[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 6 (Wednesday, February 4, 1998)]
[House]
[Page H305]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         OPPOSITION TO RENAMING OF WASHINGTON NATIONAL AIRPORT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Brown) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to 
explain my opposition to the bill passed today renaming Washington 
National Airport Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.
  First of all, as a member of the Subcommittee on Aviation, let me say 
that it is inappropriate that we reported this bill without hearing or 
markup in subcommittee. Hearings are a very important part of the 
political process here in Congress. That is where we learn what the 
implications of our actions might be, including the cost of renaming 
the airport, which includes changing signs around the region and 
airport designator codes around the world. Today the leadership ushered 
through a bill without knowing what the real costs or the impact would 
be to the Washington metropolitan region.
  Second, naming, in this case renaming, a building or airport is a 
very important decision. In respect to the family and the memory of the 
person named, there should be bipartisan support. And there should be 
no opposition from the Member of Congress whose district contains the 
facility.
  None of my colleagues would want the Federal Government to come into 
their district and rename an airport without the support of the airport 
authority. That is what happened today. That is not what Ronald Reagan 
stood for.
  My opposition is not only with the process, but also with the fact 
that naming this airport after Ronald Reagan is a totally inappropriate 
way to honor him. President Reagan's legacy will not be for aviation or 
transportation. It will be for his efforts to build a strong military 
and, with the support, I might add, of a Democratic Congress, bringing 
an end to the Cold War. A fitting honor to him would, therefore, be a 
defense-related one.
  Well, guess what? In the year 2000 a United States Air Force carrier 
will be named in his honor. President Reagan will join great Presidents 
such as Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt and Kennedy, and this is a 
fitting honor. We have also named the second largest Federal building 
in his honor. A new Federal trade center just a few blocks from the 
White House bears his name for millions of tourists to see each year. 
What more could be done to honor a President still living?
  I think for now we have done enough. History will still have to judge 
the Reagan era, and before we go further in naming things around the 
country, we should view it in a proper context, after sufficient time 
has passed.
  But most important, why the airport? Ronald Reagan's aviation 
policies were controversial, and not all Americans agreed with his 
policy. Many Americans do not feel that running up billions and 
billions in deficits was good policy. We should respect their feelings 
and not force them to enter this great city through a controversial 
monument. The word national welcomes everyone, and that is what this 
country and city are all about.
  I hate to be put in this position, when we were pressured to vote on 
an important issue that will be costly, involving wrongful governmental 
intervention into local business and renaming a public facility, 
something we have never done before.
  This is not a time for this discussion when President Reagan is ill.
  I have to say that this is a sad day in this Congress.

                          ____________________