Jim Davis

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the comments just made by the chairman of the Committee on the Budget. It is correct to say that probably every Member of this body is opposed to cutting Medicare spending to fund the effects of the tax cut whose size in retrospect was way too large given the condition of the economy and the cost to our country of maintaining security at home and abroad, but there is another point involved here in the motion to recommit, and this is what we need to debate. We are not cutting taxes tonight or spending money. We are engaged in accounting. We just spent a year preaching to corporate America about the need to be open and honest to shareholders and investors and to the public about admitting when they were in deficit and doing the math correctly, and here we are tonight in direct defiance of that principle because what we are voting upon is whether we are going to be honest first with ourselves and then with the American people that we are in deficit spending and in balance only because we are relying upon the Social Security Trust Fund. Every Member of Congress who went home the last campaign campaigned upon fiscal responsibility, the virtues of balancing the budget and paying down the debt, and there are many Democrats and some Republicans that increasingly will argue for that. It has had benefits in terms of interest rates. It has benefits in terms of preparing Social Security and Medicare for the retirement of the baby boomers. One of the key principles that brought Democrats and Republicans together to balance the budget was the principle of pay as you go because pay as you go has meant, until today after this vote, that if you want to increase spending, Medicare or other discretionary spending under formulas or programs, or if you wanted to increase taxes, you had to pay as you go. You had to consider the impact that would have on the balanced budget, growing the deficit. Tonight we are throwing those rules out. We are saying for the next 5 years, whether it is increased spending or additional tax cuts, we do not care what impact it has on the size of the deficit. We are going to dig deeper. Let us think back to the things we said to corporate America and what we promised the people we represent. Let us have a direct, open, and honest debate tonight. Let us admit to ourselves we made a mistake in terms of the size of the tax cut. We need to come straight with the American public. It starts by coming straight with ourselves. Let us reinstate PAYGO starting the year after this. Let us vote for the motion to recommit because what the motion to recommit says, and my colleagues are going to hear this over and over again, is let us commit, let us make the President commit to a plan to get back to a balanced budget, to stop relying upon the Social Security Trust Fund. The motion to recommit says it is not going to happen tomorrow. We have got security problems we need to deal with. We have got funding at home we need to deal with, but we need to have a plan, and we need to be honest with the folks at home just as we said to corporations across America, we have got a problem, we have got a growing deficit and we are going in the right direction and not the wrong direction. It starts by reinstating the PAYGO principle. I would ask my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans, that care about fiscal responsibility and the growing budget deficit to vote for the motion to recommit.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of the late Carl Riggs, a former provost and acting president at the University of South Florida who dedicated 25 years to turning the University into the first-class, nationally renowned institution that it is today. Carl began his academic career at the University of Michigan, where he earned three zoology degrees before serving in the United States Air Force as an aviation cadet. He went on to work for 23 years at the University of Oklahoma, where he published several books and articles on zoology and served as acting provost. In 1971, Carl was asked to join USF as a biology professor and a vice-president of academic affairs, and in the next 25 years, he held a host of leadership positions at the University, including acting president from 1977 to 1978. During his time at the University, Carl set clear standards for faculty tenure, salary and promotions, and at a time when USF was primarily considered a teaching college, Carl was instrumental in developing USF's graduate and research program, which he oversaw until the mid 1980s. Carl's accomplishments helped make USF a successful university that competes with the best. Carl's colleagues remember him with admiration and respect. He had a vision for USF, and made it come to life. But most importantly, he never stopped caring for the students. In 1990, Carl was awarded USF's Distinguished Citizen's award, and the mayor of Tampa named June 28 of that year to be Dr. Carl Riggs Day. Carl's contributions to the Tampa Bay community extend far beyond the USF campus. He served as a member on the board of directors of the Boy Scouts of America, and on the Florida Foundation for Future Scientists. Although Carl retired from USF in 1996, he still represented the school, and remained an integral part of it. On behalf of our community, I would like to extend my deepest sympathies to Carl's wife and children, who have been blessed to have a wonderful, selfless role-model in their family. We will always remember Carl for his dedication and service to our city and the USF community.

