C. Cox

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, our economy needs new jobs. That is why I so strongly support President Bush's proposal to promote job creation and economic growth. One provision of that plan will lead to the creation of over 400,000 new jobs by the end of next year, and that is the proposal to eliminate the double tax on savings in stocks and mutual funds. America's savers should be rewarded, not penalized, for investing, because when they invest their savings, they not only promote job creation, create the wherewithal for the hiring of new workers, but they also help provide for their own retirement. Indeed, those who are already retired stand to benefit from the elimination of the double tax, because over half of dividend payments are received by senior citizens. To get our economy growing again, to provide tax fairness to the men and women who are saving for their future retirement and those who are already on fixed incomes, it is time to repeal the double tax on savings.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Clause 2 of House Rule XI, I submit for publication in the Congressional Record the following rules of procedure for the Select Committee on Homeland Security in the 108th Congress. Rules of Procedure Adopted March 4, 2003 1. Convening of Meetings The regular meeting date and time for the transaction of business of the Select Committee on Homeland Security (``the Committee'') shall be at 9 o'clock a.m. on the first Friday of each month, unless otherwise directed by the Chairman. The date, time, place and subject matter of any hearing of the Committee shall, except as provided elsewhere in these rules, be announced at least one week in advance of the commencement of such hearing. The notice requirement may be abridged or waived in extraordinary circumstances, as determined by the Chairman with the concurrence of the Ranking Minority Member. The date, time, place and subject matter of any meeting, other than a hearing or a regularly scheduled meeting, shall be announced at least 36 hours in advance for a meeting taking place on a day the House is in session, and 72 hours in advance of a meeting taking place on a day the House is not in session, except in the case of a special meeting called under Clause 2(c)(2) of House Rule XI. 2. Preparations for Committee Meetings Under direction of the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, designated majority and minority committee staff, respectively, shall brief Members of the Committee at a time sufficiently prior to any Committee meeting to assist the Committee Members in preparation for such meeting and to recommend any matter which the Committee Members might wish considered during any meeting. Such briefing shall, at the request of a Member, include a list of all pertinent papers and other materials that have been obtained by the Committee that bear on matters to be considered at the meeting. 3. Meeting Procedures Meetings of the Committee shall be open to the public except that a meeting or any portion thereof may be closed to the public if the Committee determines by record vote in open session and with a majority present that the matters to be discussed or the testimony to be taken on such matters would endanger national security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement information, would tend to defame, degrade or incriminate any person, or otherwise would violate any rule of the House. The determination whether any such discussion or testimony, or papers and other materials in connection therewith, shall be presented in open or executive session shall be made by the Chairman in conformity with the rules of the House and these rules. Opening statements at any hearing, mark-up, or other meeting of the Committee or any sub- committee may be given by any Member who is present within five minutes after the hearing, mark-up, or other meeting is called to order, in his or her discretion, in each case not to exceed three minutes. With the consent of the Committee, prior to the recognition of the first witness for testimony, any Member, when recognized for opening statement, may completely defer his or her three-minute opening statement and instead use those three minutes during the initial round of witness questioning. One-third of the Members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business, except in the following circumstances, in which a quorum shall be a majority of the Committee: ordering a report; entering executive session; releasing executive session material; issuing a subpoena; immunizing a witness; and reporting contempt. Two Members shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of holding hearings to take testimony and receive evidence. In full Committee or subcommittee, the Chairman may postpone further proceedings when a record vote is ordered on the question of approving any measure or matter or adopting an amendment. The Chairman may resume proceedings on a postponed vote at any time, provided that all reasonable steps have been taken to notify Members of the resumption of such proceedings. When proceedings resume on a postponed question, notwithstanding any intervening order for the previous question, an underlying proposition shall remain subject to further debate or amendment to the same extent as when the question was postponed. Whenever the Committee by roll call vote reports any measure or matter, the report of the Committee upon such measure or matter shall include a tabulation of the votes cast in favor of, and the votes cast in opposition to, such measure or matter, or any amendment thereto. If at the time of the approval of a measure or a matter by the Committee a Member of the Committee gives notice of intention to file supplemental, minority, or additional views for inclusion in the report to the House thereon, that Member shall be entitled to not less than three additional calendar days after the day of such notice (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays except when the House is in session on such a day) to file such views, in writing and signed by the Member, with the Clerk of the Committee. 4. Procedures Related to the Taking of Testimony Notice. Reasonable notice shall be given to all witnesses appearing before the Committee. Oath or Affirmation. Testimony of witnesses shall be given under oath or affirmation which may be administered by the Chairman or his designee, except that the Chairman of the Committee may not require an oath or an affirmation where the Chairman determines that it would not be appropriate under the circumstances. Questioning of Witnesses. Committee questioning of witnesses shall be conducted by Members of the Committee and such committee staff as are authorized by the Chairman or presiding Member. In the course of any hearing, each Member shall be allowed five minutes for the questioning of a witness until such time as each Member who so desires has had an opportunity to question the witness. The Chairman, or the Committee by motion, may permit an equal number of majority and minority Members to question a witness for a specified, total period that is equal for each side and not longer than thirty minutes for each side. The Chairman, or the Committee by motion, may permit Committee staff of the majority and minority to question a witness for a specified, total period that is equal for each side and not longer than thirty minutes for each side. Counsel for the Witness. Any witness may be accompanied by counsel. A witness who is unable to obtain counsel may notify the Committee of such fact. If the witness informs the Committee of this fact at least 24 hours prior to the witness' appearance before the Committee, the Committee shall then endeavor to obtain voluntary counsel for the witness. Failure to obtain counsel will not excuse the witness from appearing and testifying. Statements by Witnesses. A witness may make a statement, which shall be brief and relevant, at the beginning of the witness' testimony. Such statements shall not exceed a reasonable period of time as determined by the Chairman, or other presiding Member. Any witness desiring to submit a prepared or written statement for the record of the proceedings shall file a copy with the Clerk of the Committee, and insofar as practicable and consistent with the notice given, shall do so no less than 72 hours in advance of the witness' appearance before the Committee. Objections and Ruling. Any objection raised by a witness or counsel shall be ruled upon by the Chairman or other presiding Member, and such ruling shall be the ruling of the Committee unless a majority of the Committee present fails to sustain the ruling of the chair. Transcripts. A transcript shall be made of the testimony of each witness appearing before the Committee during a Committee hearing. Inspection and Correction. All witnesses testifying before the Committee shall be given a reasonable opportunity to inspect the transcript of their testimony to determine whether such testimony was correctly transcribed. The witness may be accompanied by counsel. Such counsel shall have the appropriate clearance necessary to review any classified aspect of the transcript. Any corrections the witness desires to make in the transcript shall be submitted in writing to the committee within five days from the date when the transcript was made available to the witness. Corrections shall be limited to grammar and minor editing, and may not be made to change the substance of the testimony. Any questions arising with respect to such corrections shall be decided by the Chairman. Upon request, those parts of testimony given by a witness in executive session which are subsequently quoted or made part of the public record shall be made available to that witness at the witness' expense. Minority Witnesses. Whenever a hearing is conducted by the Committee or any subcommittee upon any measure or matter, the minority party Members on the Committee or subcommittee shall be entitled, upon request to the Chairman by a majority of those minority Members before the completion of such hearing, to call witnesses selected by the minority to testify with respect to that measure or matter during at least one day of hearing thereon. Contempt