Lincoln Diaz-Balart

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. Madam Speaker, in closing, I thank my friend from Maine for her courtesy and all who have come to the floor to debate this rule, and I reiterate, I think it's an important piece of legislation. I'm sorry that it was brought forth in an unnecessarily closed manner. I think the legislation deserves more respect, and I think especially the membership of this House deserves more respect. I have, again, gratitude for all of my colleagues, and I thank them for having participated in this debate. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, with regard to this point of process, which I think is important, I think it is appropriate to point out the facts. The majority is bringing this legislation to the floor by using another bill as a shell. The other bill is the Small Business Innovation Research Reauthorization bill, which has extraordinary bipartisan support. So the rule before us now strikes that legislation, which is job growth legislation--again, supported overwhelmingly in a bipartisan fashion in this House. It strikes that, and it inserts into that shell this legislation, the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The Don't Ask, Don't Tell legislation is not germane to the underlying legislation, so it is anything but regular order. The House Armed Services Committee has absolutely no jurisdiction over that Small Business bill which the majority is using as a shell to move this legislation out of regular order in order to prohibit transparency, even a motion to recommit. The majority has demonstrated time and time again its willingness to eliminate transparency, to void regular order and to take steps totally out of regular order as it is doing again today. So I think this is important to put on the record because this legislation, which by the way is important, as I said before, I think deserves to be treated with respect, consideration, and the membership of this House I think deserves to be listened to, to be heard on legislation, especially legislation which evidently is important, like the one we are discussing today. I wanted to put that on the record. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to my friend from Georgia, Dr. Gingrey.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I thank my good friend, Ms. Pingree from Maine, for the time and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, we find ourselves back on the House floor with yet another closed rule. In fact, we haven't seen a single open rule during this entire 111th Congress. I never thought that I would see that, Madam Speaker, an entire Congress pass without a single open rule. Just 3 hours ago, the Rules Committee was meeting on the underlying legislation before us today. This is the fifth rule since the election that will deny the minority the basic right even to a motion to recommit; in other words, one alternative piece of legislation which, when we were in the majority, we wrote into the rules that the minority would have that right. And since the election last month, this majority has brought five, with this piece of legislation, five bills to the floor with a rule denying even that right to the minority--a motion to recommit. The underlying legislation repealing the so-called Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy is important and should be considered carefully and thoroughly by all Members of this House. As a matter of fact, Madam Speaker, when I spoke on this issue on this House floor in May of this year, I said and I reiterate what I said at that time: Sexual preference should not even be a point of reference when judging individuals. This is an important issue. Unfortunately, the congressional majority has not even held a hearing in the Armed Services Committee since the Pentagon released their findings of this recent survey. Members of the House on both sides of the aisle support our men and women in uniform. Ensuring the best equipment, improving quality of life for soldiers and their families, and doing everything we can to increase pay are issues of the utmost importance. For 48 consecutive years, Congress has provided the necessary oversight by passing the Defense authorization bill always in a bipartisan manner. This record of effective congressional review is in jeopardy as we proceed along with what could be the final week of this Congress. I think the majority continues to give insufficient seriousness to even important issues such as this by closing the process. The repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell is not a policy decision to be taken lightly. The Defense Department, at the urging of Congress, spent 10 months collecting and analyzing survey responses from the men and women in our Armed Forces. I believe that analysis, nearly 15,000 pages in length, including the direct comments of our troops, should be the most important factor in considering this legislation, in considering how we vote on this legislation. The Department of Defense released the results of their survey on November 30, just over 2 weeks ago. Now the majority is asking Congress to move forward in a manner that denies the committees of jurisdiction any review, that denies input from the membership of this House, that takes the product of the Speaker and the author of the legislation and forces the House to vote on it without any ability to offer alternatives, not even a motion to recommit. I think we do a disservice to this body when we do not debate and deliberate with transparency. That lack of transparency has been standard procedure for the past 4 years. Obviously, we should not expect this congressional majority to change in its final weeks, but that will change in the next Congress. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I thank my friend. I think it's unfortunate the way that the majority leadership has treated this issue when, Mr. Speaker, you see that after bringing the stimulus and the cap-and-trade and the health care legislation and all of the political capital that the President and this majority leadership had has been exhausted; and after receiving that defeat at the polls, after all that they bring this legislation to the floor. I think the process is most unfortunate. And the way in which they have handled this legislation, Mr. Speaker, shows the lack of interest that they have had in it. That doesn't negate, however, the fact that the legislation is extremely important. If there is anything that distinguishes the United States of America--I think in an appropriate and in an admirable way--it is that we are a meritocracy. You stand or you fall in the United States of America based on your own decisions, not the decisions of your parents or your grandparents or their grandparents. Your decisions determine your reputation in the United States of America. So what we are dealing with in this legislation is who we are dealing with, number one, the kind of immigration that we work day in and day out to try to attract and retain in the United States, college-educated people who have become so after extraordinary hard work. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, after thinking about what we are trying to do, it all boils down to the decisions. I referred previously to the fact that the United States is distinguished by the fact that the American people stand or fall based on our own decisions. What are the decisions that those students who we're dealing with in this legislation have made in their lives? They didn't make the decision to come to the United States out of status. The only decisions that they have made in their lives have been to work hard, to study hard, to make our communities proud. This legislation seeks to give them an opportunity to make their situation regular, normal so that they can contribute even more to the greatness of this Nation. At the end of the day, despite the unfortunate process, we cannot stop thinking about who we are dealing with in this legislation. That is why I have been, for a decade, a sponsor or cosponsor of this legislation, and that is why I am proud to support it this evening. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

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. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank my friend from Colorado (Mr. Polis) for the time. I also thank him for his gracious words. He, in the short period of time that he has been here, has already left a mark with his thoughtfulness and his hard work, and really his conscience and compassion. He has left a mark on this Congress. And I know his constituents must be, and will continue to be, very proud to have sent him here because they have already seen the kind of Member of Congress that Jared Polis is. So I thank him for those kind words. And I share with him the view that we have been able to work on some projects together, and my hope that we will be able to work in the future. And really my almost certainty that we will be able to work together in the future on important projects as well. Mr. Speaker, as this, the 111th Congress, proceeds, it's in its final days evidently. The rule before us provides for expedited same day consideration for all legislation brought forward until December 18, and extends suspension authority for that period. It's really martial law rule because it closes down the process, does not allow Members of Congress to review legislation, to really know what legislation that will be considered is about. And in an historically unprecedented manner, it sets 11 days for this expedited consideration of legislation without necessarily showing legislation to colleagues before consideration. The congressional majority and the Speaker have not fulfilled their 2006 campaign pledge to have, and I quote, ``The most honest, the most open, and the most ethical Congress in history.'' It was indeed needed reform at that time. But as we now know, it failed to materialize. This majority admits, Mr. Speaker, with the rule before us today, it admits that it doesn't even pretend to care about fair process and transparency and the rights of the minority any more. The congressional majority feels no need to allow the public and all of our colleagues to read legislation before the House votes. The language before us allows bills to be considered the same day that they are ushered through the Rules Committee. The majority cares little for the ability of Members to have input in the form of amendments to vital, must-pass legislation that we will consider in the next days and weeks. I think it's important to note, though I think it's unfortunate, that the House of Representatives has not considered even one open rule this Congress. And that would have been certainly something that I would not have expected. In my 18 years here, I have never seen this before, and did not expect it. This House has not considered even one open rule this Congress. Now, we've come to expect that from the current majority. And so it's to be expected that the majority will have more martial law rules like the one before us in the days ahead. I think it's appropriate, I think it's good news that the Republicans, that we have made a pledge that I am confident will be kept. I am happy to report that very soon there will be significant and impactful course correction in the House of Representatives. The Members will be able to read legislation before they cast votes. Open rules will make a triumphant return to the House floor. All Representatives in this House will be able to