of the world; and 
I believe that to be absolutely true. I, myself, would have no problem 
seeing Ronald Reagan put up on Mount Rushmore. But I do not believe 
that it is appropriate to rename Washington National Airport after 
Ronald Reagan, simply because it has a name and there are many other 
monuments that we can name for former President Reagan.
  Mr. GINGRICH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I have thought a good bit about the debate that has 
occurred both in the committee and in the Committee on Rules and on the 
floor and also in the Senate about naming the Ronald Reagan National 
Airport. I have partly reflected, as a former member of the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure, on how often over the past years 
when I have been here Republicans, in a good spirit, voted yes to name 
buildings, to name airports. Because we felt that if there was somebody 
who was a national leader who had worked hard, even if they had been a 
partisan figure, that there comes a moment when we band together as 
Americans and we express it.
  I just flew back from a meeting and landed at Kennedy Airport in New 
York. I did not think anything of it. I happen to serve on the board of 
the Kennedy Center, and it is totally appropriate.
  Yet there has been more noise, more heat. I do not think a single 
Republican who has served in the House, who is currently serving, can 
remember the level of opposition, the level of explanation. People who 
are for it, but. They like President Reagan, but. They think there 
ought to be something named for him, but.
  Yet I have to confess, as I was reading Dinesh D'Souza's brilliant 
new

[[Page H275]]

book on Ronald Reagan which he called ``How An Ordinary Man Became An 
Extraordinary Leader,'' that it is a real tribute to President Reagan 
that even today that there is so much passion about who he is. That, in 
fact, he was such a decisive agent of change that some Members on the 
other side still cannot quite accept that he might have something 
important named for him.
  He arrived at a time when we had malaise. We were told there were 
limits to growth. We were told we had to accept high inflation, high 
unemployment. It was the American's people's fault that the system was 
failing. We had price controls on gasoline. People waiting in line 
routinely to buy gasoline. The Soviet empire was occupying Afghanistan. 
Taxes were high, take-home pay was low, and the American people felt 
miserable.
  The man who was elected with the highest negatives of any person ever 
elected president walked into the Oval Office and in his very first act 
eliminated price controls for gasoline and ended all government 
bureaucratic controls of gasoline, and within 6 months the price had 
collapsed because the free market had worked and the gasoline shortage 
was over.
  He announced proudly that we stood for freedom. He described the 
Soviet Empire as an Evil Empire to the great shock of political elites, 
and we were told later by Gorbachev it was quite helpful because they 
always thought it was evil, but it was useful to have somebody verify 
it.
  He said the Berlin Wall should come down, and people thought he was 
fantasizing. He built up the American military on the grounds that, in 
the end, the Soviet Empire would account not compete with us. And 
within 8 years, the Berlin Wall had fallen, the Soviet Empire could not 
compete with us and, in fact, it is today gone.
  It is politically incorrect to say we had won the Cold War, but let 
us me say unequivocally, Ronald Wilson Reagan led the United States to 
the cause of freedom and we won the Cold War and there is today no 
Soviet Empire. And, for that alone, he deserves a historic role.
  But he did more. He said lower marginal tax rates, encourage 
entrepreneurs, create economic growth. We are today in a continuation 
of the entrepreneurial boom that began with Ronald Reagan and which, 
with the exception of one brief recession brought about by a tax 
increase, in fact has been continuous since late 1982.
  He said we should be proud about being Americans. He was the proudest 
of Americans; and, under him, we revived American culture. People came 
back once again to have the sense not that there were limits to growth, 
not that there was malaise, not that poverty was inevitable, but 
instead that our only limits were those of the spirit and the mind, 
that every American had the right to pursue happiness. And, as 
President Reagan said so often, ``You ain't seen nothing yet.'' That is 
the spirit he rekindled.
  So a man who in one brief appearance on the world stage defeated the 
Soviet Empire, reestablished American strength, rekindled the American 
spirit, revalidated American culture, and launched a 20-year economic 
boom of entrepreneurial invention I think deserves to be remembered.
  Let me say there has been some confusion. Nancy Reagan did not ask 
for this. She sought, and the President sought, no personal 
aggrandizement. On the other hand, I think she would be very gratified 
if the Congress on its own decided this was an appropriate thing. The 
family has not been out seeking anything. But, on the other hand, they 
know that their father did great things and they would be, I think, 
humbly grateful if we were willing to recognize him for that.

                              {time}  1445

  Finally, more than any President in my lifetime, President Reagan 
came close to taming Washington, D.C. It will somehow be very fitting 
that as people come from overseas to the capital of freedom they will 
be landing at the Ronald Reagan airport. It will be even more fitting 
as taxpayers fly in from all over America to demand that we reform the 
IRS, to demand that we keep a balanced budget, to demand that we lower 
taxes, to demand that we get government out of their lives that they 
land at the Ronald Reagan airport.
  This is a good proposal. It is a sound proposal. It is one which 
reflects President Reagan's commitment to history. I hope every Member 
will put aside partisanship and every Member will put aside pettiness 
and decide to honor a very great man on this week of his birthday.


            Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Davis of Virginia

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on amendment No. 1 offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) 
on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 206, 
noes 215, not voting 10, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 4]

                               AYES--206

     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baesler
     Baldacci
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bentsen
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Cardin
     Carson
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Collins
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Cummings
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Engel
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fazio
     Filner
     Forbes
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gilchrest
     Goode
     Gordon
     Green
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Holden
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     John
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHale
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith, Adam
     Snyder
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates

                               NOES--215

     Aderholt
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Brady
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Coble
     Coburn
     Combest
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Deal
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Foley
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gingrich
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kasich

[[Page H276]]


     Kelly
     Kim
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moran (KS)
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pappas
     Parker
     Paxon
     Pease
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Redmond
     Regula
     Riggs
     Riley
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryun
     Salmon
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stump
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Traficant
     Upton
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Abercrombie
     Barcia
     Becerra
     Eshoo
     Fattah
     Gonzalez
     Herger
     Leach
     Schiff
     Torres

                              {time}  1508

  Messrs. Quinn, Radanovich and Talent changed their vote from ``aye'' 
to ``no.''
  Ms. Kilpatrick, Mr. Pascrell, Mr. Baesler, Ms. Pelosi, and Messrs. 
McDermott, Rahall, Weygand and Hall of Texas changed their vote from 
``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the committee amendment in the 
nature of a substitute.
  The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Hansen) having assumed the chair, Mr. Combest, Chairman of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2625) to 
redesignate Washington National Airport as ``Ronald Reagan Washington 
National Airport,'' pursuant to House Resolution 344, he reported the 
bill back to the House with an amendment adopted by the Committee of 
the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  The question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute.
  The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


               Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Oberstar

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman from Minnesota opposed to 
the bill?
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I am opposed to the bill, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:
       Mr. Oberstar moves to recommit the bill to the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure with instructions to report 
     the same back to the House forthwith with the following 
     amendment:
       Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. FINDING.

       Congress finds that Ronald Wilson Reagan was the forty-
     second President of the United States and is deserving of 
     have a structure that will be seen by many visitors to the 
     Nation's capital named in his honor.

     SEC. 2. NAMING OF TERMINAL BUILDING AT WASHINGTON NATIONAL 
                   AIRPORT.

       The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority is urged to 
     use its existing authority to name the terminal building that 
     opened in 1997 at Washington National Airport as the ``Ronald 
     Wilson Reagan Terminal Building'' and that signs and other 
     appropriate designations should be erected to reflect the 
     name of the terminal building.
       Amend the title so as to read as follows: ``A bill to urge 
     the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority to name the 
     terminal building that opened in 1997 at Washington National 
     Airport as the `Ronald Wilson Reagan Terminal Building', and 
     for other purposes.''.

                              {time}  1515

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I offer my colleagues an opportunity to 
designate an appropriate memorial to President Ronald Reagan without a 
single dissenting vote.
  As was indicated by the previous vote, there is not complete 
bipartisan support. There are many on the other side of the aisle who 
voted crossing their fingers with a little check in their throat. This 
is not the right way to go about designating an appropriate memorial to 
the memory of Ronald Reagan.
  The motion to recommit that I have offered has precedent. The 
precedent for the motion I offer is that offered by no less than the 
Senate Minority Leader in 1990, almost 8 years to the week, Senator 
Dole, who offered a joint resolution to urge the Washington 
Metropolitan Airports Authority to use its existing authority to change 
the name of Washington-Dulles International Airport to Eisenhower 
International Airport.
  Note, Senator Dole rose to urge the Washington Metropolitan Airports 
Authority to use its authority to change the name of Washington-Dulles 
to Eisenhower International. He was in the Senate when the legislation 
was introduced and enacted to create the Metropolitan Washington 
Airports Authority to rebuild both Dulles and Washington National.
  His great wife was the Secretary of Transportation at the time. 
Senator Dole understood fully the importance of the transfer of 
authority from the Federal Government to the Airports Authority created 
by that legislation. He did not presume to rush in and rename National 
Airport on the sole fiat and power of the United States Congress but 
rather, as I propose here modestly, to urge the Metropolitan Washington 
Airports Authority to use its authority to change the name of this 
airport.
  I propose to name the terminal, which does not now bear a name. I am 
opposed to renaming, I am opposed to taking a good name, anyone's good 
name, off a building and renaming it. But I do not oppose naming that 
which does not now bear a name or a title. There is no name. There is 
no title for the new terminal. That is the greatest contribution of the 
legislation submitted to the Congress by President Reagan, building of 
the new terminal and reconstructing Dulles Airport.
  I think it is entirely appropriate that we should name the terminal 
for Ronald Reagan. It does not now bear a name. We will not be doing a 
disservice to anyone. We will not be creating a precedent for this 
Congress to come in and name any other airport in the country simply 
because we have given that airport Federal grant funds from the airport 
improvement program and thereby arrogate to ourselves the power to 
rename any airport in America. That is not right.
  Naming the terminal would be appropriate. I think that would be a 
fitting memorial; and if there are other memorials that my colleagues 
on the Republican side propose to offer and to construct in the name of 
President Reagan, I will support those. But do not take a good name. My 
colleagues would not want their good name taken off any structure, any 
building, or off their own door. Do not take Washington National's good 
name off that airport.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to my colleague the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Moran).
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) for the arguments that have been made today; 
and I would say, if it matters to any of my colleagues, that I am the 
Member who represents the area where Washington National Airport is 
located.
  Mr. Speaker, if we were to agree to this recommittal, I daresay it 
would probably be unanimous. What a fitting tribute for President 
Reagan to have a unanimous vote of this body. It would be fully 
accepted by all the people and the businesses that are located in 
Northern Virginia. This is a beautiful terminal, millions of dollars. 
It is state-of-the-art. It has no name now, so there is no need to 
strip George Washington's name from it.