Procedures. No recommendation that a person be cited for contempt of Congress shall be forwarded to the House unless and until the Committee has, upon notice to all its Members, met and considered the alleged contempt. The person to be cited for contempt shall be afforded, upon notice of at least 72 hours, an opportunity to state shy he or she should not be held in contempt, prior to a vote of all the committee, a quorum being present, on the question whether to forward such recommendation to the House. Such statement shall be, in the discretion of the Chairman, either in writing or in person before the Committee. Closing Hearings. Hearings of the Committee shall be open to the public unless closed in accordance with Clause 2(g) or 2(k) of House Rule XI. 5. Subpoenas, Subpoenas Duces Tecum, and Affidavits Unless otherwise determined by the Committee, the Chairman, upon consultation with the Ranking Minority Member, shall authorize and issue subpoenas. In addition, the Committee may itself vote to authorize and issue subpoenas. Subpoenas shall be issued under the seal of the House and attested by the Clerk of the House, and may be served by any person designated by the Chairman. Subpoenas shall be issued under the Chairman's signature or that of a Member designated by the Committee. Provisions may be included in a subpoena, by concurrence of the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, or by the Committee, to prevent the disclosure of Committee demands for information when deemed necessary for the security of information or the progress of an investigation, including but not limited to prohibiting the revelation by witnesses and their counsel of Committee inquiries. A subpoena duces tecum may be issued whose return shall occur at a time and place other than that of a regularly scheduled meeting. Requests for investigations, reports, and other assistance from any agency of the executive, legislative, and judicial branched of the federal government, shall be made by the Chairman, upon consultation with the Ranking Minority Member, or by the Committee. The Chairman or the Committee may require any person who is unavailable to testify as a witness at any hearing to submit an affidavit comprising such person's sworn testimony for use at such hearing. 6. Staff Members of the committee staff shall work collegially, with discretion, and always with the best interests of the national security foremost in mind. Committee business shall whenever possible, take precedence over other official and personal business. For the purpose of these rules, Committee staff means the employees of the Committee, consultants to the Committee, and any other person engaged by contract, or otherwise, to perform services for, or at the request of, the Committee, including detailees to the extent necessary to fulfill their designated roles. All such persons shall be subject to the same security clearance and confidentiality requirements as employees of the Committee under this rule. Committee staff shall be either majority, minority, or joint. Majority staff shall be designated by and assigned to the Chairman. Minority staff shall be designated by and assigned to the Ranking Minority Member. Joint Committee staff shall be designated by the Chairman, in consultation with the Ranking Minority Member, and assigned to service of the full Committee. The Chairman shall certify Committee staff appointments, including appointments by the Ranking minority Member and joint staff appointments, to the Clerk of the House in writing, and such certification shall be submitted to the Committee for approval by majority vote. The joint Committee staff works for the Committee as a whole, under the supervision and direction of the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Committee. Except as otherwise provided by the Committee, the duties of joint Committee staff shall be performed and Committee staff personnel affairs and day-to-day operations, including security and control of classified documents and material, shall be administered under the direction supervision and control of the Staff Director. Majority and minority staff appointed by the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, respectively, shall be subject to the same operational control and supervision concerning security and classified documents and material as are joint Committee staff. Members of the Committee staff shall not discuss or divulge (a) either the classified substance or procedure of the work of the Committee, (b) any classified information which comes into such person's possession while a member of the Committee staff, or (c) any classified information which comes into such person's possession by virtue of his or her position as a member of the Committee staff, with any person except a Member of the Committee, for any purpose, or in connection with any proceeding, judicial or otherwise, either during or after the person's tenure as a Member of the Committee staff, except on a need-to-know basis, as determined by the Committee, and in such manner as may be determined by the House or by the Committee. No member of the Committee staff shall be employed by the Committee unless and until such person agrees in writing, as a condition of employment, to notify the Committee, or, after the Committee's termination, the House, of any request for testimony, either while a member of the Committee staff or at any time thereafter, with respect to classified information which came into the staff member's possession by virtue of his or her position as a member of the Committee staff. Such classified information shall not be disclosed in response to such requests except as authorized by the Committee, or, after the termination of the Committee, in such manner as may be determined by the House. No member of the Committee staff shall divulge to any person any information, including non-classified information, which comes into his or her possession by virtue of his or her status as a member of the Committee staff, if such information may alert the subject of a Committee investigation to the existence, nature, or substance of such investigation, unless directed to do so by the Committee. The Committee shall immediately consider disciplinary action in the event any member of the Committee staff fails to conform to any of these rules. Such disciplinary action may include, but shall not be limited to, immediate dismissal from the Committee staff, criminal referral to the Justice Department, and notification of the Speaker of the House. 7. procedures related to classified or sensitive material and other information (a) Committee staff offices, including majority and minority offices, shall operate under strict security precautions administered by the Director of Security of the Committee. At least one security officer shall be on duty at all times by the entrance to control entry. Before entering the office, all persons shall identify themselves. (b) Sensitive or classified documents shall be segregated in a secure storage area under the supervision of the Security Director. They may be examined only in an appropriately secure manner. Copying, duplicating, or removal from the secure area of the Committee's offices of such documents and other materials is prohibited except with leave of the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member for use in furtherance of Committee business. No classified documents shall be maintained or stored in the majority or minority offices. Classified information in any form that is not obtained in Committee hearings and is not the property of the Committee or the House shall, while in the custody of the Committee, be segregated and maintained by the Committee in the same manner as Committee records which are classified. (c) All Members of the Committee shall at all times have access to all records of Committee hearings and all other records, data, charts, and files that are the property of the Committee. In the case of any such materials that are classified, the Security Director shall be responsible for the maintenance, under appropriate security procedures, of a registry, which will number and identify all classified papers and other classified materials in the possession of the Committee. Such registry shall also be available to any Member of the Committee. (d) Members who are not Members of the Committee shall have access to all Committee records as described in paragraph (c), in the same manner and subject to the same conditions and restrictions as Members of the Committee. (e) Access to classified information supplied to the Committee shall be limited to Committee staff members with appropriate security clearance and a need-to-know, as determined by the Committee, and under the Committee's direction, the Staff Director. No Member of the Committee or of the Committee staff shall disclose, in whole or in part or by way of summary, to any person not a Member of the Committee or the Committee staff for any purpose or in connection with any proceeding, judicial or otherwise, any testimony given before the Committee in executive session, or the contents of any classified papers or other classified materials or other classified information received by the Committee except as authorized by the Committee in a manner consistent with the provisions of these rules, or, after the termination of the Committee, in such manner as may be determined by the House. Before the Committee makes any decision regarding any request for access to any testimony, papers or other materials in its possession or a proposal to bring any matter to the attention of the House or a committee or committees of the House, Committee Members shall have a reasonable opportunity to examine all pertinent testimony, papers, and other materials that have been obtained by the Committee. (f) Before a Member, officer, or employee of the Committee may have access to classified information, the following oath (or affirmation) shall be executed: ``I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will not disclose any classified information received in the course of my service on the Select Committee on Homeland Security, except as authorized by the Committee or the House of Representatives or in accordance with the Rules of such Committee or the Rules of the House.'' Copies of the executed oath (or affirmation) shall be retained by the Clerk as part of the records of the Committee. The Clerk shall make signatures a matter of public record, causing the names of each Member who has signed the oath to be available each day for public inspection in an appropriate office of the Committee offices. 