Mr. JIM DAVIS of Florida

Mr. JIM DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of Ted Maliaris, a devoted American who is following his heart and sharing his love for our nation through his passionate music. Through his ``A Tribute to America Tour,'' Ted is lifting the spirits of Americans across the nation while teaching children the importance of American values. Ted was born in South Florida, and thanks to the encouragement of his grandparents, who were both musicians, Ted soon discovered his true love for music. During his years working on the family farm, Ted honed his musical talents and soon decided to follow his dream of sharing his music with others. He recently recorded his first album with the London Symphony Orchestra, where he honored the immigrant farm laborers who worked along side him during his career on the farm. After the tragic events of September 11, Ted's mother, Ann S. Miller composed ``A Tribute to America--A 21st Century Anthem'' to honor the men and women in the Armed Forces. The song inspired Ted to organize the ``Tribute to America Tour,'' which features his performance of his mother's song and performances by various children's groups around the country. Hoping to show children the patriotism and pride that lies in our country, America's Life Line Association is planning a special recording of 50,000 children singing the Anthem together. On behalf of the people of Tampa Bay, I would like to extend my gratitude to Ted for his dedication to our country and this important cause.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to commend the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) on their work. Mr. Speaker, as a Floridian I need to provide a little more sober assessment as to where we are and where we need to go. I painfully need to first point out that we began discussing this issue right after the November 2000 elections, and it has taken the verge of the next set of elections to revisit the issue. We should not just be talking about this issue at election time. This is a burden we all bear, Federal, State and local. The people that testified before the House Administration Committee pointed out to us that the legislation, if it was going to work, was not just about replacing machines. It was about making sure that we had qualified people who were trained to use the machines. And, unfortunately, once again in my home State of Florida we have provided another painful lesson as to just how right they were. Let me also point out that tonight is only half the battle. This is an authorization bill; but the guts of the bill, apart from some of the issues that have been discussed earlier, have to do with some of the funding that needs to be provided. I want to urge the President for the first time to stand up and be counted on this and to release the funds that he has sequestered that would provide the first $400 million in installment for this bill and to work with Democrats and Republicans to fund this bill, because without funding, the bill will only be an expression. It will not be action by this Congress. So this is the beginning tonight. I applaud the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), but we need to get to work on finishing the bill.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise in support of this resolution. I intend to support the resolution for three reasons. First, I believe the President needs, as has been said by a number of speakers, the credible threat of force to maximize the chances of negotiating a peaceful settlement to disarm Saddam Hussein through the United Nations. Secondly, I believe that we should at least attempt, if necessary, to use military force to back up an attempt to inspect and disarm. Obviously, Saddam Hussein has been very difficult to deal with in the past, and a more muscular form of inspection may be a further way to avoid a more broad military attack. Finally, if Iraq fails to disarm and then, in fact, if it is clear that Iraq poses a likely risk of serious harm to this country, I believe we should be prepared to defend ourselves by the use of force as a last resort. I think it is important to point out that this very difficult decision before us today has been made more difficult by the mismanagement of this issue by the Bush administration in the days leading up to this. Originally, the presentation by the White House was very much of a unilateralist tone and, as the previous speaker mentioned, many Americans, many Members of Congress have had difficulty recovering from that initial misstep. I am pleased that the resolution reflects a change in heart by the President to work with our allies through the United Nations. Secondly, it was originally suggested to the Congress and the country that there was some additional information that made the risk of Iraq to the United States imminent. This also proved ultimately to be incorrect. There was no additional information of a heavily significant nature in terms of the level of risk that Saddam Hussein posed to this country, and I personally do not believe the case has been made that the threat is imminent. I do believe the case has been made that the threat is significant and, if we do nothing, it will grow; and that is one of the reasons why I support acting. But the case of regime change, based on any additional information and the allegation of the NSC, has not been made. Finally, all of the tone coming out of the administration in the early days was force as a first resort, not as a last resort. That is not what has made this country great. It is our strength and our wisdom that has allowed us to succeed and enjoy the moral authority that we enjoy today. I am pleased that, as recently as last night, the President has changed his tone and is saying correctly that force should be used as a last resort, and the resolution reflects that as well. But let me add, I think we can do better. It would be my intention to continue to pursue an amendment to this resolution similar to what I offered in the Committee on International Relations. That amendment borrowed from the proposal of the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Lugar, supported then by Senator Hagel. What that amendment provided for was that before the President would use force, in the event the United Nations was not successful in negotiating disarmament, that the President must make a determination and a declaration to Congress and the American people that the risk that Iraq posed to our country was so great as to justify the use of military force. I believe that higher standard, that moderation, is what will help bring this Congress together to give the President the tools he needs to do his job and to demonstrate that what we are acting with is a combination of strength and wisdom. Secondly, and most troubling of all, we should adopt an amendment that clarifies that the mission of the United States of America and our allies is to disarm Saddam Hussein, not to engage in regime change. The way the resolution is currently written, it is far from clear, it is far from precise, that the Security Council resolutions that we are authorizing the President to enforce through force deal strictly with disarmament. These two changes should be adopted to make the resolution stronger, more precise, and more clear. For that reason, I hope the House will take that amendment up later in the action.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge). (Mr. ETHERIDGE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner).

