DOCSLIB.ORG

Second Concurrent Resolution on the Budget-Fiscal Year 1980

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Second Concurrent Resolution on the Budget-Fiscal Year 1980 96TH: CONGRESS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT 1st Session No. 96-435 SECOND CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET-FISCAL YEAR 1980 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO ACCOMPANY H. Con. Res. 186- REVISING THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET FOR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1980 TOGETHER WITH SUPPLEMENTAL, ADDITIONAL, MINORITY, AND ADDITIONAL MINORITY VIEWS SEPTEMBER 14, 1979.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 48-0690O WASHINGTON : 1979 R 3 I COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET ROBERT N. GIAIMO, Connecticut, Chairman JIM WRIGHT, Texas DELBERT L. LATTA, Ohio THOMAS L. ASHLEY, Ohio JAMES T. BROYHILL, North Carolina LOUIS STOKES, Ohio BARBER B. CONABLE, JR., New York ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN, New York MARJORIE S. HOLT, Maryland DAVID R. OBEY, Wisconsin RALPH S. REGULA, Ohio PAUL SIMON, Illinois BUD SHUSTER, Pennsylvania NORMAN Y. MINETA, California BILL FRENZEL, Minnesota JIM MATTOX, Texas ELDON RUDD, Arizona JAMES R. JONES, Oklahoma STEPHEN J. SOLARZ, New York WILLIAM M. BRODHEAD, Michigan TIMOTHY E. WIRTH, Colorado LEON E. PANETTA, California RICHARD A. GEPHARDT, Missouri BILL NELSON, Florida WILLIAM H. GRAY III, Pennsylvania MACE BROiDE, Emeoustfe Director WENDELL BELEW, Chief Counsel ALLEN C. GROMMET, Chief Economist BRUCE MEREDITHi, Director,Budget Priorities CONTENTS Page H. Con. Res. 186 ------------------------------------------------- v I. Purpose of resolution ----------------------------------------- 1 II. Overview of resolution ---------------------------------------- 5 III. Economic outlook and fiscal policy ------------------------------ 9 IV. Impact of the economy on the budget -------------------------- 25 V. Energy, defense, and other major budget proposals ---------------- 27 VI. Revenues -------------------------------------------------- 37 VII. The deficit and federal debt ----------------------------------- 39 VIII. Multiyear budget outlook ------------------------------------- 43 IX. Legislative Savings ------------------------------------------ 67 X. Spending by function for Fiscal Year 1980 ---------------------- 69 XI. Appendices: A. Text of resolution ------------------------------------ 141 B. Summary tables ------------------------------------- 144 C. Description of functions ------------------------------- 152 D. Multiyear budget projections: revenues and budget func- tions -------------------------------------------- 165 E. Controllability of federal outlays ------------------------ 233 F. Legislative savings ----------------------------------- 248 G. Federal aid to state and local governments --------------- 252 H. Tax expenditures ------------------------------------ 258 I. Estimating differences from the First Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 1980 -------------------------------- 269 J. Energy: background including President's proposal --------- 272 Additional views of: Hon. Jim Wright -------------------------------------------- 280 Hon. Norman Y. Mineta -------------------------------------- 281 Hon. Jim Mattox -------------------------------------------- 283 Hons. Louis Stokes and William H. Gray III --------------------- 284 Hon. James R. Jones ----------------------------------------- 286 Hon. Leon E. Panetta ---------------------------------------- 287 Hons. Richard A. Gephardt, Bill Nelson, Leon E. Panetta and Timothy E. Wirth ----------------------------------------- 289 Minority views of Representatives Delbert L. Latta, James T. Broyhill, Barber B. Conable, Jr., Marjorie S. Holt, Ralph Regula, Bud Shuster, Bill Frenzel, and Eldon Rudd ------------------------------------ 291 Supplemental views of Hon. Marjorie S. Holt ------------------------- 305 Additional minority views of Hon. Eldon Rudd ----------------------- 307 (II) 96TH CONGRESS t HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT 1 t Session J I No. 96-435 SECOND CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET-FISCAL YEAR 1980 SEPTEMBER 14, 1979.