8. Subcommittees (a) There shall be five standing subcommittees of the Committee, with jurisdiction as follows: (1) Subcommittee on Infrastructure and Border Security: border security including prevention of importation of illicit weapons, pathogens, narcotics, and other contraband; illegal entry by foreign nationals; land borders, ports, and airspace; integration of federal, state, and local immigration law enforcement; protection of highways, bridges, waterways, airports and air transportation, energy supplies, and other critical infrastructure from attack; preservation of critical government, business, and financial institutions; relevant oversight; and other matters referred to the Subcommittee by the Chairman. (2) Subcommittee on Rules: study of the operation and implementation of the House Rules with respect to homeland security; examination of jurisdictional disputes and overlap related to the Department of Homeland Security, and homeland security in general; consideration of changes to the House Rules, pursuant to Section 4(b)(3) of H. Res. 5, necessary to ensure effective oversight of the Department of Homeland Security, and homeland security in general; relevant oversight; and other matters referred to the Subcommittee by the Chairman. (3) Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness and Response: preparation for and response to chemical, biological, radiological, and other attacks on civilian populations; protection of physical infrastructure and industrial assets against terrorist attack; issues related to liability arising from terrorist attack; public health issues related to such attacks; disaster preparedness; coordination of emergency response with and among state and local governments and the private sector; homeland security technology; relevant oversight; and other matters referred to the Subcommittee by the Chairman. (4) Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Science, and Research & Development: security of computer, telecommunications, information technology, industrial control, electric infrastructure, and data systems, including science, research and development related thereto; protection of government and private networks and computer systems from domestic and foreign attack; prevention of injury to civilian populations and physical infrastructure caused by cyber attack; relevant oversight; and other matters referred to the Subcommittee by the Chairman. (5) Subcommittee on Intelligence and Counterterrorism: prevention and interdiction of terrorist attacks on American territory; liaison and integration of the Department of Homeland Security with the intelligence community and law enforcement; collection, analysis, and sharing of intelligence among agencies and levels of government as it relates to homeland security; threat identification, assessment and prioritization; integration of intelligence analysis, and sharing of intelligence, with and among federal, state, and local law enforcement; preservation of civil liberties, individual rights, and privacy; relevant oversight; and other matters referred to the Subcommittee by the Chairman. (b) Bills, resolutions, and other matters shall be referred by the Chairman to the appropriate subcommittee within two weeks of receipt by the Committee for consideration or investigation in accordance with its fixed jurisdiction. Where the subject matter of the referral involves the jurisdiction of more than one subcommittee or does not fall within any previously assigned jurisdiction, the Chairman may refer the matter as he deems advisable. Bills, resolutions, and other matters referred to subcommittees may be reassigned by the Chairman when, in his judgment, the subcommittee is not able to complete its work or cannot reach agreement on the matter. In a subcommittee having an even number of Members, if there is a tie vote with all Members voting on any measure, the measure shall be placed on the agenda for full Committee consideration as if it had been ordered reported by the subcommittee without recommendation. This provision shall not preclude further action on the measure by the subcommittee. (c) The full Committee shall have general jurisdiction over all programs and activities of the Department of Homeland Security, liaison between homeland security agencies and programs throughout the federal government, and the Department of Homeland Security, state and local homeland security, and such other matters within the jurisdiction of each subcommittee as may be referred directly to the full Committee by the Chairman. (d) The Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Committee shall be ex officio Members of each subcommittee to which they have not been assigned by resolution of the Committee. 9. legislative calendar The Clerk of the Committee shall maintain a printed calendar for the information of each Committee Member showing any procedural or legislative measures considered or scheduled to be considered by the Committee, and the status of such measures and such other matters as the Committee determines shall be included. The calendar shall be revised from time to time to show pertinent changes. A copy of such revisions shall be furnished to each Member of the Committee. 10. committee travel No Member of the Committee or Committee staff shall travel on Committee business unless specifically authorized by the Chairman or Ranking Minority Member, respectively. Requests for authorization of such travel shall state the purpose and extent of the trip, together with itemized expenses anticipated thereon. No preliminary arrangements for foreign travel shall be undertaken by any Committee Member unless such travel has been authorized in writing by the Chairman. A report on all foreign travel shall be filed with the Committee Clerk within sixty calendar days of the completion of said travel. The report shall contain a description of all issues discussed during the trip and the persons with whom the discussions were conducted. If an individual with the Committee staff fails to comply with this requirement, he or she shall be subject to disciplinary procedures set forth in these rules. 11. broadcasting committee meetings Whenever any hearing or meeting conducted by the Committee is open to the public, the Committee or Subcommittee, as the case may be, shall permit that hearing or meeting to be covered by television broadcast, internet broadcast, print media, and still photography, or by any of such methods of coverage, subject to the provisions and in accordance with the spirit of the purposes enumerated in the Rules of the House. 12. disposition of committee records Upon dissolution of the Committee at the conclusion of the 108th Congress, the records of the Committee shall be deemed current records and, consistent with House Resolution 5 of the 108th Congress, shall not be delivered to the Archives of the United States but rather shall become the records of such successor committee as shall be designated by the Speaker. 13. changes in rules These rules may be modified, amended, or repealed by the Committee provided that a notice in writing of the proposed change has been given to each Member at least 48 hours prior to the meeting at which action thereon is to be taken.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, tomorrow is National Peace Corps Day. It is with great pleasure that I send my congratulations to Peace Corps volunteers serving throughout the world as we celebrate the Peace Corps' 42 years of service. Forty-two years ago, President John F. Kennedy mobilized a generation to work in developing nations around the world in education, community development, agriculture, health care, and public works. Although each volunteer is given a particular role in a community, the most important job is the simple day-to-day interaction each volunteer has with the people of the villages in which they serve. Since 1961, over 168,000 Americans have volunteered their expertise, time, and energy to foster development and progress in 136 countries. There is no greater symbol of America's generosity than American volunteers living and working in partnership with the people of developing nations to encourage education and opportunity. As grass-roots ambassadors, Peace Corps volunteers have conveyed the message of freedom and hope to communities in need of help. In doing so, they have strengthened the ties of international friendship and understanding, and have spread the spirit of sharing that is so fundamental to American society. It is my deepest hope that we continue to recognize and support the Peace Corps' work. By honoring the Peace Corps, we reaffirm our nation's commitment to strengthen freedom and create opportunities around the world. I am very happy to join with Peace Corps volunteers, past and present, to celebrate National Peace Corps Day 2003.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, had I been present on February 26, 2003, I would have voted ``yes'' on H. Con. Res. 36 to celebrate the 140th Anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation and commend President Abraham Lincoln's efforts to end slavery.