REFERENCE: Vol. 135 No. 49

TITLE: DIRE EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS AND TRANSFERS, URGENT SUPPLEMENTALS, AND CORRECTING ENROLLMENT ERRORS ACT OF 1989

SPEAKER: Mr. WEISS; Mr. CONTE;

TEXT:
   Text that appears in UPPER CASE identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by a Member of the House on the floor.
 

Mr. WEISS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this bill, and especially the provision providing for funding for the Japanese-Americans intered during the Second World War.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE PROVISION IN THIS MEASURE WHICH HELPS TO REDRESS THE WRONGS PERPETRATED BY OUR GOVERNMENT AGAINST AMERICAN CITIZENS OF JAPANESE DESCENT DURING WORLD WAR II. THE BILL APPROPRIATES $250 MILLION TO FUND THE PROGRAM AUTHORIZED BY THE CIVIL LIBERTIES ACT OF 1988, WHICH WAS PASSED BY BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS LAST YEAR.

THE INTERNMENT POLICY UNDERTAKEN BY THE U.S. GOVERNMENT DURING WORLD WAR II WAS A TRAGIC ERROR. THE POLICY AUTHORIZED U.S. ARMY TROOPS TO ROUND UP THOUSANDS OF JAPANESE-AMERICANS ON THE WEST COAST AND FORCE THEM INTO RELOCATION CAMPS. THIS DISGRACEFUL PROGRAM WAS NOT MOTIVATED BY REASON, IT WAS DRIVEN BY WARTIME HYSTERIA AND RACIAL PREJUDICE.

DURING MY ASSIGNMENT AS A MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY TO JAPAN IN 1946-47, I MET A NUMBER OF JAPANESE-AMERICANS WHO HAD FLED THE UNITED STATES AND RETURNED TO JAPAN BECAUSE OF THEIR MISTREATMENT HERE. THAT PEOPLE SHOULD EMIGRATE FROM THE UNITED STATES TO FLEE PERSECUTION DEMONSTRATES HOW FAR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAD STRAYED FROM THE PRINCIPLES UPON WHICH THIS NATION WAS FOUNDED.

MR. CHAIRMAN, THERE IS NO ADEQUATE FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR THE FUNDAMENTAL VIOLATION OF CIVIL LIBERTIES AND THE HUMILIATION THAT THESE INDIVIDUALS SUFFERED. HOWEVER, THE PAYMENTS TO THE SURVIVING INTERNEES FUNDED BY THIS LEGISLATION ARE A SYMBOL OF THE STRONG AFFIRMATION BY THIS GOVERNMENT THAT A TERRIBLE MISTAKE WAS MADE WHICH WILL NEVER BE REPEATED.

Mr. CONTE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, a lot has been said about the Conte amendment, which I decided not to offer. I did offer it in committee, but I got beat, and I mean, beat tough. And I gave a lot of thought to whether to offer it. Instead I argued here in the well against adoption of the rule. I thought that was the proper thing to do -- not give a waiver, of the Budget Act, send this bill back to the Committee on Appropriations, and let us bring out a lean bill. And if any chairman of any subcommittee, those great cardinals of the U.S. House of Representatives, wanted to beef up his chapter, let him take it out of his bill some other place. Pay as you go.

It is easy to put money in a bill. It is a cinch. I have done it myself. I might be one of the bigger culprits in the House of Representatives; I will admit it. It is easy to put it in. But it is darned tough to take it out.

Now my dear and beloved friend, Mr. Foley, mentioned what he said was the one difference between my amendment and his amendment -- at least what was my amendment. I was glad to see him incorporate 90 percent of my amendment into his, and glad to see him go for a little fiscal responsibility on that side of the aisle. But there was another big difference in my amendment. My amendment cut $944 million of real money.

I cut out $453 million in drug programs; I cut $250 million in the Japanese-American internment repayment; I cut $241 million for homeless programs.

It was painful, painful for me to do that. But I served on the 1987 budget summit with our leader, and I complimented him after that. He was a great chairman, one of the best. We would have never had an agreement if it was not for the majority leader, Mr. Foley, one of the finest men I have ever met in my life. We signed in blood on that agreement, and we said "no more supplementals."

I used to get banged on the head here on the well every time we took up a supplemental. They said, "You guys on appropriations are a bunch of fakers. You always know how to get around the budget. You cut your bills and then you come around with a supplemental later on and put it all back in."

"No," we said, "no more of that, no more trickery here. We are going to play above the table." And we did. So this is the first bill, that tests us the first real test.

A lot of remarks were made today about the Contra aid. I voted against the Contra aid. In full committee, I said, "Look, how in the heck can we vote for Contra aid and not vote money for the veterans? I don't know how you can go home and justify a thing like this."

I voted against the Contra aid, but I am standing here today saying vote against the Foley amendment. That hurts me to be opposed to Mr. Foley. I think I am with him 99 percent of the time. He is a beautiful human being and he is a great leader.

Today he is wrong.

We ought to vote against the Foley amendment, vote against the bill, and let us send this bill back to the committee and come out with a fiscally responsible bill. As Bill Natcher said, take care of the veterans health care, take care of the firefighters, take care of the Soviet refugees, and peacekeeping.

Put in the guaranteed student loans, the trade adjustment assistance, the foster care money, all mandatory, not discretionary. Take care of all those things which are mandatory, and the discretionary spending I mentioned, and weed out the rest.

In the Labor/HHS/Education Subcommittee, we didn't add one penny in our section. When we marked it up, they tried, and our good chairman, the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Natcher] said, "No, no, this is not the place to do it. Do it in the regular bill. Hold off on this amendment. Hold off on that amendment," and we did. We did not add one plug nickel.

 [*H1419]  So I think the proper way to go is to defeat the Foley amendment, defeat the bill, let us get back to committee tomorrow and bring out another bill, and it will go through here like a hot knife going through butter.

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I am tempted to believe that the gentleman from Massachusetts invented the phrase "Kill with kindness," and appreciate the generous remarks. If I had more time I would yield him some additional time.

....

 [*H1421]  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Washington [Mr. Foley].

The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes appeared to have it.

RECORDED VOTE

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The vote was taken by electronic device; and there were -- ayes 172, noes 252, not voting 9, as follows:

(See Roll No. 35 in the ROLL segment.)

Messrs. VISCLOSKY, DURBIN, ROWLAND of Georgia, and DERRICK changed their vote from "aye" to "no."

Messrs. BRYANT, WAXMAN, CONYERS, and GRAY changed their vote from "no" to "aye."

So the amendment was rejected.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Mr. WHITTEN. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

The motion was agreed to.

Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, Mr. Glickman, 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. 2072) making dire emergency supplemental appropriations and transfers, urgent supplementals, and correcting enrollment errors for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1989, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.