Peter Deutsch

Mr. DEUTSCH

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 7(c) of rule XXII, I hereby notify the House of my intention tomorrow to offer the following motion to instruct House conferees on H.R. 1141, the 1999 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act. The form of the motion is as follows: Mr. Deutsch moves that the managers on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the Senate amendment to the bill H.R. 1141 be instructed to disagree to any provision not contained in, or directly related to, the following: (1) H.R. 1141, as passed by the House; (2) H.R. 1664, as passed by the House.

Mr. DEUTSCH

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As we are debating this at this moment, conferees are still meeting and maybe brainstorming more things that they can put into this bill before it finally gets to the floor. It is not the way things should be, and it is not the way they have to be, and we have the power to stop them. And on occasion, as a Chamber, we have stopped it. We have rejected these types of things before. And if it comes to us, as has been said by several of my colleagues, we ought to reject it today. I am just going to read through some things that, again through press accounts or other accounts, are still being talked about or being discussed. Extending a freeze on the pending regulation on environmental and reclamation standards at mines on Federal land. I would challenge any of my colleagues in this Chamber to come to this floor to defend that as an issue related to emergency spending. I would challenge anyone in a public setting to even attempt to say that that belongs on this bill. And it very well might be on this bill. A delay in the Clinton administration's plan to reclaim the value of royalties paid on oil and gas production on Federal lands. Again, on the Kosovo funding bill, on the emergency funding bill, allowing States to keep all of the $246 billion promised by tobacco companies in settlements of lawsuits. The transfer of a $100 million from Forest Service wildfire management operations to an Agriculture Department fund for restoration of national forestlands. I am sure someone wants that. I am sure they can articulate a policy reason for it. But does it really belong on this piece of legislation and is it really the right policy? I guess maybe because it is simple to understand and apparently, according to press accounts, it is actually in the bill, is the Glacier Bay commercial fishing issue. That one, I mean, it is simple. Maybe sometimes when we stop talking about billions of dollars or tens of billions of dollars or trillions of dollars we can understand this process maybe a little bit more. My understanding is that the conferees have actually agreed to restrict commercial or actually to allow commercial fishing in Glacier Bay, which had been stopped by previous negotiations and rulings by the Forest Service and they have actually provided $26 million, again small by our standard in a bill of $13 billion or $14 billion, but $26 million literally that was not in either bill that just came in to provide, to buy up some of the people that might not be making as much money as they could have been because of the policy ruling regarding Glacier Bay. And men and women are in harm's way in Kosovo. As again at this point, my understanding is the conferees have agreed to accept Senator Byrd's amendment regarding steel subsidies in the hundreds of millions. So now we are not talking about 26 million anymore, we are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars. My understanding also is there is an issue, which I still do not understand, about livestock reindeer that is either in the bill or about to be put in the bill or it is being discussed as an additional rider to provide funding issues for livestock reindeer. And what also has been reported as part of the supplemental issue is the so-called general's aircrafts. I urge my colleagues to support the Upton amendment. But I think more than just supporting the Upton amendment, I think that all of us need to not just be on record as a vote today but as a message to our conferees and to the Senate conferees that there are many of us, and I would hope a majority of us, on this floor who will reject a bill, who will not allow this thing to be gamed, who will say that the issues that we are dealing with are significant enough. And I really urge the President, because he holds many of the cards in this whole thing and he has the ability to take the high road and he has the ability to say and to stare down those people and those individual Senators who are trying to do this outrageous activity and say to them they cannot and he will not let them. And I guarantee to the President that, on both sides of the aisle, and this is I think one of the really good days in the Congress in a sense, that this is totally a bipartisan issue, that I think a clear majority from both sides of the aisle do not want to see this legislation happen in this way. I will tell the President, I will tell him again directly, that that will not occur, that we will be able to sustain a veto like that. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, I think the gentleman from California (Mr. Bilbray), used the expression of a Christmas tree. I think what we have here is not just a Christmas tree but a Christmas tree forest. This is beyond the Christmas tree. Again, I appreciate the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) bringing this as a motion to instruct, because I think what is going on in the conference at this point does not really withstand the light of day. And the more the light of day that we in this Chamber put on this, the less chance this will occur. This morning's New York Times editorial read, ``Trifling With Humanitarian Aid.'' I think that really is a headline of a story which we need to think about, ``Trifling With Humanitarian Aid.'' We have had some, I think, very thoughtful and very emotional statements by some of my colleagues. I cannot think of anything more powerful than the statement by my colleague and my good friend, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind). This is serious business. This is not a joke. Are we going to be able to get our friend, our campaign supporter, a little more money by changing the mining laws or by giving them some additional fishing rights in Glacier Bay or by doing some kickback in terms of loan guarantees for certain mining interests? Literally, I think we should all think about what is going on here. It is absurd. I wish there was someone here against the bill, to try to defend this in a public setting really. Because what we are talking about are the types of things that cannot be defended in a public setting. They cannot be defended in a public setting. And let no one forget or misinterpret what is going on here. This is a gamesmanship thing. People understand that we need to support the operation in Kosovo in terms of our men and women who are in harm's way; and, in fact, two of whom have literally lost their lives in this operation already to this date; and we have been blessed that we have not lost more in terms of the operations that have been going on. So there is this incredible understanding that we need to do something, that the way in passing the supplemental not just on Kosovo but the three issues which truly are emergencies, now I think there is a clear consensus that fit the criteria of emergency. One this House passed literally over a month ago, the October Hurricane Mitch that devastated Central America that we have talked about, that we understand that if we do not deal with that emergency the repercussions are severe not just for the people that live in Central America but for ourselves in terms of our borders, in terms of what will happen, in terms of what has happened, the positive things in Central America, and the farmers who are also dealing with the crisis across this country. These other issues are not emergencies. And to use the leverage, because that is what it is, to use the leverage of a power position in the dark of night to put them into a bill and then come to the floor, because we can write the script today, we know what the script is, the script is that it is going to come to the floor with some of these, hopefully none of them, but the script that is being written by the conferees is that it is going to come to the floor with some of these items. And although none of us are going to say we like these items and in a sense we do not know where they came from, they came by magic, by thin air, or by individual Senators who have a specific interest that in their State it is okay. But from a national perspective, it is totally inappropriate, that now we have a choice, we are going to be faced with a choice. We can accept this pork, that trifling with humanitarian aid, or we can reject it and reject the operation and the need to deal with that. And I would tell my colleagues, I say to them that we need to tell them, and the President needs to be clear on this, that we cannot let our process of this Government be used as a game, that the President has the ability to draw the line right now and say he will not accept that, that in 1 hour, if he vetoes this, we will sustain that veto, we can come back in 1 hour and take the junk out and pass a clean bill that deals with true emergencies that the American people want to see happen. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall).