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, we are here today to commemorate the birthday of President Reagan. As you know, he turned 92 just a few days ago, and as you know, Mr. Speaker, we were delayed in honoring him here on the floor because of the Space Shuttle Columbia tragedy. It is fitting that we remember President Reagan in this context because in his time, during his presidency, he helped heal and bring together our Nation in the wake of the Challenger disaster. Just as his words honored the crew of the Space Shuttle Challenger, President Reagan's eloquence continues to comfort and console us as we now remember the fallen crew of the Space Shuttle Columbia. President Reagan's words of January 28, 1986, speak to us 17 years later with all of their original force and beauty. He said, ``We will never forget them, nor the last time we saw them, as they prepared for their journey and waved good-bye, and `slipped the surly bonds' of effort and `to touch the face of God.' '' At 92, President Reagan is America's oldest President ever. The previous record was set by John Adams. You remember, Mr. Speaker, that John Adams and Thomas Jefferson died on the same day, and they died, even more remarkably, on the 50th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. As we think back years from now, as we think back on our founding, on our founders, on the Declaration of Independence and our great Presidents, I am quite sure that we will recall Ronald Reagan, for he has already distinguished himself as one of America's most remarkable individuals. Any one of his careers would itself be worthy of recognition by this Congress. He was an accomplished sports announcer on radio. He was a very renowned film actor. As you know, he was one of the best-known actors in America. He was a labor leader, twice elected president of the Screen Actors Guild. He was a very successful two-term Governor of California, and a very successful two-term President of the United States, elected twice in landslides. He was called the Great Communicator, in part because he spent so much time on television explaining his policies to us. He was quite good at it. But it was more than communication skill, because he had something very important to communicate. Lady Thatcher, then Prime Minister Thatcher, compared Ronald Reagan to Winston Churchill. She said, ``Like Winston Churchill, he made words fight like soldiers, and lifted the spirit of a nation.'' If the events of September 11 have taught us anything, it is that America still requires a strong national defense against enemies who would destroy freedom and democracy. When Ronald Reagan became President, we had endured an era of national malaise, bereft of any sense of moral direction. Throughout his term of office, throughout 8 of the fastest-moving years in history, President Reagan brought our Nation back with his Irish twinkle and that homespun style of his, which seemed never to abate. He brought a new assurance to America. He not only was America's oldest President, he was one of America's most active Presidents ever, and he was one of the most energetic leaders of the Free World that the world has ever seen. With a toughness that we had not seen in a long time, he stood toe-to-toe with what he unabashedly described as the Evil Empire. For such moral clarity, he was dismissed as naive and dangerously undiplomatic. When he said, ``Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall,'' he was criticized. The realists among us knew that the Soviet Union was going to be there forever and we should learn to accommodate it. President Reagan saw a different future, and he worked hard to bring it about. As a result, hundreds of millions of people, not just in the Soviet Union, but throughout Central and Eastern Europe, were liberated. If he were with us here today, President Reagan would humbly acknowledge that he appreciated the birthday wishes on the 53rd anniversary of his 39th birthday. When former President Clinton was running for office, he once said America needed a President for the '90s. Perhaps now, if we could repeal the 27th Amendment, we could have a President in his 90s. Hope springs eternal. Mr. Speaker, President Reagan and his vision will not be forgotten. His love of country and his ability to see the best in all of us revitalized our common faith in the American dream. President Reagan's enthusiasm and big-hearted spirit of America continues to inspire us with a vision of our potential and the limitless possibilities that dwell just beyond the horizon. As he said at the end of his D-Day speech in Normandy, we can say of President Reagan: Mr. President, we will always remember, and we will always be proud. Happy birthday.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I submit the following letter by myself and the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Frost, and the accompanying information on the continuity of Congress Working Group for the perusal of my colleagues. House of Representatives, Washington, DC, November 12, 2002. Hon. David Dreier, Chairman, House Rules Committee, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Dreier: In May 2002, the Speaker and Minority Leader asked us to co-chair a bipartisan Continuity of Congress Working Group, of which you are a member, to study ways to ensure that the legislative branch continues to function in the event that a terrorist attack or other catastrophe kills or incapacitates a large number of Members. Because the Constitution permits the House to ``determine the Rules of its Proceedings'' and to judge the ``Qualifications of its own members,'' the Working Group has been studying pertinent rules changes to remedy some of the problems that could be created under such circumstances. As you know, during the past six months, the Working Group has held eight meetings, drafted new House Rules, drafted a House Resolution--which the House passed on October 2, 2002 by a vote of 414-0--urging states to review their special election laws, drafted amendments to the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, and reviewed three constitutional amendments related to congressional continuity. Accompanying this letter are three draft Rules, developed by the Working Group, which we are requesting be included in the final rules package to be voted on by the House at the beginning of the next session. The Working Group has identified three areas with respect to congressional continuity that the Working Group believes can be addressed through changes to the House Rules: Codifying the process by which the Speaker certifies the death of a House Member in order to reduce the whole number of the House for purposes of establishing a quorum; Allowing the Speaker to accelerate or postpone the reconvening of the House in the event of a declared emergency; and Authorizing an individual other than the Speaker to reconvene the House in the event of a catastrophe resulting in the death of the Speaker. Death Rule: Presently, no House rule codifies the process by which the Speaker certifies the death of a House Member in order to reduce the whole number of the House for purposes of establishing a quorum. When a Representative dies in office, the House and the Speaker take cognizance of the vacancy by adopting a House Resolution expressing the sorrow of all House Members. The whole number of the House is adjusted accordingly. However, because the preceding determination of the whole number of the House is the number that must be used to establish a quorum until a new whole number is established, in the event that a large number of Members are killed, a quorum could not be established for the purpose of establishing a new whole number. To remedy this potential problem, the Working Group has drafted a rule which would allow the Speaker to announce the adjustment of the whole number of the House upon notification of the death, resignation, expulsion, disqualification, or removal of a Member. The Speaker's announcement would not be subject to appeal. Emergency Recess Rule: In a time of national emergency, such as that seen on September 11th when the Capitol building was a target of the terrorists, the Speaker may need to accelerate the reconvening of the House or postpone House action in order to protect the lives of House Members and staff. Accordingly, the Working Group has drafted an Emergency Recess Rule. Under this Rule, the Speaker, if informed by the Sergeant-at-Arms of an imminent threat to the safety of the Members and after obtaining the concurrence of the Minority Leader of the House, could notify Members that the House would not convene at the time stipulated when the House previously adjourned but would instead convene at another time during the next three days in accordance with the Constitution. The Rule would also allow the Speaker, with the concurrent of the Minority Leader, to reconvene the House earlier than stipulated for the sole purpose of declaring a further postponement. Speaker Succession Rule: Current House rules do not explicitly address who would preside over the House in the event that there is a vacancy in the Office of the Speaker. Therefore, if the Speaker and the Clerk of the House die during a catastrophic attack, there would be no living individual authorized to reconvene the House, or call the House into session. To remedy this potential problem, the Working Group has crafted a rule which would allow the Speaker to establish a line of succession for a Speaker pro tempore whose duty would be to preside over the election of a new Speaker or Speaker pro tempore. Conclusion: During the past six months, the Working Group has explored a variety of possible solutions to the many problems surrounding congressional continuity. The Working Group began with an examination of the least constitutionally intrusive solution--changes to the House Rules. We request that the House Rules Committee consider these three rules and include them in the rules package to be voted on by the House in January. These simple changes to the House Rules will help to ensure the continuity of this great institution--the United States Congress. Sincerely, Christopher Cox, Chairman, House Policy Committee. Martin Frost, Chairman, House Democratic Caucus.