Lincoln Diaz-Balart

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Ortega y Gasset. In Spain, you often have compound names or long names. Ortega y Gasset. An extraordinary philosopher, really a liberal in the best sense of the word and an open man, a man open to realize, my distinguished friends, that good ideas often come from not only both but all political viewpoints. And Ortega y Gasset was one such thinker. I highly recommend him to such an erudite, studious not only here Member of the House but generally a man of the law as my friend.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I thank my friend. ``Man is man plus his circumstances.''

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise to celebrate with the people of the Republic of China on Taiwan on the occasion of their ``National Day.'' On October 10, the people of the Republic of China on Taiwan will celebrate their 97th National Day and remember the uprising that started China on the path toward freedom and democracy. In the 97 years since their revolution, the Republic of China, on Taiwan since 1949, has become a strong democracy and trusted friend to the United States. As our 8th largest trading partner and member of the World Trade Organization, the Republic of China on Taiwan has achieved a flourishing market-based economy and one of the highest standards of living in the world. I appreciate the contributions of the Republic of China on Taiwan to the freedom and prosperity of the Asia-Pacific region, and I look forward to the continued cooperation between the United States and the Republic of China on Taiwan. As the people of the Republic of China on Taiwan celebrate their National Day, it is my privilege, honor and pleasure to join with my colleagues in congratulating and confirming our mutual commitment to the democratic ideals of freedom of speech, the Rule of Law, and free and fair elections.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my good friend, Mr. Cardoza, the gentleman from California, for the time; and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, on the opening day of this Congress, the distinguished chairwoman of the Rules Committee, Ms. Slaughter, came to the floor and said that the new majority would, `` . . . begin to return this Chamber to its rightful place as the home of democracy and deliberation in our great Nation.'' That pledge echoed a document by Speaker Pelosi titled A New Direction For America. That document said, ``bills should generally come to the floor under a procedure that allows open, full, and fair debate.'' Now as we approach the closing hours of the 110th Congress, I think it is appropriate for us to take a look at whether the majority has actually lived up to those promises. Let us begin with closed rules. There really can be few, if any, parliamentary procedures that are more offensive to the essential spirit of democracy, the spirit of democracy, than a closed rule. A closed rule shuts off, blocks Members from both sides of the aisle from offering any amendments to legislation that is considered on the floor. As I said, no matter what their party affiliation, if and when Congress operates under a closed rule, all Members are shut out from the legislative process on the floor. Even though the majority promised a more open Congress, as I referred to in the beginning of my remarks, they silenced the vote of every Member and thus all of every Member's constituents a record 63 times this Congress. Sixty-three times. No other Congress in the history of the Republic has ever brought forth so many closed rules. No other Congress in the history of the Republic has brought so many pieces of legislation to the floor under that legislative framework that prohibits every Member of this House from offering amendments to the legislation. The consistent use of closed rules by the majority constitutes an affront to the democratic spirit as well as to their own promises. But that is not the only way that they have failed to live up to their promises. They have also systematically bypassed what is known as the conference process, effectively shutting out the minority from having a say on legislation that makes its way to the President's desk. Madam Speaker, as you know, the conference process is the process by which the House and Senate work out differences, resolve their differences and achieve a final legislative product that is exact to be passed by the House and the Senate and sent to the President. Now the majority has also used a technique known as ``ping-pong'' to avoid that conference process. They have used that technique in order to subvert the rights of the minority to offer motions to recommit and amendments. For comparison, in the 108th Congress and 109th Congress-- those Congresses combined--that technique known as ping-ponging was used three times during the 108th Congress and 109th Congress. But that is not all. The majority has also considered 45 bills outside the regular order. They also blocked minority substitute amendments, allowing only 10 minority substitute amendments even though they promised a procedure that, and again I remind the majority of its own words, they promised that they would ``grant the minority the right to offer its alternatives, including a substitute.'' So here we are today with a rule that a distinguished senior member of the majority on the Rules Committee said, and I quote, is `` . . . outside the normal parameters of the way that the House should conduct its business . . . it effectively curtails our rights and responsibilities as serious legislators.'' Prior to becoming Speaker, Ms. Pelosi pledged, and I quote, ``to conduct our work with civility and bipartisanship and to act in partnership, not partisanship, with the President and the Republicans in Congress.'' Obviously, the record has been another story. Now with regard to what the majority is doing today, the majority is bringing forth 44 bills for consideration under what is known as suspension of the rules. It's a process by which usually noncontroversial bills, as my friend described them, bills that generally have bipartisan support because they require two-thirds of the House in order to pass, under the rule being brought forth today, we will be authorizing under this rule 44 bills for consideration under suspension of the rules. At least they're telling us what the 44 bills are. That's why it took some time for the Clerk to read them, because there are 44 bills to read the titles. So at least I think the majority should be commended for telling us what the 44 bills are. Now, unfortunately, we're informed that the Rules Committee is meeting at this time, as we speak, to pass a rule to authorize more suspensions, but not telling us what they are; in other words, a blanket authority. So, obviously everything has to be put in perspective. Compared to what the Rules Committee is doing now for the rest of the session, this is a commendable rule because at least it is informing us and the American people what we will be considering. At least the titles have been brought forth. So that is something that, when we consider how the majority has acted procedurally in this Congress, we have to be grateful that we're being informed at least what bills are being authorized for consideration under the rule today. Madam Speaker, as we look back at this 110th Congress that is nearing its end, I think it would be fair to say that when one considers the promises for openness and fairness and transparency made by the majority at the beginning of this Congress and in their campaign before this Congress began, when one compares that with their record of having broken all precedent in terms of the number, the number, having broken the record in terms of the number of pieces of legislation brought to this floor authorizing no amendments, in other words, closed rules, there is an extraordinary difference between the promise and the reality by our friends on the other side of the aisle. