David Dreier

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 30 seconds to our Rules Committee colleague in the name of comity and civil discourse to respond.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to one of our new Members, the gentleman from Oklahoma City (Mr. Lankford).

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, as a native of the Show-Me State, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to my friend from St. Elizabeth, Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer).

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 5 seconds to respond. Madam Speaker, let me say to my friend that the President did say that he is willing and eager to work with Republicans to rectify the problems that are here, and right after the election, he said that he wanted to correct the 1099 issue, recognizing it is a flawed measure. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, last month, The Economist exhorted Western leaders to more openly and consistently criticize Russia for its sham democracy, its brutal treatment of human rights activists and political dissidents, and its utter disregard for the rule of law. It was a challenge that should be taken seriously. Our approach to Russia has been characterized paradoxically by a failure to be both sufficiently pragmatic and sufficiently idealistic at the same time. Russia is a key international player with whom we must engage. That's undeniable. It is a permanent member of the Security Council. It is a key actor in any international effort to contain Iran's nuclear ambitions. It exerts great influence in regions such as central Asia, with implications for our struggle against violent extremists in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Keeping our engagement with Russia as constructive and effective as possible is essential to pursuing our vital national security interests. But, Mr. Speaker, this reality cannot preclude our commitment to promote democracy around the globe and condemn those who brutally suppress it. We must stand up for human rights and the rule of law, even when-- especially when--they are undermined by major international players. We cannot remain silent when journalists and activists are killed or savagely beaten with impunity, while political prisoners face years of jail time. The new guilty verdict imposed on Mikhail Khodorkovsky late last year makes it appear that the only crime that's actually punishable in the Russian Federation is opposition to Putin. Days after the verdict was handed down, opposition leader and former Prime Minister Boris Nemtsov was arrested for participating in a peaceful rally. He had committed the grave offense of expressing support for the protection of constitutional rights and condemning the sham Khodorkovsky verdict. Hostility to the rule of law extends beyond Russia's own borders, as we saw in the August 2008 invasion of our democratic ally Georgia. It was reprehensible. Georgia's sovereignty and territorial integrity remain under threat today. In our relationship with Moscow, we must learn to balance the twin imperatives of effective engagement and criticism of gross miscarriages of justice. This will only become more essential in the context of the coming debate on Russia's entry into the World Trade Organization. Russia has moved closer than ever to acceding to the WTO. We are likely to face this prospect in the coming year and the resulting vote on whether to extend Permanent Normal Trade Relations. We will need to have a full and robust debate on this issue. We will need to ensure that PNTR is not granted until we have confirmed that Russia has fulfilled the basic obligations that WTO membership demands. If those obligations are met, my view is the WTO accession would be a very positive step forward. Bringing Russia into a rules-based trading system would bind Moscow to the rule of law. It would create consequences and enforcement mechanisms for failure to live by its commitments. WTO membership is by no means a panacea, particularly for symptoms as deeply flawed as Russia's, but it would be a significant step in the right direction. Not only would it impose the rule of law in Russia's trading relationships, it would demonstrate that even Moscow recognizes the value of international rules of fairness. This should serve as a reminder that their presumed indifference to our criticism is no excuse for failing to voice that criticism. We need to engage with Russia, but Russia also needs to engage with us. We cannot shy away from taking a public stand against increasingly brutal repression at the hands of those with whom we have important negotiations. Neither can we lose sight of the fact that supporting the rule of law is not just about promoting American ideals. One of the most important lessons of the last decade is that democracy strengthening is as firmly grounded in realpolitik as it is steeped in lofty, high-minded ideals. If our moral clarity helps to strengthen democracy advocates in Russia, we will further our strategic goals in the long run. A less corrupt, less autocratic regime in Moscow will result in a better international partner. As Vladimir Kara-Murza has written in World Affairs, defending the rule of law is not just our right but our duty. Last week, Vladimir wrote that statutes of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, to which both the U.S. and Russia are party, make this clear. The statutes state, ``issues relating to human rights, fundamental freedoms, democracy, and the rule of law are of international concern.'' It is absolutely imperative, Mr. Speaker, that we do absolutely everything that we can to strengthen this relationship but pursue the rule of law.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, ``one of the brightest lights of the greatest generation,'' that's how President Obama correctly described Sargent Shriver, who we all know passed away yesterday. Sargent Shriver gave new meaning to the term ``public service.'' He never held elective service, and yet he launched the Peace Corps, was a member of the Diplomatic Corps, and he and his wife started the great Special Olympics. In fact, I first got to know him in 1997 when I happened to be traveling with President Clinton in Latin America. We were in Buenos Aires, and it just so happened that that night Sargent Shriver was there holding an event to raise funds for the Special Olympics. He, by virtue of his public service, was able to touch lives not just here in the United States, but because of his service, he was able to touch lives all over the globe. Our thoughts and prayers are with his wonderful children and all the members of his family.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. I appreciate our distinguished majority leader for yielding me this time. Madam Speaker, obviously, this is, as everyone has said, an extraordinarily challenging time for this institution. And we have to remember that this institution is the people's House, and so, by extension, this is a challenging time for the United States of America. When we think about the victims ranging in age from age 9 to 79, and when we think about our colleague, who is at this moment wounded and recovering, it is, as my friend from Colorado has just said, extraordinarily far reaching. And we need to expend time and energy soul-searching. And I think that last Saturday's tragedy is going to lead all of us to do that. I do believe that engaging in civil discourse is something that is essential, and I believe it is what our framers wanted us to do. I regularly say in this House that James Madison wanted there to be a clash of ideas, and I think that we need to make sure that that continues. But at the same time, I think it's important for us to remember that we are not dealing, based on every shred of evidence we have now, with anything political as it relates to what took place on Saturday. As George Will said over the weekend, there are 308 million Americans, and a few of them are unhinged. And we need to remember that. But while we remember that, I think it's imperative for us to do everything that we can to remember the responsibility that we have, to remember the great people who are public servants and serve as our staff members and are regularly on the front line, and to do everything that we can to ensure, as we proceed as an institution, that we do our job and, as Speaker Boehner has said, don't do anything that will impinge on our responsibility to the American people. Our thoughts and prayers are with our colleague, Gabby Giffords, and with all of those who were victimized last Saturday.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, then, in light of that, I am very happy to yield 1 minute to a physician, another hardworking member of this freshman class, the gentlewoman from Mount Kisco, New York (Ms. Hayworth).