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I think it is appropriate that we pause briefly in this debate as we debate our fundamental responsibility about how we best protect our country and what role our constituents will play in protecting our country to appreciate the fact that at 4:15 this morning Eastern Standard Time two Marines with the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit from Camp Pendleton, California, were outside of Kuwait City participating in a training exercise. One of those young Marines was shot and killed, and the other was seriously injured. We are waiting an update as to his condition. This was merely a training exercise taking place with the Kuwait military, and one person lost his life and another may because of a senseless act of terrorism. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask Members to join me in a minute of silence to give thanks to these two brave Marines and appreciate the sacrifice they have made. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Members for joining me in that minute of silence. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall).

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, as we debate this extremely important resolution, I feel compelled to voice my concerns and those of my constituents who are very uneasy with the way President Bush has presented his case. In the minds of many, President Bush has failed to make a convincing case for using military force against Iraq. Throughout our history, this country has not militarily attacked another nation-state for any other reason except for self defense. As a member of the House International Relations Committee, I offered an amendment that would have addressed many of these concerns by making the resolution more narrow and precise in scope. Unfortunately, this amendment was not passed in Committee, and I was not allowed to offer my alternative on the floor today. Thus, I face what will certainly be the most important vote I will ever cast with a very heavy heart, knowing that my vote could put our men and women in harm's way. While the resolution we are voting on today does not address all of my concerns, it has come a long way since the early days of the Administration rhetoric. Just two months ago, President Bush and his advisors where talking albout using force first, rather than last, and taking unilateral action to facilitate regime change in order to confront an imminent threat from Iraq. While the President has not convinced me that Iraq is a clear and present danger to the security of the United States, today, as reflected in this resolution, the President is committed to working with the United Nations to build a coalition to disarm Saddam Hussein. Furthermore, knowing the historical background of Saddam Hussein, only a resolution that gives the President the credible threat of force will give America and the world a chance to disarm him without engaging in war. Thus, I will support House Joint Resolution 114. Mr. Speaker, if force proves necessary, we must forge a coalition of other countries supporting and participating with our armed forces to the greatest extent practical. A formidable, multilateral alliance, similar to the one assembled during the Persian Gulf War, is necessary before, during and after the war, and will help continue the momentum in the international war on terrorism. The United States should resolve the situation using all of the political and diplomatic resources at our disposal, keeping in mind that military action is sometimes the only option available. Although I will support this resolution, I still have a number of concerns: this resolution will give the President broad authority to make war form any reasons well beyond disarming Saddam Hussein of his weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and the resolution's standard to justify going to war is too low. In an attempt to address this and other concerns, I offered an amendment in the House International Relations Committee, similar to a proposal authored by Senators Biden and Lugar, which makes perfectly clear that the goal of the resolution is disarmament. To that end, the amendment would have limited the President's war-making power by focusing the authorization to use military force on securing the dismantlement of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, not human rights violations, prisoners of war, or the failure to return property as called for under the resolution we debate today. In addition, my amendment emphasized the importance of international support and encouraged the President to exhaust diplomatic efforts at the UN, while reserving the right to act unilaterally if the UN fails to approve a new resolution requiring the dismantlement of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction in a timely fashion. Lastly, the amendment would have raised the standard for justification of going to war by elevating the risk assessment from ``continuing'' to ``grave''. The U.S. faces many continuing risks but they do not warrant the use of military force. By requiring the President to inform Congress that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction pose a ``grave'' risk to the United States, the amendment raised the standard which must be met before placing American men and women in harm's way, something President Bush's resolution fails to do. Remember, President Bush warned that Iraq is a ``grave and gathering'' danger during his excellent speech to the United Nations General Assembly on September 12, 2002. Unfortunately, as I mentioned earlier, my amendment did not pass the House International Relations Committee and it was not made in order by the Rules Committee. The authority this Congress is about to give to the President must be used judiciously. After all, war is the ultimate failure of diplomacy. I expect that after this important authority is granted, Congress and the President will closely work together.