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. GiAixo, from the Committee on the Budget, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. Con. Res. 186] . PURPOSE OF THE RESOLUTION The Congressional Budget Act provides for the consideration of at least two concurrent resolutions on the budget for each fiscal year. The first budget resolution, which is scheduled for adoption by mid- May, sets preliminary targets for overall spending (budget authority and outlays), revenues, and the public debt as well as budget author- ity and outlay targets for each of the 19 functional categories of the budget. The second budget resolution, scheduled for consideration by the Congress in September, sets binding ceilings on total spending (budget authority and outlays) and a floor for revenues. In addition, the Budget Act provides that the second budget resolution may con- tain language directing House and Senate committees to report legis- lation increasing or decreasing revenues or spending in accordance with the levels set forth in the budget resolution. Congress may not adjourn ske die until it has completed action on the second budget resolution and reconciliation legislation if any is required. In preparing the Second Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 1980, the Committee relied upon a substantial body of information updat- ing the First Budget Resolution. On July 12, 1979, Congress received a Mid-Session Review of the 1980 Budget, containing revised esti- mates of spending and revenues as well as an undated economic fore- cast. On July 31, 1979, these estimates were revised to reflect new en- ergy estimates. Subsequently, the Congressional Budget Office re- viewed the OMB submission and presented its findings to the Com- mittee. Pursuant to the Committee's invitation to comment on the Second Budget Resolution, a number of House committees have sub- mitted their views on matters relating to the fiscal year 1980 budget. The Committee heard testimony from administration economic and policy advisers, including Treasury Secretary W. Michael Blumen- thal, Office of Management and Budget Director James T. McIntyre, Energy Secretary James R. Schlesinger, and Council of Economic Advisers Vice-Chairman Lyle E. Gramley. In addition, testimony was received from Congressional Budget Office Director Alice M. Rivlin, Federal Reserve Board Chairman Paul A. Volcker, Professor Walter W. Heller and Leif H. Olson, Chairman of the Economic Policy Committee of Citibank. PROVISIONS OF LAW RELATING TO THE SECOND BUDGET RESOLUTION Unlike the First Budget Resolution (H. Con. Res. 107), which es- tablished targets to guide subsequent congressional action on revenue, spending, and debt measures, this resolution establishes a floor on revenues and a ceiling on spending which shall be applicable to all subsequent revenue and spending legislation affecting fiscal year 1980. Once this resolution is adopted, neither House may take any action which would cause spending to exceed the budgeted level for budget authority and outlays, or reduce revenues below the level specified in the resolution. Determinations of the House and Senate Budget Com- mittees are the basis for concluding whether legislation would cause the appropriate levels of spending or revenues to be breached. FLOOR PROCEDUIS FOR THE SECOND BUDGET RESOLUTION The Budget Act provides for special procedures for considering budget resolutions in the House of Representatives and the Senate. The House procedures include the following important elements: (1) A budget resolution may be considered only after a 10-day layover period, which begins the day the report is available to Members. (2) A budget resolution is highly privileged and may be brought to the floor without a rule providing for floor consid- eration. (3) Ten hours are provided for general debate on a budget resolution, with amendments to be read under the 5-minute rule. Five hours are provided for debate on a conference report. (4) It is not in order to recommit or reconsider a budget reso- lution or a conference report on a resolution. Motions to post- pone or to proceed to other business and appeals from rulings of the Chair are to be decided without debate. (5) After the Committee of the Whole has reported, the House may consider such technical amendments as are necessary to make a budget resolution mathematically consistent. THE REcoNCILIATION PROCESS The reconciliation process has been utilized on only one budget resolution to date, the