Lincoln Diaz-Balart

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 7 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin, ranking member of the Budget Committee, in my view, the premier economic mind in the Congress of the United States (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, there are only two ways to balance a budget, whether it's your family budget or the Federal budget. You can either spend less, or you can increase the amount of money coming in. The majority, as reflected in their budget, have flat out rejected option one and have chosen higher spending, higher taxes, and an ever-growing Federal Government. The Republicans have chosen what I believe is a more responsible approach by committing to spending less and letting workers, families and small businesses keep more of their hard-earned income to save, invest, and spend as they see fit. While Republicans have faith in the ability of families and workers to decide how best to use their paychecks, the majority budget reflects their belief that the Federal Government can make better choices at spending money than individual Americans. And that's really a fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans. In order for the majority to fund their government spending, their budget raises taxes, Mr. Speaker, by two-thirds of a trillion dollars over the next 5 years. Let me repeat that, two-thirds of a trillion dollars. Now, you can call this a tax increase or you can call it letting tax cuts expire, but the bottom line is that under the Democrats' budget every American will pay more of their paycheck to the Federal Government. Although the majority will try to claim otherwise, the numbers in their own budget document show that taxes will increase nearly three times more under their budget than the largest enacted tax increase to date in history, making this the largest tax increase in American history. While the majority claims that their budget will protect middle-class families, their budget numbers tell a different story. Under the massive tax increases in the majority's budget, the average taxpayer in the State of Florida, for example, will see their annual tax bill rise over $3,000. The majority's budget does not extend tax relief from the marriage tax penalty. This means approximately 48 million married couples will face an average tax increase of $3,000 a year. It does not extend the $1,000 tax credit that many young families use. The majority's budget would cut that credit in half. It doesn't extend the State sales tax deductibility fairness. The majority's budget, Mr. Speaker, even manages to resurrect the death tax. It doesn't fix the alternative minimum tax for middle-class families. It does not protect those who pay the lowest tax rate either. It would again impose taxes on six million lower income Americans who now pay no taxes thanks to the 2001 tax relief law passed by Congress. Mr. Speaker, in order to boost our economy to incentivize growth, increase investment in the United States and create jobs, Congress should not be raising taxes by the largest amount in history. This critically important tax relief should not be repealed or allowed to expire to pay for the majority's spending plan. It should be made permanent. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. On February 14, the majority decided to leave Washington to take a Presidents Day recess and allowed the Protect America Act to expire 2 days later, rendering U.S. intelligence officials unable to begin new terrorist surveillance without cumbersome bureaucratic hurdles. At the end of this week, the House and Senate plan to adjourn for a 2-week district work period. Therefore, we only have a few days left to address one very important issue, and that is taking action on permanently modernizing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This didn't have to happen, Mr. Speaker. In February, the Senate passed, by a bipartisan vote of 68-29, legislation updating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, FISA, a bill that the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said ``is the right way to go, in terms of the security of the Nation.'' We could have easily considered that legislation. But the majority, instead, decided to head home. And they may just do that again this week. The House should vote on the Senate measure, and we should do it now. We must always stay one step ahead of those who wish harm on Americans. Now is not the time to, in any way, tie the hands of our intelligence community. The modernization of foreign intelligence surveillance into the 21st century is a critical national security priority. I am pleased that several of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle agree. On January 28, 21 members of the Blue Dog Coalition sent a letter to the Speaker in support of the Senate FISA legislation. The letter states, ``The Rockefeller-Bond FISA legislation contains satisfactory language addressing all these issues and we would fully support that measure should it reach the House floor without substantial change. We believe these components will ensure a strong national security apparatus that can thwart terrorism around the globe and save American lives here in our country.'' Today, I will give all Members of the House an opportunity to vote on the bipartisan, long-term modernization of FISA. I call on all my colleagues, including members of the Blue Dog Coalition that signed the letter to the Speaker, to join with me in defeating the previous question so that we can immediately move to concur in the Senate amendment and send the bill to the President to be signed into law. I will remind my colleagues that defeating the previous question will not prohibit consideration of the budget, but would merely require that we first take a vote on FISA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the text of the amendment and extraneous material inserted into the Record prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would ask Mr. McGovern if he has any additional speakers.