[[Page H277]]

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, because there is only 
a second left, this is not a killer amendment. We will support and 
advocate the Airports Authority to name the terminal.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hansen). Is the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania opposed to the motion to recommit?
  Mr. SHUSTER. I am, Mr. Speaker; and I yield to my good friend the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the distinguished Majority Whip.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Shuster) is recognized for 5 minutes, and he yields to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. DeLay).
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, this motion to recommit is one of the saddest 
motions I have ever seen. This is, to me, a personal insult to Ronald 
Reagan. I can understand voting against the bill if my colleagues do 
not want the airport named after Ronald Reagan. But to say that it is 
okay to name a terminal after Ronald Reagan is an insult to the name of 
one of the greatest presidents that has ever served this country, and I 
hope the Members will understand it that way.
  If they want to vote against the bill, vote against it. Or if they 
want to name this terminal after a congressman, go right ahead.
  In Houston, Texas, we named a terminal after Mickey Leland; and he 
deserved the naming of that terminal. But we named the entire airport 
after George Bush. And to name it after a terminal is just an insult. I 
hope our Members will vote no against this motion to recommit.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, make no mistake about it, this does kill 
the naming of the airport for Ronald Reagan. President Reagan deserves 
more than simply to have a terminal bearing his name. Other important 
people, including presidents of the United States, have airports named 
after them. The Kennedy Airport is named after President John F. 
Kennedy, not simply a terminal at the airport.
  Mr. Speaker, the airport in Houston, the airport, is named after 
President Bush, not simply a terminal. Washington-Dulles International 
Airport, the airport, is named after a former Secretary of State, not 
simply a terminal. The John Wayne Airport is named after an actor, not 
simply a terminal. In all of these cases, the entire airport is named 
for the individual, named after an important person.
  President Reagan's legacy is worthy of similar treatment, indeed even 
greater treatment. I strongly oppose this motion to recommit and urge 
its rejection.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 5 of rule XV, the Chair 
will reduce to a minimum of 5 minutes the period of time within which a 
vote by electronic device, if ordered, will be taken on the question of 
passage of the bill.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 186, 
nays 237, not voting 8, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 5]

                               YEAS--186

     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Bentsen
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Cardin
     Carson
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Cummings
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Engel
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gephardt
     Goode
     Gordon
     Green
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Holden
     Hooley
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     John
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith, Adam
     Snyder
     Spratt
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Thompson
     Tierney
     Torres
     Towns
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates

                               NAYS--237

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Brady
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Filner
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gingrich
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kim
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moran (KS)
     Morella
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pappas
     Parker
     Paul
     Paxon
     Pease
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Redmond
     Regula
     Riggs
     Riley
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryun
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stump
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Becerra
     Ehlers
     Eshoo
     Gonzalez
     Herger
     Hoyer
     Ney
     Schiff

                              {time}  1543

  Mr. STARK and Mr. HORN changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Mr. BARCIA changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hansen). The question is on the passage 
of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5 minute vote.

[[Page H278]]

  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 240, 
nays 186, not voting 5, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 6]

                               YEAS--240

     Aderholt
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Brady
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gingrich
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kim
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     Martinez
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Meehan
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moran (KS)
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pappas
     Parker
     Paxon
     Pease
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Redmond
     Regula
     Riggs
     Riley
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryun
     Salmon
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stump
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Vento
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NAYS--186

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Bentsen
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Cardin
     Carson
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Cummings
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Edwards
     Engel
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Goode
     Gordon
     Green
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hamilton
     Hastings (FL)
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     John
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Markey
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHale
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meek
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith, Adam
     Snyder
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Thompson
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Torres
     Towns
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Becerra
     Eshoo
     Gonzalez
     Herger
     Schiff

                              {time}  1554

  Mr. DEUTSCH changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The title of the bill was amended so as to read: ``A bill to rename 
the Washington National Airport located in the District of Columbia and 
Virginia as the `Ronald Reagan National Airport'.''.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________