David Dreier

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, when our former colleague, Mr. Cox, was nominated by the President to become the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, it obviously created an opening in one of the most beautiful congressional districts in the entire country in Southern California; and we are very pleased that our new colleague who has just been sworn in, John Campbell, was elected. John Campbell has an extraordinary history in California. As I look around the Chamber, Mr. Speaker, at our colleagues, very few of them actually have roots in California. The fact of the matter is John Campbell has roots that extend deeper than, frankly, anyone that I know. Our State is a little more than 150 years old; and yet in 1860, the year that Abraham Lincoln was elected President of the United States, John Campbell's great grandfather was elected to the California State legislature. So 145 years later, we have John Campbell now coming to serve in the United States House of Representatives, to me the greatest deliberative body known to man. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of all of our colleagues from California, from both sides of the aisle, it is a great privilege and honor for me to congratulate and to welcome our new colleague, Mr. John Campbell.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. DREIER. If I could reclaim my time, let me just say that it is fascinating to listen to my friends on the other side of the aisle who, when we were in the midst of our debate just a few minutes ago on the alternative minimum tax, they were very strong proponents of making sure we bring about reform so that people who are in that wage rate that goes all the way up to $342,000 a year get relief under the AMT. So I believe that if you look at the jobs that have been created, if you look at the wage rates that we have right now in the United States, if you look at the standard of living in the United States of America juxtaposed to other countries in the world, it is very clear that the United States of America is the single greatest Nation on the face of the Earth, and it is in large part due to the fact that we have over the last several years put together a wide range of trade agreements. And I would argue that building on the Central American Free Trade Agreement, this Bahrain trade agreement, which is what we are talking about at this moment, I believe is very, very critical to continuing that kind of growth. Now, let us look at the issue of the global war on terror. My friend from Wisconsin raised that. Now, one of the things that is essential as we seek our opportunity to try and turn the corner on the threat of terrorism, we need to focus on economic growth throughout the Middle East. A former Defense Department official said to me when we were talking about the aftermath of September 11, 2001, that if we had seen a percentage point or two more growth in Afghanistan and Pakistan, we might have been able to diminish the threat of September 11. Why? Because there is a sense that somehow those involved in international terrorism are simply doing this in the name of Allah. All one needs to do is look at what Mohammed Atta and his cronies were doing before perpetuating the most heinous act on our soil on September 11 of 2001. It is not as if they were worshipping Allah. I recall their being in south Florida and Las Vegas, Nevada, leading up to that; meaning the focus on economic opportunity is something that we need to realize can help diminish that kind of terrorist threat there. And that is a very important part of what this agreement is about. Now, I have to say that realizing that the rule of law, the expansion of parliamentary elections, all of those kinds of things which can help diminish that kind of threat are critical, and that is a very important part of this agreement. So as I listen to my friends on the other side of the aisle, and I am happy to say this agreement is enjoying strong bipartisan support, but as I listen to those on the other side of the aisle who are opposed to this agreement, it is very unfortunate that so many of them do not recognize the tremendous growth that my friend from Florida, the chairman of the Trade Subcommittee, just went through: the 4.3 percent GDP growth, a 5 percent unemployment rate, 215,000 jobs created last month alone in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and all of the other challenges that we faced, that these have come about in large part due to the trade agreements that we have put into place. And why? Because we are opening up new markets around the world. And I thank my friend very much.