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. I rise in support of this legislation, which is urgently needed and has been urgently needed since September 11, and particularly since November of 2001, when this House first passed it. By backstopping the market's provision of terrorism insurance, this legislation will be a boon for new construction everywhere in America. But construction cannot get completed in America because financing is not available, and the reason financing is not available is that terrorism insurance is not available. This bill will fix that. By taking a huge, unquantifiable risk out of the equation, we will make writing terrorism insurance feasible again and will help Americans get back to work and start growing the economy. We are dealing with this bill much later than we should be, many months after it should have been completed, because there has been a disagreement about protections against abusive litigation. This bill that we are voting on tonight is imperfect in that respect. Several of the protections of taxpayers' interests and the national interest that were built into this legislation in the original House-passed version have been deleted. These differences are not minor. From the original House bill, we have eliminated a prohibition on punitive damages. We have eliminated fair-share liability for noneconomic damages, such as pain and suffering, and a requirement that attorneys' fees be reasonable. I do not believe that any of these provisions should be eliminated; but in the very brief time that I have remaining, Mr. Speaker, I will address just one of them: fair-share liability for noneconomic damages. When the U.S. Government certifies that the terrorists were responsible, it should not be possible for lawyers to come in and assert, because of 1 percent liability found or prospectively that might be found for another party, that 100 percent of the obligation should rest there, particularly when we are talking about noneconomic damages; that is to say, completely notional damages like pain and suffering, things that lawyers can gin up by asserting it, merely by asserting it in a complaint. In each of these circumstances, the taxpayers will be made liable. Mr. Speaker, we need to fix these flaws in the bill immediately when the 108th Congress convenes. On that understanding, I am supporting this bill because it is so desperately needed to put America back to work.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, today I have the great pleasure of sending my congratulations to the people of Taiwan on the 91st anniversary of Double Ten National Day. Ninety-one years ago today, forces loyal to Sun Yat-sen led the Wuch'ang uprising and paved the way for the rise of a new political experiment in democracy for the people of China--the establishment of the Republic of China, Asia's first republic. This was a turning point not only in the history of the East but in the history of the world. In 1911, Dr. Sun envisioned a China that was nationalist, democratic, and dedicated to the social well-being of its citizens. While his Republic's political control on the mainland of China was short-lived, its impact in the minds of the people of China is eternal. After more than 50 years of sound economic and political development, the Republic of China on Taiwan has proven to the world that not only the citizens of Taiwan, but all of the people of China can govern themselves in a system that is--as Dr. Sun Yat-sen envisioned--Chinese, democratic, and prosperous. The significance of this experiment is especially meaningful to us now because Taiwan has attained such a full measure of economic and political freedom. And in that fifty year history, Taiwan has proven to be one of America's most loyal friends. It is my deepest hope that we continue to recognize Taiwan's great achievements, loyal friendship, and sustained progress by continuing to promote Taiwan's participation in the World Trade Organization and such global bodies as the World Health Organization. We must also continue to provide Taiwan the defensive arms it requires to maintain peace on the Taiwan Strait. I am very happy to join with the citizens of Taiwan to celebrate Double Ten National Day 2002.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate the life of my classmate and friend, Douglass Lory Warren, whose passions in life earned him the moniker ``Renaissance Man'' among his many admirers. He died Sunday, July 21, 2002, at Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital, of non-Hodgkins lymphoma, at the age of 52. This Saturday, October 12, 2002, his friends and family will gather for a memorial service at the Memorial Chapel on the campus of Doug's beloved Harvard University. His classmates, business associates, neighbors, and many others whose lives he touched will share remembrances, anecdotes, and even photos for inclusion in a ``Book of Doug'' that will serve as a lasting reminder of this extraordinary individual. Doug was born in Memphis, TN. He graduated from St. Paul's School, Concord, NH, and received his BS and MBA from Harvard University. He was a member of The Hasty Pudding Theatricals and the Harvard Krokodiloes, and was president of The Harvard Independent. A resident of Hopkinton, he was a founder of the Hopkinton Education Foundation. At the time of his death, he was a partner with Tatum CFO Partners, LLP. According to his brother Gregory, Douglass viewed the world with his heart rather than his head. Both the humble and the mighty deserved and received his equal care and consideration. As one friend put it, ``Douglass was the man I knew I could call on in the middle of the night when I had to make an important decision--one that might even hurt me. I knew I could count on him to help me do the right thing. We might discuss it then, or he would say, `Let me think about it and I'll call you back.' And he always called me back.'' To his wife Nancy, his daughters Julia and Madeleine, his brother Gregory, and all who loved him, the prayers of this Congress are with you and your families.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, it will reward us to read the resolution we are being asked to vote upon. It is self-refuting. This resolution would have this Congress find that Iraq and Saddam Hussein unconditionally accepted U.N. Security Council Resolution 687, their obligation to destroy their chemical and biological weapons. That was unconditional. The resolution has us find that Iraq unconditionally accepted its obligation not to proceed with the development of nuclear weapons. The resolution has us find that Iraq agreed to immediate and unconditional inspections. The resolution goes on to have us find that Iraq has failed to comply with these obligations over a period of more than a decade. The resolution has us find that Iraq obstructed the inspectors and ultimately expelled them in 1998. Finally, the resolution has us find that this noncompliance with the United Nations Security Council resolutions, including specifically Resolution 687, quote, ``endangers U.S. security.'' That is the preamble in this resolution. That is the predicate. Then what would the resolution have us do? Pass yet one more U.N. resolution which, by its terms, lacks enforcement. Only a U.N. resolution that lacks enforcement would be acceptable if we were to pass the resolution that is before us. What have we learned in 11 years? Surely, without at least the threat of military force, we will get exactly the same result that we have had 16 times in a row. There is a cost, indeed a much heavier cost of doing nothing, of temporizing, of adding a 17th, toothless U.N. resolution to the 16 that Saddam Hussein has already violated. And to the charge that what we are doing is unilateral, we must say, we have already earned the cooperation of Britain, Turkey, Canada, Poland, Romania, Israel, Bulgaria, Australia, Singapore, Japan and others. If we vote to deny the President of the United States the backing of this Congress at this moment and think that then he can win the support of other nations, we are delusional. All of us must surely hope that the United Nations passes its next resolution, that Saddam Hussein will, this time, finally see reason and disarm. But as the proverb says, He who lives only by hope will die in despair. My colleagues, let us unite hope with reason and practicality and a willingness to act. Let us defeat this resolution.

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong agreement with all of the essential premises of the Spratt resolution and urge a ``no'' vote because of its conclusion. The Spratt resolution, like the Lee resolution before it, spells out precisely all of the reasons that we are here today; that Saddam Hussein and Iraq have unconditionally agreed to destroy all chemical and biological weapons there, ballistic missiles, to stop the development and the seeking of nuclear weapons; that Iraq unconditionally agreed to immediate inspections. The Spratt resolution goes on to say, and would have this Congress find, that Iraq and Saddam Hussein have ``flagrantly violated these unconditional terms.'' The Spratt resolution goes on to say that Saddam Hussein and Iraq are currently supporting international terrorism and continuing to develop chemical and biological weapons and actively seeking nuclear weapons and the ballistic missiles to deliver them. But here, unlike the Lee resolution before it, the Spratt resolution does not denounce the use of force but rather says that at this time we should have a U.N. resolution that expressly authorizes the use of force; and, if such a U.N. resolution is adopted, then, by section 3 of this Spratt resolution, the Congress today would have anticipatorily authorized the use of force, expressly authorized President Bush to use military force to eliminate weapons of mass destruction and missiles. It even provides an expedited procedure for the President to get Congressional authority for war if the U.N. does not act. In short, this resolution, an alternative resolution that we are now considering, accepts every single premise of House Joint Resolution 114 that is supported by President Bush, the Speaker of the House, the Democratic leader of the House, the Republican leader of the Senate, and, as of today, the Democratic leader of the Senate. The Spratt resolution accepts the operative conclusion of House Joint Resolution 114 that the authorization of military force is essential. It is essential if this time we are to succeed where 16 past U.N. resolutions have failed. So the only real difference is that this different way of going after all of the same objectives, based on all of the same premises, this Rube Goldberg mechanism that we have set up, will scuttle the broad agreement that has been reached among the House, the Senate, and the executive and legislative branches, this consensus that America will stand as one. This resolution will jeopardize, in fact, passage of the very U.N. resolution that it purports to support.