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of Janett Martin, a very strong leader in the City of Tampa who devoted her life to her church and community. Janett was a pioneer in the advancement of diversity and fairness in the workplace and will be greatly missed by family, friends, and admirers. She led the way by becoming Tampa's first African-American city clerk, as well as president of the American Society of Public Administrators. Many in the Tampa Bay area were drawn to her intelligence, hard work, and perseverance. Janett took on as many responsibilities as possible, showing all heart and boundless determination. Even after she became ill, she still served a term as president of Tampa's League of Women Voters. Janett continued to make a difference in the African-American community by recently heading the Lincoln-Douglas Ball. Without a doubt, Janett Martin left a unique mark throughout the entire Tampa Bay community. I would like to express my upmost admiration for the person Janett was and my condolences to the Martin family. She will be well-remembered for her integrity, strength, and commitment to her ideals.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, the victims of the September 11, 2001 attack on the United States of America were honored by a special performance of Charles Gabriele's ``Ave Maria'' presented by the Sarasota Concert Band, conducted by its director Maestro William Barbenera, at the band's September 2nd concert. Lorraine Murphy-Renfroe and Douglas Renfroe were the solo vocalists. Members of the band who performed in the tribute were: Patricia Dominowski, Adrienne Clover, Kelly Hatin, Valerie McManus, Lindsey White, Tom Hughes, Kelly Jacobs, Jave Martin, Pan Winkle, Phil Hohman, Estella Lilly, Maria Herrera, Calvin Wright, Megan Jefferds, Harry Phillips, Lynn Miller, R.C. Summers, George McLain, Marc Levensen, Kristen Constantino, Liz Jefferds, Joe Martinez, Dick Thierry, Gerry Snyder, John Hietala, Dave Jacobs, Jacob Bradley, Robert Moore, Merril Wilson, Eric Vanzytveld, Andrea Hatin, Robert Thurston, Marvin Luckett, Charles Wilson, Bill Namack, John Haswell, Lara Fetzek, Chuck Evans, Laurita Noller, Pam Winkle, Robert Andrews, Jack Brokensha, Mike Dubi, Carolyn Gallmeyer, Fred Gallmeyer, Jeff Hanscom, Joe Hruby, Ann Jefferds, Marc Levensen, Faye Luckett, William Namack, Eddie Pawl, Bryson Sanders, Dianne Saunders, Michael Saunders, Paul Worrell, Lisa Barbanera, Kim Clark, Diane Jolly and Melissa Martinez. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in applauding this most commendable musical tribute to the victims.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of Leland Hawes, a respected journalist and historian, who last month marked his 5th year of work at the Tampa Tribune. In a world of 24-hour-a-day news stations, wireless phones and Internet connections, it is easy to get so wrapped up in the here-and- now that we forget the history that shaped our community and our lives. For 50 years, Leland Hawes has worked to remind Tampa Bay residents of where we came from and how we got here. Every Sunday, Tampa Tribune readers are treated to Leland's ``History and Heritage'' page where he passes on a wealth of knowledge about Tampa Bay's rich and vibrant culture. Leland's detailed stories restore the color and texture to the events that we may vaguely remember, and open the door to a fascinating past that we had long forgotten. Most importantly, Leland and his stories make us proud of our community, our history and our heritage. Those fortunate enough know Leland personally have only the best things to say about him. During his career at the Tribune, he has earned the upmost respect as an award winning journalist, a kind mentor to young reporters, a gentleman, and a loyal friend. On behalf of the Tampa Bay community, I would like to express my deep appreciation to Leland for his dedication to telling our story, telling it well, and preserving our history for future generations.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of Morris Michael Scionti, a passionate political activist who lived every moment of his life with tremendous enthusiasm and flair. As Chair of the Hillsborough County Democratic Executive Committee, Mike displayed unwavering loyalty to his country and his party. Mike first shared his love for the political process in the classroom. For thirty years, he taught high school civics and history classes with the same affection and conviction that he later brought to politics. After teaching, Mike dove full force into politics, playing an integral role in Lawton Chiles' successful campaigns for U.S. Senate and Governor, among other races. He then went on to work for the Division of Business and Professional Regulation and as executive director of the Florida Athletic Commission. Tampa Bay, however, will remember Mike most for his countless contributions to Hillsborough County's Democratic Executive Committee. Never one to shy away from a good political argument, Mike was an excellent choice to take the helm of the organization. With his boundless energy, he always found a way to excite people about politics. Despite all of his commitments in the community, Mike, a father of three, always found time for family. I would like to express my heartfelt sympathies to Mike's children and family members. Morris Michael Scionti will be remembered in Tampa Bay as a passionate and fiercely loyal competitor. Our community will miss him greatly.