[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 18 (Friday, February 25, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: February 25, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
THE BUZZARDS AMONG US
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I call attention to a news story that
appeared in the Washington Post on February 19, 1994. The news story
carries a headline ``Now Preying in Stafford: The Birds. Vultures
Attack Pets, Terrorize Humans With Hitchcockian Menace.''
I will read excerpts from the story:
With a loaded shotgun sitting next to her back door, Lynn
O'Hara-Yates says she's living in terror of the dozens of
black vultures that gather each morning on her back fence to
stretch their wings, sharpen their talons and wait for lunch.
When the first birds showed up in November, they were a
curiosity. As their numbers multiplied, curiosity turned into
concern despite assurances from state wildlife specialists
and longtime residents that the huge birds wouldn't harm a
living thing.
In the last month, O'Hara-Yates has lost eight ducks from
her pond, all of them picked clean to the bone. Her
neighbor's cat, Stripe, was grabbed by the tail and carried
25 feet in the air for a distance of 100 yards. A vet
stitched up the four talon holes in Stripe's body. Dogs and
horses also have been attacked.
``It's a nightmare,'' said Stripe's owner, Jeude Barrett.
``And we can't do anything. . . . They have no fear.''
Vultures are federally protected animals and cannot be
killed without a permit.
Most of those spotted in Kings Grant are black vultures,
which weigh about five pounds and have a wingspan of five or
six feet. Black vultures are more aggressive than their
cousin, the red-headed turkey vulture, and are common to the
South, according to Paul Engman, a naturalist who works for
the Fairfax County Park Authority.
The birds, commonly called buzzards,
that is what we call them in West Virginia--
prefer their food either dead or dying, Engman said, but on
rare occasions they have been known to swoop down on live
animals.
Bob Thomas, an inspector with the Virginia Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services, has seen horses, lambs,
pigs and newborn calves attacked.
``Normally, they kill the calf before it even gets up. I've
seen them standing in the fields by the dozens, walking
around the cows, just waiting,'' he told the Fredericksburg
Free Lance-Star newspaper.
Thomas, who is working to rid the Kings Grant area of its
vultures, said he understands residents' concerns. ``I would
not be comfortable with a 2-year-old child playing around
them,'' he said. ``When they're hungry, meat's meat.''
Now she (O'Hara'Yates) is applying for her own license to
kill. But even if she doesn't get it, she's armed and ready.
``What else can I do?'' she said. ``One of us is going to
give up, and it's not going to be me. We'll do what we have
to do.''
Now, having prefaced my remarks by this news story, let me say that I
come to the floor this morning to express my utter disgust with the
antics of personnel connected with ABC's Prime Time program.
This morning, while I was walking my dog just before my breakfast, I
was pounced upon by ABC reporter Chris Wallace and his camera crew,
whose desire for a story far exceeded his regard for privacy and
decency.
Generally speaking, I have great respect for the profession of
journalism and for the reporters that I come in contact with through my
work here in the Senate. While I realize we are all reliant on the good
journalism skills of reporters to obtain an accurate accounting of the
issues of the day, it is exactly this type of behavior--this type of
crude, rude behavior--that taints the perception of all reporters and
creates a pervasive attitude of sleaziness and intimidation.
Madam President, I was majority leader during the years 1977, 1978,
1979, and 1980. I was minority leader through the years 1981, 1982,
1983, 1984, 1985, and 1986. And I was majority leader then again in
1987 and 1988, since which time I have been the chairman of the
Appropriations Committee and President pro tempore of the United States
Senate.
I have always been available to the press. I am available to the
press when I go to West Virginia. I respect the press. Over all of
these years, my relations have been good with the press.
I said to Mr. Chris Wallace, when he accosted me out in front of my
house--he and his crew were on the sidewalk which borders my front
yard, and they wanted to ask me about appropriations for the FBI
facility in West Virginia --I stated that I did not have interviews at
my house. I said, ``The place to interview me is at my office. That is
where I do my work. I do not have any interviews here.''
