Allen Boyd

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Madam Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman, my friend, Chairman Spratt, for yielding the time. I rise today to speak in support of the budget resolution that Chairman Spratt and his committee have crafted and brought to the House floor. Madam Chairman, in 2001, January of 2001, when this Republican administration came into office, and since that time, the 47-strong Blue Dog Coalition, fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition, has been sounding the alarm about the terrible financial management of our country's resources and financial resources, and we have been calling for fiscal sanity in terms of how we perform our duties as a government and how we pay for those duties. Unfortunately, for the first 6 years of this administration, those calls fell on deaf ears of this Republican administration and in the Republican Congress. Since last January, a year ago, there has been a change in course in how this country, this government, this Congress does its business as it relates to managing the fiscal resources that our citizens here in the United States of America give to us to perform our community functions and our government functions. And so we have before us today a budget resolution which meets the guiding principles that the Blue Dogs have laid out over the last 2 years in how we should manage ourselves fiscally. And so I am extremely delighted to be here today to support the budget resolution that Chairman Spratt brings and tell you that those guiding principles of having a balanced budget by 2012, an AMT fix that's paid for, abide by PAYGO rules, which is a very important tool, providing for the resources for the defense of our country. As a matter of fact, we used the President's defense number. All of those principles have been met in this budget, and I'm delighted to support that budget. At this time, I would like to recognize the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Tanner) to address the budget resolution.

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Tennessee. He's been a leader on this issue for a long time and the leader of the Blue Dogs. And at this time, I would like to recognize another one of our leaders from Arkansas (Mr. Ross).

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Madam Chairman, it's my privilege to recognize at this time one of what we call our ``Blue Puppies,'' the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mahoney).

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mahoney). He's been a great leader, and he's been successful before he got here, and he's going to be a successful Member of Congress. I will call at this time on really the fiscal conscience of this House of Representatives, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper).

Mr. BOYD of Florida. I thank the gentleman from Tennessee. May I inquire of the Chair how much time we have left.

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Let me simply close, Madam Chairman, by saying that there is always a lot of rhetoric and accusations flying around at budget time in the House of Representatives, and you will hear much talk about this budget raising taxes. Let me tell you, this budget does not raise taxes. The independent, nonpartisan groups outside of this body say that. Listen to them. They certainly would come at this in an objective manner. What this budget does do is it sticks to the principles that the Blue Dogs have laid out. It adheres strictly to the PAYGO principle, a principle that helped us get the Federal Government budget back in balance in the nineties that this Congress in 2002 allowed to expire, the PAYGO principle. This budget also provides for a fully offset AMT fix, fully offset. What does that mean? It's paid for. You either find spending cuts or other revenue sources to do it. This budget also provides for adequate defense funding. One of the things that we said is let's not have the debate in this budget about the war. We know what the policy is now of this administration; let's provide the funds for our troops overseas and not have that debate here. This budget does that. And most importantly, Madam Chairman, it provides a glide path for balance, gets this Nation's fiscal issues back into balance by 2012. If I could, Madam Chairman, the gentlelady from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth Sandlin) has just arrived and I would like to yield to her.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend Mr. Neal for yielding. And let's be clear that the passage of this suspension of the rules abandons our commitment to fiscal responsibility and waives the PAYGO rules that were put in place by this Democratic majority back in January. And the blame lays squarely at the feet, Madam Speaker, of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and those in the United States Senate who, at the behest of the President, have blocked all attempts for this Congress to responsibly pay, responsibly pay for an AMT fix. It is a sad, sad day, Madam Speaker, and it's a strong testament to how far we have gotten off track as a United States Government. The Republicans are expected to vote almost unanimously for the rule that waives PAYGO. It is abundantly clear that they have chosen to abandon fiscal responsibility. Madam Speaker, the Blue Dogs are standing firm on PAYGO, and in the coming year we will continue to fight for what's right, for a Congress that pays its bills and for strict adherence to the PAYGO rules.