Norm Dicks

Mr. DICKS

Mr. DICKS. I would invite the gentleman to go ahead with a couple of more speakers at this juncture.

Mr. DICKS. If the gentleman will yield on that point, if we did that, if we had a clean CR, the President would sign it into law.

Mr. DICKS. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) who can explain why part of this CR is very ideologically driven and extreme.

Mr. DICKS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished former whip, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), who is now the assistant minority leader.

Mr. DICKS. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished Democratic whip, Mr. Hoyer, my good friend from Maryland.

Mr. DICKS. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. DICKS. I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran), former chairman of Interior, now the ranking Democratic member of the Interior and Environment Subcommittee.

Mr. DICKS. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. DICKS. I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), who is the ranking member on the Homeland Security subcommittee.

Mr. DICKS. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. DICKS. I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel), who is a former member of the Appropriations Committee doing great things in his new job.

Mr. DICKS. I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlelady from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), who is the most senior woman in the House of Representatives and on the Appropriations Committee.

Mr. DICKS. I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. DICKS. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch).

Mr. DICKS. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time remains on both sides.

Mr. DICKS. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DICKS. I yield myself 15 seconds. I would just remind the gentleman that if we had a clean CR, the troops would also be taken care of, and a clean CR would be signed into law by the President of the United States so it would be effective. What is being proposed today will be vetoed. The President has already sent a statement. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) who is a distinguished member of this institution.

Mr. DICKS. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DICKS. Madam Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. DICKS. I will yield myself 4\3/4\ minutes. (Mr. DICKS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DICKS. I just want to make sure that everyone has heard the Statement of Administration Policy that was issued today: ``The administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 1363, making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes. As the President stated on April 5, 2011, if negotiations are making significant progress, the administration would support a short-term, clean continuing resolution to allow for enactment of a final bill. ``For the past several weeks, the administration has worked diligently and in good faith to find common ground on the shared goal of cutting spending. After giving the Congress more time by signing short-term extensions into law''--which, by the way, many of us voted for--``the President believes that we need to put politics aside and work out our differences for a bill that covers the rest of the fiscal year. This bill is a distraction from the real work that would bring us closer to a reasonable compromise for funding the remainder of fiscal year 2011 and avert a disruptive Federal Government shutdown that would put the Nation's economic recovery in jeopardy. The administration will continue to work with the Congress to arrive at a compromise that will fund the government for the remainder of the fiscal year in a way that does not undermine future growth and job creation and that averts a costly government shutdown. It is critical that the Congress send a final bill to the President's desk that provides certainty to our men and women in military uniform, their families, small businesses, homeowners, taxpayers, and all Americans. H.R. 1363 simply delays that critical final outcome. ``If presented with this bill, the President will veto it.'' I think the President is right. What I suggested yesterday to the Rules Committee and to our chairman was that we go forward with a clean CR, which we have done many times. It would allow the President to sign this and us to finish our work. I would much rather have preferred if the clean CR was at a point when all three--the President, the Speaker, and the Majority Leader--had all agreed and said, ``We're done; we need a little more time to do the paperwork,'' but that is not the situation that we're in. I also want to reiterate, with a clean CR, the troops will be paid and they will receive their checks as they should. And the defense part of this bill, I have worked on. It's a very good piece of legislation. But when you throw in the District of Columbia abortion issue, it really shows that you're not serious. That's why the American people I think believe that this is ideology and not people working together in a commonsense way to get this thing resolved. So, again, I worry about what we're doing here in terms of economic policy, that again the magnitude of these cuts are going to have a negative effect on the economy. We need to create more jobs, to lower the deficit, and put people back to work. I urge that we defeat this bill. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DICKS. I believe that the Democratic whip may want to propound a question to the chairman, so I am not going to yield back my time until he has an opportunity to do that.

Mr. DICKS. I yield 1 minute to the distinguished Democratic whip, my good friend, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. DICKS

Mr. DICKS. Yesterday, we met in the Rules Committee to discuss this potential CR. The point I wanted to make was that I felt--and I wish the gentleman from California were here--that a clean CR would be more appropriate at this time, especially if we get an agreement. Because, that way, the President can sign the clean CR, which would keep funding for the troops--I want to point that out as the ranking member on Defense Appropriations--this CR is troubled. I believe, the President will veto it. I also believe it won't be passed in the Senate. So why are we doing this? Why are we wasting time here when we should be focused on getting a clean CR through, which the President said he would sign, which would allow a little more time for negotiations on this agreement? Now, we have got to get an agreement. The idea of shutting down the Federal Government in the middle of this economic downturn is just the worst possible idea. Goldman Sachs says you'll lose two-tenths of 1 percent of economic growth. This will mean laying people off. Whether they will get reimbursed or not is a major question for those who are not considered to be vital--and I think all workers are vital, but it's regarding those who are not in essential kinds of jobs. We talked yesterday to the FAA. They will keep operating. We have troops in the field. As I mentioned before, if we did a clean CR, they would be paid. I think this is a waste of time and that every ounce of effort should be taken in reaching this agreement.

Mr. DICKS. The administration has bent over backwards, and the Senate has bent over backwards to try to reach an agreement on this, but the leadership on the Republican side keeps changing the goalposts. First, it was $33 billion. Now it's $40 billion. They just can't take ``yes'' for an answer. The most important thing is that this will hurt the economy. Also, it shows a kind of mean-spiritedness here. When you're going after Medicare and Medicaid in the budget resolution and, in this deal, you're going after women and infant care, this is not what we should be doing. We should be helping the poor people, not taking their safety net away.