Tom DeLay

Mr. DeLAY

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong and, frankly, enthusiastic opposition to this resolution. But I should add I rise in strong and enthusiastic support for its addition to the House calendar this week. The resolution before us, bravely introduced by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), crystallizes the debate in this country between Republicans and Democrats to a degree rarely witnessed in these days of homogenized, air conditioned, political discourse. And for this debate, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin who, even in an election year, has the courage and confidence to know that vigorous partisan debates between conservatism and liberalism are all together good and healthy for American democracy. What this resolution before us comes down to is two questions: First, are small business taxes in America too high or too low? And, second, does the Federal Government spend too much money or too little? Now, if you pay attention, you will notice the proponents of this resolution will speak grandly about the needs for shared sacrifice and will assert that this resolution would only impact taxpayers earning more than $1 million in 2005. It is a clever debating trick, this impression that this tax increase will only get the idle rich to pay their fair share, but it is false. As proponents of this resolution no doubt know, 83 percent of the taxpayers fleeced by this resolution report business income. Small businesses, Mr. Speaker, sole proprietorships, subchapter S corporations, partnerships, family farms, we are not just talking about the cast of ``Friends'' here. Instead, we are talking about the people, the entrepreneurs, the risk-takers, the opportunity makers who are creating the jobs that are fueling what is now, beyond dispute, a full- fledged economic recovery. Indeed, these are the exact same taxpayers for whom Democrats just last week proposed cutting taxes. I guess it is just another example of Democrats voting for something before they vote against it. Mr. Speaker, this resolution is a direct punitive attack against the men and women of American small businesses, against the owners who have risked and invested to compete in the marketplace, against the managers who have generated the economic growth of the last 2 years, and against the new employees who have leapt at the opportunities those owners and managers have created. Hiking taxes on those small businesses, farmers, doctors, and families would immediately stifle the economic recovery that we are now enjoying, a recovery it must be noted, that is already producing government revenues greater than would have been generated without the Republican tax relief this resolution is trying to undo. How bad would it be? Estimates suggest damage in the neighborhood of 100,000 lost jobs, $11 billion in lost GDP, and $30 billion in lost family income in just the first 5 years. The 12-digit tax increase that is being proposed, therefore, would only serve to increase government revenues by $19 billion over the next 5 years, and thereby add to the deficits he says he wants to cut, add to them, in fact, by more than $82 billion in the same time frame. And as if that is not enough, Mr. Speaker, this resolution, after gutting the economic expansion and failing to generate sufficient government revenue to meet our needs, would then go for the Triple Crown of fiscal suicide, massive spending increases. I know Democrats often complain that Republicans try to cast them as just tax-and-spend liberals. Well, Mr. Speaker, this resolution only does two things, tax and spend. I would love to call them tax-cutting, fiscally-sound supply-siders, Mr. Speaker, but if a party wants to tax like Mondale, spend like Dukakis, and stagnate the economy like Carter, and the worst thing we call them is liberal, frankly, I think they are getting off pretty easy. Mr. Speaker, the ideas at the very core of the proposal of the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), indeed at the core of the Democrat Party today, is that the government will be making more decisions, and individuals families and small businesses should be making fewer; that Washington should have more money and more power, and the American people, they should have less. That is what the Democrats believe is what this resolution would write into law, and that is why it must fail. Now, while I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) for bringing this, albeit bad idea, to the floor for debate, I must urge all Members to vote ``no'' and make sure American jobs, economic health, and fiscal security are protected from the bone-crushing futility of liberal economic incompetence. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time, the remainder of which is to be controlled by my designee, the gentleman from Iowa (Chairman Nussle).