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 1184, I was unable to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend, the distinguished chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, Mr. Peterson, for granting me time to speak on behalf of this legislation and also thank him and the ranking member, Mr. Goodlatte, and his representative for supporting this legislation. Mr. Speaker, the Apalachicola National Forest is the largest of Florida's three national forests. It contains 564,000 acres, and its rivers and streams provide a steady freshwater flow to some of the most productive coastal bays and estuaries known for shellfish and other commercial seafood. Portions of the forest are in wet lowlands and they abound with cypress, oak and magnolias. Watching wildlife, hunting and fishing are popular recreation activities in this beautiful national forest. Visitors to the forest also enjoy swimming, picnicking, boating, and camping. The Apalachicola National Forest is truly a national treasure, and I am very proud that this legislation will help strengthen and sustain one of our Nation's most valuable natural assets. As the chairman and the ranking member have said, this enables the national forest to sell a piece of property that really lies right on the south side of Tallahassee, Florida, in Leon County. It actually comes up to the beltway, or what we call the Capital Circle and is surrounded on three sides by commercial development. It is detached from the rest of the national forest, and so it is really, as you have heard earlier, an unmanageable piece of land. And with those proceeds, we are going to use the proceeds to go and purchase some privately held holdings within the confines of the 564,000 acres, what we commonly know as ``inholdings,'' and that is the only purpose that those funds can be used for. There are about 2,000 acres of inholdings, privately held lands within the Apalachicola National Forest, and that is what those funds, Mr. Speaker, would be used for. I want to thank Mr. Joe Baca, the Forestry Subcommittee chairman, and his staff director, Lisa Shelton, for helping guide this legislation through the subcommittee process. And also I want to thank my friend, the majority leader, Mr. Hoyer, for scheduling. I encourage our colleagues to pass this legislation.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza) for leading this debate. Let's be very clear. I think it is well understood by the country, the fiscal recklessness of the period, the 6-year period from January 2001 to January 2007, a recklessness which included record spending levels at the same time revenues were being reduced to a level that created record deficits during that period of time which are going to have a serious negative effect on the future of this country, the economy, the kind of life that our children and grandchildren will see if we don't get under control this recklessness that has been demonstrated over the last 6 years since the 2000 Presidential election. Madam Speaker, you have to fix those problems by, first of all, believing in some principles. And the principle that we believe in is if you are going to have a program, you ought to be able to pay for it. We all understand the serious consequences of the AMT and we want to fix it, but many of us believe if you are going to fix it, you are going to do it in a revenue-neutral way. That is the difference between this leadership and the previous 6 years' leadership, which says just damn the port, torpedoes, full steam ahead; tax cuts and increased spending, it doesn't make any difference, as long as everybody is happy at the moment. Our children and grandchildren are the ones who are going to pay that bill in the end. And I want to thank Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the majority leader, Steny Hoyer, for standing tall with us on this principle of PAYGO and this particular vote on the AMT as we send another AMT, paid-for AMT to the Senate. It is a very critical time in the future of this country and how we are going to handle our fiscal responsibility. Again, I want to thank our leader, the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza) and the Speaker of the House.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. I thank my friend, Madam Speaker, for yielding, and it is a great privilege to join my Blue Dog colleagues here on the House floor to talk about these issues that are of such great import to the American people and to the children of America today, because they are the ones who will be, in the end, mostly affected by these policies that we are having great debates about today. Now, my fellow Blue Dog colleagues have spoken very eloquently and succinctly about PAYGO, what it is, how it got started, how it works, and the importance of it. Just in brief summary, I will remind our viewers that PAYGO was a principle that was first put in place in 1990 by then-President George H.W. Bush, commonly referred to around these parts of the country as Bush 41. With a Democratic Congress and Republican administration, they began to realize the misguided policy of deficits, large annual deficits, so they did something about it. After the election in 1992, when President Clinton became President, and then in 1994, the Republican