David Dreier

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me time. I would like to pay respects to my California colleague, the very distinguished minority leader, and I certainly respect her right to come forward with this privileged resolution. I would also like to thank my friend, the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson), for the stellar leadership she has provided, ensuring that we would not only bring about reform of Medicare, but make sure that we are able to provide access for our seniors to affordable prescription drugs. Mr. Speaker, I think it is very important to note a couple of items. First, on the 2nd of April, 1789, the day after the first Congress was put into place, James Madison who was, in fact, a member of that first Committee on Rules, and I believe that as he talked about what my friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) referred to, that intimate sympathy with the people, he did appropriately refer to the fact that this is the greatest deliberative body known to man. And we do have an extraordinary responsibility here to implement the will of the people through this structure we have of a representative democracy. Now, what I would like to say is that as we look back on that debate, that both of my friends, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) and the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) have just addressed, I think it is important to note that our friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) came before the Committee on Rules and made a request that we extend the time that is provided under the rules of the House for the debate of a conference report. Every single Member of this House is well aware of the fact that when a conference report is voted upon, there is a 1-hour provision for debate on that conference report. Now, request was made to extend that. And my friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), as she knows, made a rare appearance before the Committee on Rules and requested that we increase the amount of time for debate on that conference report. And in response to her request, the Committee on Rules chose to double the amount of time allowed for the conference report. That amount of time was granted. I think it is also important to note that the 15-minute provision according to clause 2(a) of rule XX, Mr. Speaker, specifically says the minimum time for a record vote or a quorum call by electronic device shall be 15 minutes. And so I think that there is no one who is claiming that there was a violation of the rules of the House because this was, in fact, in compliance with the rules of the House. And I think that there needs to be recognition that during that 2 hour and 50 minute period a number of votes were changed. And I think it is important for the record to note for the record, Mr. Speaker, that the last three votes that were cast on that bill were, in fact, cast by members of the minority. I would like to thank my friend for yielding me this time. What I have simply chosen to do here, Mr. Speaker, is make the record clear as to exactly what the rules of the House consist of on this matter.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule and the underlying conference report. My friend from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) is absolutely right, Medicare is a sacred trust. He is also right when he says that this conference report, when we pass it, will end Medicare as we know it. Medicare as we know it does not have provisions for prescription drug coverage. And guess what? If we pass this, we will, in fact, end Medicare as we know it by making prescription drugs available to seniors. It will also end Medicare as we know it because right now under Medicare there is a provision that allows for $148,000 to be expended on heart transplant surgery, but at the same time it does not provide the $1,000 a year that would be necessary for people to prevent heart disease by giving them access to Lipitor. And so it is true, we are going to finally bring about the very important reforms necessary so that we can maintain that sacred trust to which my friend refers. So I believe, Mr. Speaker, that we have an opportunity to go a long way towards addressing this concern that exists on both sides of the aisle. I know that my democratic colleagues, Mr. Speaker, want to make sure that we do provide access for senior citizens to affordable prescription drugs. And I believe that on both sides of the aisle, Mr. Speaker, there is a clear understanding that if we are going to do that, we have to bring about major reforms so that we maintain the solvency of Medicare for the future. I also believe that as we look at the changes that will come about in the area of potentially creating another new entitlement program, Republicans and Democrats, Democrats who raise concern regularly about deficit spending, should feel good about the unprecedented measures that we put in this bill that allow for our Members to insist on a vote if, in fact, Medicare outlays exceed 45 percent of general revenues. So I believe we are going a long way towards addressing these concerns. And then that wonderful incentive that also is there for people to plan for retirement with health savings accounts. Planning for their health care needs of the future is exactly what this measure will do by taking those very successful HSAs that have been out there and expanding that program. Mr. Speaker, this may not be, this may not be the perfect solution, but this is our opportunity to bring about these much needed reforms. And I urge my colleagues to support this rule, and, in a bipartisan way, do as I know the other body will do, and that is vote in support of this conference report so that we can help our seniors.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, continuing this spirit of comity, I ask unanimous consent that the conference report on H.R. 1 be debatable for 2 hours, doubling the amount of time that is made in order for consideration for a conference report.