Jim Davis

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes. Mr. Chairman, I do not think the debate here today is about whether the system here is broken. I think, fortunately, that debate is over. This system is broken. This system is rancid. It needs repair. I do not think the debate here today is about constitutionality. We know, those of us who proudly support Shays-Meehan, that we are about to pass a constitutional bill. But let me set forth some facts here. In the 1991-1992 election cycle, $86 million in soft money was raised and spent by both political parties. By 1996, that number had exploded to $260 million. In next year's election cycle, it appears that may reach an unprecedented level of $500 to $750 million. This is a system out of control. This is an example of excess. Control is moving further and further away from people and more and more in the hands of special interests. Those are the facts. The same problem is developing with respect to the sham issue ads. The argument that we are having to debate here on the floor of the House of Representatives is whether people in this country who have special interests before Congress should have a right to anonymous political advertising. These groups on the right and left are so ashamed of their ads, they are unwilling to put their names on it. As a result, the voters are disenfranchised because they are misled, they are deceived, they do not know whose voice they are hearing that is telling them how to vote for a particular candidate. These are the merits we are going to defeat today. We need to defeat amendments like the Doolittle amendment that are designed to gut this bill. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) be permitted to control 11 minutes of my time and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan) be permitted to control 9 minutes of my time during the general debate.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, that would leave 10 minutes.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule because it is going to present an opportunity to the House of Representatives to vote on the merits of this very important bill that I am a cosponsor of, the Shays-Meehan bill. It has been suggested earlier, there is not public clamor for us in Congress to take up campaign finance reform, and I think that statement alone really demonstrates what a problem we have here. The public is leaving it to us to figure out the details on how to rid this system of its excesses. What they want from us, what the public is clamoring for, is simply independent judgment. They want control over this political process returned to people. They expect us to judge each of the issues that come before us on the merits. If they were exposed to what we are exposed to, the incredible acceleration in the rate of soft money and sham issue ads pouring into the system, overshadowing their individual votes, they would expect us to take up this very bill today. We have to be on guard to defeat the poison pill amendments. The Shays-Meehan bill is not a bill that favors Democrats or Republicans, it favors ordinary citizens who want their vote to count. We need to defeat the poison pill amendments, we need a straight-up vote on Shays-Meehan, we need to return control of our elections of this Congress to the people of the United States.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, we have an opportunity today to take an important step towards returning control of this Congress to the people and away from the special interests that have a disproportionate influence in Congress. This will be the Shays-Meehan bill that we will debate later today that will close two of the most gaping loopholes in our campaign finance system: soft money and sham issue ads. Let us be clear about what opposition we face today. The leadership of this House has arranged for amendments to be offered that are very innocuous, but will have the effect of depriving the House of Representatives from voting on Shays-Meehan. This is a disingenuous way to conduct the debate. We need to see through it today. This is not a Democratic issue or a Republican issue; this is an American issue. Senator McCain is leading the fight in the Senate. We need to come together as Democrats and Republicans today. We need to have an open and honest debate on campaign finance reform and defeat the poison pill amendments that will be offered on the bill.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) be allowed to control 7 minutes of my time, and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan) be allowed to control an additional 7 minutes of my time.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the Rohrabacher amendment, and listening to the arguments that have been made today that suggest we discontinue normal trade relations with China, one of the points that is being made is that we need to send a message to China that we disapprove particularly of some of the reprehensible behavior that appeared to have occurred recently with their government. I agree we need to send a message to China. They certainly should not be engaged in conduct that is contrary to the very values which we stand for and practice every day. But I strongly disagree that this is the proper means by which to send a message. This is not just a sense of Congress, this is not just a message. This is a complete collapse of our trade relationship with China. Listen to what some of the missionaries have said who serve in that country and care very deeply about many of the human rights issues that we have discussed here on the floor of the House today. They have argued for constructive engagement to continue in China. Let us not set off another trade war just to send a message. The United States trade representative has estimated that it could cost consumers as much as half a billion dollars in increased prices for shoes, clothing, and small appliances if we were to end this trade relationship entirely and set off a trade war. Now the question has been raised today by a number of very eloquent speakers, what has changed since we have allowed normal trade relations to continue over the years? Where have we seen progress? Well, what is about to change is that we hopefully will have a debate on the floor of the House in just a few months about whether China enters the World Trade Organization, and this will be an incredibly fundamental debate. It will be an opportunity for us to engage China on a broader scale than ever before in an attempt to expose them to our values and to expose them to more people from our country. A number of us met with the premier of China just a few months ago, and many of us told him that, as we begin to trade more with this country, we invariably will expect more from that country as we expose them to our values, as we exchange more citizens on a regular basis. We believe democracy will be contagious, we believe our values will be contagious because we think that we stand for many universal truths. That is when constructive engagement really begins to have a dramatic and long term impact, when we begin the debate on WTO accession, and we talk as a Congress about how we are going to use that to really have truly long-term improvement in the lives of the citizens of China regardless of what their government chooses to do and the progress the government chooses to make. So today let us send the appropriate message which is this is not an endorsement of policies that China is engaged in that we strongly disagree with, but it is a clear recognition once again that a trade war is not in our Nation's best interests and that we should defeat this motion today.