revolution where you had a Democratic President and Republican-led Congress, in 1997, those principles of PAYGO were continued in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. In 1999, we saw for the first time in 30 years a balanced budget. And we could see surpluses, Madam Speaker, as far as the eye could see. It looked great for America at that point in time. We had money to deal with national security. We had money to fix the problems that we know exist in Medicare and Social Security, the long-term problems, which are so important. Those two programs are so important to the future of this country. What happened? In 2001, we got a new President, President George W. Bush, commonly known in these circles as Bush 43. And this administration, along with the Congress back then, decided that PAYGO wasn't a good idea because they couldn't do the policies of their tax cuts they wanted, as much as they wanted to do and live within those rules of PAYGO, so they abandoned the PAYGO rule, the PAYGO principle. As a result, from 2000 to today, 2007, you have had a swing of several trillion dollars in terms of the surpluses versus the deficit. So we are in a bad situation. We are in a bad situation; and during the campaigns last year, people running for the House and the Senate across this country campaigned on this issue, that we had to restore fiscal responsibility to our government. You heard from four members of the Blue Dog, freshmen members, who are brand-new here tonight. This is their first term as Members of Congress. They campaigned on this issue. They understand it. They understand the importance of it. Their constituents back home do. Madam Speaker, our Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, our majority leader, Steny Hoyer, our Ways and Means chairman, Charlie Rangel, and our budget chairman, John Spratt, and other Democratic leaders, in addition to the Blue Dogs, vowed to put an end to the reckless fiscal policy that has existed in our government for the last 6 years. And under the leadership of Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Hoyer, and with the help of the Blue Dogs, we put in place this PAYGO principle on the very first day when this new Congress took power in early January of this year. That is what the American people wanted us to do. They wanted us to stop acting foolishly when it comes to fiscal management. We are like a board of directors, Madam Speaker, of a major corporation. It is our job to manage the resources, the fiscal financial resources, of this country in a prudent way for our stockholders, who are our people back home. And we said we have to stop spending more than we take in. There are lots of tools that you can use, as has been said here earlier, but the one that we have in place right now, the one that we have been able to get in place, given the current political environment, is this PAYGO rule, and we need to abide by it. We don't need to abandon it. Congress without those tools in place has not exhibited the willpower, if you will, to make tough choices when it comes to spending or tax cuts. So that is why it is important that we have tools like PAYGO. If you don't have the ability, the will or the backbone to make choices about how we responsibly spend the taxpayers' money, then what are we doing here? This Congress, under the leadership, under the Democratic leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer has shown that it has the ability and the will and the backbone to be good stewards of the taxpayers' tax dollars that they send here for us to spend. Every single bill, Madam Speaker, that is passed by the House this year has complied with PAYGO rules. Whether it was the farm bill, SCHIP reauthorization, or AMT relief, every bill has complied with the PAYGO rules. And do you know what, Madam Speaker? Seventy-five percent of the pay-fors have been spending cuts and not revenue raisers. Sadly, very sadly, the Senate last week failed in their duties as leaders of this country and as responsible stewards of our taxpayer dollars when they passed an AMT bill that was not paid for. The Senate was held hostage by the Republican caucus in the Senate and they blocked a House AMT bill that was paid for from even being heard on the Senate floor. The Blue Dogs, Madam Speaker, and the House leadership are standing behind PAYGO for one simple reason: it is the right thing to do. It may not be the easy thing to do or the politically easy thing to do, but, Madam Speaker, I didn't take this job because I thought it was going to be easy. I took this job to do right by the people of the Second Congressional District of Florida and the American people. The House of Representatives will again pass an AMT bill this week that is paid for. It is possible to do it. The Senate will have another opportunity to do what is right and responsible. And I strongly urge the Senate to have the gumption and the will and the good sense to keep the promise they made to the American people to be good stewards of the taxpayers' dollars and pass an AMT bill that does not violate the PAYGO rules and that is paid for. Again, I want to thank my fellow cochair, Mike Ross from Arkansas, for his steady leadership on this issue and so many others, but also steady leadership in forming these Tuesday night Special Orders, in which we have had a chance to come talk to the American people about issues of much importance.