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and in favor of a bipartisan permanent solution that helps protect American lives from international terrorism. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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 would like to thank my friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui), for the time and I yield myself such time as I may consume. In a world often plagued by selfishness, those who commit themselves to the service of others through volunteerism really serve as a beacon of compassion and hope for all. Community service is one of the most gratifying, rewarding, fulfilling ways people can give back to their communities. Community service has always been a vital pillar of our society. Volunteers all over the Nation dedicate millions of hours to their contemporaries, all in the hope of making people's lives better. Through their selfless work and tireless effort, volunteers help improve the lives of millions of Americans. In 1993, Congress, with my support, passed legislation creating AmeriCorps and the Corporation for National and Community Service to administer and coordinate Federal community service programs. Since then, almost 500,000 Americans have served with thousands of nonprofit organizations, public agencies, and faith-based organizations nationwide. These citizens tutor and mentor children, they coordinate after- school programs, they build homes for the needy, they conduct neighborhood patrols, restore the environment, respond to disasters, build nonprofit capacity, recruit and manage volunteers. They do, oftentimes, exemplary work. The underlying legislation, Madam Speaker, H.R. 2857, the Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act, known as the GIVE Act, will reauthorize the national service programs administered by the Cooperation for National Community Service. This reauthorization will help increase the number of volunteers in AmeriCorps to over 100,000 by 2012. It will also create service opportunities for middle school and high school students through the Summer of Service program. The legislation emphasizes the critical role of service in meeting the national priorities of emergency and disaster preparedness. I do believe it will help improve program integrity. I am pleased that the committee, the Committee on Education and Labor, worked in a bipartisan manner to reauthorize this program and to include provisions that will make these programs more effective and efficient, responding to State and local needs, and performance- oriented. It goes to show, Madam Speaker, that when we are willing to work together and negotiate, we can bring forth good pieces of legislation with bipartisan support. Now, I know the majority is trumpeting this rule with which we bring this underlying legislation to the floor because it will allow Members to debate all the amendments to the Rules Committee. But I remind my colleagues, Madam Speaker, the majority does this only when the underlying legislation is noncontroversial, even though the majority promised to be the most open Congress in history. If the majority is so proud of this rule, it should allow open rules on controversial bills as well. In closing, Madam Speaker, I urge Americans everywhere, regardless of whether they take part in a AmeriCorps, to volunteer and give back to their communities. The rewards are extraordinary to both the volunteer and to the community. As Winston Churchill said, ``We make a living by what we do, but we make a life by what we give.'' Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Although the reauthorization of AmeriCorps certainly is an important matter and one that deserves our attention, I must express my disappointment that the majority decided to take up this legislation before we finish our work on bipartisan legislation to protect Americans from international terrorism. On February 14, the majority decided to leave Washington to take a President's Day recess and allowed the Protect America Act to expire 2 days later, rendering U.S. intelligence officials unable to begin new terrorist surveillance without cumbersome bureaucratic hurdles. Because of the inaction of the majority, the United States is more vulnerable to terrorist attack. This didn't have to happen, Madam Speaker. Earlier last month, the Senate passed, by a bipartisan vote, really an extraordinary vote of 68-29, a bill updating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, FISA, a bill that the chairman, Democratic chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said, and I quote, ``is the right way to go in terms of the security of the Nation.'' We could have easily considered that legislation, but the majority in the House instead decided to head home. The House should vote on the Senate measure, and the House should