contribute to the legislative process, bringing forth a chorus of ideas that have been suppressed during the last two Congresses. So that's good news. And that is one of the good things about renewal in politics and the democratic process. Again I thank Mr. Polis for his courtesy, for his friendship, and all of my colleagues. As I said a few weeks ago, these have been an extraordinary 18 years, Mr. Speaker, the honor of my life. This is the Congress of the greatest Nation in the world. And it's a miracle. The United States of America is a miracle of freedom. And so as I leave this House, again I thank all of my colleagues for the honor of being able to have been able to serve with them, for the honor of having been able to serve with them, both those who have helped me, who have agreed with me and the causes that I have fought, and those who have opposed me. It's been an honor to serve with all of them. At this point we have no further speakers, and so, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule, and to let this House return to openness a few weeks ahead of schedule. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, in recent weeks, we have seen the issue of the Western Sahara receive a great deal of coverage in the world press. Unfortunately, the press coverage has often been biased; in fact, I've seen cynical attempts at purposeful disinformation. I think it's important that we remember history. Let's not forget that while the Sahara was under Spanish colonial rule, only Morocco laid claim to that territory as its own. The Kingdom of Morocco repeatedly claimed the Western Sahara and demanded the end of Spanish colonial rule. It was only when Morocco's efforts at recovering the Sahara from Spanish colonialism under the leadership of King Hassan II began to be seen as making serious progress in the 1970s that the so- called Polisario Front came into being. Then, as now, the so-called Polisario group is financed by Algeria and is propped up by Castro's Communist dictatorship in Cuba. Why is it important to understand this? Because in Morocco, our ally in North Africa in the struggle against international terrorism, the issue of the Sahara is the decisive issue. The reality of Moroccan sovereignty over the Sahara enjoys the support of the entire population of Morocco, including the Sahara itself. In other words, the issue of the Sahara is the sine qua non, the necessary ingredient for stability and peace in that country of strategic importance in North Africa, our friend and ally, Morocco. King Mohammed VI and his negotiating team have demonstrated great courage and patience in dealing with this critical issue so closely tied to the security of the entire region. Let us never forget that a make-believe, an illusory, a fake microstate in Northern Africa would be led by a Castro-Cuban-formed political class which would constitute a minority of the population even within the fake microstate, but would control it through Castro-style repression. Let us never forget that such a microstate would serve as a focal point of regional instability and destabilization, as well as an exporter of terrorism. For over a decade, Mr. Speaker, Morocco has agreed to grant a genuine and profound autonomy to the Sahara under Moroccan sovereignty in order to reach a realistic and definitive solution to this problem, but Algeria and the so-called Polisario continue to insist on the creation of a fake microstate. Majorities in this Congress comprising both Republicans and Democrats have spoken clearly in support of our ally Morocco's position on this critical issue in letters we have sent, first to President Bush, and then to President Obama. The United States, during both administrations and with the strong leadership of Secretary of State Rice and Secretary of State Clinton, has agreed with the position expressed by the overwhelming majority of this Congress. The future of America's struggle against international terrorism and the stability of Northern Africa require that the Government and the Congress of the United States continue to stand firmly and clearly with our friend and ally, the Kingdom of Morocco.

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. Speaker, in closing, I believe it's fitting that those of us on this side of the aisle are bringing forward another proposal, a YouCut proposal that's been voted on and recommended to this House by a significant number of our constituents. They continue to sound the alarm on government spending, and we must, this Congress must finally listen. To date, participants in Republican Whip Cantor's YouCut initiative have voted to cut over $180 billion in spending. This week, those participating have voted for a proposal by Congressman Lee of New York, who we heard from before, to end the unnecessary printing of congressional bills and resolutions. I think it's appropriate that we finally acknowledge the existence of the Internet, and that much unnecessary spending is taking place through the printing of documents. That was appropriate and logical in the past, but not after the development of many new technologies. So I will be asking Members to vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can have a vote on Congressman Lee's proposal. And again, I remind my colleagues that a ``no'' vote on the previous question will not preclude consideration of the underlying legislation that we have been debating today. I ask unanimous consent, Mr. Speaker, that the text of the amendment and extraneous material be placed in the Record prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Again, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and ``no'' on the rule. Having said that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 2 minutes to my friend from Michigan (Mrs. Miller).