Mr. BOYD

Mr. BOYD. I want to thank my friend Mike Ross from Arkansas, the communications cochair of the 47 member strong fiscally conservative Blue Dog Democrats. I came down here tonight to join him to try to continue to deliver the message to the American people that I think in some ways this administration and this Congress have lost their focus on what's important to keep America great and strong. I noticed today that the President of the United States and the minority leader and the minority whip stood before the American people and talked about vetoing an appropriations bill which funds the health and education agencies of our Federal Government simply because that bill would increase spending over last year at a rate, I think, of some $9 billion or $10 billion, which is actually below inflationary and population increases. At the same time, the President of the United States has sent in a supplemental request down here for funding for the Iraq war, which I believe is to the tune of $49 billion or $50 billion to get us through the next few months. I think we have just lost our sense of balance, or our sense of what we have to do to keep America strong and keep it a great Nation. I want to refer, if I could, if we think about those numbers, about an agency of the Federal Government that helps provide health care and education benefits to the people of the United States of America, while we are thinking about that, I want to refer you to a recent report released by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction. In that report, we uncovered the waste, fraud and abuse of taxpayers' dollars caused by the lack of necessary oversight by the U.S. Government. This is something that the Blue Dogs have been focused on for a long time, is the government, we as a government being good stewards of our taxpayers' dollars that we take involuntarily from our citizens to run the government, to provide security, transportation and other things, the other functions of a government. This quarterly report, which details progress in the U.S. Government's reconstruction of Iraq, uncovers continuing problems which have left millions of dollars, billions of dollars unaccounted for and a large number of products unfinished in Iraq. In fact, the Inspector General himself has stated that 40 percent of all projects in Iraq are in danger of not being completed under the original contract and ``virtually every project in Iraq has cost more or taken longer than expected.'' The Inspector General also noted that some projects are never finished. In one recent case, the Federal Government invested $90 million in a project to overhaul two giant turbines at a plant south of Baghdad. However, the multimillion dollar project, which is critical to providing power in Baghdad, has not been realized because of weak operations and maintenance practices by the Iraqis after the project was turned over in April of 2006. This report goes on to cite several examples of the same egregious waste, fraud, and abuse. I want to outline some of those; I want to give you six specific examples of the waste, fraud, and abuse identified in this Inspector General report. Number one was a 50-bed children's hospital in Basra, a 50-bed children's hospital in Basra, Iraq, which was originally expected to cost $50 million. This might be appropriate, because we have heard the previous speakers in the previous hour talk about how SCHIP ought to be vetoed, SCHIP, which would provide health care services to our children here. We just spent $50 million in Iraq on a children's hospital. That hospital is a full year behind schedule. The contractor responsible for the project left the hospital only about half complete, yet 100 percent over the original cost estimate. We haven't heard a lot of fuss about that from the previous majority. Number two, due to inefficient oversight by the State Department, the Federal Government spent $44 million on a residential camp for refugees that has never been used. Another $36 million was spent on weapons and equipment which are now unaccounted for. Number three, oil contract overcharges and contract mismanagement recently cost the U.S. Government $263 million. Oil contract overcharges and contract mismanagement, $263 million. Number four, due to poor contractor oversight, a failed oil pipeline project wasted nearly $76 million of your taxpayers' dollars. Number five, according to an Iraqi estimate, $5 billion per year, this is according to the Iraqi estimate, $5 billion per year is wasted due to widespread corruption in Iraq. Number six, after allocating $17 billion in U.S. funds to the security and justice reconstruction sectors in Iraq, only four of those, 18 of those sectors, only four have transferred to Iraqi control. This quarter's report also included a financial review of large contractors funded by the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund. International Bechtel is the largest Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund contractor, and there were many examples of waste and fraud and abuse discovered in that report when analyzing the Bechtel contracts. This report analyzed 24 job orders that Bechtel contracted to perform at a total cost to the government of $761.2 million. Of those 24 job orders, only 11 were successfully completed, 10 were incomplete, canceled