Mr. DEUTSCH

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, Central America has been an American foreign policy success story, probably one of the great success stories in this country. We have actively supported or helped take countries from dictatorships to democracies, from conflict to peace, and from closed to opened economies. But along the way in October a disaster occurred, a disaster which actually I was told today as a factual statement is actually the worst disaster in recorded history in the Western Hemisphere; an incredible historical statement to make, but a factual statement. That is the hurricane that devastated this area, Hurricane Mitch. The devastation that occurred, the equivalent destruction, had it occurred in the United States of America, would have been 80,000 people dead, 25 million people made homeless. It is hard to conceive of what that would mean on a scale in our country, 25 million people homeless. The issue of the hurricane was that it was not a localized damage, it was not a localized effect. The hurricane was over Honduras for 6 days. These are just incredible statistics, but accurately, I think, ascertained through AID sources. In Honduras, 77 percent of the people in Honduras were directly affected by the hurricane, ``directly affected'' defined as either a family member died, was severely injured, was displaced in their home, lost their job, or their crop was lost, 77 percent of a country. In Nicaragua, that number was 20 percent. To give you a sense again just of the scope of the destruction, from 1961 to 1998, AID spent a total of $298 million in the western hemisphere for aid in terms of natural disasters. That is from 1961 to 1998, during that entire period of time, a total of $298 million. We have already spent, already expended, $312 million in terms of Hurricane Mitch restoration efforts. This is a region in the world which truly is our neighbor. It is also a huge trading partner, $18 billion a year in U.S. exports, which is actually more than all of the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe combined. This House has passed previously funding, actually $621 million in direct funding for reconstruction assistance. The House I think wisely actually increased this number above the Senate number, and this motion to recommit is to substantiate, to support the House position. This funding is mostly through, really, AID in terms of projects like schools, health units, bridges, really infrastructure of the countries that were devastated by the storm. If we do not do this, if we do not do this, what will occur? On a human level, what is already occurring is really the health issues, severe health issues of dysentery. Luckily, we were able to reprogram money, actually $30 million, $30 million of the 50 million additional dollars that this Congress appropriated for world children's health. We appropriated in the last Congress $50 million for children's survival for the entire world. $30 million of that $50 million had wisely been spent to avoid a public health disaster in Central America. But that disaster can still occur. So on a human level, we really are talking about health issues really in a sense whether we are going to do this or deal with increasing assistance or seeing starvation. But we are also dealing with a planting season which hopefully we will able to do this supplemental and reach the time when the planting season will occur, which is before the start of the summer. So, on a human level, there are incredible human issues that we need to deal with. But I would say to my colleagues that there are two direct issues. What we have seen previously is that this truly is our neighborhood, and these are our neighbors. Literally, our neighbors have the ability to walk to our homes, and we have seen this occur. If we give no hope to these people, I think what is overdetermined and what we know will happen is we will have another issue to deal with. It is an issue which I do not think this Congress directly wants to face, but it is an issue that will come to us. On a second level, I think we need to remind ourselves, before the success stories, what was Central America. It was a place, from the changes we discussed, of dictatorships, of conflict, of war, and of closed economies. I can think of nothing worse than us not supporting this funding than the action, the likely or the possible action that this could literally encourage that type of instability in that region. There is a donors' conference that the administration has been very active in creating of many countries around the world that are pledging an additional over $5 billion to the restoration efforts in Central America. If we do not participate, and this donors' conference is at the end of this month, if the United States does not take the lead in our commitment, we have already asked other countries around the world, France, Germany, England, Japan, the Scandinavian countries to come up with their participation, what will happen? This is not something we support as a Congress; we support as a country to help in this region. But I think all of us know the reality is that if we do not help, no one will help. The accompanying disaster that we can foresee will be on our shoulders as well. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rodriguez), who has been a leader on issues regarding Central America and has been very sensitive and very effective in making sure that that part of the region of the world continues to receive our partnership with the United States.

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley) who, as a freshman Member, has shown real leadership on all sorts of issues but including our concern on foreign policy issues in this hemisphere. (Mr. CROWLEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct conferees on the bill (H.R. 1141) making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1999, and for other purposes.

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes), who also has actually witnessed firsthand some of the devastation in Central America on more than one occasion with the President as well as additional trips down there.

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega). (Mr. Faleomavaega asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra) who has been active on this issue, has traveled with the President to Central America.

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining?

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I too want to congratulate the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz- Balart), who really has shown an incredible amount of leadership and ability on this issue. We really have been a team effort and this really has been a bipartisan effort by a number of Members in this Congress to really explain to our colleagues the importance of this issue, that this is really clearly in America's national interest and our financial interest and in our moral interest to support and make sure this bill occurs. I actually look forward to the day when our roles are reversed and I am in the majority helping on these types of issues and my good friend and colleague from Florida is in the minority helping us on these issues and each of us will have a chance to replay some of these thoughts. But really in closing, I guess I would just reiterate what my colleagues have said over the last hour or so, but I will mention one specific thing. As has been mentioned, I had the opportunity to view some of the devastation. Words truly cannot describe the level of devastation. I mentioned some things in my opening statement, statistics, facts, historical analogies of what has occurred, and they are significant. It is hard to comprehend the pictures on television of the devastation that really did not match in any way in numbers of thousands killed or millions displaced. They do not, I think, give us that sense. We attempt to use those numbers to try to explain to us, but witnessing mud slides that literally wiped out entire villages, there is not a trace, not a building, not a street at all, where literally thousands of people are buried under 40 feet of mud is an incredible sight, the devastation that has occurred. That is really the component, the sort of humanitarian component to show what the United States must do to lend a hand, that we need to, that we did not choose to be in this situation but we are in that situation. If we do not help, the reality is no one will. These economies are not in a position to rebuild on their own in any short period of time. The number has been mentioned, 25 years. That is not an unfair or unlikely scenario. Finally in closing, as I mentioned, this really is in our interest. This has been a success story in terms of American foreign policy. As my colleague from Florida has mentioned, we have, unfortunately, only one country in our hemisphere that has not taken the road to democracy and open economies, and hopefully relatively soon that will change as well. But to continue that record we are going to need to pass this bill. Mr. Speaker, I urge the support of the motion to instruct. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), the vice chairman of the Democratic Caucus and a leader in the foreign policy area in the entire Congress. (Mr. MENENDEZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Filner), whose district borders Mexico and who understands the implications of this issue probably as well as anyone in this House.