Mr. DeLAY

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I am just a little overwhelmed by the previous two speakers. What we are here for is a resolution that celebrates successes in the war on terror. Yet, to make their arguments, they might as well go back to World War II and all kinds of things that have nothing to do with the war on terror, with the national security of this Nation, with trying to protect the American people, and while we are doing that, spreading freedom and democracy around the world, because, Mr. Speaker, next Wednesday, the whole world is going to stop what it is doing and it is going to look toward the Tigres and the Euphrates Rivers, the cradle of civilization, and witness the miracle of democracy taking hold in Iraq. For a generation, the proud and resilient people of that great nation were brutalized by a dictator. Today, they are free, and next Wednesday they will take up their God-given, human right to self-determination. The resolution before us acknowledges all that has been won in Operation Iraqi Freedom and all that has been sacrificed in that victory. Words, of course, cannot replace the years lost to millions of Iraqi families during Saddam Hussein's reign of terror nor can they bring back the brave American heroes lost in battle since the war began last March. Despite the finest planning, equipment and training in military history, servicemen and women of the American armed forces are still at war, and no matter how just and how necessary wars may be, they still rob us of the bravest and truest of the young. Just as the miracle of June 30 will be a celebration of the Iraqi people, it will also be a celebration of the men and women who liberated them from evil and especially a celebration of the legacy of service left by those who will not make it home. That legacy, Mr. Speaker, is not one of grief and regret but of service, duty, love and courage. It is a legacy of honor which cannot be undone by the unyielding winds of history or the frantic storms of politics. It cannot be undone because we will not let it. Those young men and women will not have died in vain. Therefore, this resolution affirms Congress' absolute support for democracy and freedom in Iraq and for the forthcoming Iraqi interim government sworn to provide both. It also reaffirms our commitment to see the job of stabilizing and securing Iraq to the end. Terrorists remain in Iraq targeting Iraqi government officials and American and coalition troops. Terrorists remain in Iraq, targeting Iraqi government officials and American and coalition troops. Those terrorists, like all terrorists in this war on terror, must be killed or captured before democracy can truly be secured in Iraq or anywhere else in the world. In order for America's war on terror to succeed, Iraq's interim government, and ultimately the democratic government elected next year, must also succeed. Its success depends on the continued military, economic, and diplomatic support of the United States and the international community, which President Bush has pledged and garnered since before Operation Iraqi Freedom began. That support will remain in place as long as it is necessary, and I know all Americans hope for a strong and enduring alliance between the United States and a sovereign democratic Iraq. Before I close, Mr. Speaker, there is one man who deserves special thanks in this debate, a man who stared down enemies and appeasers alike and marshaled the civilized world to victory in Iraq. Were it not for the courage and vision of George W. Bush, June 30 would be just another Wednesday in Iraq. Instead, it is a day to be remembered, fraught with danger, to be sure, a day, too, of unfinished business, but a day of pride in this country. For June 30 is not the end of the road, but it is just another step along mankind's unending journey toward freedom. We will not be divided by our enemies or deterred from our goals in the war on terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, or anywhere else in the world, and that is due to the steadfast leadership of our Commander in Chief. Thank you, Mr. President. So I urge all Members to support this resolution and send a signal of solidarity from the American people to the people of Iraq and to the nations around the world that all people who seek to be free are now and will always be our friends.

Mr. DeLAY

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I too want to express my thanks to the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for his incredible work on this issue and his cooperation and his friendship. I also want to thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the minority whip, for his cooperation in developing this resolution and for his help in bringing it to the floor today. It is really important for two reasons for the record to note that this legislation is bipartisan. In the first place, it is always valuable in times of national conflict, and especially during election campaigns, to show that for all of our differences, we can all rise above our partisan allegiances and come together as Americans behind our President. Secondly, it shows not only to the country, but to the world, that one of those issues that we can unite behind is our national commitment to the people of Israel. That commitment was reaffirmed on April 14 of this year when the President wrote a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Sharon expressing his support for Israel's right to self-defense in a war against Palestinian terror. In this letter, the President established two fundamental principles that, in light of the repeated and willful failure of the Palestinian Authority to dismantle the terrorist elements within it, have become unavoidable. This resolution expresses the House's affirmation of those principles, specifically, that ``it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the Armistice lines of 1949.'' And that ``any agreed, just, fair, and realistic framework for a solution to the Palestinian refugee issue will need to be found through the establishment of a permanent alternative and the settling of Palestinian refugees there, rather than in Israel.'' Put simply, Mr. Speaker, Israel must not retreat behind its 1949 borders, and there is no so-called ``right of return.'' The people of Israel are at war, and it is our responsibility to help them win it. As long as the Palestinian Authority refuses to take the necessary steps to end terrorism within its ranks, we must stand with Israel. We must stand by the commonsense principles established in the President's April 14 letter and stand against the voices of violence and appeasement that would sacrifice Israel's security. Peace cannot be negotiated with unpeaceful men. Peace must be won. We must stand with Israel as they work every day towards its winning. The alliance between the United States and Israel is not merely one of shared strategic goals and common interests, though it is that too. No, Mr. Speaker, the alliance between the United States and Israel is one of shared values and a common destiny. From Israel we have learned the need for an iron will in the face of terrorist evil; and from us, Israel has learned the value of steadfast friendship in good times and in bad times. Today, both the United States and Israel are fighting a war on terror; and one day soon, we both will win it. So I urge all of our Members to support this resolution before us today, which, once again, reaffirms the unbreakable bonds of freedom our two nations share.