or transferred to someone else, and the other three, they could not determine status of. You see that there are many, many problems in Iraq. I think that the American people have figured out that we have some serious, serious problems over there, not only with the policy as it relates to how we keep ourselves secure, but also to our involvement over there and our spending of, as Mr. Ross has shown you, $135 billion on an annual basis. That is $16 million an hour, $2.5 billion a week, $135 billion a year; and we seem to, in many cases, send that over there without asking a lot of questions about where the money is being spent and what we are getting for it. At the same time, we talk about vetoing an SCHIP bill which is $7 billion a year, which will go to cover 10 million additional children in the United States of America. I think we have just lost our way in terms of priorities. I want to wind up by telling our viewing audience that recently I took a trip to Iraq. It was my first visit over there. I led a congressional delegation of five Members, three of whom had never been before and two, it had been several years since they had been. It was a bipartisan delegation, a great group of Members to work with. We spent several days in the region, one full day in Baghdad. We found that morale of our Armed Forces, our uniformed personnel over there is very strong and very high. I am proud of that, having served, having worn the uniform of this country in Vietnam and served in an era when morale wasn't so high and we lost the support of the American people. It was refreshing to me to see that our morale is pretty high over there. I think our soldiers are performing what they are being asked to do. They are performing it very well. What I discovered is that what we are doing over there is policing the streets of Baghdad and refereeing a civil war in Iraq. That's not an appropriate role for the United States military. We don't even allow our military to police our streets here in America. This role has to be turned over to the Iraqi people. General Petraeus told us that we can train security forces, and we can get them in place, and we can train them, but unless the Iraqi Government can stand up and give them the command and control that they need and the logistical support that they need to be effective, they never will be effective. The Iraqi Government has failed at this point in time to stand up because they are fighting each over their sectarian differences, and we have to come to grips with that. I will close with that it kind of brought all this into focus for me and how out of kilter we have gotten on things. One of the briefings we have shown was a video that was taken in a fighter plane. I don't know what the cost of that Air Force plane was. It was probably maybe a quarter of a billion dollars, very expensive plane, delivered probably $50,000 to $100,000 worth of munitions to two Iraqis riding a bicycle out of a house. I thought to myself that we have really lost focus on what our great military is supposed to be used for. We should redirect our resources into a strategy which will provide long-term security for us around the world. That strategy has to be developed, well thought out, obviously, developed through a great deal of diplomacy, a great deal of political acumen and also the appropriate leverage of our great military that we have. I want to thank Mr. Ross for putting together this Special Order, but also for the many other Special Orders that you have done to try to deliver the Blue Dog message to the American people. I want to thank you for your service.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor for H. Res. 106.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss H.R. 3056, the Tax Collection Responsibility Act of 2007. I find myself in the awkward position of opposing the distinguished Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, but we are being asked to eliminate the Internal Revenue Service, IRS, program to collect past-due income taxes without an alternative. This program involves the collection of millions of tax dollars, and there are no plans in place to collect this money if the program were to be killed. There are no plans to collect the millions of dollars needed to close the tax gap. Additionally, there is also no alternative to finding employment for the countless disabled veterans and severely disabled Americans. Before we eliminate this program, there should be an alternative in place. Our colleague in the other body, Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, has introduced an initiative that would take the IRS program and use it to create meaningful employment for persons with disabilities and disabled veterans. The Disability Preference Program for Tax Collection Contracts would give an incentive to private third-party collection companies to hire people with severe disabilities and provide them with quality jobs. Mr. Speaker, one in ten Americans has a disability. While the current unemployment rate in the Nation stood at 4.7 percent in September, the low employment rate of persons with disabilities continues to hover at 70-80 percent. The high number of returning disabled American veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan will only serve to compound this problem. Currently, there are not