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. No, I would inform my friend that we have no other speakers. So at this time I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I would like to thank my good friend, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor) for the time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Every day our Nation faces new and critical challenges on how to approach globalization, really the great issue of our time. It is an extremely difficult and controversial issue that affects our economy, and it affects so much more. It is important, now more than ever, to equip our students, not just with the basics, math, reading, social studies, and et cetera, but also with opportunities in areas such as science and the environment to compete in tomorrow's global economy. This legislation, the legislation we are bringing to the floor with this rule, reauthorizes the National Environmental Education Act administered by the Environmental Protection Agency. Among other things, the bill will create opportunities for enhanced and ongoing professional development in environmental fields. It authorizes the Secretary of Education to award grants to help environmental education become more effective, more widely practiced. It establishes seven uses of funds aimed at encouraging increased environmental education. Environmental education is an important issue that Congress should support. But, really, with just a few days left in the legislative calendar for this Congress, what we ask is whether this is what really is considered by the majority among the highest priorities, whether it is legislation that we need to be considering, with just hours before leaving before the end of this Congress, and with great challenges facing the Nation, including very significant economic challenges and an energy situation, extraordinarily rising prices, whether this is the type of priority that we need to be setting aside time for at this time. This bill, which is a good bill, could easily have been placed on what is known as the suspension calendar, in other words, taking it automatically to the floor. Obviously it received overwhelming bipartisan support. But, instead, we are here today spending time on debating a noncontroversial--an important but noncontroversial environmental education program. So we think that it's most unfortunate, but symptomatic, of how this new majority has run this Congress. Just last week we spent 2 hours of debate time discussing a study of a river in Vermont. On another occasion we spent precious time debating the Washington-Rochambeau Revolutionary Route National Historic Trail, the Taunton River in Massachusetts, the land claims of the Bay Mills Indian community, and the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Water Trails Network. Those are the priorities of this majority. Now those are important issues. They are not the energy crisis and the serious attention that we need to be devoting to stabilizing our markets. We need to make sure that America remains the Nation where the entire world seeks to invest because of confidence in the future of the United States. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I thank my distinguished friend, Ms. Castor. Americans are tired of spending more and more of their paycheck, of their resources, for their energy needs. And for months they have been calling on us to take up legislation that will help lower the price of gasoline. Now just like the overwhelming majority of the American people, we in the minority in this Congress have been calling for legislation that will help the American consumer with the skyrocketing price of energy. Yet every time we have tried to debate real energy legislation, the majority has blocked and has stymied our efforts. In August, the majority decided to go on the recess instead of seeking to solve an extraordinarily high priority for the American people, the rising gas prices. I guess the majority must have heard quite a bit from their constituents in August because when they returned in September, they decided they would finally say they would debate energy legislation. On Tuesday of this week, the majority brought to the floor legislation, the so-called Comprehensive American Energy Security and Consumer Protection Act, which does nothing to produce energy or provide Americans with energy security since it will only increase our dependence on unstable foreign sources of energy. The bill brought to the floor this week by the majority was a farce. It will never be enacted into law and was only put together to provide the majority with an attempt at political cover so they can say that they passed energy legislation when in reality they did nothing. Now the majority is set to end this Congress and any chance to actually pass genuine comprehensive energy legislation. That's where we are today. Well, we do not have to leave here and head home without having considered comprehensive energy legislation. Madam Speaker, I will be urging my colleagues to vote with me to defeat the previous question so the House can finally consider genuine solutions to rising energy costs. If the previous question is defeated, I will move to amend the rule to prohibit the consideration of a concurrent resolution providing for adjournment until comprehensive energy legislation has been enacted into law. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment and extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. By voting ``no'' on the previous question, Members can assure their constituents that they are committed to enacting legislation to help their constituents with rising energy prices. I also remind Members that the previous question in no way will prevent consideration of H.R. 3036, this legislation on environmental grants to schools. I encourage a ``no'' vote on the previous question. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I rise today in support of the efforts of AMAVEX, a group of Venezuelan exiles who work, along with more than thirty non-profit organizations, in support of the ``Bring Chavez to Justice'' campaign. This campaign aims to highlight the troubling associations between Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez and the Marxist- terrorist group known as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, FARC. The FARC has been listed as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States government since 2001. Between 1996 and January 2008, the FARC kidnapped 6,877 people including three U.S. citizens who were recently liberated by the valiant efforts of Colombia's government. Mark Gonsalves, an American contractor kidnapped and held by the FARC for more than five years, described his ordeal at the hands of his captors and declared that the FARC are ``terrorists with a capital `T'.'' Chavez supports the FARC unashamedly proclaims his admiration for this violent terrorist group. He described the FARC in January 2008 as ``a real army.'' While his praise is sometimes peppered with halfhearted criticisms of the FARC's narco-trafficking, kidnappings, and violence, his actions betray his true intentions. He welcomes the FARC to conduct operations along Venezuela's border with Colombia and does nothing to cooperate with Colombia and the U.S. to combat the terrorist group's drug trafficking within its borders. The computers and evidence that came from the raid that killed the FARC's second in command, Raul Reyes, also resulted in the discovery of evidence showing FARC-Chavez associations. Seized computer files reveal high level connections between the FARC and senior officials in the Chavez administration. These files, authenticated by INTERPOL, reveal hundreds of millions of dollars in payments from the Venezuelan government to the FARC. And, as recently as June of this year, Colombian officials captured four men, one who was a sergeant in Venezuela's national guard, for transporting 40,000 rounds of AK-47 ammunition to the FARC in Colombia. It is often said that one can judge a person by the company he keeps. In this context, we should all take note that just last Thursday, while Americans observed the anniversary of the September 11 attacks, Chavez rejected all semblance of solidarity with the U.S. and our battle against terrorism by expelling the U.S. ambassador from Caracas. Chavez chooses the company of terrorists, drug traffickers, kidnappers and murderers, and severs diplomatic ties with the U.S. Chavez is a dictator who harbors terrorists. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of AMAVEX and the efforts of all Venezuelans to bring the terrorist associations of dictator Hugo Chavez to the world's attention.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, we continue to reserve.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. We continue to reserve.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, we continue to reserve.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I would ask my friend if she has any additional speakers.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. It's obvious, Mr. Speaker, that this legislation appropriately enjoys extraordinary bipartisan support, and really, I'm pleased to see an example of Congress working together across the aisle for the good of the Nation, in this instance, all of those who seek a higher education, which is such an important part of the American Dream. The dream of being able to acquire a higher education and to see one's children and one's grandchildren do so, to advance that dream as this legislation does is something that's admirable; and I wish to commend all who have worked to make this legislation possible. Mr. Speaker, we will not fail to utilize every opportunity on this House floor, before leaving for a 5-week break to be with our constituents, to provide our constituents, before we leave a debate on this floor on the issue that I certainly am being contacted most about by my constituents, and I know that many of our colleagues are as well: the unacceptable price of gasoline, the energy crisis facing American families, American workers, American businesses. Part of the reason that we are seeing this situation and that we are seeking a debate to alleviate this crisis is that gas prices have continued to rise, one important reason being because more and more so we are dependent on foreign oil, while we avoid developing domestic energy sources. And so we think that we need to comprehensively debate this issue to alleviate the crisis. The crisis is affecting all American families and affecting countless millions of businesses. One important source of domestic energy is the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. However, efforts to develop just a tiny portion of ANWR have been fought and blocked to the detriment of America's energy independence, even though the people of that great State overwhelmingly are in favor of searching for energy there. With the price of gasoline at $4 a gallon, we should be looking to do all we can to lower that price, and that includes domestic exploration when the people of a State wish to permit it. I think it demonstrates arrogance on our part to say we know better than the people of a State and their Representatives. In the case of Alaska, all of their Representatives in Congress are clamoring for what the overwhelming majority of the people of that great State are also clamoring for: the ability to search for additional sources of energy within their borders. Today I will be asking each of our colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question to this rule. If the previous question is defeated, I will amend the rule to make it in order for the House to consider an amendment that would have the effect of lowering the price of gasoline and diesel by increasing the domestic supply of oil by permitting the extraction of oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, as the people of the great State of Alaska wish to do so and their Senators and Representatives wish to do so, in representation of the overwhelming majority of the people of that great State. I remind the Members that defeating the previous question will not stop debate on the important underlying legislation. It enjoys bipartisan support. We wish, in addition to bringing forward an important piece of legislation like we are today, to offer the American people a debate on the issue that is on the minds of the overwhelming majority of American people, certainly of my constituents, the simply unacceptable price of gasoline. We have to do everything we can to deal with the issue. And I think it's unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, that we're not and that we're not being allowed to. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment and extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Again, by voting no on the previous question, Members can take a stand, can show that they want to do everything possible on this issue. Once again, I reiterate that this will not preclude taking action on the important piece of education legislation that we possibly, even unanimously, in this House, certainly in consensus fashion, support. I ask for a ``no'' vote on the previous question. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would inquire of my friend how many additional speakers she has.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, we continue to reserve.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to my good friend and classmate, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg).

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield so much time as he will consume to the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Higher Education, who has done tremendous work in this legislation, Mr. Keller.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, we continue to reserve.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.