Mr. DREIER. The gentleman posed the question, and I am happy to respond to that question, and then I will continue with my statement. On average, jobs that are focused on exports into new markets, which is exactly what these agreements are all about, exactly what these agreements are all about, on average, these jobs focused on exports pay about 17 percent higher wage rates than those that are focused on jobs that are merely designed for domestic consumption here.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this agreement, and I want to begin by extending my congratulations to the distinguished chairman of the Trade Subcommittee for his fine work on this effort and to thank him along with my friend from Wisconsin and my friend from Texas, both of whom are here on the floor and who worked closely with us, with our working group, to promote the issue of trade. My friend from Florida is absolutely right, if we do not shape the global economy, we will be shaped by it. The world is moving dramatically towards breaking down barriers, understanding that the free flow of goods and services and products and ideas is absolutely essential, and I believe that we must do everything that we possibly can to expand that. Now, Mr. Speaker, we have put into place over the past several years, under Democrats and Republicans as Presidents, a wide range of trade agreements. We have, since we put Trade Promotion Authority back into place, been able to see the expansion of the North American Free Trade Agreement. And by the way, if you look at the trade relationship between Mexico and the United States today, there is a third of $1 trillion in cross- border trade between Mexico and the United States. The middle-class population in Mexico is larger than the entire Canadian population. And so focusing on these issues is very important if we are going to deal with questions like the one we are going to address next week, illegal immigration, to try to enhance the economies of these developing nations. We want people who are struggling to get on to the first rung of the economic ladder, and that is what these trade agreements are about when it comes to their relationship. Now, let us look at what these trade agreements mean to U.S. workers. As my friend from Florida just said, last month 215,000 new jobs were created. If we look at the last few years, at the last 4 years, we have seen 4.5 million new jobs created. In fact, Mr. Speaker, I will say that there are more people working in the United States of America today than we have ever seen working.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from California, Mr. John Campbell, be permitted to take the oath of office today. His certificate of election has not arrived, but there is no contest, and no question has been raised with regard to his election.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield for a parliamentary inquiry?

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire of the Chair, is it appropriate for Members of this House to address the Chair or address their remarks to other Members?

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, we have listened to Democrats and Republicans decry deficit spending. We have listened to Democrats and Republicans talk about the need to bring about reform so that we can ensure that those who are truly in need are able to have those needs addressed. No one in this institution wants to pull the rug out from anyone who is desperately in need. We know that the most effective way to ensure that those needs are met is to do what everyone knows has to be done. We have to bring about meaningful reform. Anyone who will stand in this Chamber and claim that the Medicaid program is free of any kind of abuse, that the food stamp program is free of any kind of abuse, that everything that we are looking at in this budget reconciliation bill is free of any kind of abuse does not understand the operations of the Federal Government. We know that these programs are filled with that kind of abuse and it is absolutely essential that we bring about this reform. Democrats and Republicans alike, Mr. Speaker, have the opportunity to bring about reforms to ensure that those who are truly in need have those needs met.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark the passing of an incredible individual. He was a teacher and a friend of mine, and he was known to the world as the father of modern management. I am referring, of course, to Professor Peter Drucker, who passed away last Friday at his home in Claremont at the age of 95. When I spoke to his wonderful wife, Doris, early Saturday morning, the first thing she said, of course, was that Peter led an incredibly full life, which we all know that he did. I was able to, as an undergraduate, because of this great structure at the Claremont colleges, that allows for cross registration among the six different colleges, to begin taking classes as an undergraduate with Professor Drucker. Then, of course, going on to the graduate university there, I did the same. His words and his wisdom have had a profound effect on my strong beliefs and personal responsibility, free markets, the power of entrepreneurship and, of course, the very healthy and important skepticism of the effectiveness of sprawling government bureaucracies. I remember having dinner with him just a few years ago, and he was talking about an Italian observer who said the greatest threat to the future of Italy is efficient government. He was a genius, he was a genius who generously shared his talents, his kindness and his time with so many of us. For a man of such unparalleled vision and capability, he had wonderfully disarming sense of humor and an amazing humility. He was a world-class thinker and a provocative, as we all