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule, and obviously we at this moment have begun the debate on what is clearly one of the most important issues that we will face in our entire careers here. We all know that 38 years ago the Medicare program was established, and it has met the very important needs of many retirees, many of our seniors. But we are also well aware of the fact that there have been more than a few problems with the Medicare program, and for years and years and years people have talked about bringing about reform of Medicare. There has been a lot of talk; and in just a few hours, we are going to finally have an opportunity to vote ``yes'' on this conference report which will effectively address many of those concerns which have existed for many, many years. We all know, Mr. Speaker, that this measure will include a number of other very important items. Back in 1987, I had the privilege of introducing in this House legislation calling for the establishment of what we then called MSA, medical savings accounts, the opportunity for people to put dollars aside, tax deductible, so that they could plan for their future health care needs purchasing either health insurance or direct health benefits. Health needs that they had could be addressed with those dollars. We have already proceeded with bipartisan support in putting into place pilot programs, and there has been a great deal of success. Why? Because it does help diminish the demand for Federal programs by allowing people to again privately plan and privately save with some incentive as they look toward those health care needs in the future. We also, Mr. Speaker, with this plan are doing something that is unprecedented, and it is a need which Democrats and Republicans alike have said needs to be met. We know that in the last Presidential campaign, both Vice President Al Gore, who was a candidate, and now President George Bush, when he was a candidate, talked about the need to ensure that we for our seniors provide an opportunity for them to have access to affordable prescription drugs. One of the things that is often said, our majority leader points it out, I have said it for a long period of time, 38 years ago when the Medicare program was established, the only prescription drug available was that doctors would say, ``Take two aspirin and call me in the morning.'' We know that if today we were putting into place a Medicare program, there would clearly be a prescription drug component included in that program. That is why, Mr. Speaker, I believe we are taking this very bold and important step to enhance the availability of prescription drugs for our retirees. Mr. Speaker, having said that, we know that we included $400 billion in our budget, but there are many who have projected that this program could in fact spiral out of control, that it could become another massive new entitlement program which would get us into a great deal of fiscal trouble for the future. That is why I am very pleased at the direction of the Speaker, who, as we all know, has been intimately involved in working on health care issues for years. He was very involved, of course, in the medical savings account issue earlier. He has headed task forces on this issue. He instructed me and my colleagues on the Committee on Rules to work on a cost-containment vehicle that would help us take steps to diminish the prospects of having this program spiral out of control so that there would be a degree of accountability here in this institution. That is why I say, Mr. Speaker, this legislation that we are going to be voting on later this evening includes this unprecedented cost-containment requirement that will ensure the fiscal integrity of Medicare for more than just a generation of Americans. The legislation protects Medicare in two ways. First, it instructs the Medicare trustees to keep a constant vigil over the ebbs and flows of revenues in their different systems. We need that kind of monitoring mechanism to make sure that the programs are working and to make sure that the cost stays within our expectations. More important than that, Mr. Speaker, however, this legislation defends against the creation of another out-of-control entitlement program. As Members know, this is one of the most serious and debilitating and unintended consequences of the good intentions of so many of our programs here, that the costs run way, way beyond what are anticipated. There are already too many entitlement programs, we know, over which we have very little or, in fact, no fiscal control. We know them as mandatory programs. This legislation is different because it sets up an early warning system that alerts us to unexpected and unintended spending increases and gives us a mechanism for applying the brakes if spending is driven out of control by events and circumstances we could not have foreseen. Under this legislation, the Medicare trustees are required to notify the Congress if 45 percent or more of Medicare outlays are predicted to be funded through general revenue. Two such notifications in consecutive years require both Presidential and congressional action. Within 15 days of his annual budget submission, the President then has to propose legislation to resolve the funding difficulties. Continuing under expedited procedures, the House then has 3 legislative days to introduce the measure, and any such legislation introduced on the President's behalf, or any legislation introduced by a Member with the same purpose, must be certified by the chairman of the Committee on the Budget to ensure that it adequately address the problem. At this point, Mr. Speaker, it would be easy for some in Congress to take the path of least resistance and let the difficult solutions die in the committee process. I want to underscore to the Members that this legislation does not allow that to happen. It does not allow us to just push it off to the committee process. By July 30 of any