Mr. DeLAY

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 12:30 p.m. on Monday, June 21, for morning hour debate.

Mr. DeLAY

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, 139 years ago tomorrow, the sin of human bondage was ended in the United States. It has been said that the Civil War was the last battle of the American Revolution, and so it was. More than 600,000 Americans died in that conflict to save the Union, preserve the democratic ideals of the Founding, and make those ideals a reality for 4 million slaves. If it is that the Civil War was indeed the last battle of the Revolution, then so it is that Gordon Granger fired its last shot. On his arrival in Galveston, Texas, on June 19, 1865, Granger, a major general in the United States Army, issued General Order No. 3 to the people of Texas informing them of the end of the war and the emancipation of the slaves. ``This involves an absolute equality of rights and rights of property between former slaves and masters, and the connection heretofore existing between them becomes that between employer and free laborer,'' he said, and in an instant the world changed. The United States, the first Nation in history ``conceived in liberty and founded on the proposition that all men are created equal,'' was, for the first time, seeing to it that liberty and equality were extended to all its citizens. Juneteeth, then, reminds us of the first principles of our Nation and of our Nation's special commission in the affairs of men. While Texas may be the only State in the Union that celebrates the anniversary of Juneteenth, the entire country, and indeed all of the civilized world, celebrates its legacy. Man is born to be free. That is not an idea, it is the truth, absolute and without exception. But like all truths, freedom is almost never easy. It took wars to extricate ourselves from Britain, to free the slaves, to rid the world of fascism, and 40 years on the brink of nuclear holocaust to defeat Soviet communism. So it takes war now to free the civilized world from the threat of international terror. The price of freedom is internal vigilance, and even a cursory survey of American history shows that price is a bargain.

Mr. DeLAY

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, I would anticipate that the Department of Defense appropriations bill would not take very long; it does not usually, and if that is the case, the Intelligence bill would follow right after that. It could be Tuesday if things go well. If they do not, then I would imagine the Intelligence bill would be on Wednesday.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the distinguished whip, for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, the House will convene on Monday at 12:30 p.m. for morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. We will consider several measures under suspension of the rules. A final list of those bills will be sent to Members' offices by the end of this week. Any votes called on these measures will be rolled until 6:30 p.m. On Tuesday and the balance of the week, we expect to consider additional legislation under suspension of the rules. We also plan to consider several bills under a rule: The Fiscal Year 2005 Department of Defense appropriations bill; H.R. 4548, the Fiscal Year 2005 Intelligence Authorization Act; H.R. 3973, the Spending Control Act of 2004; and the Fiscal Year 2005 Energy and Water Development appropriations bill. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to note that we are expecting a very busy week leading into the July 4 district work period. We are likely to work some late nights and possibly late Friday afternoon. I repeat, for the Members listening, possibly late Friday afternoon as we work to resolve these important pieces of legislation. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I would be glad to answer any questions.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding. We have not made a final decision as to when we might suggest that we place them on the schedule. Just as a possibility, we would put Department of Defense on the floor on Tuesday; Energy and Water might be later on, because we are working, trying to work with the Committee on Appropriations to make sure we are not on the floor when the committee is in markup.

Mr. DeLAY. Definitely. I would see no reason why we would not traditionally have open rules on these appropriations bills.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, I do not want to speak for the committee, but I believe that on the Intelligence Reauthorization Act, I believe the committee will solicit all types of amendments and will have a very lengthy debate. I would anticipate there will be many amendments allowed on that bill. On the Budget Enforcement Act, did the gentleman ask about that?

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding, and as the gentleman can see, the chairman of the Committee on Rules is standing here. I do not want to spoil the surprise of the chairman, his announcement, but I believe that they do plan to solicit all types of amendments and substitutes. I do not want to prejudge their actions, but I do expect them to make in order a number of amendments.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DeLAY. Well, I will take the gentleman seriously. I was going to make a joke.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I was waiting for the chairman of the Committee on Rules to say that, or I thought I heard him say that the leader is always right.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield again, I do not want to prejudge the chairman of the Committee on Rules or the Committee on Rules on what they would do, but I think, I think this budget enforcement process bill is a very important piece of legislation. It defines who we are and where we want to take this country, and I am saying, ``we'' the House and both parties, and I think a free and open debate should be warranted.