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 2488, the Financial Freedom Act of 1999 and in support of the Democratic alternative which will provide targeted tax relief but will ensure at the same time that we pay down our national debt and address the solvency of Social Security and Medicare first. The Republican tax package ignores the fiscal discipline which as brought the federal budget from record deficits into balance and projected surpluses in the coming years. By abandoning PAYGO rules and relying completely on projected surpluses as offsets, this package threatens to undo all of the gains we have made over the past six years. If in fact these surplus projections are not accurate, we will be faced with either massive cuts to keep the budget balanced or deficits reminiscent of the 1980's. Rather than passing this tax package, I believe we should be focusing first on the solvency of Social Security and Medicare. During this time of economic growth and positive budget forecasts, Congress should take strong steps to shore up these two vital programs. We have a narrow window of opportunity to prepare these programs for the demographic changes coming with the retirement of the baby boomers. If we squander this opportunity, future generations with look back on this Congress as one more concerned with short-term political pandering than long-term responsibilities. Furthermore, H.R. 2488 would consume virtually all of the projected on-budget surpluses and devote virtually none to debt retirement. Currently, the publicly held debt is roughly $3.7 trillion and our interest payments alone on that debt consume 11% of the overall federal budget. This debt and corresponding debt service crowd out private investment and put pressure on all of our national budget priorities. Since coming to Congress, I have strongly advocated devoting the lion's share of these surpluses to debt retirement. As Former Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin has pointed out, debt reduction creates a cyclical benefit of lower interest rates, greater economic growth, higher budget surpluses, and further debt reduction. In my view, retiring a significant portion of the federal debt is the most fiscally responsible course of action and will lead to tangible benefits for all Americans. Consider, for example, what would happen if, as Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has testified is likely, long-term interest rates were to drop another two points as a result of debt reduction. For citizens in my district of Hillsborough County, Florida with a $115,000 home, monthly mortgage payments would be reduced by $155. That is real savings and real money in the pockets of Americans. The Democratic alternative offered today will dedicate the vast majority of the surplus to debt retirement and still leave room for targeted tax cuts. This modest package of tax cuts includes marriage penalty relief, long-term care tax credits, accelerated deductibility of health insurance for the self-employed, and the restoration of an itemized deduction for state and local retail sales taxes, important for states such as Florida which have no state income tax. This alternative represents a balanced approach, making certain that we fix Social Security and Medicare first, dedicating most of the surplus to debt reduction thereby ensuring continued fiscal discipline and economic growth, and providing targeted tax relief for millions of Americans. Mr. Chairman, the decisions we make tonight will affect the next decade of public policy discussions. The choices are clear and stand in stark contrast to one another. We can, as the Republican leadership would like to do, enact massive tax cuts which explode in cost just as the baby boomers retire, dissipate all of the projected on-budget surplus, and run the risk that if the projections are wrong, as has been the case repeatedly in the past, Congress will be forced to slash federal spending or run budget deficits. Or, we can adopt a prudent approach which emphasizes our responsibility to future generations by addressing the solvency of Social Security and Medicare, paying down the publicly held debt and controlling the size of the tax cut until these projected surpluses become a reality. I urge all of my colleagues to vote against H.R. 2488 and adopt the Democratic alternative.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Roemer-Davis amendment to the Teacher Empowerment Act. We are approaching an education crisis in our country. Over the next decade, school districts across the country will have to hire an additional 2 million teachers. In my home, Hillsborough County in Tampa, we need to hire 600 teachers alone before school starts in about 3 weeks and 7,000 teachers over the next decade. To meet this need, talented Americans of all ages and all backgrounds need to be recruited to be successful, qualified teachers. Several years ago, Congress authorized the Troops to Teachers program at the Department of Defense. This program has been successful in recruiting and training over 3,000 men and women who have retired from the military and gone on to serve as math, science and technology teachers. The graduates of this program that I have met have demonstrated a deep commitment to their students and to their profession and have used their life experiences to relate to the young people whom they are teaching. Due to the downsizing of our military and a shrinking pool of military retirees, we need to find other ways to address this shortage that is developing of teachers. Together with my colleague, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer) and 25 Democratic and Republican cosponsors, we have introduced the Transition to Teaching Act and offer an amendment today very similar to the bill. The amendment, which is modeled after the Troops to Teachers Act, will target mid-career professionals who are looking for a career change and want to be teachers. This new program does not replace the existing Troops to Teachers program, it simply builds on its success. We encourage professional associations, business and trade groups, unions