[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 47 (Thursday, April 13, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H2329-H2330]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DO WHAT IS RIGHT FOR AMERICA, NOT WHAT IS RIGHT FOR POLITICAL REASONS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 6, 1999, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) is recognized for
10 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I heard an interesting talk by one of the
Senators from the State of Utah wherein he talked about his service in
the White House under the Nixon years. What I found interesting about
it was that he talked about the days of Watergate, and he said the
thing that was feared the most in the White House was the Attorney
General's office.
Now, I find that very interesting that the Attorney General's office
was feared by the President and the President's cabinet. Well, now, Mr.
Speaker, I would like to point out that we have an interesting
situation going on in a little island down by Puerto Rico. It is called
Vieques. Vieques has been a training island for many, many years for
the Navy and the Marines.
In fact, that is where they get their final test. That is where they
go, before they are deployed to the Persian Gulf or some other hostile
place. They go down there and the Marines hit the beach. And as they
do, there is fire from those ships, live fire over their heads. Then we
have a situation where
[[Page H2330]]
actual fighter planes come in and strafe, and then bombers go in. And
they do all this as the final preparation before we put all these fine
young people in harm's way.
It is interesting that the Eisenhower went out untrained. They did
not have the ability to do it. And now the Washington, another aircraft
carrier, is going out untrained without the ability to do it. Why is
this? It is because we had a very interesting situation occur. A number
of people went in and invaded that base. A United States military base.
They invaded it.
Now, what should happen there? Obviously, what should happen, the
Marines and the Navy should kick them off and turn them over to the
Justice Department. And the Justice Department, at that point, should
prosecute them for what they have done.
Mr. Speaker, I do not think a lot of people realize that in the
United States there are 48 States that have live fire. What if some
environmental group or others went in and took it over? Do we stand by
and say they can have a vote, and if they vote right, we would give
them $40 million, like we do there? I hardly believe it.
So, Mr. Speaker, I have written the Attorney General, as a member of
the Committee on Armed Services, and I have asked the question, what is
the Attorney General doing to take these people off, who are nothing
more than trespassers? The answer to that is that they have done
nothing.
Now, today, in the paper I read where an extreme environmentalist, a
lawyer by the name of Robert F. Kennedy, Junior, will go to Vieques
this Monday and he will scuba dive and he will play down there to see
what is going on. I called today and we informed the Attorney General's
office that a law is about to be broken, and I asked what was going to
be done about it. So far we have heard absolutely nothing.
Mr. Speaker, I do not know if a lot of folks realize that in my years
here in Congress I served for 14 years on the ethics committee. For 2
years I chaired the committee. It was my responsibility to talk to
Democrats and Republicans alike and say this: You cannot solicit funds
from a Federal building, period. You cannot do that. You will be in
violation if you do.
I find it very interesting and disagree respectfully with the Vice
President of the United States who made the statement that there was no
controlling authority because he solicited funds from the White House.
If the White House is not a Federal building, my goodness, what is a
Federal building in America today?
So I wrote to the FEC, the Federal Election Commission, and I asked
them to please explain why the Vice President, in violation, could do
that. I knew what their answer would be. They said, we understand the
law, but that I would have to call the Attorney General. So we wrote
the Attorney General 3 months ago and asked the question, why is it the
Vice President has no controlling authority? And if that is the case,
then do 535 Members of the Senate and the House not have exactly that
same thing? We could sit in our offices, call anybody we want, solicit
money from people, even foreign nationals. Why could we not do that?
I find it interesting, Mr. Speaker, that we have not had the Attorney
General write us back. So I have had my legislative director, Mr. Bill
Johnson, call them on a regular basis and ask them if they would please
respond to our letter. And every day we get the same thing, which is,
oh, we are working on that. Does it take 3 months to answer a simple
letter asking if there is no controlling legal authority? And if that
is the case, 535 of us should have exactly the same rights to do it.
I imagine we will hear about it, maybe in the second week of
November. Because, again, the Attorney General is dragging her feet.
Mr. Speaker, if I may mention one other issue. In September of 1996,
safely on the South River of the Grand Canyon, the President of the
United States put 1.7 million acres into a national monument. Now, what
authority did he use to do that? He used what is called the 1906
Antiquity Law. Which is a very short law. It is only two paragraphs.
But it says he should consider an archeological or a historic thing.
Now, I would ask respectfully of the President of the United States
why he did not do that in that proclamation. And in January of this
year, why did he not do it on the strip of Arizona; why did he not do
it in Phoenix. Why did he not do it? And now this Saturday, rumor is,
and I admit I am paranoid, because I hear these rumors and I know they
are going to happen, that down in Sequoia Forest in California there
will be another national monument. I would just disagree with the
President and ask him to please obey the law this time.
And why is he doing these things? We subpoenaed those papers, and in
those papers the White House, the Department of the Interior, and the
Council on Quality Control said exactly the same thing; we are doing it
for political reasons. My goodness, why in this Nation do we do things
for political reasons?
I still remember sitting with President Ronald Reagan who made the
statement, ``First and foremost we will do what is right for America.''
Not first and foremost we will do what is right for political reasons.
Mr. Speaker, I am just hoping in these three examples, Vieques, the
ethics committee, the soliciting funds and the Sequoia Park, that
people will follow the law for a change. It would be very refreshing to
see this.
____________________