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, as was so horribly demonstrated on September 11, the greatest threat to our country today comes not from the world's greatest powers but, rather, from unstable and dangerous individuals scattered across much of the world with nothing more in common than their hatred of the United States. Some of these individuals are itinerant phantoms, like Osama bin Laden. A very few control territory and governments, like Mullah Omar and Saddam Hussein. It is for this reason that we are forced to deal with Iraq. It is not merely that Iraq's brutal and ruthless dictatorship is hostile to America, or that it has given comfort to the al Qaeda terrorists, or even that it possesses the most gruesome weapons of mass murder. Beyond all of this, Iraq's barbaric dictator, like the al Qaeda fanatics whom he supports, is unstable and a proven killer. We cannot deal with him or the territory that he controls by terror as if it were a nation state like any other. It is not. Saddam Hussein does not merely possess chemical weapons; he has used them. He does not merely mouth hatred for the United States; it is well known that he attempted to assassinate our President. He does not merely tolerate global terrorism; he is one of its main incubators. We must ask, however, is confronting Saddam Hussein worth the cost that we will surely have to bear if we are required to make good on our threat of force? To that we must answer that there is potentially an even heavier cost of temporizing, of doing nothing, of adding a 17th toothless U.N. resolution to the 16 that Saddam Hussein that is already violated. What we learned on September 11 is that turning a blind eye to the metastasizing of cancer cells, of terrorist cells, is the costliest choice we can make. What of our friends and sometime allies, such as, for example, France and Russia, who have accused us of going it alone? If we approve this resolution today without their prior agreement, will we not simply display to Saddam Hussein that the world lacks the international agreement that is necessary to win the war on terror? To that I am afraid we must answer that if even such great nations as France and Russia cannot be convinced to see their own self-interest in protecting the civilized world from the likes of Saddam Hussein, then, in fact, the war on terrorism will indeed be compromised. But this is not the end, it is the beginning. Just as Saddam Hussein must know that America is serious, so, too, must our friends and allies. If we vote to deny the President the backing of this Congress and think that then he can win the support of additional nations, we are delusional. Mr. Speaker, our purpose is a good one; and we must lead. To save a nation from terrorist rule, as with Mullah Omar and Saddam Hussein, protects not only the citizens of those countries but our own country and the entire world. All of us must hope that when the United Nations passes its resolution, Saddam Hussein will this time finally see reason and disarm. But as the proverb says, he who lives only by hope will die in despair. I ask my colleagues to unite hope with reason and practicality and willingness to act. Let us support this resolution.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. Charles Krauthammer, a journalist who is very well known to the Members of this body. On September 5, 2002, Charles Krauthammer was honored with the ``Mightier Pen'' award from the Center for Security Policy. The Center for Security Policy launched the ``Mightier Pen'' Award in 2001 to recognize individuals who have, through their published writings, contributed to the public's appreciation of the need for robust U.S. national security policies and military strength as an indispensable ingredient in promoting international peace. This is not the first, or the most widely known honor for Dr. Krauthammer. He has received many such honors before, among the most significant being the 1987 Pulitzer Prize for distinguished commentary and the 1984 National Magazine Award for essays. Today, I bring to the attention of my colleagues the ``Mightier Pen'' Award not only because it has meaning with respect to Dr. Krauthammer's talent and intellect, but because it has particular meaning for our nation, even more so as we consider the next steps in the War on Terrorism. Dr. Krauthammer initiated his weekly column for The Washington Post in January 1985. It now appears in more than 100 newspapers. Most of us have had the chance to read him weekly. We could do no better than to consider his cogent analysis as we make critical decisions in the coming weeks and months that will doubtlessly influence the future of our national security for many years to come.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, we are here in form, importantly, to discuss a resolution about the Prime Minister of England, about Tony Blair. It is fitting that we are here paying tribute to someone who is standing with America in tough times, because the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) has always stood for America in tough times. It has been my privilege to serve with the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) for 14 years here in Congress, but the gentleman's career goes back many more years before that. His whole life has been devoted to service to his country. We can see in this unique combination of good manners and high honor on the one hand and toughness and courage on matters of substance on the other hand that in the annealing fire of combat in World War II the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) was tested and found completely capable of taking on the challenges of our country. He was a Staff Sergeant in World War II in the 19th Bomb Group of the 20th Air Force. He flew 35 missions over Japan, and it is during that time that he earned the Distinguished Flying Cross, as my colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel), mentioned, in addition the Air Medal with oak leaf clusters. He came home from defending America overseas to defend America at home, working as the Assistant Attorney General of the State of New York. He also served as counsel to the State legislature, and then went on to become a member himself for 3 terms. He then went on to serve 15 terms in this body, and he has attained every honor that this House can bestow. He has been chairman of the Committee on International Relations, chairman of the Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia, vice-chairman of the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources of the Committee on Government Reform, and the list goes on. When I first brought a bill to the floor of this House in 1989, it was a human rights measure to grant refugee status to Ukrainian Orthodox and Ukrainian Catholics who were being persecuted in the Soviet Union. And Ben Gilman was here on the floor arguing in support of my bill. During my entire time here, Ben and I have worked together on issues that we both care about, including the Congressional Human Rights Caucus. We have served together on the Committee on Government Reform. Since 1994, Ben has been a leading member of the Republican Policy Committee, which I chair. He chaired the Speaker's Working Group on North Korea, on which I was privileged to serve, and brought so many of the issues of human rights abuses and the threats of weapons of mass destruction to the world's attention there. We worked together on the Speaker's Advisory Group on Russia, and Ben's experience and knowledge of U.S.-Russia relations has proved to be a tremendous asset in helping to shape that report on a decade of U.S.-Russia relations. Together we have co-sponsored countless bills, including the Eastern European Democracy Act, the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act, and the Iraqi Liberation Act. Ben and I worked closely on the Iraq bill frequently mentioned in newspapers these days and around the world; it is now getting comments because of its emphasis on regime change. I was honored to be the sole co-sponsor of that bill, which passed this House on a vote of 360 to 38 4 years ago on October 5, 1998. As evidenced by the current debate in Washington, Ben's legislation calling for support for the Iraqi opposition groups that would foster regime change in Iraq was farsighted, necessary and important and will be the follow-on policy after this current conflict. Mr. Speaker, I have the utmost respect for the gentleman. He is one of the best friends that I will have in my career. He has a knack for moving beyond partisan lines because he always stands for what is right and that always attracts followers. I hope that the gentleman and Georgia and his family will now have a little bit of quiet time now that he is moving on from the House. But I know that he will not have a whole lot more time because I know he will remain as a leader for the United States, and in all the things that I expect he will be doing, the gentleman can count on my support and his colleagues' support; and I wish the gentleman Godspeed.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, on the rollcall votes scheduled for Tuesday evening and Wednesday morning, October 1 and 2, I was unable to vote in consequence of travel outside of Washington, DC.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. The statement that we just heard from the gentleman on the other side of the aisle was essentially aimed at one point, and that is because Saddam Hussein is in Iraq, the worry about the economy and so on, we ought to raise taxes on everyone; and we ought to do so on schedule, a little less than 10 years from now. At once I heard that is so far off from now, why are we worried about it? And on the other hand, if we do not have that tax increase a few years from now, then all hell is going to break lose. The truth is that 36 million married taxpayers, low and middle income taxpayers, deserve to be treated fairly. Americans should not be taxed more because they are a working woman. When a woman goes to work, her husband goes to work, she ought to be treated the same as every other American. But, we have a penalty right now if married couples work, and they do not pay taxes the same way as two Americans would if they were two men sharing an apartment. They do not pay taxes the same way that they would if they were a man and woman who were not married. It is discrimination, plain and simple, against working families, against working couples. It is wrong. That is why we want to get rid of the marriage tax penalty. It is unfair. It is immoral for the United States to do this. We did, in fact, pass a law here that has been signed by President Bush to repeal the marriage tax penalty, but in the Senate, which we are now privileged to call it on the House floor, because of their arcane budget rules, they put in this poison pill which had a time bomb that will blow up in 2011 and then hike taxes on 36 million married people. That is wrong. This says let us fix it, and we shall. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. COX. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) for raising the point, because it is a good one. I want to thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird) for his foresight and quick action on this problem as well. It is appropriate at the outset of this discussion to explain to our colleagues why our thanks are in order for the hard work that is being done, because the hard work is being done behind closed doors for good reason. This is a grizzly topic, number one. Nobody likes to think about the destruction of the Capitol and the loss of hundreds of Members of Congress, Senators and Representatives, in some horrible catastrophe. Second, the work is very detailed, involved, legalistic and consequential. So a good job has to be done, a careful job has to be done, a thoughtful job has to be done, but there is not much profit in laying it out before the House every day. We are necessarily here on the floor today because we are going to ask in the most formal way that we possess, through a resolution of this body, the cooperation of the States in this effort. We are made up of elected Representatives from States whose election laws interweave with our own Federal rules for eligibility and service in the United States House of Representatives. Some of the rules and procedures are House rules and are Federal rules. Some of them are State rules. In particular, the rules governing elections within the several States under our constitutional system are State rules. The resolution we are bringing forward today respects that aspect of our federalism, but urgently asks every Governor and every State legislator to examine their election laws and amend them with a view toward solving a very serious problem that we have in the House, and that is if many Members are killed, there is no quick way to reconstitute the Congress of the United States. A special election is required. Only election under our Constitution is prescribed as the means of filling a vacancy, and as a result, where the Senate can have its Members appointed by Governors, replacement Members, and be reconstituted, there would be no House, no functioning House, perhaps no majority, no quorum and thus no Senate, because we are a bicameral body, and they could produce no legislation on their own, thus no legislative branch in time of urgent crisis by definition in the United States. When after an attack on our Nation, the Commander in Chief, whoever that might be, because the attack might kill simultaneously the President, Vice President, Secretary of State perhaps, as well as the Speaker of the House, who is third in line, we do not even know who the President would be in that circumstance. So the operation of our legislative check and balance against executive power would be of vital importance. We might lack it. And something as workaday and ordinary and mechanical in procedure, therefore, as the State election laws becomes of vital importance, and we are asking in this resolution for the States to address that problem. This is one and only one of several issues that have arisen as a result of a study by the working group established by the Speaker of House, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert); and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt), the Democratic leader, the minority leader. Both Speaker Hastert and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt) have shown extraordinary leadership by putting together a high-level leadership task force that has as its contributors not only the chairman and the ranking member of the House Committee on Rules, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost), who is also the chairman of the Democratic Caucus, my cochairman of this working group; but also, as we have seen, the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on House Administration, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), who were just here on the floor; and also the chairman and ranking member of the House Committee on the Judiciary and the Subcommittee on the Constitution, which is very involved in these issues. The members of the working group include, besides myself and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost), the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier); the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), who is the subcommittee chairman on the Committee on the Judiciary responsible for the Constitution; the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), the ranking member on that subcommittee; the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney); and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer); the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird), to whom we just referred for his efforts; the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter), who is the chairman of the policy subcommittee on reform; the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee); and the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin). Throughout several months and nearly a score of meetings, we have covered the waterfront on these issues. I will return to further discussion on the specifics of this resolution, but I have several speakers on our side who wish to be recognized. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor). (Mr. CANTOR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder).

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I think it is important to add to the list of people whom it is necessary to thank for their efforts on this thus far: the Parliamentarian and his office and his staff, Charles Johnson, who has contributed extraordinary expertise and hard work on this initiative; also, the American Enterprise Institute and the Brookings Institution who, in addition to their scholarly studies on these subjects, have convened a commission on the continuity of government, which has been an extraordinary resource to this Congress. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Policy and Election Reform.

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Louisiana makes a fine point in commending the Congressional Research Service, and I was remiss in not mentioning this earlier. Walter Oleszek and others from CRS have been an enormous and very, very professional resource for us in our work. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), the chairman of the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, what we have heard thus far this afternoon should be very sobering to all of us. We are asking the States in this resolution to join in a thorough examination of their role, what they can do to help us with these problems. But the problems are manifold. It is not simply a question of solving the special election problem, it is not simply a question of solving the Presidential succession problem; we have other equally serious problems, and, in combination, they multiply into virtual paralysis of our government at a time when we would need our government to be functioning at its peak efficiency: a time of crisis. Mr. Speaker, we are here, of course, because of September 11. In working with my colleagues and our expert staff in this working group over several months, we have all been heartened to draw upon such a long and rich tradition in our Congress, in our democracy. There is barely a question that can come before us about the governance of this House or about the election of Members or about the relationship of the States to the Federal Government that has not been considered in other contexts; so we are not without precedent, far from it. Yet there is something unprecedented to what we are doing here. Were it not for September 11, I do not think any of us doubts we would not be here today, because on September 11 we were forced to confront a different kind of danger, qualitatively different, and we hope not quantitatively different than what we have seen thus far: a disastrous, horrible, apocalyptic future in which the unthinkable becomes reality. None of us here wishes that ever to occur. We are taking every national security step elsewhere, separate from this measure, to stave that off, to avoid it, to make our world and the rest of the world safe. But if these things happen, if loose nukes become a threat to our domestic security, if chemical warfare or the spread of biological toxins become our future, and if these attacks are directed against the Capitol, then we simply have to imagine that contingency. So that is what the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Frost) and I and our working group have been focused upon. The fact that, according to al-Jazeera Television, we now know that Flight 93 was directed towards the United States Capitol makes this all too real. Had Flight 93 hit the Capitol, many Members of Congress, we do not know how many, would have been killed. Had a joint session been attacked, the worst case, we can imagine not only a heavy toll, a nearly complete toll among Members of the House and Senate, but also the executive branch, including the President and the Vice President. The remaining Members of the House of Representatives would have had to try to muster a quorum. If none of them objected on the ground that a quorum was not present, then even 10 Members could have kept the House going. If, on the other hand, someone objected, then there would have to be somehow a quorum. And a quorum of 435 Members being 218, if more Members than that were killed or injured and unable to function in the attack, then Congress itself would be unable to function and unable to get a quorum. We are working in this working group on rules changes to address this, but ultimately we have got to have Members of Congress back in this body, real live Members. Because even if we can, through changing the rules or through unanimous consent of those remaining 10 Members, get those 10 Members to function as the House of Representatives, who would not question the legitimacy of Congress in those circumstances? Indeed, there might be court challenges. If the President of the United States, no longer the President that we elected but some replacement under the Presidential Succession Act is now acting in the teeth of an attack on our Nation so severe that the Congress itself has been wasted in that attack, is that not the time when the legislative