and other organizations to follow the military's example and encourage their retiree employees to become teachers. Our amendment is intended to make sure that these men and women get the training they need to become teachers. The Roemer-Davis amendment will help move people from the board room to the classroom, from the firehouse to the schoolhouse, from the police station on main street to the classroom on main street. Since we introduced the Transition to Teachers Act last month, I have heard from a number of people throughout Florida who have expressed support and excitement for this proposal. I heard from a woman from Tampa who spent more than 20 years as a pharmacist who is considering a career change and would like to be a teacher and sees this bill as a way to help her do that. Mr. Chairman, the time is now for us to begin dealing with this crisis that is developing. We need to replenish the ranks of our teachers. We need our best and brightest there. We need people whose maturity and life experience can help them reach out to the young people in our classrooms today, and I would urge adoption of the Roemer-Davis amendment.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Maloney- Campbell-Gilman amendment and in opposition to the Smith amendment. I think it is very important that we get back to the facts here. As has been pointed out, the funding that we are talking about tonight goes into maternal and child health services and devices. This includes family planning; it includes birth control devices. These are exactly the types of tools that we need to put in the hands of men and women, particularly in our developing countries, who are seeking to improve the lives of themselves and their families and to better their own countries. There are many men and women in these countries who are struggling to support their families, and we should be encouraging them to engage in responsible family planning. Now, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) has expressed a multitude of concerns about practices in China. I think it is fair to say here that every Member of Congress standing here tonight deplores those activities. But it is also very clear and should be beyond dispute that there is not a single dollar proposed to go to China and to endorse any of those practices and, instead, will go to other countries. I urge adoption of the Campbell-Gilman-Maloney amendment.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the African Growth and Opportunity Act. More so than ever before, we are seeing economic development in developing countries provide tremendous prosperity to folks for whom hope was once outside their grasp. This bill today will provide a very important tool to sub-Saharan African countries to help empower men and women and their communities to begin to support themselves and their families, begin to develop their own businesses. We spend a lot of time talking about how great our economy is, how good our ideas and values are, but we have got to go further. We have got to provide tools to countries so they can emulate our success. This bill is not just about a good idea. It is about a very important tool. There has been concern expressed about abuse and exploitation of workers. Those are valid concerns. We constantly balance those concerns as we foster our economy here. There are unions in these countries that will work to protect workers. There are important provisions in these bills. This bill will allow the President to decertify these preferences should there be abuses. This bill is balanced. We should support it. It will empower our friends in these very important countries.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to instruct conferees. This is not a vote of a popularity contest with respect to the President. This is a vote to recognize the achievement of goals. We had several debates on the floor of this House. We had disagreement as to those goals. But ultimately we as a country, acted in furtherance of goals, and we achieved those. Why did we achieve those goals? Because we had our best men and women in the country here in the field giving their very best efforts, and by the grace of God we prevailed. Were mistakes made? Of course there were. Were lessons learned? Absolutely. An important part of our job is to think about what lessons were learned. But we did achieve those goals, and I do not think anybody can stand here today and say that everybody did not give it their best effort. So let us come together as a country through this Congress. Let us recognize that we achieved those goals. Let us be thankful we succeeded. Let us learn our lessons from Kosovo and let us put this behind us and recognize our troops and everybody who played a part in the mission.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, we are about to have a major problem on our hands in this country. We have more and more children entering in our schools than we have seen in a generation. At the same time, we face a massive retirement as more and more of our teachers begin to reach retirement age. In fact, we are going to need over 2 million new teachers over the next decade. In my home, Florida, a growth State, we are going to need over 7,000 teachers just in Hillsborough County, one county that I represent. Fixing our education system is like a three-legged stool. We have to modernize our schools, we have to build them the right size the first time, we need to reduce class size, especially in the early grades, so we can return control of the classroom back to the teachers, and we need to begin preparing to replenish the ranks of our teaching profession with the very best and brightest we can find. Along with the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer) who spoke earlier this evening, I will be introducing legislation on Thursday that offers one approach to attract more qualified people into our teaching profession. Our bill is referred to as the Transition to Teaching Act. It is modeled after the very successful Troops to Teachers law in this country which has resulted in more than 3,000 retired members of the military choosing to become math, science, and technology teachers since 1974. More than 270 of these men and women alone are now teaching in Florida schools. The Transition to Teaching Act expands the Troops to Teachers program so that any midlife career professional can consider making a change in the teaching profession, and like the Troops to Teachers program, will qualify for up to a $5,000 grant or stipend to cover the cost of returning to a college or university to complete the coursework necessary to be trained as a teacher and certified as a teacher in the State where they choose to go. In exchange for that training, we and the taxpayers of our country will expect at least 3 years of teaching, and we have targeted our bill towards those schools that have the highest