Second Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 1976, which directed the Ways and Means and Finance Committees to submit legislation decreasing revenues by $6.4 billion. This year the Senate Budget Committee has reported a resolution containing reconciliation language pertaining to expenditures. S. Con. Res. 36, the Second Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 1980, directs seven committees to reduce spending by a total of $3.15 billion in budget authority and $4.0 billion in outlays. Reconciliation language directs one or more committees of the Congress to submit legislation increasing or decreasing revenues, spending or the limit on the public debt. The purpose of the recon- ciliation process is to require committees to implement the decisions made in the second budget resolution. If the reconciliation directive involves more than one committee in each House, then all committees affected by the directive are to submit their recommendations to the Budget Committee which will assemble all the recommendations into one package for action by the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 OSWALD's VISIT to MEXICO CITY A. Chronology1 07/20/63 CIA
    OSWALD'S VISIT TO MEXICO CITY A. Chronology1 07/20/63 CIA headquarters receives a cable (internal # 83858) from presumably Mexico City Station (addresser is blocked out on cable) informing them that an unidentified American telephoned the Cuban Embassy on July 19 trying for the second time in a week to establish contact. While speaking with Maria Luisa Calderon, he said that he was staying at the Alameda Hotel and would be leaving for Dallas on American Airlines on July 20. He also said that he refused to go to the Cuban Embassy because there was a possibility that an American spy might see him. After being lured to the hotel restaurant, this American identified himself as Eldon Hensen, cattleman from Athens, Texas. He said that he was willing to help the Castro government, but he wanted money for the cooperation. Hensen agreed to accept phone calls from this contact but only with key word "Laredo." (This document was included in Oswald's 201 file prior to the assassination. Source: Document id #: 1993.08.04.08:25:27:530053) 09/02/63 A Russian speaking female contacts the Soviet Embassy and asks 1 If not otherwise indicated, the source of information for the chronological entries is the "Oswald's Visit" subfile of the Mexico City subject file. 1 to speak to Svyatoslav Fedorovich Kuznetsov, KGB. She identifies herself by name and as a professor from New Orleans. She also gives the address of her apartment and requests a meeting. This lead is promptly followed up by station investigative assets who identify the woman and learn that she is attending a philosophers' conference at the University of Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • Grand Ballroom West)
    This document is from the collections at the Dole Archives, University of Kansas http://dolearchives.ku.edu GOPAC SEMI-ANNUAL MEETING Wednesday, November 19 2:00 p.m. Sheraton Grand Hotel (Grand Ballroom West) You are scheduled to address the GOPAC meeting at 2:00 p.m. Lynn Byrd of GOPAC will meet you at the Sheraton Grand's front entrance and escort you to the Grand Ballroom West. You will be introduced by Newt Gingrich and your speech, including Q&A, should last no more than 25 minutes. The theme of the meeting is "a time to look back, a time to look forward" and GOPAC asks that you give an analysis of the elections and what the results mean to the Republican party and the country. (Attached is information on the Senate, House, Governor, and State Legislature elections.) There will be about 75-100 people (GOPAC Charter Members and guests) in the audience; no press or media has been invited. Speeches by Alexander Haig, Frank Fahrenkopf, Governor du Pont, Jack Kemp, Jeane Kirkpatrick, and Governor Kean will precede your remarks; Pat Robertson and Donald Rumsfeld are scheduled to speak after you. Expected to be in attendance at your luncheon speech are: Congressmen Dick Cheney, Joe DioGuardi, Robert Lagomarsino, and Tom Loeffler. Author Tom Clancy (Hunt for Red October/Red Storm Rising) is also expected to attend. GOPAC Background GOPAC was formed in 1978 and its purpose is to raise funds to elect state and local Republicans nationwide. This meeting is for Charter Members, who give or raise $10,000 a year for GOPAC.