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of the Bayshore Patriots, a group of four proud Americans from Tampa whose patriotism inspired thousands of people from across Tampa Bay to join together this morning for ``Flags Along Bayshore: Tampa Remembers 9-11,'' an event to remember those lost in the September 11 attacks and honor those who protect and serve our nation every day. The Bayshore Patriots--Linda Alfonso, Julie Sargent, Julie Whitney, and Bill Hamblin--have gathered every Friday afternoon since September 11th to wave flags on Bayshore Boulevard in Tampa, a major route for service men and women who work on MacDill Air Force Base. Through their simple act--the waving of a flag--this group has shown their support for troops in the Tampa Bay area and sent a message that terrorism will not destroy Americans' love of country. The Bayshore Patriots' spirit and dedication has invigorated the Tampa Bay community as more and more flag wavers join the group each week and passing motorists honk their horns in support. General Tommy Franks, Commander in Chief of U.S. Central Command, based at MacDill, has seen the group on this way to work and stopped to show his appreciation for the group's efforts. When the Patriots decided to organize a September 11 tribute, with the hopes of having all 4.5 miles of Bayshore Boulevard lined with Tampa residents all waving flags, they were overwhelmed with support. Local businesses volunteered time, money and services to make the event possible, and people from every corner of our community signed up to wave flags and participate in the event, which was scheduled to include a keynote address by General Franks, patriotic songs, and remembrances. A steady downpour may have interrupted the program, but nothing could have dampened the resolve of the participants. The Bayshore Patriots have taught us that we all can make a difference in the war on terrorism. They started as just a few voices calling out in patriotism and support for those impacted by September 11, but today, they were joined by a giant chorus of voices--men, women, and children from all walks of life singing in harmony. On behalf of the Tampa Bay community, I thank Linda Alfonso, Julie Sargent, Julie Whitney, and Bill Hamblin for their inspiration.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, about 1 year ago, former Congressman Joe Scarborough and I led a debate on the floor of the House that is remarkably similar to the one today, except it had to do with the coast of Florida. One of the arguments we raised was that the minimal amount of supply available off the coast of Florida did not warrant the extraordinary risk to our State, its pristine beauty, and to so many people that depended upon the economy associated with those beautiful beaches. Those same arguments apply here today in California. We are talking about supply related to asphalt. I do not hear anybody here complaining we are depending on other countries to build enough parking lots in this Nation. California needs a few less parking lots and so do the State of Florida and others. So we are not talking about a precious supply for motor vehicles, for generating electricity for industry and manufacturing; we are talking about asphalt. I think the Democrats and Republicans in the State of California are entitled to the same respect that we afford to Floridians when we sat up and told our colleagues of the economic impact to our State associated with a spill that could occur. The final point here is that the President of the United States and others need to stand up and say, why are Californians different than Floridians? Are they of some inferior status? Of course the answer is no. We are a country. This is an issue to put politics aside. It does not matter who the Governor of the State of California is this year or in the future. It is the same issue. If this Congress will pay attention to the details, because the devil is in the details, as we did last year, we will adopt the Capps amendment, and I urge adoption of the amendment.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to join in the gentleman's comments and to thank the chairman for his recognition of this very important issue. This is one of the most historic parts of the Tampa Bay area. It is a convergence of the gentleman of Florida's (Mr. Dan Miller), the gentleman of Florida's (Chairman Young), and the district I represent; and we will be introducing legislation shortly to transfer title, and there certainly will be appropriation issues accompanying that. This is also a piece of land that the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks), the ranking member of the subcommittee, is very familiar with as well.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. We have heard the debate tonight. There is one question that lingers. Where are the fiscally responsible members of the Republican House of Representatives? So many of my colleagues campaigned, as many Democrats did, on the virtues of the balanced budget and paying down the debt. The plan that has been outlined here tonight that was offered as an amendment in the Committee on the Budget by me and others addresses all the concerns that have been expressed. It gives discretion for us to spend some money on security. It allows time to get back to a balanced budget and paying down the debt. On September 11, thank God we had economic security. We had a balanced budget. We were on our way to paying down the debt. It kept us strong. It keeps us strong. We could not ignore that. We need to get back to it. The arguments my colleagues make about tax cuts would be better arguments if we did not have the debt in the trillions of dollars, over $4 trillion. The interest payment 2 years ago on that debt exceeded more than we spent on Medicare every year. Now a number of us are worried about the health of the economy. If we continue down this path without adopting the plan that has been advocated tonight, we will start to drive interest rates up again and we will really be in trouble. I urge rejection of this bill. Let us adopt the plan.