percentage of students from an impoverished family where we face the greatest challenge in attracting teachers. We will expect the recipients of this grant to spend up to 3 years teaching in one of these schools, to help begin to fill the ranks of our dwindling number of teachers. Yesterday in my home, Tampa, I met with three highly qualified individuals who formerly served in our military and are using those life experiences to be very successful teachers, Ronald Dyches, Al Greenway, and Karen Billingsley. Ronald Dyches told me it had always been his dream to be a teacher. When it came time to retire from the military, the Troops to Teachers program was there to help cover some of the costs to pay the bills of going back to school before he could begin to earn a salary as a teacher. He told me it was always his dream to be a teacher, and that grant helped him realize his dream. Now he is doing a terrific job. As a matter of fact, as a veteran he helped design a course on the history of the Vietnam War that is not only being used in his high school, it is being used in other high schools in the Hillsborough County area. He is simply one example of some of the very talented and mature people who have worked in other professions, who can be brought into our schools. Our bill can help move people from the boardroom to the classroom, from the firehouse to the schoolhouse, from the police station on Main Street to the school on Main Street. Let us work together to bring more qualified people into our teaching profession. Let us reach out to people who might consider realizing their dream and making that change to a second career in teaching. Let us get together and pass this legislation, and begin to deal with the need to have quality teachers as more and more students are in our schools.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I would like to reinforce the point that the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon) just made. One of the central recommendations of the Cox-Dicks report is that we need to beef up domestic launch capacity here in the United States as a matter of national security. We have a very direct, simple opportunity to do that by investing in increased launch capacity in the Vandenberg Air Force Base in California and in the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. This amendment provides additional funding for a second shift, will increase the ability of the Kennedy Space Center and the Vandenberg Air Force Base to engage in other commercial launch capacity, exactly what is being recommended by the Cox-Dicks report. This should be the first in a series of steps we take to directly respond to that recommendation. I urge adoption of the Weldon amendment.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I think the case has been made here today by a broad number of Members, both Democrat and Republican, to defeat this rule. Let us go back and do this right. The point has been made by the gentleman from California (Mr. Dicks), the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) and others. Let us look at the very important lessons from the report that has just come out with respect to national security. In fairness to the committee, the report was just issued. But let us do it right the first time. Let me offer one specific example. The Weldon amendment that was not allowed to be made in order by the Committee on Rules provides a perfect opportunity to respond to the recommendation that we begin to invest in the United States domestic launch capacity instead of relying, unduly so, on other countries to launch communications satellites. The Weldon amendment, which was the product of a study done by the Air Force, recommended a very specific investment by the Kennedy Space Center. There are other space centers around the country that are well suited for this investment. Let us go back and do this right the first time. Let us begin to respond to the solutions identified by the Chris Cox report, and the Weldon amendment would be a good place to start.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow).

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), who is the prime sponsor of the motion to recommit on the bill.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Thurman).

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm). (Mr. STENHOLM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kleczka), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton).

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Sisisky). (Mr. SISISKY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of Senate Concurrent Resolution 21. The Congress needs to have a voice in the involvement of the United States in Operation Allied Force. We should stand up and express our support for our troops and our allies in NATO. We must also take this opportunity to show to President Milosevic that we are united in our belief and determination that this campaign of terror must be stopped. We must continue to work with our NATO allies to restore peace to the region, to ensure that the Kosovo Albanians who want to return to their homes can be allowed to do so under peaceful circumstances, and we must continue to ensure that Mr. Milosevic will withdraw his military and paramilitary forces from Kosovo and, ultimately, provide for self-governance in Kosovo. To accomplish these goals we must participate in Operation Allied Force and support the air strikes. We are steadily diminishing the power of Mr. Milosevic and his military forces. For the United States to withdraw from this attack at this moment would undermine the entire NATO effort and would, in effect, validate Mr. Milosevic's inexcusable and terrible campaign of ethnic cleansing. Our NATO allies have stepped up to the plate in Kosovo. Leaders of the NATO alliance have recently reaffirmed their commitment and resolve to continue the air strikes until we stop President Milosevic. This is the time for Congress to step up and to endorse those air strikes. The Senate concurrent resolution authorizes the President to conduct military air operations and missile strikes against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Passage of this resolution will express our endorsement of these strikes and send a strong message to President Milosevic that we are unified with our allies. This will also send a strong message to our troops in the field. Fifty years ago we formed NATO to work together for the security of Europe. The cold war has ended and communism has ended. However, there is a great need for us to work to assure the safety and stability of countries in Europe who have been our partners for over 50 years. We can continue this good work by adopting this resolution today, sending a message that we are united as a country and determine our resolve to stop the slaughter in Kosovo. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.