know, prolific writer. When he was just 23 years of age, living in Germany, he wrote an essay that was both outlawed and burned by the Nazis. When he was 30 years of age, his first book, The End of Economic Man, was made required reading for graduates of the British Officers' Candidate School by Winston Churchill. All told he wrote over 30 books that sold millions of copies around the globe and influenced business leaders, social pioneers and heads of state. The great thing was that while he had the ears of the world's top leaders in both business and government, he maintained his strong commitment to teaching. He put great emphasis on individuals, and their contributions to large organizations and society. He saw employees as a company's most valuable resource, and in working together toward a defined goal, its greatest source of progress and change. Mr. Speaker, I could not agree more. He also believed that the highest standards of ethics and morality were essential to both a successful enterprise and a vibrant society. Being a good corporate citizen was a duty on par and not at odds with maximizing profits. Later in his career, he devoted much of his time to studying community organizations, because, in his words, the 21st century will be the century of the social sector organization. The more economy, money and information become global, the more community will matter. He donated his expertise to a wide range of organizations, the American Red Cross, the American Heart Association. The results of his advice and leadership have played a role in responding most recently to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. His groundbreaking work resulted in many accolades and many opportunities to share his thoughts. In 1987, Claremont named its graduate school of management in his honor. He was a regular economist for the Wall Street Journal for two decades, from 1975 to 1995. He was bestowed with 25 doctorates from universities in Europe and here in the United States. In 1990, he created the Peter Drucker Foundation to bring together business and social leaders. One of the great thrills for me was I was able to be with Professor Drucker and his wonderful and extraordinarily talented wife, Doris, in the East Room of the White House when President Bush in 2002 bestowed the Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian award in our country, on Professor Drucker. The Economist Magazine, one of my favorite publications, called him the greatest thinker management theory has ever produced. In his book, Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Dr. Drucker described entrepreneurs as those who create something new, something different. They change or transmute values. By his own definition, it is clear that Dr. Drucker was an intellectual entrepreneur. I mentioned this dinner that I had with him just a few years ago. I had the thrill of spending 3 hours with him. We talked about the impact that he had on so many people. The Los Angeles Times recounted that great entrepreneur Jack Welch, who headed General Electric, as saying that the turning point in large part came for him when Professor Drucker asked him the question, if you were not doing exactly what you are doing today, would you begin doing it, which was a very, very important point in determining what the future of General Electric was going to be. I also remember our former colleague Amo Houghton often quoting Peter Drucker when he said every brilliant idea ultimately degenerates to hard work. He was an amazing individual. He was a man of great warmth and accomplishment, and I will miss him personally, and I know the world is better because of his life. My thoughts and prayers are with Doris and their wonderful children and grandchildren. I will simply say to Professor Drucker, thank you, thank you, thank you for everything that you have done to improve the quality of life for so many.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, the Rules Committee may meet next week to grant a rule which could limit the amendment process for floor consideration of H.R. 1065, the United States Boxing Commission Act. Any Member wishing to offer an amendment should submit 55 copies of the amendment and one copy of a brief explanation of the amendment to the Rules Committee in room H-312 of the Capitol by 12 noon on Tuesday. Members are advised that the combined text from the committees of jurisdiction should be available for their review on the Web sites of the Energy and Commerce Committee, the Judiciary Committee, the Education and the Workforce Committee and the Rules Committee by later today. Members should use the Office of Legislative Counsel to ensure that their amendments are drafted in the most appropriate format and should check with the Office of the Parliamentarian to be certain that their amendments comply with the rules of the House.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the 1-minute speech I just offered.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. I yield to my very good friend from Peoria, Illinois.