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I yield time to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, this debate today should be about the highest priority of the Congress and the Nation and, that is, national security. Instead, what we have heard from the other side is they will do whatever it takes to pass this bill. One of the questions that deserves to be answered today is at what cost? What limits are there to us doing whatever it takes to pass this bill? Are there any limits in decency, in fairness, in what this country and this Congress is supposed to stand for? Nobody has attempted to rebut the fact that there is a special fix in this bill for 2 hospitals in the United States when hospitals all over the country are suffering, the people they are supposed to serve. No one has attempted to rebut the fact that we are rewriting a trade agreement with Caribbean nations that was balanced and strongly supported on a bipartisan basis. There are few facts we agree on today. These are some of the ones we do agree on. This should be about national security. It should not be about economic security and Social Security. Thank goodness on September 11 this country was strong economically to withstand the horrendous attack that occurred because we had balanced the budget and begun to pay down the debt. Nobody is rebutting the fact that what is happening today is we are going to raise the debt ceiling; the Federal Government is going to start borrowing money again. There is no dispute that that has the serious risk of raising long-term interest rates which threaten the prosperity of my State, Florida, and communities across the country. The men and women in uniform that are protecting our country at home and abroad are not just fighting to protect the flag. They are not just fighting to protect a Nation. They are fighting to reflect certain principles that we all swore to uphold here, to have a strong country, a strong economy, a national community, a strong system of Social Security and, most fundamentally of all, a democracy. Well, we have a stand here, and that is, have an open and honest debate on the issues which we have been deprived of, not just Democrats but Republicans as well, under a rule that is forcing us to pass laws that would never survive a majority vote in this Congress. Let me finally refer to the USAir situation. We are changing the rules in the middle of a system that was passed on a bipartisan basis that allows airlines to demonstrate they deserve a loan from the Federal Government. Nobody has tried to rebut the fact that what this bill is doing, just as the Senate is about to do, is to close the opportunity for a major carrier in my home, Florida, and the Southeast and the Northeast and other parts of the country, to borrow money to avoid a bankruptcy. Have any of my colleagues seen airline bankruptcy? I have. I watched the Air Florida bankruptcy. It is an ugly thing. I will tell my colleagues who benefits. It is the bankruptcy lawyers. Ultimately this is not about USAir. It is about the passengers that depend on that airline in my home and around the country for competition, for reasonably low fares, for choices, and who will forgive us if we contribute to the bankruptcy of a major carrier in the Southeast? The answer that is offered in response to this argument is let somebody else take care of it some other time. Well, excuse me, but who is ultimately accountable here? We are. The Senate Appropriations Committee has already passed a bill that does exactly what this bill does. It closes the funding window. USAir has said they are on the verge of preparing a loan application. They are at risk of filing bankruptcy. What are we doing about it? Exactly nothing. Some of us called over to the Senate today to find out, is this going to get fixed in the Senate. The answer came back, no, it is not. Folks, this is our job. We are ultimately accountable. This is a real serious issue amid a lot of politics and speechmaking here. This bill needs to be fixed. We need to restore the integrity of this loan application program. We need to worry about the people that depend upon this carrier and for traveling to do their business.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I was detained from voting on rollcall vote number 183. Had I been present, I would have voted in the affirmative.