enough jobs to provide gainful employment for the severely disabled veterans with only a high school GED. The Disability Preference Program would serve to alleviate the lack of meaningful employment opportunities for these young men and women. Jobs with third-party debt collection agencies can translate to high-paying careers. These jobs pay anywhere from $25,000 to $150,000 including health and 401(k) benefits. Under the provisions of the Disability Preference Program, an initial hire of 750 persons with disabilities would save the Federal Government close to $350 million over ten years in Supplemental Security Income, SSI, and Disability Insurance, DI, benefits alone. This figure does not include the additional benefits associated with the hiring of people in the $40,000 salary range. This landmark program would not only create well-paying jobs for our severely disabled Americans, it would save the Federal Government millions of dollars at no cost. This legislation is necessary because the IRS stated that ``under existing GSA Federal Supply Schedule, FSS, contracting procedures, it cannot set a specific number of awards aside for contractors employing significant numbers of persons with disabilities,'' only for the one disabled employer who may never hire another disabled person. This is an oversight in our law which needs to be corrected. It makes no sense that current law provides an employment opportunity for ONE disabled person, while this initiative would create opportunities for hundreds--if not thousands--of people who are disabled and without a college education. Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned previously, there is particular concern over the group of young, disabled veterans who have few employment options. Most able-bodied soldiers without formal education, upon leaving service, take positions as bus drivers, cafeteria workers, janitorial services, or security personnel. If the Disability Preference Program is not enacted soon, a viable opportunity will be lost. This initiative is supported by the Disabled American Veterans, the American Legion, the American Legion Auxiliary, the American Association of People With Disabilities, the One Percent Coalition, and the National Rehabilitation Association. In addition, the language has been passed by the other body on numerous occasions. I ask my colleagues in the House to join with me in supporting the Disability Preference Program for Tax Collection Contracts. I ask them to join me in providing meaningful employment opportunities for persons with disabilities and for our returning soldiers who have been disabled in the line of duty.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Brady for yielding, and I rise to oppose H.R. 3056. Let me start, Mr. Speaker, by saying that I strongly support the right of public and private employees to organize and to work for better working conditions and to improve the quality of life in their workplaces and in their communities, and my record reflects that. However, I think there is something that we all agree upon, as Democrats, as Republicans, as public employees, private sector employees, and that is that there is a huge tax gap in this Nation, and that tax gap is to the tune of $345 billion. It adds, on the average taxpayer, about $2,700 to its tax bill on an annual basis. These are tax dollars, most of them having been acknowledged by the taxpayer that they owe, but the IRS has not been able to go after them for whatever reason. And so the IRS private debt collection program is putting money back in the pockets of hardworking Americans. I would like to tell you that the private collection agencies working on this contract do not replace a single IRS worker, and no IRS jobs are lost through this program. To date, this program has recovered about $30 million in delinquent taxes. Through this pilot project, the IRS has turned over about 77,000 cases worth nearly $450 million in unpaid taxes. Now, I heard some speak about harassment, undue harassment by private collectors. I have to tell you, Mr. Speaker, that this program is closely scrutinized by the IRS. And the IRS program has, according to the Internal Revenue Service itself, received a 98 percent favorable rating from the IRS for regulatory and procedural accuracy, and a 100 percent rating for professionalism. This program has also received at or above a 96 percent rating for taxpayer satisfaction. Less than 1 percent of those taxpayers collected by the private collection agencies have filed complaints with the IRS, and none of those complaints against the companies currently participating in the program have been validated. Mr. Speaker, this program is bringing in money to the U.S. Treasury without raising taxes and closing that tax gap, and will be able to close that tax gap if we can keep the programs and improve them, money that otherwise would never be collected. To this end, it would be a very bad message to send that we are not serious about closing the tax gap. I urge my colleagues to vote down H.R. 3056.