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that all of us as Members of this great institution owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to our Parliamentarian and his staff of Parliamentarians who do a phenomenal job for us. One of the very best examples of success from those Parliamentarians who work daily to ensure the orderly operation of this great institution is our friend, Muftiah McCartin. After nearly three decades in the Office of the Parliamentarian, Muftiah is retiring to spend more time with her family. As anyone who has worked with Muftiah can attest, speaking with her is like having a double espresso. Her enthusiasm for her job is infectious, and there is no doubt that we will sorely miss her, for after working here 30 years, she is retiring. Muftiah has worked in the House longer than most Members. This year I marked my 25th year of service in this institution, and she was working here 5 years before I arrived. Over the course of those three decades, she has served under six Speakers and during the tenure of six Presidents. Most importantly, she has worked for three Parliamentarians of the House. Mr. Speaker, throughout her career in this institution, Muftiah has strived for personal and professional excellence; and she, without a doubt, achieved both. After earning her bachelor's degree and law degree while working in the office as a clerk, Muftiah became the first woman to be appointed a Parliamentarian in January, 1991. In my position chairing the House Rules Committee, we have a special bond with Muftiah. She has worked very closely with the staff members of the Rules Committee in drafting many of the rules for considering legislation on the floor. As Members know, at this moment, we are in the process of dealing with something of a challenge as we put together the manager's amendment for the measure that we will be passing out of this House tomorrow. She also served as the long-time editor of the House Rules and Manual. I have my appropriate prop right here for those who have not seen that. And she edited two editions of House Practice. I know she takes great pride in both the contents and the craftsmanship of these beautiful, leather-bound volumes that each of us has in our office. Muftiah has always had a passion for service and an endearment for this institution and a commitment to our great democracy. Over many years and many late nights, she has been essential to the work of the House. Her unvarnished advice has helped countless bills receive a proper hearing on the floor. We were very lucky to have her. Though they may not have known her name, the American people have been very, very fortunate to have had Muftiah McCartin working on their behalf. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of all of the Members and the staff Muftiah so ably served over these past 30 years, I would like to offer my sincere thanks and very best wishes for a happy and fulfilling retirement to Muftiah. Congratulations, Muftiah.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I would say to my friend that so many of us have seen the gentleman from Illinois, in an extraordinarily able manner, preside over this institution. The word is now out that it is not Ray LaHood who is presiding so ably over this great institution, it is Muftiah McCartin who is, in fact, making that happen. When it comes to appreciation, the gentleman is absolutely right, Mr. Speaker, we do not express enough appreciation to our staff. Muftiah, I will say to you, you saw what Ray LaHood did to ensure that he was adequately appreciated. He went from serving as a staff member to becoming a Member of Congress. I don't want to necessarily recommend that to you as you head into retirement, but if you do want to follow the LaHood model, it is certainly something you might consider. Let me say again, congratulations to Muftiah for her phenomenal service. I know on behalf of Speaker Hastert, the House leadership, and all the Members of this institution on both sides of the aisle, we are very, very honored to have had you serve here so ably.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule and the underlying legislation. I want to congratulate my friend from Georgia and my friend from California for their management of this issue. I would like to say that the rule itself provides by a 2-1 ratio more amendments offered by Democrats than Republicans. Not every single amendment was made in order, as I see my friend, Mrs. McCarthy, here. I will say, as we regularly hear people say that the amendments the Democrats proposed are not given an opportunity to be heard on the floor, by a 2-1 margin, Mr. Speaker, we are seeing amendments made in order by Democrats over Republicans. Specifically to the concern I know will be raised by the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy), we frankly upstairs had been under the impression that the language that she and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) had proceeded through consideration, and I was wrong on that. I had gotten some incorrect information. But I have talked with staff members of the Judiciary Committee; and I have an assurance, and while I know this amendment will not be made in order today, when it comes to looking at background checks and the history of individuals, this is a priority that the committee will put forward. They have assured me that they will proceed with hearings on this issue. I would like to say to my friend from New York who will raise concerns about this that is a priority that we have and we hope very much to address it. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a few minutes to talk about the legislation itself. I would like to begin by congratulating Chairman Sensenbrenner and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert), who as a former judge is obviously concerned about the threats that have been out there for his former colleagues. I believe it is very important, when we think about the importance of the rule of law, which is absolutely essential, absolutely essential for the success of liberty, ensuring the safety of these judges who have continued to face threats, is very, very important for us to do. Last night in the Rules Committee, our colleague from Texas (Mr. Sessions) referred to his father who was a judge, and as we all know, former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He talked about those threats. He told me repeatedly about the threats that existed. This legislation, I believe, that