Mr. DEUTSCH

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 7(c) of rule XXII, I hereby notify the House of my intention tomorrow to offer the following motion to instruct House conferees on H.R. 1141, the emergency supplemental appropriations bill. Motion to instruct conferees on H.R. 1141: Mr. Deutsch moves that the managers on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill H.R. 1141 be instructed to instruct on the funding level of $621 million contained under the heading ``Central America And The Caribbean Emergency Disaster Recovery Fund'' of the House bill for necessary expenses to address the effects of hurricanes in Central America and the Caribbean and the earthquake in Colombia.

Mr. DEUTSCH

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would put in the emergency supplemental that we passed earlier this year, House bill 1141, as an amendment onto this emergency supplemental bill, and specifically, the reason for that is there is a very true emergency going on right now that appropriately this House and the Senate both passed legislation to deal with. It is interesting, following the comments of my colleague, the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Roukema) about hungry children, there are not only hungry children today in the Balkans, but there are literally tens of thousands of hungry children in Central America, much closer to our shores, much more directly impacting the United States. And, in fact, the hurricane that occurred in October was of incredible proportions. I had the opportunity to travel to Central America, to Nicaragua, with the President and had a chance actually to view firsthand some of the destruction, where literally entire villages were wiped out. I remind my colleagues, and, again, this House passed 1141, but I remind my colleagues of what is happening in Central America. Up until the hurricane, a lot of very good things were happening: Economies were growing, had been growing, through the dynamic progress of a capitalistic, democratic, emergent democratic society; there were vigorously contested elections and vigorous opportunities in terms of an economic future. Right now that is on hold, and it has been on hold effectively since October. We have no choice, and not just because of the humanitarian reasons, but I think, really, for America's national security reasons. Many in this Chamber remember a different Central America, where the United States was spending far in excess of $1 billion for issues other than humanitarian aid, and I would hope and I would pray that that does not happen again. Without this aid package that we have approved, to do things like build infrastructure, to do things like deal with potential immigration problems to the United States of America, I am not sure what the future holds for Central America. And if the chairman of the committee would enter into a colloquy with me, I would appreciate knowing if my understanding is correct that the Senate's desire is to merge the two bills, the two emergency supplementals.

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to speak about an issue that this amendment does not directly address. It takes the form supplemental that was dealt with in our March supplemental, but it does not address the other part, which was really the main part of that supplemental, which was the aid, which was a true emergency, dealing with Hurricane Mitch in Central America. The supplemental that we have in front of us now will not just be a defense supplemental, it will be defense and farm supplemental, and it is absolutely, I would use the word tragic, for it not to be a defense farm and Central American supplemental. The devastation caused by Hurricane Mitch is historic in terms of its magnitude. Now I had the opportunity to travel to Nicaragua when the President went down there to view firsthand some of the damage. Literally entire villages were wiped out. We could not see any trace of what once was thriving communities. The only way that these countries, which really have done an incredible job towards democracy, towards economic viability as we are their major trading partners and major allies, the only way that they are going to be able to get back on their feet and to continue this road is with our support. This occurred in October. Let me remind my colleagues in this Chamber of another time in Central America when the United States Congress funded far more than $1 billion in not humanitarian aid but in military activities, and with tragic consequences. I do not even want to speculate what will happen if these economies in these countries do not get back on their feet, but I think we can speculate what will happen. If we are looking for true emergencies, by the definition of the statute on supplemental bills, this is clearly the case. I urge that we end up doing this. I will offer an amendment later this afternoon to do just that.

