The only thing I can say for it is that I wish the gentleman had been here in 1995 when the Republican majority forced upon National Airport and the Washington Metropolitan Area Government Authority, Airport Authority, the changing of the name to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. And they did so, I say to the gentleman from Idaho, with their finger in the nose of the authorities, saying either you make the changes and you spend the money or we'll take your money away from you. And they said it right here on this floor. What was the purpose of changing the name of that airport? No useful benefit. We are creating a new safety emphasis for the Federal Railroad Administration. In 1996, this committee and this Congress created a Motor Carrier Safety Administration. I didn't hear anybody jump up on the floor and say, Oh, my God, it's going to cost money to change the stationery of the agency. Baloney. It doesn't cost any money at all. You just use up the existing stationery you have and print new ones. It doesn't cost you any new money. This is bogus. I have no idea where people get such ideas as this. But when it comes to some priority that some people on the other side of the aisle had in previous Congresses, they shove it down the throat of the Washington Metropolitan Airport Authority and say, You will change the name on all the facilities.
James Oberstar: “The only thing I can say for it is that I wish the gentleman had been here in 1995 when the Republican majority forced…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the renaming of National Airport and its implications during a floor speech.
Share
More from James Oberstar
I wish to express my appreciation to the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Mica, who made a very elaborate statement about the provisions of the bill. I will not elaborate on it, except to concur with him that we are getting the…
I wish with all my heart we didn't have to be here and that the other body had acted on this measure in the 110th Congress and earlier in this Congress, but that's not the case, unfortunately. Without going into any detail or further…
We want to protect our waters. We want to protect our wetlands. We want to provide for future generations.
An orphan site is one of the issues to be addressed, as we do under the Superfund Act. Yet the order of priority for response under the law, its first responsibility, is for the responsible party to act to the limit of its liability under…