Mr. Gohmert has put together will go a long way towards addressing that concern. I would like to talk about a very important provision that is included in this bill that enjoys strong bipartisan support. One of the serious problems with which we are all dealing is the issue of illegal immigration and the problem we have of people who are in this country. We know 98 percent of them are here to simply feed their families, but we know there are people here in this country who perpetrate crime against our fellow citizens. We know there continues to be the existence of a threat that a terrorist could come here. We know that Mohammed Atta, one of those who flew a plane into the World Trade Center Tower on September 11, 2001, was, in fact, here illegally. So as we look at the issue of illegal immigration, focusing on criminals and potential terrorists is a very high priority. One of the worst days for law enforcement in the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department was April 29, 2002. That is 3\1/2\ years ago. On that day, Deputy Sheriff David March was on patrol. He pulled over for a traffic violation an individual who ended up putting a gun to Deputy March's head and brutally killing him. The alleged killer, Armando Garcia, fled to Mexico, and it has been 3\1/2\ years, and we have not resolved that case. Within just a few weeks of that April 29 killing in 2002, upstairs in the Rules Committee I convened a meeting of my colleagues, Buck McKeon, who represented the March family; Ken Calvert, who was very involved in this issue and concerned about it. On the other side of the aisle, Howard Berman and Adam Schiff, and we also had at that meeting, Mr. Speaker, representatives from the Mexican Embassy's judicial department within the embassy here; and we also had representatives from our Department of Justice. Now, our concern has been a terrible provision that exists in Mexican law. It is actually constitutional, saying that the Mexican Government refuses to extradite a criminal who potentially could face the death penalty, and this is something that has existed for a long period of time. Something that was very unfortunate was that in September of 2001, the Mexican Supreme Court took steps to say that they refused to extradite an alleged criminal to a country or a state or a jurisdiction that had life imprisonment as the punishment because they considered that to be cruel and unusual punishment. Mr. Speaker, it is horrible that they have that policy, and we need to do everything we can to change that policy. We need to encourage the Mexican Government to change that policy. Why? This does not have to do with something that took place in their country. It has to do with a crime perpetrated on U.S. soil. So I believe the Mexican Government should, in fact, extradite an alleged criminal who has perpetrated a crime here in the United States to face the punishment in the jurisdiction where the crime was perpetrated. So what has happened here, Mr. Speaker, is that we want to ensure that we never see happen again what happened on April 29, 2002. And I should add that is not the only instance. We all know of many other instances where law enforcement officers have been killed and people have fled the country. But this case has become a very prominent one. So I was approached by Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, and I was joined by my colleague Mr. Schiff, who serves on the Judiciary Committee; and we were asked to introduce legislation that would make it a Federal crime to kill a law enforcement officer and flee the country. We spent a great deal of time working with a wide range of organizations, and we have put together a package which I believe can allow us to do that without impinging on the local jurisdiction that we believe district attorneys should have in dealing with this issue. It does not in any way diminish the level of punishment. But what it does do, Mr. Speaker, is it puts the full force of the Federal Government behind an effort to ensure that we do not have happen again what happened on April 29 of 2002. One of the things that I believe is important is to recognize that there are families that have suffered, and I have had the opportunity, through Sheriff Baca and through others, to get to know the family members of Deputy Sheriff David March. So, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3900 is the legislation that Adam Schiff and I introduced, and it is included as part of this very important court security measure that Mr. Gohmert has offered, and I would like to name the provisions that are included calling for making it a Federal crime to kill a law enforcement officer in the name of Deputy Sheriff David March. And I spoke with Sheriff Lee Baca this morning about that, and I really feel that we are doing this in the name of David March to keep the memory of his life alive, the memory alive so that we can send a signal that we are not going to tolerate this kind of act in the future. So, Mr. Speaker, we have here, again, a very important measure included in critical must-pass legislation, and I hope that my colleagues will join in providing bipartisan support for this measure.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, once again, we continue to hear gross mischaracterizations of what it is that we are trying to do. Democrats and Republicans alike decry deficit spending. They say we have to balance the budget, both sides of the aisle. We have come together with what I hope will be a bipartisan package at the end of the day that is designed to bring about 50-plus billion dollars in spending reductions. We all decry the fact that mandatory spending is out of control. What is it we are doing with this package? Well, for the first time in a long time, we are trying to rein in so-called mandatory spending. The reason is that we believe in growing our economy, not Federal spending; we believe in reducing the reach of government, not limiting the reach of individuals; and we believe in government's helping hand, not government's heavy hand. Mr. Speaker, it is very important that the day after tomorrow, when we look at this important legislation, that we do all that we can to come together and try to do what the American people want us to do, and that is reduce the size and scope and reach of the Federal Government.