Mr. DeLAY. We have a number of extensions that have to be done next week, many we are working on with the other side; and on those, the welfare extension along with the highway extension, the child nutrition act extension, and maybe a couple of others that are really important to do next week. And we hope that in working with the minority that we can come to some sort of agreement on these extensions and put them on the suspension calendar on suspension days.

Mr. DeLAY. That is correct.

Mr. DeLAY

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the business in order under the Calendar Wednesday rule be dispensed with on Wednesday next.

Mr. DeLAY

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, 3 long years the American people have waited. In fact, some people have been working on a long-term energy policy for 8 to 10 years. President Bush promised to establish a national energy policy to prepare America's producers and distributors of energy for the changing times of the 21st century before he was even elected. His energy task force was formed inside the White House within 10 days of his inauguration. The first comprehensive energy bill was introduced in the House in the summer of 2001. The House has passed it three times; and it has been stalled in the Senate all this time, even though a majority in the Senate supports the bill, but they will not let them vote on it. Three long years, Democrat obstruction in the Senate, obstruction, make no mistake, undertaken at the highest levels of Democrat leadership, at the beck and call of extreme special interests has kept the American people without a national energy policy. For most of those 3 years, the United States has been at war with an ideology that makes its home in the very region that produces most of the world's oil. We depend to too large a degree on the energy resources produced in this unstable region, and we have had before us for 3 years a policy to change that fact. The comprehensive energy policy we will pass once again today will reduce America's dependence on foreign oil. That greater independence will increase America's political and economic security which, in turn, will increase our national security; and in addition to protecting our security, this bill will also add to our prosperity. Provisions in this bill would increase domestic energy production, would create hundreds of thousands of new jobs here at home while the Democrats' dithering in the Senate, solely responsible for America's continued overreliance on Middle East oil, is sending jobs overseas every week. All along, provisions in this legislation that would encourage conservation and innovation and new fuel technologies have stagnated, thereby harming our economy, our environment, and letting us fall behind international competitors. While the Democrats have hamstrung the energy bill in the Senate, gas prices have risen, and the Northeast was struck with the largest blackout in history. The summer traveling season is upon us, the fourth since the President first delivered his legislation to us; and still, the American people wait for action. These are the facts. Jobs are waiting to be created. Our economy is waiting to be stronger and our Nation is waiting to be safer. I urge all my colleagues to help bring this waiting to an end. Vote ``yes'' on the comprehensive energy bill and give the Senate Democrats one more chance to do their duty. announcement by the speaker pro tempore

Mr. DeLAY

Mr. DeLAY. If the gentleman will yield, yes, the Committee on Ways and Means will mark up the Americans Jobs Creation Act on Monday, which would give us time, if the markup went well, we could see that bill on the floor either Thursday or Friday.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman for yielding to me and dreaming. Mr. Speaker, the House will convene on Monday at 12:30 p.m. for morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. We will consider several measures under suspension of the rules. A final list of those bills will be sent to the Members' office by the end of this week. Any votes called on these measures will be postponed until 6:30 p.m. On Tuesday and the balance of the week, we plan to consider several bills under a rule: H.R. 4513, the Renewable Energy Project Siting Improvement Act; H.R. 4503, the Energy Policy Act; H.R. 4517, the U.S. Refinery Revitalization Act; and H.R. 4529, the Arctic Coastal Plain Domestic Energy Security and Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Reform Act. In addition, we expect to consider H.R. 4520, the American Jobs Creation Act, the fiscal year 2005 Department of Interior appropriations bill, and the fiscal year 2005 Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill as well. And, finally, I would like to make all Members aware that we will have votes next Friday perhaps well into the afternoon. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me and would be happy to answer any questions he may have.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I can say that substitutes would certainly be allowed, I would assume. I do not want to preempt what the Committee on Rules might do. As far as amendments to these bills, I would have to refer to the Committee on Rules, as we do not know what they might rule.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding. No decision has been made, but I think the gentleman can assume that these bills will be sent separately to the Senate.