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3087. This bill requires the administration to develop a new, redefined mission regarding our involvement and long term interests in Iraq. This body has taken many votes this year on the issue of Iraq, but this is the first bill to address this issue that has come to the Floor with overwhelming bipartisan support. A bipartisan approach is critical to put an end to the political infighting that has thus far stymied congressional debate on Iraq. As a member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense and a Vietnam veteran myself, it is my utmost concern to see that our troops are receiving the resources that they need, but I will continue to assert that our military has done all that we have asked it to do and now it is time for the Iraqi Government to take responsibility for the country's future. Given that, our Commander in Chief owes this Congress and the American people a plan for a redefined mission that reflects this reality. I have always believed that bipartisanship equals progress and in no other situation is the need more immediate. In fact, I hope that my colleagues know me as a person who puts these words into action. In the near future, I will be leading a bipartisan congressional delegation to visit our men and women stationed in Iraq. It is my sincere hope that our upcoming bipartisan trip and this vote today begin a new era where Members continue to join together on areas in which we find agreement in order to make progress for the good of the American people and our great country.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Madam Speaker, had I been here on September 7, 2007, I would have voted in favor of H.R. 2669, the College Cost Reduction Act.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Madam Speaker, had I been in Washington on September 7, 2007, I would have voted in favor of H.R. 1908, the Patent Reform Act of 2007.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Madam Speaker, had I been present on Monday, September 10, 2007, I would have voted ``yea'' on H. Res. 643.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Madam Speaker, had I been present on Monday, September 10, 2007, I would have voted ``yea'' on H. Res. 257.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name withdrawn as a cosponsor from H.R. 1983.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. I thank my friend Chairman Olver. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of the FY08 Transportation and Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act. This is a bill, Madam Chairman, that the American people can be proud of. This bill's spending levels fall within the fiscally responsible budget resolution passed earlier this year by providing $50.7 billion for the Transportation Department and Housing and Urban Development. Our tax dollars are well used by investing in our road and airway infrastructures. I'm very supportive of the $1.5 billion this bill provides for Amtrak, and I'm hopeful this money can provide for the reinstatement of the Sunset Limited line that crossed into north Florida and traveled throughout the State. This bill also invests $4.2 billion in economic development which folks all across our Nation find essential for their communities' well- being. The improvements made with these funds serve all of the American people, whether it be the overnight delivery of important documents to our workplaces, or the timely travel to and from schools, or the arrival of fresh produce at our grocery stores across the country. Efficient state-of-the-art transportation infrastructure ensures that our economy continues to be the strongest economy in the world, and that our citizens continue to have the highest quality of life throughout the world. The Federal Government is fulfilling the role envisioned by the Founding Fathers by providing these community benefits with our tax dollars. I want to thank Chairman Olver, Ranking Member Knollenberg and their staff for their hard work in producing this legislation. I urge an ``aye'' vote.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend Mr. Ross for yielding, and I'm very proud of him. He's obviously one of our elected leaders of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition and does a great job. I'm very proud of him, and I'm very proud of the other 42 members of the Blue Dogs who deliver this message to the American public that accountability and good stewardship of our tax dollars does matter. Mr. Speaker, I'm very pleased that the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Lincoln Davis) was here earlier talking about the 1990s and how we extracted ourselves from a fiscal mess where we were experiencing huge and systemic annual deficits, and how this government worked hard during the 1990s under a Democratic President and Republican-led Congress in a bipartisan way, worked real hard to pare down what government was doing and make the revenues come into balance with the expenditures. We did that during the course of the 1990s under a divided government, but, Mr. Speaker, none of us like taxes. We live in America, the greatest country on the face of the Earth. I talk about this regularly with my constituents back home in north Florida, that America is the greatest country on the face of the Earth. We're the most successful democracy. We're the most successful, greatest economy in the history of mankind. We have the greatest military machine in the history of mankind. I tell my constituents that 25 percent of the world's wealth is controlled by 5 percent of the world's population. That's what