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, our men and women in the military continue to make our nation very proud. We are forever grateful for their sacrifice as they protect our precious freedoms and encourage the rise of democracy in the heart of the Middle East. We honor their dedication and admire their resolve under such difficult circumstances. Because of the valor of our troops, there is cause for great optimism in Iraq. On October 15th, nearly 10 million Iraqis traded bullets for ballots and voted on their draft constitution. The constitution was approved by an overwhelming 79 percent. This is a remarkable feat and an important milestone on Iraq's path toward democracy. The next step is a December 15th vote for the first government under the new constitution. After the constitutional vote, the Washington Post quoted a 53-year- old Iraqi shoe salesman who said: ``[Before], no one showed us the draft of a constitution. None of them. This is the first time. Since the days of the monarchy until now, this is the first government willing to put the constitution before its people.'' Another Iraqi, who planned to mark his ballot with his own blood, said this about voting for the constitution: ``It will bring all that is good for the people, such as stability, democracy and peace. With such a charter, we will show the world that we are a civilized nation, not a bunch of . . . bloodthirsty extremists.'' The election day itself was a resounding success. Violence was minimal and did not affect voting at the more than 6,000 polling places. Nearly 200,000 Iraqi security forces took an active and lead role in ensuring the safety of their fellow citizens on the day of the vote. For Iraqis, this was truly a national effort to determine the future of their nation. The increasingly Iraqi-dominated security operations are a huge boost in our efforts to defeat the terrorists. After a recent trip to Iraq, Retired Army Major General Robert Scales commented: ``[The Iraqi forces] are better able to gather intelligence. They can spot insurgents by their body language and by how they act and the language they use.'' The Iraqi security forces are gaining the trust and respect of the Iraqi people. In fact, the number of tips to security forces rose from 442 in February to over 3,000 in August. The increasing capability of the Iraqi security forces is essential to our strategy for victory. Mr. Speaker, the trial of Saddam Hussein is yet another very positive development. This is a trial by Iraqis, for Iraqis--and for justice long denied to the victims who suffered under his murderous rule. The Iraqi Special Tribunal operates under Iraqi law and shows the solid foundation being built for law and order in Iraq. There has also been significant progress resulting from U.S. and Iraqi reconstruction efforts. Unfortunately, these signs that point to a revived society, economy and culture have not received much attention. Consider this: There were no independent newspapers or magazines in Saddam Hussein's Iraq--today there are more than 100; before the war, there were no cell phone subscribers--today there are over 3.5 million; over 3,400 schools have been renovated; local governments are conducting town hall meetings; the Baghdad real estate market is booming; and, the court system is coming to life--Iraqi judges have conducted 387 trials since 2003. There remain terrorists committed to derailing democracy in Iraq. But Iraqis have already experienced the conditions that terrorists seek. They are conditions of hopelessness, violence, intolerance and repression. As we saw by the constitutional vote, nearly all Iraqis reject this dark existence. Mr. Speaker, we know that more tough days lie ahead for the American military. Their mission is dangerous, but their cause is just. And because of their courage and sacrifice, they are making significant progress toward supporting a free and democratic Iraq. This is great news for the people of Iraq--and great news for our own national security.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, as we all know this week, the House will consider very important legislation to reduce Federal spending, root out waste and fraud in government programs, and make a large dent in our Federal deficit. Along with cutting taxes and supporting job creation, making government more responsive is a critical part of our Republican agenda to keep our economy growing. Mr. Speaker, the numbers are in. Our agenda is working for the American people. Despite the destruction caused by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the economy grew at a 3.8 percent GDP level last quarter. Now, that is ahead of the second quarter and certainly ahead of projections that we had in the wake of those hurricanes. Over the past 12 months, nearly 2 million new jobs have been created. Because of tax cuts and a strong economy, Federal revenue increased by almost 15 percent last year, and the deficit fell by nearly $96 billion. Mr. Speaker, this happened not by raising taxes, but by cutting them and empowering America's entrepreneurs. In the face of such remarkable progress, we are not about to let up. We are moving forward with reforms that will save more than $50 billion over the