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of the late Rose E. Grimaldi, a longtime Tampa businesswoman and community leader whose love of life and dedication to her family and hometown is an inspiration to us all. For 30 years, Rose worked as an insurance agent and general manager for Grimaldi and Grimaldi Insurance Agency, and she later served as a chairwoman of the board for Columbia Bank of Tampa for 18 years. In 1987, Hispanic Heritage Inc. honored her with the Business Women of the Year Award. Rose, however, was best known for her service to the Tampa Bay community, and in particular, her great interest in helping Tampa's young people. Rose was a founding member of the Girls Club of Tampa Bay, the Hillsborough County Community Mental Health Center and the Visiting Nurses Association of Tampa. She was also active in the All Children's Hospital Guild, the Red Cross Angels and the Gulf Coast Lung Association. In 1987, the National Conference of Christians and Jews honored Rose for her commitment to service by giving her the Silver Medallion Award. Rose, never one to tire easily, still found time to participate in St. Andrew's Episcopal Church programs and a multitude of social events. Through these and her many other activities, Rose truly had a friend in every corner of the community, and she was known and admired by all for her warm heart and boundless energy. On behalf of the Tampa Bay community, I would like to extend my deepest sympathies to Rose's family--her 3 children, 12 grandchildren, and 10 great-grandchildren. They have truly been blessed to have such a wonderful, loving role model as a matriarch, and our community is a much better place because of Rose.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of the late Margaret ``Dutch'' Silver, a highly respected Florida political activist whose years of hard work and enthusiasm inspired countless people to become involved in the political process and helped several of Florida's successful female legislators get their foot in the political door. A native of Alabama, Dutch entered Tampa's Democratic political scene in the 1970s, bringing with her a host of fresh ideas in political campaigning and the energy and drive to turn those ideas into successful political strategies. Dutch renewed the practice of door-to- door campaigning and updated the party's approach to political canvassing and targeting. Her exuberance encouraged others to become activists, and her knowledge and experience soon led her to become the executive director of the Hillsborough Democratic Party. Many of Florida's Democratic women politicians credit Dutch for guiding them to leadership positions. In 1972, Dutch ran Betty Castor's campaign to become Hillsborough County's first female Commissioner and then advised Betty Castor in her three successful Florida State Senate races and her campaign to become state commissioner of education in 1986. Dutch also ran Fran Davin's Hillsborough County Commission race and helped Helen Gordon Davis become elected to the Florida State House of Representatives. On behalf of the people of Tampa Bay, I offer my deepest sympathy to Dutch's family. Through her hard work, dedication and passion to make our community, state, nation and world a better place for everyone, Dutch helped Florida's Democratic party break ground. She was committed to her cause because she loved the work and she believed in the political process. Florida has truly lost a trailblazer.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Madam Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), a senior member of the House Budget Committee.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule and would like to identify another reason for opposing this rule. We need to have a credible plan to get back to the balanced budget without relying on the Social Security Trust Fund once we have gotten control over this war on terrorism that the chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has alluded to and pulled out of this recession. This budget resolution provides no such credible plan. A trigger, which a number of us offered which received a Republican vote in the Committee on the Budget, stated that next year the House had to produce a budget resolution that put the budget in balance without using the Social Security Trust Fund, and it had to be a 5-year plan. There is no such provision in this bill today. We are headed down a path without regard to how we are going to debate spending and tax cut proposals as far as how it impacts our ability to get back to a balanced budget, to pay down the debt, to help keep interest rates low, to prepare Medicare and Social Security for its future solvency when the baby boomers begin to retire in 2006. Mr. Speaker, we need a plan. This budget resolution does not do it. The trigger is such a plan, and it ought to be part of a debate we have today.

Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, when this debate started, the chairman referred to this as a wartime budget. We are united in the war on terrorism. What exactly are we fighting for? We are fighting for a democracy. We are fighting for the right to have an open and honest debate on the floor of the House of Representatives about our Nation's priorities. We are failing that standard miserably today, because there was absolutely no response whatsoever to the fact that we are using a faulty set of numbers to have this debate. For years, there has been universal support for using the Congressional Budget Office, which has been widely referred to as a nonpartisan, apolitical office, so we can discuss how spending proposals and how tax cut proposals affect our ability to have a balanced budget and pay down the massive Federal debt, which influences interest rates and has a lot to do with the solvency of Social Security and Medicare. Instead of using those numbers, we are left with the flippant comment, ``If you do not like the weather, change the channel.'' Also, we are using the politically-charged Office of Management and Budget numbers. No one disputes that fact. So we are not going to have an honest road map, an honest blueprint with which this body can judge how our spending and tax cut proposals affect our ability to get back to a balanced budget, to keep interest rates low, and to begin to prepare Social Security and Medicare for the solvency of the baby boomers. We are failing one of the most fundamental tests of our democracy today. For that reason, we should reject the budget resolution.