And he persisted, just kept on persisting, wanting to ask a question,
another question. I said, ``I'm not going to break up my few hours at
home for your convenience.'' And I repeated it: ``The place for
interviews with me is my office.''
So then he wanted to know how to go about arranging an interview, and
he mentioned my press secretary's name. I said, ``Yes, call her.'' He
said, ``Well, will you give us an interview?'' I said, ``I do not know.
I do not know what my schedule is. I have been very busy working on the
balanced budget amendment.''
So he understood that there would not be an interview there and that
if there was going to be an interview it would be at my office, and he
knew my press secretary's name.
Well, I came on to the office. I did not get into my office, but out
here just in front of the Capitol, as I was about to come in the door
of the next floor below, here they were.
He did not wait to call my secretary and try to get an appointment
after our little meeting in front of my house. He did not give me time
to get into my office. He did not pursue calling my secretary and
seeing if an appointment could be set up. He meets me at the door down
here.
He wanted to know if I would answer some questions. I said, ``No, not
now.'' He asked if he could have an appointment during the day, or some
such. I said, ``I don't know. I have been busy.''
``Well,'' he said, ``we have been trying to get an interview with
you.''
I said, ``I have been busy. I have been very busy in the balanced
budget amendment debate.'' I said, ``You don't have any sense of
propriety to come out to my house. We had no appointment set up out
there for an interview, but you come out to my house. You have no sense
of propriety.''
``Well, will you see us?''
I said, ``Yes, I will.''
``Well, when?''
I said, ``I cannot state at the moment when.''
Madam President, though I had agreed after this morning's travesty to
see Mr. Wallace, in retrospect I have decided against it. I was
reminded when I got into my office that I had sent a statement
yesterday to Mike Wallace--not to Mike Wallace. I have always thought
well of Mike Wallace, the father of Chris Wallace. And I think, I
really think that Mike Wallace would have been ashamed of his son's
persistence in this rude, crude manner; coming to my house and then
rushing to the Senate, rushing up to the Capitol. He got here before I
did, wanted an interview out there. He did not wait, as I say, to try
to set it up.
And so my staff reminded me that we had sent a statement to Chris
Wallace yesterday. I want to read the statement, and it is as follows:
The Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill signed into
law on February 12, 1994, was a complex piece of legislation.
It was technically three bills rolled into one.
Title I contained over $10 billion for emergencies relating
to the disasters in Los Angeles and in the Midwest, and to
peacekeeping costs connected with U.S. operations in Somalia
and Bosnia. The emergency designation assigned to these costs
were not offset and will add to the deficit. Title II was a
routine supplemental for fiscal year 1994 which represented
program adjustments recommended by the President and Members
of Congress. This title totaled $1.04 billion and was more
than offset by the $3.26 billion in spending cuts contained
in Title III of the bill.
The funding for the FBI was included in title II of the
bill and thus does not add to the deficit. There were deep
concerns over the low attrition levels at the agency, and its
ability to hire personnel to operate the new fingerprint
identification center [which is at Clarksburg, WV]. Quite
frankly, the FBI was in danger of building a state-of-the-art
facility without the employees to run it. At a time when
crime is the number one concern of the American people and
when Congress and the President are searching for solutions
to this epidemic [of crime], it would be foolhardy to deny
our policemen one of the few new [high-tech] weapons in the
crime fighting arsenal. This new fingerprint record system
will support all law enforcement officers [throughout the
Nation] and [will] provide a revolutionary advancement in
fighting crime and drugs. The funding in this bill will
assure Federal, State, and local authorities the tools that
are necessary to help apprehend repeat offenders and is
crucial if violent, recidivist criminals are to be removed
from our [Nation's] streets. To do otherwise would be
wasteful and do a disservice to the law abiding citizens of
this country.
Now, Madam President, as I say, in retrospect, I have decided against
an interview with Mr. Wallace because I do not believe that my views on
that program will get a fair airing, and would more than likely end up
on the cutting room floor. I, therefore, have decided to take my case
to the place where I know it will be heard unedited.
Earlier in the week, Mr. Chris Wallace was told by my staff that I
would be unable to grant an interview because of my involvement in the
current debate on the constitutional amendment to balance the budget.