next 5 years. This will help us reduce the deficit even further and support rebuilding along the gulf coast. I commend the hard work done by all the committees who found significant savings in mandatory programs without altering benefits to those who are truly in need. While I am hoping for bipartisan support of this legislation, I fear that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will stand in the way of restraint and reform. After all, my Democratic friends voted against our responsible budget. During the appropriations process, Mr. Speaker, they offered amendments that would have increased Federal spending by $61 billion. While they measure compassion through spending, we demand results through reform. Mr. Speaker, mandatory spending needs to be reformed. Each year, the government funds critical programs at increasingly higher levels. But we have seen that automatic spending breeds unaccountable spending. Consider Medicaid. As medicine has made rapid advances over the past two decades, Medicaid has not been updated. The program costs more, delivers less, and, as we all know, is beset with abuse. In 2002, the Department of Health and Human Services found that Medicaid was paying pharmacies $1.5 billion more than the cost of those drugs they were dispensing. In one case, Medicaid paid over $5,000 for a prescription that cost a pharmacy just $88. Our reforms will save billions by giving States more flexibility, eliminating fraud and ensuring the system only serves the needy. It is also important to note that Medicaid will continue to grow in the years ahead. Right now, it grows at a rate of 7.3 percent. Under our plan, it will grow at 7 percent. We are also zeroing in on other programs, Mr. Speaker, that can benefit from reforms. The food stamp program nearly doubled to $35 billion over the past 5 years. While funding will continue to grow, we are targeting savings of less than one-half of 1 percent. We will do this in part by extending the eligibility waiting period for noncitizens from 5 to 7 years. Mr. Speaker, public benefits should not be a magnet for immigration. Over the past 5 years, Federal spending for child support administrative costs has increased by 29 percent while caseloads have declined by 8 percent. The Ways and Means Committee saves over $3 billion by splitting administrative costs 50/50 with the States, the same match that they use for other entitlement programs. Mr. Speaker, our savings proposals are common sense and responsible, and they represent a very good and important start. In the months ahead, we will continue to work for ways to cut the deficit, eliminate waste and reduce discretionary spending. Because as Republicans, we are committed to growing our economy, not Federal spending. Mr. Speaker, I look forward to what I know will be a lively debate on this issue as we bring our package for reform forward, and it will, I believe, when we implement this, help us in our quest to keep the economy growing and to reduce the Federal deficit. It is my hope, Mr. Speaker, that at the end of the day, we will be able to see bipartisan support for this very appealing, very attractive, very important package.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, the Rules Committee may meet next week to grant a rule which could limit the amendment process for floor consideration of H.R. 1751, the Secure Access to Justice and Court Protection Act of 2005. Any Member wishing to offer an amendment should submit 55 copies of the amendment and one copy of a brief explanation of the amendment to the Rules Committee in room H-312 of the Capitol by 12 noon on Tuesday, November 8, 2005. Members should draft their amendments to the bill as ordered reported by the Judiciary Committee on October 27, 2005, which is expected to be filed with the House next week. Members are also advised that the text should be available for their review on the Web sites of both the Judiciary Committee and the Rules Committee by this afternoon, November 4. Members should use the Office of Legislative Counsel to ensure that their amendments are drafted in the most appropriate format and should check with the Office of the Parliamentarian to be certain that their amendments comply with the rules of the House.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 12:30 p.m. on Monday next for morning hour debate.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I will take responsibility, and I am looking forward to it in just a couple of minutes.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, as I said in my remarks earlier today, the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), has done an absolutely phenomenonal job in moving these measures through. As you know, we have just voted on the foreign operations appropriations bill conference report, and we have three conference groups that are continuing to meet on Energy and Water, the Science, State, Justice, and Commerce appropriation bill, and the Military Quality of Life appropriations conference report. From the conversation I have had with the chairman of the committee, it is his hope that we have those three measures up for consideration at some point next week.

Mr. DREIER. All three of those bills that I mentioned, the Energy and Water conference report and the Science, State, Justice, and Commerce conference report, and Military Quality of Life, they are all in conference as we speak. It is our hope that those conferences will be completed and those conference reports will be filed in the House. We cannot anticipate exactly when their work will be completed. We just want it to happen as expeditiously as possible.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the business in order under the Calendar Wednesday rule be dispensed with on Wednesday next.