vote on the Senate measure now. Madam Speaker, we must always try to stay one step ahead of those who wish to harm Americans. Now is not the time to in any way tie the hands of our intelligence community. The modernization of the foreign intelligence surveillance is a critical national security priority. I am pleased that several of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle also agree. On January 28, 21 members of the Blue Dog Coalition, Democrats, sent a letter to the distinguished Speaker in support of the Senate Rockefeller-Bond FISA legislation. The letter states, and I quote, ``The Rockefeller-Bond FISA legislation contains satisfactory language addressing all these issues, and we fully support that measure, should it reach the House floor without substantial change. We believe these components will ensure a strong national security apparatus that can thwart terrorism across the globe and save American lives here in our country.'' Today, I will give all Members of the House an opportunity to vote on the bipartisan long-term modernization of FISA. I call on all my colleagues, including the members of the Blue Dog Coalition that signed the letter to the distinguished Speaker, to join with me in defeating the previous question so that we can immediately move to concur in the Senate amendment and send the bill to the President to be signed into law. I remind my colleagues that defeating the previous question will not prohibit consideration of the underlying legislation being brought to the floor today, the GIVE Act, but would merely require that we first take a vote on FISA modernization. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the text of the amendment and extraneous material inserted into the Record prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and in favor of a bipartisan long-term solution that helps protect American lives from international terrorism. With that, Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. We have no other speakers. I am ready to make my final remarks.

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

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, after thousands of kidnappings and murders inside Colombia carried out by the terrorist organization known by its initials as FARC, Colombia finally had enough. And when it learned that key heads of the terrorist group that were being given sanctuary inside Ecuador by the government of that country, when Colombia learned that the terrorists were 1,800 meters from Colombia, Colombia decided to strike. It did so from Colombian airspace. And, in fact, the FARC shot at the Colombian Air Force, which permitted the Colombian Air Force to pinpoint the exact spot where the FARC terrorists were, where they had been, and from where they were attacking Colombia. Colombia struck, and the second-ranking FARC terrorist head, Luis Edgar Devia-Silva, alias Raul Reyes, was killed. Reyes was killed along with approximately 20 other terrorists. Unfortunately, one brave Colombian soldier fighting in defense of freedom, Carlos Hernandez Leon, was also killed during the operation. It is as tragic as it is condemnable. It is, in fact, criminal for the Governments of Ecuador and Venezuela to provide sanctuary for terrorists who systemically commit murder and kidnappings inside Colombia, and then those terrorists return to Venezuelan and Ecuadorian soil. President Bush and the United States of America have stood by and are firmly standing by our great democratic ally and friend Colombia and its twice overwhelmingly elected President Alvaro Uribe. Unfortunately, that is not the case with much of the rest of our hemisphere. I commend President Bush for his steadfast support of our great ally President Uribe. Now, Mr. Speaker, it is time for this Congress to act. We need to renew and to increase our security aid to Colombia, which has been known for a decade as Plan Colombia, and the majority leadership of this Congress must immediately schedule a vote on U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement, an agreement that is in the interest both of the American and the Colombian peoples. The majority leadership of this House must stop preventing a vote on the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement. The position on that critical issue of the majority leadership of this Congress is petty and is ultimately irresponsible. The chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee was quoted recently as saying, referring to trips that Members of Congress have been taking to Colombia to find out for themselves how the Free Trade Agreement would affect our two countries: ``It is not the facts on the ground that are important; it is the politics in the air.'' How sad, Mr. Speaker. How sad. It is time for this Congress to send a clear sign of support and solidarity to our good friend Colombia. It is time to stop blocking the FTA with Colombia and for the majority leadership of Congress to schedule a vote on the Free Trade Agreement with Colombia now.