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. DEUTSCH. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I know the gentleman from Florida was very supportive, obviously, of the early supplemental, but is it fair to say the gentleman's current position is to be supportive and to include the Central American aid package, House bill 1141, as part of the final product that will come with this?

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be withdrawn; and I thank the gentleman for that assurance.

Mr. DEUTSCH

Mr. DEUTSCH. I could not agree with the gentleman more, literally listing some of the areas where we ought to legislatively increase benefits. That is really what the debate should be about. I think this year our focus, and I think really the President's focus is really trying to get that prescription drug coverage which is a necessary component of Medicare. That is our number one priority. I could add and agree with the gentleman on five other things that are probably just as high but I think the focus this year is trying to get that additional coverage. I think some of the things that the gentleman also mentioned, this is sort of a high class problem we have. First of all, we have dealt with the actuarial issues and it is a good thing people are living longer. That is a high class problem that we have in America. We can deal with it, we have dealt with it, in some of the changes that we talked about in 1994. I keep thinking as we are talking, particularly in that pre-65 age group, where if we went from 65 to 67. One of the things about health insurance is statistically people who do not have health insurance actually get sick at a higher rate than people who do have health insurance. In effect, whether you have health insurance or not, statistically you have got a chance of getting sick. What is going to happen when you do not have health insurance? What happens in America today? What happens to real people in that category, 65, younger than 65, retired, for whatever reason, as you said, without health insurance in America? What is happening to those people? The reality is not a lot of good things, things that we know for a fact we can do better as a country. We have made changes where we can do things. It is going to be an approach of saying, hey, here is a problem, how are we dealing with it? As my colleague from Ohio mentioned, there is a plan out there, there is legislation out there to do that without costing the system any money. That is an actuarially based system, which I think is something that people again need to hear and really need to understand. Medicare is not welfare for health. Medicare is not a giveaway program. Medicare is a forced retirement system. It is Social Security for health. Every working American is paying into the Medicare Trust Fund today, this week, in their paycheck, a certain amount of money that is going into a trust fund that is Social Security for health. That is what we are getting back. It is not an entitlement, it is an insurance plan. That is a big difference. It is a forced insurance plan, yes. You do not have a choice in our salaries, or working people in America in their salaries, whether to choose to pay the Medicare payroll tax or not. You have got to pay that payroll tax. But that is going into a plan that we as Americans control, this body, this Chamber and our colleagues on the other side of this building control. I think also, just as we are coming to the close of this hour, to reiterate, is people out there in the real world, in America, who live with Medicare understand the system. With all of its faults and foibles, it is a darn good system. It is not Cadillac coverage but it is a darn good Chevy. It has worked really well for over 30 million people in this country. It is an incredibly successful system. It has done innovative things over the last 10 years to make itself even more successful. We could talk about some of the specific changes, probably not this evening but another night, that we have done in terms of whether it is DRGs or whether it is issues regarding that which have really saved the system incredibly, tens of billions of dollars to make it even better, to provide more benefits for people.

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would continue to yield, it is really interesting also just talking about the present situation of Medicare. I think we would agree that this is another area where benefits really should be expanded, not cut back. I think what we really should be doing, and we have been involved in supporting legislation to this effect, although it has not passed, is giving options to buy into Medicare for that age group that my colleague from New Jersey talked about as people who retire early. We have a phenomenon in America now that, yes, people are living longer and some working longer. But some are not working longer. And really the worst situation to be in is either by choice or by forced circumstances, maybe by health, of retiring early and not having retirement benefit of health care coverage and trying to buy private coverage in that 60-to-65 age group, where private coverage could literally be potentially 50 percent of someone's income. It is an incredible box that we are in. Previously we have tried to expand that coverage, because that is another area where appropriately from what Medicare should be doing, we should be expanding the coverage to people who retire before 65, and not talking about raising the eligibility to 67.