year after a Medicare Funding Warning is issued, it is in order, under this legislation's special provisions, to move to discharge any committee that is holding up any legitimate attempt to address the funding gap. The motion to discharge would be in order with the support of one- fifth, one-fifth, of the House Members; that is, 87 Members can stand up. After the legislation has been discharged, the measure would have to be considered on the floor within 3 days and must result in a vote. Mr. Speaker, this mechanism ensures that we are not going to in any way abrogate our constitutional duty to watch over the Federal Treasury even in the case of what is considered to be entitlement spending. I want to congratulate the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick), my Committee on Rules colleague, for working very closely with us on this issue, and I believe that taking this step, putting this mechanism into place which has never been put in place before, to help us ensure that we do not see the spending spiral out of control will go a long way towards addressing the need of making sure that we have a prescription drug program for our seniors and at the same time making sure that we do it in a fiscally responsible way. We do have a very unique opportunity ahead of us, and again I want to congratulate the gentleman from Illinois (Speaker Hastert) for the vision that he has shown on this, the fact that we have worked in a bipartisan way. And I want to say that as we proceed with work on the same-day rule and the rule that will allow for consideration of the conference report, we want to ensure that every Member has an opportunity to be heard. We will have an hour on this rule, an hour on the second rule, and then the traditional hour on the conference report; and we have been working on an arrangement which will allow an opportunity to at least double the amount of time on the conference report. So I believe we have a very good measure here. I think that it is deserving of strong bipartisan support since both Democrats and Republicans have consistently said that we do need to address this need of both reforming Medicare and at the same time making sure that seniors have access to affordable prescription drugs. So I thank my friend for yielding me this time for me to provide this explanation for our colleagues, and we look forward to strong passage of this rule, the next rule, and the conference report itself.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this conference report. And I was told that I had to spend my entire 2 minutes praising the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), but I am going to instead talk about the benefits of this bill. And I want to compliment my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo), and the chairman of the conference, our good friend, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), the chairman of the Committee on Agriculture, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden), and others who have been so involved in this measure. I happen to represent the Los Angeles area in southern California. And the world knows that we have just suffered devastating fires in the southern California area. It impacted the districts of my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) who represents the area in the Inland Empire to the east of Los Angeles, further east of the area I represent, and several others of our colleagues in San Diego. I know that my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), as we all know, lost his home. And this impacted the district of the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham). And I can go through the litany of our colleagues. Many members of the California delegation had their districts impacted by this. We lost lives, we lost a tremendous, tremendous amount of property. I lost in excess of 50 homes in the area that I represent. And I was very pleased when the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) was before the Committee on Rules yesterday and talked about the fact that within this measure we will be able to have resources to deal with things like the bark beetle which has played a role in creating a problem in southern California when these trees were not cleared. And that played a role in starting these fires. We know that some resources were provided through the Department of Agriculture to deal with this, but it was not handled appropriately from the reports that we had from the head of the Office of Emergency Services there. It is important for us to do everything that we can to ensure that the loss of life and property is diminished. I am convinced that passage of this conference report will go a long way towards doing just that. And I thank all my friends who played such an important role in making this happen.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule and the underlying conference report which we are going to consider this morning. I want to begin by thanking my friend, the former mayor of Charlotte, the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick), for the fine work she has done not only in managing this rule but her important support of provisions in this measure dealing with concurrent receipt, making sure that those veterans who have been wounded and suffered will also receive their retirement pay. This I know was a very high priority for her. She also was very involved, Mr. Speaker, in addressing the Buy American Provision, which my very dear friend and classmate, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the chairman of the committee, has pursued. And I believe that we have come to a reasonable compromise on it. I am not in total agreement with the gentleman on this provision, at least the way he had originally had it, because I believe we need to focus on ensuring we get the best quality product at the lowest possible price for our taxpayers. But at the same time, obviously, we do want, as a first choice, to focus on, in the area of machine tools and other areas, American workers and American job opportunities here. I want to say that there is another provision that my friend, the gentleman from Washington State (Mr. Hastings), worked on, and I know the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) worked on as well, which is very important, and that is to ensure that we provide citizenship to those who have risked their lives and fought on behalf of the interests of the United States of America. I am pleased that the conference has in fact chosen to follow the direction of this House in ensuring that we have brought about the Hastings language on this. We know that President Bush strongly supports this as well, and I would like to congratulate him on this. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is very important. As we opened the Committee on Rules meeting at 7 o'clock this morning, I said that if you look at most of the things that we do here in Washington, D.C., most all of them can be handled by State and local governments. We are obviously involved in health care and education and a wide range of areas, but clearly those are things that can be handled at the local level. There is really one preeminent issue that cannot be handled by a city, a county or a State government, and that happens to be the overall security of the United States of America and our interests overseas. And that is why I feel as a Member of this body very fortunate to have both the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) working hard to ensure that we have the very, very best defense for our Nation. Now, I want to say that as I listened to my friend from Dallas go through his prepared statement on this he did end by talking about the fact that Democrats and Republicans alike stand together in support of a strong defense, but I have to disabuse my colleagues of the notion that was made that somehow Republicans are interested in gutting worker rights, murdering our environment. Nothing could be further from the truth, Mr. Speaker. I will state that when it has come to the environmental issues, and I know the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) will get into this as he has in our meeting upstairs this morning and he has repeatedly here in the well, he has talked about the responsibility to ensure that our men and women in uniform are not playing second fiddle to some obscure environmental priorities that one has. This measure, in fact, pursues a very balanced approach to environmental issues. Similarly, this notion that we somehow want to plunder workers rights, that we want to gut the rights of workers, again, nothing could be further from the truth. This measure pursues a very balanced approach which focuses on worker rights. And so I want to say that I believe this measure is going to pass with strong bipartisan support. As the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) pointed out, the issue of concurrent receipts is important for us to address, especially as Members prepare to go back to their States and districts and talk about the important sacrifice that has been made and, of course, as we think today, and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) was the first one to report this to us in the Committee on Rules this morning, we heard the tragic news overnight of a Black Hawk helicopter that was downed and the loss of six lives. We continue to live in a very dangerous world. And the chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), I think made a point very clearly in our hearing this morning and that is that we need to take action now. We want to make sure that the conflict exists there and not here, and that is why this legislation is so important, so that we can in fact deal with those who want to do us in. The training that continues to take place in the madrasas, which is virulently opposed to the United States and our Western values, the other kind of terrorist activity that we are seeing, we have to be prepared to deal with that. Lives are being lost on a regular basis because of this battle against international terrorism, but with passage of this legislation we will be able to diminish the threat of loss of life and ensure that our men and women in uniform are equipped and compensated to deal with this very, very serious issue. Mr. Speaker, I urge strong support of this rule and the conference report.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, as we prepare this morning to deal with one of the most important pieces of legislation, the Department of Defense authorization bill conference report, which my friends, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), will be managing, I would like to take this 1-minute to talk about a different issue, and that is the report that we got this morning of the improvement in our Nation's unemployment rate. We are so gratified that the policies that President Bush has put forward are working. We obviously have a long way to go, but based on the numbers as they used to exist, a 6 percent unemployment rate, which is where we are today, used to be considered full employment. Now, we obviously in the last several years have seen it drop to the 4 percent level, and we want it to get there. But, Mr. Speaker, with the report of a 126,000 increase, nearly triple what had been estimated in the payroll numbers, we are on the track; and our policies of reducing the tax burden on working Americans to encourage economic growth and, yes, Mr. Speaker, our goal of free trade, opening up new markets for U.S. goods and services around the world and ensuring we have the opportunity for imports to come here, are beginning to pay off. Let us make sure that we stay on that track.N O T I C E Effective January 1, 2004, the subscription price of the Congressional Record will be $503 per year or $252 for six months. Individual issues may be purchased at the following costs: Less than 200 pages, $10.50; Between 200 and 400 pages, $21.00; Greater than 400 pages, $31.50. Subscriptions in microfiche format will be $146 per year with single copies priced at $3.00. This price increase is necessary based upon the cost of printing and distribution.