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 1 minute to another hardworking physician, a member of this new freshman class, the gentleman from south Pittsburgh, Tennessee, Dr. DesJarlais.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining on each side?

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

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 1 minute to another great new Member, the gentlewoman from Archie, Missouri (Mrs. Hartzler), my home State.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, this is the first act of the 112th Congress, and I have to say that I am particularly gratified that we have had six new Members of this 87-Member Republican class participate in this debate because, Madam Speaker, they have come here with a very, very strong, powerful message from the American people. That message is that we have to make sure that we create jobs and get our economy back on track. Even though we have gotten this positive news of the reduction of the unemployment rate from 9.8 to 9.3 percent this morning, tragically last month only 105,000 new jobs were created. That is not enough to sustain our economy. You have to create at least 150,000 jobs just to be treading water. We know that the American people are continuing to suffer, and the message that has come from the American people through these 87 new Members is that we have to have a laser-like focus on creating jobs, getting our economy back on track, and reducing the size and scope and reach of the Federal Government. My friend Mr. Pence and I had an exchange in which we said only in Washington, D.C., can saying that cutting a $2.7 trillion increase-- eliminating that, scrapping that--will, in fact, cost money. It's absolutely crazy, but that is what they are arguing; and through their sleight of hand, with the Congressional Budget Office, they are going to continue to claim that it will somehow save money. Madam Speaker, we are doing what we told the American people we would do. It is very simple. Beginning last year, we said we would have a very clean up-or-down vote: Should we maintain this $2.7 trillion expansion with government mandates and increased taxes, or should we repeal it? That's what we are going to be voting on after the 3-day layover next week; and, Madam Speaker, are we, in fact, committing ourselves to doing everything that we possibly can to ensure that every single American has access to quality, affordable health care and health insurance? That's what the resolution that I have introduced, H. Res. 9, will do. It will direct the six committees of jurisdiction to begin immediately working on ways in which we can drive the cost of health insurance down. I personally believe that we need to allow for the purchase of insurance across State lines, which is now forbidden under the McCarran-Ferguson Act. I believe that it is very important for us to have associated health plans so that small businesses can come together and get lower rates. We need to have pooling to deal with preexisting conditions. We need to expand medical savings accounts. And yes, Madam Speaker, the fifth thing we need to do is we need to have meaningful lawsuit abuse reform so that resources can go towards doctors and not trial lawyers. These are the kinds of things that these new Members are telling us need to be done, and that is exactly what passage of this rule will make happen. Now, Madam Speaker, let me say I urge support of this rule, and I urge support of the underlying legislation.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 26, I send to the desk as the designee of the majority leader a resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. DREIER. I have no authority to do that. We are living under this rule that was passed by the House.

Mr. DREIER. I have my time, and I will be utilizing that, Madam Speaker.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I am the only speaker on my side, so I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the fact that my friend from New York has stated his respect for Mr. Sessions and Mr. Fitzpatrick. These two individuals were in this Capitol. They were in this Capitol when they took the oath of office. They didn't happen to be in this exact room. Under the standard of collegiality in Jefferson's Manual, it is indicated that they have to be within the proximity of the Speaker. Madam Speaker, any Member who does not vote in favor of this resolution is allowing the problem to persist. This resolution rectifies the problem which we all realize has happened. I believe that we have a responsibility to this institution, we have a responsibility to the Constitution, we have a responsibility to the American people, and this resolution rectifies a problem that has existed. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.