Paul Coverdell: “once again this argument, which I just simply do not understand, suggesting that the President's family somehow has to…”

“once again this argument, which I just simply do not understand, suggesting that the President's family somehow has to come here and seek homage, or lobby the Congress--it is an incredible argument. That family would never do that. Anybody waiting for some communique or something of that nature--I would not hold my breath. As I said a moment ago, this is something the Nation has to feel it needs to do. It is a ``thank you'' that they need to express; our country, our citizens. There is no way that family would come here lobbying for this kind of thing. I am always surprised when it is suggested that we have not heard or something. That is disappointing. Mr. President, again I want to make it clear, the sponsors are going to oppose any of these amendments that change the rules retroactively, that impose some new constraint on this redesignation or some new constraint on the Congress. The concept of putting something in place prospectively may be laudable. There are several amendments here by Members on the other side who have declared they are going to vote for the redesignation but they have another issue that they are bringing forward. I think that is appropriate. But the amendments that reach backwards are not acceptable on our side. The argument that a local city or authority has jurisdiction here is, in my judgment, a specious argument. The Federal Government's relationship with Washington National Airport is indisputable.…”