    [Show full text]
  • Extensions of Remarks 3511
    February 21, 1980 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 3511 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS THE IMPACT AND COST OF tant costs to convert, massive public confu­ not favored over our customary American METRIC CONVERSION sion and hardship, and economic disloca­ .system. tions that would interfere with our entire Pro-metric Board members showed their national economy and productivity. open contempt for the GAO findings short­ HON. SAMUEL L. DEVINE These disadvantages of metric conversion . ly after its report was released. OF OHIO were confirmed by an exhaustive two-year At a Board meeting in Washington. simi­ IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES study of the whole metric issue by the Gen­ lar to the one Just held by the Board in Ari­ eral Accounting Office, which resulted in a zona, Board members were asked at a public Thursday, February 21, 1980 comprehensive 757-page report to Congress forum for their view of the GAO study. •Mr. DEVINE. Mr. ·speaker, there is in October, 1978. Board member Bruce Johnson, who repre­ Following surveys and interviews of thou­ sents U.S. science on the Board, said .of the a great deal of confusion among the sands of business and iridustry leaders In GAO report: · · public about our country's policy on every sector of our economy, the GAO told the use of the metric system. "I think we should let dead dogs lie." . Congress that no major industry or sector Board member Roger Travis, who repre­ Many people have been led to be- of our economy could see or show any bene­ sents small business which ls overwhelming- .
    [Show full text]
  • Xfbi-Bul-March 02
    The Tucson Credentials March, 2002997 1 "The Tucson Credentials" Vol. 14 No. 3 Tucson Chapter March, 2002 2 The Society of Former Special Agents of the FBI From the Chairman's TOM MCGORRAY -Editor F Corner 2614 W. BEN HOGAN DR. B TUCSON, AZ. 85742-9139 I Tom McGorray ( 520 ) 297-7878 Fax: 520-297-9092 Some Thoughts on Friendship E-Mail: [email protected] We lost two more friends from our FBI family; Bob Lamphere and Eldon Rudd. Two of our very best. Both were former fellow FBI agents, both were retired colleagues, both were Thom'sHome Page: friends. Charles Colton said that “True friendship is like sound http://www.xgboy.com health; the value of it is seldom known until it be lost.” That is very true with Bob and Eldon. Emily Dickinson said, “My friends are my estate.” How very true. "The Tucson Credentials" The Tucson chapter is a small part of our FBI family. We is the are brought together in retirement, from an organization that official publication of the was a very important part of out lives. This relationship as former Tucson Chapter of the special agents is a very special one, be it for a year or twenty, we Society of Former Special Agents of the FBI. served together, working in an area of life that was exciting and Its purpose is to inform current dangerous. Society members concerning Elbert Hubard said “Your friend is the man who knows all our activities, and the activities, about you, and still likes you.” -We know a lot about each other history and heritage of the FBI.
    [Show full text]
  • Treaty Termination and the Separation of Powers: the Constitutional Controversy Continues in Goldwater V
    Denver Journal of International Law & Policy Volume 9 Number 2 Summer Article 6 May 2020 Treaty Termination and the Separation of Powers: The Constitutional Controversy Continues in Goldwater v. Carter, 100 S. Ct. 533 (1979) (Mem.) David A. Gottenborg Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/djilp Recommended Citation David A. Gottenborg, Treaty Termination and the Separation of Powers: The Constitutional Controversy Continues in Goldwater v. Carter, 100 S. Ct. 533 (1979) (Mem.), 9 Denv. J. Int'l L. & Pol'y 239 (1980). This Case Notes is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Denver Sturm College of Law at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Denver Journal of International Law & Policy by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],dig- [email protected]. CASE NOTE Treaty Termination and the Separation of Powers: The Constitutional Controversy Continues in Goldwater v. Carter, 100 S. Ct. 533 (1979) (Mem.) DAVID A. GOTrENBORG* I. INTRODUCTION Although the United States Constitution expressly provides how the President may make treaties,1 it is completely silent as to the process by which treaties should be terminated. In Goldwater v. Carter,2 a number of members of Congress sought to have the constitutional question re- garding the proper procedures required for the termination of treaties ju- dicially resolved.3 The suit was filed in response to President Carter's an- nouncement 4 that he was terminating the Mutual Defense Treaty of 1954 with the Republic of China.' Therefore, while the narrower issue was whether the President could unilaterally terminate the Mutual Defense Treaty without first consulting the Congress, the entire separation of powers question as to the extent of permissible congressional involvement in treaty terminations was opened for judicial review.