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to my friend from New York (Mr. Lee), who is the author of the proposal that we will be discussing subsequently, the YouCut proposal.

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'd just like to point out I think it's important to clarify that if our proposal today, the YouCut proposal, to eliminate for the taxpayer unnecessary spending on paperwork, if that's adopted it would not negate in any way consideration of the underlying bill on the lunch programs. At this point I would like to yield 2 minutes to my friend from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito).

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I thank my friend from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) for yielding me the time. First, Mr. Speaker, thank you. I don't know if I will have the privilege again of speaking on this floor while you're presiding, and I want to thank you for your service and especially for your friendship. And to Mr. McGovern, I thank him for his kind words. I said a few days ago in some remarks here on the floor that this is a great honor of being a Member of Congress of the United States I will never forget, and for the rest of my days, I will feel that honor. And I thanked all of my colleagues, those who have helped me during the years here and the many battles that I've been involved in, and those who have opposed me. And so I think it's appropriate to point to the example of the graciousness demonstrated by Mr. McGovern. We've had very strong debates on this floor, and yet, he demonstrated that graciousness once again today. I thank him for his words, and as I did the other day, I thank all of my colleagues, those who have agreed with me and those who have opposed me, for the great honor of having been able to serve along with them here in this Congress. Mr. Speaker, we have been discussing the issue of the effect of the debt on the economic reality of the American people, and as a matter of fact as this Congress starts reaching an end, I think it's appropriate to bring forth the fact to remind our colleagues that this is going to be, I believe, the first Congress where we have not seen even one open rule. So we stand here today with another piece of legislation being brought to the floor with no amendments allowed by the Rules Committee and, in this case, a product from the Senate before us that has had absolutely no input from Members of the House. I think that all of us in this House, certainly an overwhelming majority of the membership of the House, would support--I certainly do--the continuation and reauthorization of reduced and free school food programs. The bill before us unfortunately does not improve upon the current situation in that regard. In fact, the bipartisan National Governors Association has outlined several problems that they have with this underlying legislation, and I was reading some hours ago their objections. Governors Ritter of Colorado and Rell of Connecticut highlighted new certification and monitoring mandates that will be forced on States by this legislation in order for the States to be able to continue their important participation in these programs. Actually, I was disturbed to learn from the bipartisan National Governors Association that the underlying legislation sets a federally mandated minimum price that school districts must pay for meals. In the past, if a school district negotiated lower food costs, that was considered applying smart business practices by the school districts. But no longer. With a mandatory minimum, school districts are now going to have to pay more for their food programs, which of course will be passed along to middle class families in the form of higher meal costs. So I think, in reality, what we are seeing in this legislation is a tax increase on working families. Unfortunately, a substitute that was brought forth in the Rules Committee by the minority, by Ranking Member Kline, which would have reauthorized these important programs, was not allowed to be offered. That substitute amendment would have extended and strengthened the existing important programs but would have avoided the new mandates on States and communities. There is another issue, Mr. Speaker, that I think is important to bring out. In order to pay for the new programs in this legislation, the congressional majority decided to use previously appropriated funding intended for the Food Stamp Program. The Food Stamp funds were provided under the so-called stimulus legislation, so it's as though the majority is admitting that taxpayer dollars were incorrectly spent, and they are now using those stimulus funds to pay for these programs. The stimulus bill was not subject to the so-called PAYGO requirements because the majority labeled it as ``emergency spending.'' Under the rules of the House, emergency spending