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak about Juan Bermudez Toranzo, a political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba. Mr. Juan Bermudez Toranzo is vice president of the Cuban Foundation for Human Rights. On November 21, 2007, Mr. Bermudez was participating in a peaceful fast at his home in support of the political prisoners kept in repressive and inhumane conditions in Cuba's gulags. That evening 30 police and state security thugs stormed Mr. Bermudez's home and dragged him into a police car. According to Amnesty International the arrest of Mr. Bermudez was part of an increasingly arbitrary crackdown against dissidents because of their involvement in peaceful protests. The unjustified arrests by the totalitarian regime's goons were aimed at discouraging demonstrations against the government, particularly on December 10, International Human Rights Day. International Human Rights Day honors the day of the United Nations General Assembly's adoption and proclamation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the first global declaration of human rights. Just last month a sham regime court held proceedings in secret, ``convicting'' Mr. Bermudez of ``revealing state secrets,'' and sentencing him to 12 years in prison. But the regime hooligans were not content with the 12-year prison sentence. They wanted to send a message to future political dissidents by first putting Mr. Bermudez in a punishment cell and denying him clothes and water. They also constantly subjected Mr. Bermudez to psychological torture. The inhumane conditions in the totalitarian regime's prisons took their toll on Mr. Bermudez and he allegedly attempted to commit suicide. This is not the first time Mr. Bermudez has faced the brutality of the Cuban totalitarian- gangster regime. Last March while leaving the Rosa Parks Independent Library at the U.S. Interests Section, the regime's secret police arrested Mr. Bermudez. After his release he said that he would continue his opposition to the dictatorship and his work for human rights. After Mr. Bermudez's arrest by regime thugs, known as the ``National Revolutionary Police Unit,'' between 15 and 25 human rights activists carried out a sit-in in front of the ``National Revolutionary Police Unit,'' demanding the release of Juan Bermudez Toranzo. The sit-in included Ms. Nery Castillo, the wife of Mr. Bermudez Toranzo. Because of her participation she has been subjected to harsh intimidation by regime goons. These goons warned her that if she did not leave the sit- in they would take away her children. Madam Speaker, it is unconscionable that human beings are locked in a barbarously inhumane gulag because they believe that all men and women have a right to freedom and democracy. My colleagues, we must demand freedom and human rights for all people, including those who live under the darkness of totalitarian tyrannies. We must demand immediate and unconditional freedom for Juan Bermudez Toranzo and every prisoner of conscience in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith), the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Bilbray).

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers).

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I would like to thank my friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui), for the time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this closed rule. I know the majority calls this a structured rule, but it's a closed rule. Technically the majority gave the minority the ability to offer a substitute amendment if the substitute amendment was printed in the Congressional Record before the end of the legislative day. The rule giving the minority the opportunity to draft a substitute was passed out of the Rules Committee at about 5:20 yesterday evening. The House finished its legislative day at 5:57, giving the minority 37 minutes in which to draft a substitute to a very complex tax issue while meeting PAYGO and germaneness requirements. I understand that at the time the House went out of session last night, minority staff from the Ways and Means Committee were talking to the Office of Legislative Counsel and the Joint Committee on Taxation in hopes of drafting a substitute amendment. But since they couldn't get all their work done in 37 minutes, the minority, in fact, was closed out and prohibited from offering any amendments under this closed rule. What is even more disturbing is that I am informed that during consideration of the rule yesterday, the distinguished chairwoman, Ms. Slaughter, informed Ranking Member Dreier that the majority would keep the House in session so that the minority would have ample time to complete work on a substitute amendment. But the question must be asked of the majority at this time: How is 37 minutes enough time to draft legislation, especially on something as complicated as an energy tax bill? Mr. Speaker, it is not enough time. It is most unfortunate that the majority did not give the minority time to complete its work and that we are now proceeding under this closed process. Everyone in this body seeks to leave our children and grandchildren a better world in which to live. This great Nation has made great strides in protecting human health and the environment, but, clearly, we can do more. From 2001 to 2006, Republican-led Congresses invested nearly $12 billion to develop cleaner, cheaper and more reliable domestic renewable energy sources. This included sources such as cellulosic ethanol, hybrid electric vehicle technologies, hydrogen fuel cell technologies, wind and solar energy, clean coal and advanced nuclear technologies. I am pleased by the inclusion of the production tax credit, the PTC, in the underlying legislation being brought to the floor today. The PTC provides a tax credit for electricity produced from renewable energy facilities. Sources