    [Show full text]
  • 6/26194 Lear 4Im, Thanks for the Two Version of 89-43-104,9Ne Partly Redacted
    7 6/26194 Lear 4im, Thanks for the two version of 89-43-104,9ne partly redacted. 003 was disclosed to we in 7d-0i22, without prior CIA approval. But in that lawsuit other records relating to the tape were oithhhid and my detailed appeals were ignored. I think it would be good to demand them now and now there cart be do reason for withholding them. As you may remember, I wrote the FBI about thid. What you sent me alone proves it lied to me in telling me that what it transferred to the Archive:; is what it had already discsloced Le me. The unredacted copy lucid, tiat the liexico City LaC "Anderson has arranged for a transcript of th call" that was intercepted. Other disclosed records seem to indicate that Rudd got to Dallas, wheve"eitman picked him up at 'olio field, without such a trans- cript. After the picture he had and the tape,,was listened to Dallas cabled or telepyped a summary of the tape to PIN. it then asked for a transcript and that was sent ii.mtediately. The record that includes the suMmarl and the one that is the transcripyvere withheld from me and J. app Billed that withholding. If you loot at thl e pages the original classification was by the FBI and in my lawsuit. That classification was then unjustified. This was even more true in 1930, when the CIA classified it. tIhat was classified was public knoA_edge. "Secret" appears not to have been on the recod/1. when typed. It is added to the bottoms V11 A '01-,s_the too copies at different points at the bottom.
    [Show full text]
  • The CHAIRMAN. the Distinguished Junior Senator from Arizona, Mr
    34 The CHAIRMAN. The distinguished junior Senator from Arizona, Mr. DeConcini. STATEMENT OF HON. DENNIS DeCONCINI, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA Senator DECONCINI. Mr. Chairman, my fellow colleagues of the Judiciary Committee, it is a great pleasure to join with you and to join Senator Goldwater today in introducing Sandra Day O'Connor to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee for confirmation as an Associate Justice to the U.S. Supreme Court. It is with a sense of history that I find myself presenting to this committee Judge O'Connor, who I believe is about to become the first woman Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court. Judge O'Connor's qualifications are not that she is a woman, although it is certainly long past due that the Supreme Court has its first woman. In fact, the Supreme Court should have more than just one woman. Judge O'Connor's qualifications are many. She has distinguished herself as a judge both at the trial court level and at the appeals court level; as a legislator, where she served as majority leader of the Arizona State Senate and as chairman of one of the major committees; as an attorney, both in private practice and in public service; and as an active private citizen who is willing to devote her time for the benefit of the public as a member of the National Board of the Smithsonian Associates and as president of the board of trustees of the Herd Museum in Phoenix, as well as a long list of public and private service organizations too lengthy to go into today.