cannot be used as a PAYGO offset for future spending because it was never originally offset. As a result, the rule that we are debating must again waive the important PAYGO requirements. Now, I know it's difficult to follow. I was trying to understand it in the Rules Committee last night. But the end result is that this bill is paid for by funds that are borrowed by the Federal Government. So I guess we could say that we are voting to provide our children with nutritious school lunches which will be paid to foreign entities in the future, with interest, foreign entities from which we are borrowing funds, thus adding to our national debt and imposing new fees on families. By the way, we could have reauthorized these programs without adding to our national debt and imposing new fees on families. Adding to our national debt in that way and imposing new fees on families is not the solution to improving the Nation's school meal programs at a time when, obviously, many are struggling. At this time, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise to honor the memory of a friend who passed away just a few days ago, a larger than life personality, a generous and extraordinary man, Leopoldo Cifuentes. Scion of a distinguished Cuban family, his grandfather purchased the famed Partagas cigar factory in 1875. The Cifuentes family symbolizes Cuban tobacco and cigars, the best in the world. And Leopoldo Cifuentes symbolized his remarkable family. When the Cuban Communist tyranny confiscated all businesses in Cuba in 1960, including the tobacco business of the Cifuentes family, young Leo came to the United States of America, a country he loved and admired deeply. He married Dagmar Hidalgo Nunez, an extraordinary woman, in 1962. That year Leopoldo Cifuentes volunteered to join the United States Army. Years later, he received an honorable discharge and the commendation of the then Army Secretary Cyrus Vance. Leo and Dagmar subsequently moved to Spain, where much of their extended family resided. Their children, Leopoldo, Jr., and Mayte, were born there. As Leopoldo and Dagmar's family grew, so did Leo's business success. But he never stopped loving the United States of America, nor the country of his birth, Cuba. Leopoldo Cifuentes, along with his son Leo Jr., and his nephew Rafael, have been bulwarks in the fight for Cuba's freedom. Madam Speaker, just this last July, when I visited Spain to meet with recently arrived former Cuban political prisoners, Leo, Leo Jr., and Rafa helped me to lend a hand to our heroes, the just-released-from- the-gulag former political prisoners. And that's typical of their generosity and their patriotism. I send my deepest condolences to Dagmar, Mayte, Leo Jr., Rafa, and the entire wonderful family of Leopoldo Cifuentes. I will never forget him.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I will leave Congress at the end of this session with a sense of duty fulfilled, having given my all to the people of the 21st District of Florida, who have honored me by electing me and reelecting me to nine terms in Congress. I feel deep satisfaction not only in the achievements of my term of service, such as the codification into law of the U.S. embargo on the Cuban tyranny, requiring the liberation of all political prisoners without exceptions, and the scheduling of free and fair multiparty elections in Cuba before the President of the United States can lift U.S. sanctions; or the Nicaraguan adjustment and Central American Relief Act, which granted legal residency in the United States to hundreds of thousands of our Central American brothers and sisters who were previously facing deportation. My most profound satisfaction comes from having given my all, each and every day, to my constituents. I, as a private citizen, will work to help the freedom fighters inside Cuba who are resisting the brutality of the Castro tyranny with ultimate courage and patriotism. They are my heroes. As Cuban political prisoner Angel Moya wrote from his dungeon in the Castro-Cuban gulag a few days ago: ``My spirit is the same; it is full of joy because I am in prison for fighting for the dignity and rights of the Cuban people. I am ready to continue resisting--physically, morally, and spiritually.'' Mr. Speaker, I will continue to do all in my power to help in the struggle for the freedom of Cuba. This country, the United States of America, is a miracle--a miracle of generosity of spirit, a miracle of freedom, of human dignity, and opportunity. May God forever preserve and protect this great land and people. For the rest of my days I will feel deeply honored to have been a Member of the Congress of the United States of America. To all of my colleagues, those who have helped me and those who have opposed me, thank you. Thank you for the honor of having been able to serve along with you.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.