America is. One out of every 20 people live in America, and we control 25 percent of the world's wealth. We have a gross domestic product that exceeds, I don't know, $13-, $14 trillion a year. And we have the greatest military machine on the face of the Earth ever assembled. You can amass the military of all the other 193 countries. It will not equal, Mr. Speaker, the firepower that the United States of America can bring to bear. I tell my constituents that that great wealth and that great military power, with it comes a great responsibility in this world to use that wealth and that power in a responsible and careful manner. Now, none of us like to pay taxes. None of us like to pay taxes. Our job, as Members of the United States Congress, House of Representatives, is to make sure that we are good stewards of the taxpayers' money that our good citizens send up here for us to run the country. Now, a great deal of that money is spent on our national defense, the number one priority of this Nation. None of us on this House floor ever like to vote against defense dollars that are being spent around the world where we ask our men and women to go put on the uniform and defend our values and our freedom and our causes around the world. Mr. Speaker, over the last 6 years, I think the greatest act of omission that has been perpetrated by this Congress is the lack of oversight that has been exercised by this Congress over the executive branch when it comes to how we spend those tax dollars. Six years ago, our national defense budget was in the neighborhood of $400 billion; today it is in excess of $650 billion. That's about 5 percent of our gross domestic product. There are not many countries, if any, around the world, that spend that much on their military. Our American citizens, our people back home, don't mind us doing that. They like for us to do it. But they want to know that when they send that money to Washington, somebody is making sure that it's spent wisely, and we are good stewards of that. What has happened over the last 6 years, when we had one party come in control of the White House, and the House and the Senate, the oversight role by Congress has been abdicated. It's not the first time it happened. It happened before when the Democrats controlled everything. But in this case it was the Republican Party that was in the majority. As a result, we have seen systemic deficits built in. We have seen a situation where there has been no oversight exercised by the House of Representatives and the Senate over the administration, and the Congress just got in the mode of rubber-stamping everything that the administration wanted, and ultimately, we had some problems. Some arrogance developed, some corruption developed. That's basically when the American people stood up in November and said, no more, we don't want that any more. We think a divided government works best. As Blue Dogs, we want to work with the Members on the other side of the aisle in making sure that the American people's money, when it comes to Washington, is spent wisely and is accounted for. I wanted to remind our citizens back home that this chart in front of us that shows the $8.8 trillion national debt is for real, and that money has got to be paid back by somebody, or at least interest on it has to be paid back; and we ought to stop increasing that number on a daily basis. That's what the Blue Dogs are all about. Let's make sure that the tax money that we collect from American citizens is spent wisely, and that we exercise good stewardship as we see about the people's business of the United States of America. I am proud to be a Member of the U.S. House with my good friends on both sides of the aisle. I'm proud to be an American. I want to thank my friend from Arkansas for the time.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise today to applaud the valor and honor the legacy of a brave young man who gave his life to his country while serving in Iraq. Marine LCpl Daniel Chaires was killed on October 25, 2006, at the age of 20 in a gun battle with Iraqi insurgents. Daniel has left a wonderful legacy of devotion to his family, the community, his church, the Marines, and our great country. As a descendent of one of Leon County's pioneer families, Daniel has deep roots in North Florida. His hometown of Chaires, Florida, and Chaires Elementary School are named after his family. On Friday, Chaires Elementary School will celebrate the life and military service of Marine LCpl Daniel Chaires. The school will be dedicating a patriotic mural and a monument in honor of Daniel, who was a young man of great courage and character. As an active and energetic member of the community, Daniel touched the lives of so many. I know that his family and friends will always remember Daniel as a source of strength, inspiration, and leadership. As a Vietnam veteran, a father, and a fellow American, I would like to pay tribute to Marine LCpl Daniel Chaires. We honor him, we thank him, and we will never forget the ultimate sacrifice he made for his country and for the cause of freedom. I know that his family is immensely proud of him and his service, and we are all in his debt.

Mr. BOYD of Florida

Mr. BOYD of Florida. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 262, had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''