And so in lieu of this, as I say, I provided ``PrimeTime'' with a
statement regarding their program on the earthquake supplemental, and I
have read that statement. Chris Wallace admitted to my staff earlier
this week that the motivation for this program was ratings driven. It
seems that last week, ``PrimeTime'' aired a new program but lost the
ratings competition to CBS's coverage of the Olympics. Having learned
that lesson, this week ``PrimeTime'' will air a repeat program so this
program on the earthquake supplemental will be an attempt to regain
``PrimeTime's'' position in the ratings game and will air next week,
when the competition from the Olympics will no longer exist.
Freedom of the press--we have been talking a great deal about the
Constitution lately--freedom of the press is one of the rights
enshrined in the Bill of Rights, a right codified to protect the press
against oppression by government or other legal forces in society. But
increasingly, the behavior of certain segments of the press, like the
behavior of ``PrimeTime'' that I just talked about here, that behavior
leads me to wonder if we do not now need an additional amendment
guaranteeing citizens freedom from the press--freedom from the press.
The pursuit of headlines, or worse, the pursuit of sensation, now
leads some reporters and certain media types to violate the rights and
the privacy of other citizens without any sense of shame or propriety.
They have absolutely no sense of shame, no sense of propriety. They are
like the buzzards that I read about earlier--buzzards. Apparently no
excess, no savagery--no respect for others, no limits on behavior--is
too much in the chase for headlines or air time. And if ever that
phrase ``freedom of the press'' in the Constitution is amended and
weakened, it will be because of just such buzzards as these and their
predatory tactics that will bring down this retribution upon their
heads. And when that happens, we all will suffer.
The moment has arrived for the media to reassess their behavior--
reassess their behavior. I have seen them. I have seen them on
television when a widow is attending the funeral of her husband. And
they will press that camera right up into her face and all the people
in the land can witness the grief, the tears that roll down the cheeks
of that poor woman. I have seen this time and time again, and I have
said to my wife, ``Have they no shame? They are vultures.''
I am not talking about all the press. I am talking about such rude
predators as I came in contact with this morning. Of course, the camera
crews cannot help it. They have to go where Chris Wallace says. They
have to go where they want them to go.
So the moment has arrived, as I say, for the media to reassess their
behavior and for those charged with responsibility for the news
industry in our society to take a long, long look at their own values
and ask themselves anew: Where do we draw the line in seeking truth
before we cross the border into barbarism? And if that is not
barbarism, then I do not know what is.
Frankly, I am completely disgusted with the type of journalism
programs like ``PrimeTime'' displays, and I am even more disgusted with
the tactics used to fabricate a sensational story.
I have always, as I say, been available to the press. My office tries
to answer press questions to the best of our ability. But I resent and
deplore this type of unreasonable press intimidation.
``Mr. Wallace, that camera over there may mean everything to you. It
does not mean anything to me, and you are not going to intimidate me.
You and your cameras are not going to intimidate this Senator.''
I think it is about time that Senators stood up and deplored this
kind of invasion of privacy, this kind of head hunting, this kind of
vulturism.
I will not be pushed into playing this game just to promote some
tawdry, tacky, pseudo-news show's ratings. You know what is at the
bottom of the ratings? Money. Money. They are always talking about
Senators' salaries. What about theirs? We are elected by the people.
They are not elected by the people. We are elected by the people, and
we work and we try to work in the service of our country. They are
interested in ratings--ratings. What will be the most spectacular thing
we can do?
They did not bother to call my press secretary back yesterday after
they had received my statement. They did not bother to call her back
and say, ``Well, we need more than this.'' She never heard from them
again. And they come out to my house--come out to my house. Vultures.
Buzzards. I do not know what my little dog Billy may have thought of
them. But from the way he seemed to want to get away from you, he must
have been ashamed of your tactics.
``I am a public person, Mr. Wallace. But even a public person has a
right to walk his dog in peace in the morning without being attacked in
the front yard of his home before breakfast by vultures, by reporters
like you and cameras.''
I thank Senators for their patience. I apologize for imposing on
their time.
____________________