    [Show full text]
  • The Following File Is Part of the Arizona Department of Mines and Mineral
    CONTACT INFORMATION Mining Records Curator Arizona Geological Survey 1520 West Adams St. Phoenix, AZ 85007 602-771-1601 http://www.azgs.az.gov [email protected] The following file is part of the Arizona Department of Mines and Mineral Resources Mining Collection ACCESS STATEMENT These digitized collections are accessible for purposes of education and research. We have indicated what we know about copyright and rights of privacy, publicity, or trademark. Due to the nature of archival collections, we are not always able to identify this information. We are eager to hear from any rights owners, so that we may obtain accurate information. Upon request, we will remove material from public view while we address a rights issue. CONSTRAINTS STATEMENT The Arizona Geological Survey does not claim to control all rights for all materials in its collection. These rights include, but are not limited to: copyright, privacy rights, and cultural protection rights. The User hereby assumes all responsibility for obtaining any rights to use the material in excess of “fair use.” The Survey makes no intellectual property claims to the products created by individual authors in the manuscript collections, except when the author deeded those rights to the Survey or when those authors were employed by the State of Arizona and created intellectual products as a function of their official duties. The Survey does maintain property rights to the physical and digital representations of the works. QUALITY STATEMENT The Arizona Geological Survey is not responsible for the accuracy of the records, information, or opinions that may be contained in the files.
    [Show full text]
  • Discusses 820325 Telcon from Anonymous Caller Alleging
    ' ~ %h , _ C 0 ' y" 'l Bruce Babbitt g t G *** g o ' Charles F.Tedford | N RADIATION REGULATORY AGENCY 925 South 52nd Street, Sulle #2 * Te'rnpe, Arizona 85281 * (602)255 4845 '' March 26, 1982' \ Mr. R. E. Vorderbruggen On-Site NRC Inspector Palo Verde Nuclear Power Plant P.O. Box 21324 Phoenix, Arizona 85036 . SUBJECT: Memorandum for the Record Related to Anonymous Telephone Caller Reporting Defective High Pressure System Injection (HIPSI) and Low Pressure System Injection (LIPSI) at Palo Verde Nuclear Power Plant. Dear Mr. Vorderbruggen: 1. The subject individual related that the HIPSI and LIPSI pumps were not adequately electrically designed and inferred the same for the ability to accomodate pressure. 2. The caller stated that he worked for Bechtel and would not provide a name. The individual appeared very knowledgeable regarding the electrical and engineering requirements for the injection pumps. 3. He wanted to know who should be apprised of the problem, and if the Agency regulated Palo Verde. I suggested that he contact Mr. Van Grunt or Mr. Hartley with APS and the NRC on-site inspector since the Agency did not have on ' site jurisdiction over Palo Verde reactors. 4. The call was received about 8:45 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. on Thursday, March 25, 1982. I immediately called Mr. Leon Brown with APS to convey the nature of the call. Subsequently, I tried to get in touch with Herb Book or Frank Wenslawski of Region V, NRC; neither were available. Accordingly, you were contacted. Sincerely, ~ ' A Charles F. Tedford Director 8402130044 831110 i PDR FOIA CFT: cap BERNABE83-A-9 PDR | cc: George Britton, Office-of the Governor Leon Brown, Arizona Public Service Company Ed Van Brunt, Arizona Public Service Company ~ S-K > I * I 'e .
    [Show full text]
  • Extensions of Remarks 27105 Extensions of Remarks
    September 30, 1994 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 27105 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS THE OSHA PLAGUE Imperial Food Products chicken processing worker." While Al Gore's "Reinventing Gov­ plant in Hamlet, NC, that killed 25 employees ernment" report recommends that OSHA pri­ HON. JOEL HEFLEY and injured an additional 55. vatize its inspection duties to increase effi­ The owner of Imperial Food is currently ciency. OF COLORADO serving a 20-year sentence for manslaughter. Even pro-OSHA rhetoric is strained. Labor IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES He's bankrupt and is facing millions in cor­ Secretary Robert Reich recently patted the Friday, September 30, 1994 porate lawsuits. Meanwhile, $16 million in agency on the head by saying, "According to Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, here is the lead worker's compensation has been distributed to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, fatality rates from an article in The Chieftain, the leading the victims and their survivors. have declined since 1971." newspaper in Pueblo, CO: In trying the owner, the prosecutor chose Talk about damning somebody with faint Pueblo's construction boom came to a halt not to use OSHA's criminal penalties because praise. Yes, death rates have been falling this week but not because of the weather, they were too "weak." The State man­ since 1971-they've been falling since 1934- economic, or labor problems. What shut slaughter was chosen instead. and they fell faster before OSHA than they did down many of the new home-building And OSHA itself is being sued by the survi­ after. That's not a recommendation, though, projects in the city and county was word vors urider North Carolina law.