branch should be operating in full force as a check against excess of executive power because the Nation itself would be tempted at that point to all manner of revenge, some of it perhaps not cool-headed, not wise, not in our national security interest? The checks and balances system itself would not be functioning. As has been mentioned several times, because of the historical evolution of United States Senate from an appointed body originally in the Constitution, members were not elected in the Senate, and then subsequently by Constitutional amendment, we got direct election of Senators. Still a vestige of that earlier appointment regime is that vacancies in the Senate are filled even in the 21st century by appointment, not so for the House. We have got to have the cooperation of the States to at least speed up special elections so that the time during which Congress cannot function is not needlessly protracted. This resolution, as has been mentioned, is serious. It is also very short and to the point. It has only one purpose and that is to provoke action in the State legislatures. The resolution is an important first step, as my colleague, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird), has described it, toward focusing the attention of the States on what is their critical role in replenishing the Federal legislature by ensuring that special elections are held as expeditiously as possible. Article one, section four of the Constitution, with which many Americans became familiar during our last electoral crisis, if we can call it that, sets forth the authority of the States to determine the time, places and manner for holding elections for Congress. This creates a symbiotic relationship between the States, who the founders believed and who we still believe today were the sovereigns in their own right; a symbiotic relationship between the States, on the one hand, and the Republic in total, on the other hand, ultimately supreme over the States in all matters encompassed by the Constitution. That is the supremacy clause. And, of course, Congress as the institution representing that sovereignty, that Federal sovereignty, must remain strong and invulnerable. Our strength is drawn from every Member representing every State in the Union. This is something about which all of the Members of our working group agree. Some are focused on a constitutional amendment to try and ensure that we can get Members back here from the States. Others are focused on the absolute necessity of ensuring that the device for returning Members from the States is some form of election. But at essence, the very important thing is we have Members back here and we not have a distinct minority abnormally representing only portions of the country and disproportionately representing certain interests against other interests, defiling the whole basis of our governance by the people. Our strength is drawn from every Member representing every State in the Union who daily appears in this Chamber to conduct America's business on behalf of each of our States and each of our constituents. Our vulnerability is a result of the independence that each of our States has in deciding how and when it will hold elections. So quite simply, as an institution, we are designed as an instrument of the people of each State and ultimately they, not us, control our fate. The proper place, of course, to discuss this and debate it is on the floor of House; but the proper place to solve this problem is in the legislatures of the various States. This is, as my colleague, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Snyder), said a moment ago, the people's House. And it is my opinion it is totally appropriate for the people working through their respective States to decide how best to populate this House with their representatives. The founders in their profound wisdom in perhaps glimpsing into the future, as they seem to have done so many times, did not leave us without recourse. Where the first clause of the first paragraph of article one, section four gives the States the power to govern every aspect of electing their Federal representatives, there is a second clause. If Congress so decides, Congress has the ultimate authority to take that power away from the States. The second clause in article one, section four reads as follows: The Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, that is the regulations of the States, except as to the places of choosing Senators. So this Congress could, as any Congress before it could have, preempt every State election law, every State election law in the country governing the election of Representatives either in times of catastrophe or any other time for that matter. But of course just because we have the power to do these things does not mean we should exercise this power, and in this resolution we have chosen a different course. We are going to the States and asking them to act. What we are doing today is precisely what we ought to be doing, no more, no less. It is the measured response that continues to respect the rights of the States to govern their own elections but highlights to them their critical role in our Federal legislature and emphasizes their responsibility to ensure that their representation in Congress is never long diminished. It is, after all, in the best interest of each State to ensure that it can quickly replenish its congressional delegation, lest it be left out, unrepresented during what could be one of the most crucial moments in our Nation's history. Therefore, we should, before we do anything more, give the States the opportunity to act in their best interest and in a way that suits each State's own unique needs, and that is precisely what this resolution does. Our working group has also been examining possible amendments to the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 because the Speaker of the House stands third in line to the Presidency; and any attack on this body that decimates it, that deprives of it of Members, could take away the Speaker as well, indeed, take away other potential successor Speakers. We want to be sure that the line of Presidential succession is clear and uninterrupted. Virtually ever proposed solution to every issue the working group has addressed, including this one over the past four months, whether it be a change in the rules of the House, passing a new law, amending an old one, or changing our Constitution by altering its language, presents very serious legal issues requiring careful thought and deliberation. We are not the first to grapple with these issues. The very first Congress, meeting at the site where Federal Hall in New York stands today and where this Congress gathered just a few weeks ago, grappled with the issue of Presidential succession. One can hardly image a Congress more in touch with the sentiments and intentions of the founders than that very first Congress; and one can hardly imagine a government more tentative and fragile and in need of the stability a well-defined and certain line of Presidential succession would provide. Yet the first Congress was unable to agree on a Presidential succession law, and they went without one. It was left to the second Congress to finally pass the first Presidential Succession Act in 1792. This act stated that in the event of a vacancy in the office of President and Vice President, succession will pass first to the President pro tem of the Senate and second to the Speaker of the House. The act has been amended in all of the years intervening since 1792 only twice since then: first following the assassination of President James Garfield in 1881 and the death of Vice President Thomas Hendrix in 1886, when concerns were raised because at the time of their deaths Congress had not yet convened, leaving the office of President pro tem and Speaker of the House vacant. As a result, in 1886 Congress removed the Speaker and the President pro tem from the line of Presidential succession. Fast forward to 1945. President Truman urged Congress to restore the Speaker and President pro tem to the line of Presidential succession. Two years later in 1947, Congress did so. This time putting the Speaker first and then the President pro tem of the Senate second. This brief history demonstrates the time and deliberation that have gone into the very few changes that have been made to our Presidential succession laws since the inception of the Republic. Therefore, those of us on this working group tasked with finding a solution to these problems of congressional continuity, of the line of Presidential succession should take comfort in a history where thoughtful deliberations has been the rule, not the exception. Mr. Speaker, it is exactly that kind of deliberation, thoughtful and measured, that has gone into the proposals that the working group has put forward to the Committee on the Judiciary on statutory changes, for example, to the Presidential Succession Act, put forward to the Committee on Rules, changes to our quorum requirements in the manner of recognizing the death of a Member, particularly when mass death occurs, and on this question of the special election of Members after a death of a Member. This resolution is the first step towards ensuring that this body will endure no matter what, no matter what our enemies do to us. I encourage every Member to join the 11 Members of the bipartisan working group in supporting this resolution, this important first step to ensuring the continuity of this great institution. Mr. Speaker, I want to conclude by thanking in particular the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) and his superb staff for the time, energy and effort they have put into these matters. We have much work ahead of us. We cannot congratulate ourselves too much for work half done, but we will be after this year and next year. And as I mentioned, given this long history, we cannot be concerned that we are not moving too precipitously fast. We are moving very fast, I think. We have gotten a lot done, but we will have sometime before us. So I look forward toward to working further with the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost). Mr. Speaker, I thank the Members who have spoken on this very important topic today. I apologize to those who were concerned with raising such grizzly topics. Now, Mr. Speaker, I hope we can put ourselves and our minds back to other workday matters more important to we, the living, than this horrible-to-contemplate future contingency. I urge the adoption of this resolution by all the Members of this House, and I urge action of the States in furtherance of this resolution, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.