such as wind, solar and biomass are included under the tax credit. Since its enactment in 1992, the credit has encouraged the development of thousands of megawatts of clean, renewable electric generation facilities. But we must keep in mind that alternative fuels will not eliminate the need for traditional energy resources. Without additional supply, the tight market conditions that have put pressure on prices are going to persist, and this bill, the legislation being brought to the floor today under this rule, will do nothing to lower gas prices. Unfortunately, the majority has included in H.R. 5351, the underlying legislation, more than $17 billion in tax increases, including a repeal of the section 199 manufacturing deduction. This tax incentive in current law is aimed at reducing U.S. dependence on foreign oil by encouraging domestic exploration and production of oil and natural gas. By removing this incentive for the domestic production of oil and natural gas, we would increase the incentive to look overseas for those energy resources. How would that be in our national interest? How does increasing the cost of doing business in the United States decrease the cost of gasoline for Americans? Why would we want to deincentivize investment in a sector of our economy with 1.8 million well-paying jobs in the United States of America? Removal of these incentives will drive up prices to the American consumer even further and increase our dependence on foreign suppliers such as the buffoon Hugo Chavez, who earlier this month cut off oil sales to ExxonMobil and threatened once again to cut off all oil sales to the United States. And while the buffoon Chavez makes those threats to our energy supplies, the majority has decided that his company, Citgo, would continue to receive a tax break that the majority in the underlying legislation seeks to take away from American companies. Yes, under this legislation, three American oil and gas companies, ExxonMobil, Chevron and ConocoPhillips, will lose their current deduction while Citgo will continue to get theirs. That's unbelievable. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) 4 minutes.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of our time. Mr. Speaker, it's disappointing that the majority has decided really to waste the time of this Congress with legislation that three times has failed to make it through the Senate and that observers covering Congress have called a rerun. Instead of wasting time on legislation that will never make it into law, we should be considering bipartisan legislation that will protect Americans from international terrorism. On February 14, the majority decided to leave Washington to take a Presidents Day recess and allow the Protect America Act to expire 2 days later, rendering U.S. intelligence officials unable to begin new terrorist surveillance without cumbersome bureaucratic hurdles. Because of the deliberate inaction of the majority, the United States today is more vulnerable to a terrorist attack. And this did not have to happen. Earlier this month, the Senate passed by a bipartisan vote of 68-29 a bill updating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a bill that the chairman of the Intelligence Committee said, `` . . . it's the right way to go in terms of the security of the Nation.'' Mr. Speaker, we would have easily considered that legislation, but the majority decided instead to head home. The House should vote on the Senate measure and we should do it now, instead of debating this legislation which will not become law and is really nothing more than a rerun. We must always stay one step ahead of those who wish harm on Americans. Now is not the time to, in any way, in any way tie the hands of our intelligence community. The modernization of foreign intelligence surveillance into this century is a critical national security priority. I'm pleased that several of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle also agree. On January 28, 21 members of the Blue Dog Coalition sent a letter to the Speaker in support of the Senate legislation. The letter states, ``The Rockefeller-Bond FISA legislation contains satisfactory language addressing all these issues, and we would fully support that measure should it reach the House floor without substantial change. We believe these components will ensure a strong national security apparatus that can thwart terrorism across the globe and save American lives in the United States.'' Today I will give all Members of this House an opportunity to vote on the bipartisan long-term modernization of FISA. I call on all of my colleagues, including members of the Blue Dog Coalition that signed the letter to the Speaker, to join with me in defeating the previous question so that we can immediately move to concur in the Senate amendment and send the bill to the President to be signed into law. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the text of the amendment and extraneous material inserted into the Record prior to the vote on the previous question.

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

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I will reserve then.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and in favor of a bipartisan permanent solution that will help protect American lives from international terrorism. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

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