    [Show full text]
  • 216 Senator STEVENS. Mr. Chairman, I Would Like for You And
    216 Senator STEVENS. Mr. Chairman, I would like for you and the members of the committee to know that I have known Justice Rehnquist now since the early fifties. I knew him then as an honest, decent and very sensitive but very brilliant young lawyer. We were part of a group that came here right after we got out of law school, and I had many discussions with him in those days. As a matter of fact, I think we even had one night when we went out on a double-date together. We spent time together as young men. The CHAIRMAN. SO you worked together and dated together; is that it? Senator STEVENS. That is right. Senator BIDEN. But not one another. Senator STEVENS. He was not my date, Mr. Chairman. [Laugh- ter.] I was pleased when his name was submitted in 1971 to become an Associate Justice, and I supported it then with a statement on the floor, which I will be pleased to put in the record again here today. But I want the committee to know that I have been appalled at some of the things I have heard here. I have known this man for many years, and I am, I think you all know, a person who prides himself in believing that we have been part of a generation that has brought great change to this country, and Bill Rehnquist has been part of that change. And he has been a very steady member of the Supreme Court. And I would urge that you report his nomi- nation to become Chief Justice.
    [Show full text]
  • [Smithsonian Institution Appropriations Hearings]
    CP& DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1985 HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES NINETY-EIGHTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES SIDNEY R. YATES, Illinois, Chairman JOHN P. MURTHA, Pennsylvania JOSEPH M. MoDADE, Pennsylvania NORMAN D. DICKS, Washington RALPH REGULA, Ohio WILLIAM R. RATCHFORD, Connecticut TOM LOEFFLER, Texas EDWARD P. BOLAND, Massachusetts LES AuCOIN, Oregon Frederick G. Mohrman, D. Neal Sigmon, Kathleen R. Johnson, and Jocelyn Buck, Staff Assistants PART 8 Page Smithsonian Institution 1 National Endowment for the Arts 265 National Endowment for the Humanities 437 Institute of Museum Services 547 United States Holocaust Memorial Council 567 Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS JAMIE L. WHITTEN, Mississippi, Chairman EDWARD P. BOLAND, Massachusetts SILVIO O. CONTE, Massachusetts WILLIAM H. NATCHER, Kentucky JOSEPH M. McDADE, Pennsylvania NEAL SMITH, Iowa JACK EDWARDS, Alabama JOSEPH P. ADDABBO, New York JOHN T. MYERS, Indiana CLARENCE D. LONG, Maryland J. KENNETH ROBINSON, Virginia SIDNEY R. YATES, Illinois CLARENCE E. MILLER, Ohio DAVID R. OBEY, Wisconsin LAWRENCE COUGHLIN, Pennsylvania EDWARD R. ROYBAL, California C. W. BILL YOUNG, Florida LOUIS STOKES, Ohio JACK F. KEMP, New York TOM BEVILL, Alabama RALPH REGULA, Ohio BILL CHAPPELL, Jr., Florida GEORGE M. O'BRIEN, Illinois BILL ALEXANDER, Arkansas VIRGINIA SMITH, Nebraska JOHN P. MURTHA, Pennsylvania ELDON RUDD, Arizona BOB TRAXLER, Michigan CARL D. PURSELL, Michigan JOSEPH D. EARLY, Massachusetts MICKEY EDWARDS, Oklahoma CHARLES WILSON, Texas BOB LIVINGSTON, Louisiana LINDY (MRS. HALE) BOGGS, Louisiana BILL GREEN, New York NORMAN D.
    [Show full text]