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, it is among my duties to keep in mind the historical precedents of this body when determining how legislation will move through the House. I am very privileged to do this job for our esteemed Speaker, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert). Speaker Hastert perhaps, more than any other in recent history, is uniquely qualified to bring a historical perspective to his job as Speaker as he was, as we all know, a government and history teacher at Yorkville High School in Illinois. Because of his deep-rooted interest in the history of our Republic, it is my pleasure to announce to our colleagues that Speaker Hastert, along with former Speakers Jim Wright, Tom Foley, and Newt Gingrich, will be participating in an event entitled, ``The Changing Nature of the House Speakership: The Cannon Centenary Conference.'' This conference, named for Joseph Cannon, is being held on November 12 and is jointly sponsored by the Congressional Research Service and the University of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of our colleagues to take the time to participate in this conference and perhaps learn something new about the history of this great body and the institution of the Speakership. Mr. Speaker, I have a copy of the program here, and I will include it in the Record at this point. The Changing Nature of the House Speakership: The Cannon Centenary Conference A historic event featuring all three living former speakers and the current speaker The Speaker of the House is second in line only to the Vice President to succeed to the presidency. Few lawmakers can be said to possess the visibility and authority of the Speaker. The role of the Speaker has been shaped largely by history rather than by constitutional definition. The Speakership has been influenced by the individuals who have held the post and the circumstances in which they have operated; formal obligations that have been assigned to the office by House rules and by statute; the character of the House as a political and constitutional institution; and the traditions and customs that have evolved over time. We invite you to attend a one-day conference examining the changing nature of the speakership--a historic event featuring the current Speaker and all three living former Speakers and commemorating the centenary of one of the most noteworthy Speakers in the history of the House: Joseph G. Cannon, Republican from Illinois, who served as Speaker from 1903 to 1911. This conference will explore the evolving nature of the speakership and discuss the key forces and factors which influences the ability to lead a large and complex institutions like the House of Representatives. 8:30 am Registration 9:00 am Welcome and Introduction--Daniel P. Mulhollan, Director, Congressional Research Service 9:15 am The O'Neill Speakership, 1977-1987--John A. Farrell, author, ``Tip O'Neill and the Democratic Century'' Comments by Hon. Mickey Edwards and Hon. Dan Rostenkowski 10:45 am Hon. James C. Wright, Jr., Speaker, 1987-1989-- Comments by Hon. David E. Bonior and Hon. Tom Loeffler Noon-1:45 pm Hon. J. Dennis Hastert, Speaker 2:00 pm Hon. Thomas S. Foley, Speaker, 1989-1995--Comments by Hon. Vic Fazio and Hon. Bill Frenzel 3:30 pm Hon. Newt Gingrich, Speaker, 1995-1999--Comments by Hon. Leon E. Panetta and Hon. Robert S. Walker 4:45-5:15 pm Conference Summary--Robert V. Remini, author of books on Andrew Jackson, John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay and Daniel Webster

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for House Resolution 425, which recognizes and honors the firefighters and other public servants who responded to the devastating wildfires in Southern California which began last month. I commend Congressman Duncan Hunter and Congresswoman Susan Davis for their work on recognizing these heroic efforts. More than 14,000 firefighters from five different states were called upon to fight these fires. Those on the fire lines continue to make excellent progress toward full containment, which in the course of the past three weeks, consumed over 745,000 acres, destroyed over 3,500 homes, and took the lives of twenty-two individuals. Among those lives lost was firefighter Steven L. Rucker, who died in the line of duty on Wednesday, October 29, 2003, battling the Cedar Fire in San Diego County. Steve, just 38 years old, was an 11 year veteran of Novato Fire District. He is survived by his wife and two children. This tragic loss, as well as the hard battle the firefighters are still engaged in, is why we come to the House Floor today. It is devastating to hear the numbers of people lost, homes gone, and communities that are faced with rebuilding. However, by far greater numbers are the people saved, homes protected, and communities sheltered by the tireless efforts of firefighters. I also want to take this time to recognize all the volunteers who are working at the various shelters, many of whom lost their own homes in these fires. And while we still look forward to full containment of the fires that have burned in five counties in Southern California, we are already working toward rebuilding, mitigating for potential mudslides and erosion during the rainy season, and looking at every opportunity to prevent another disaster of this magnitude. The firefighters are aided in this by support from a number of federal agencies including the U.S. Forest Service, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Small Business Administration, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service. We are resolved, in remembering Steve Rucker and the other fire victims, as well as in sharing the devastation with those who lost their homes and businesses, to do all we can to ensure the expedited delivery of federal disaster assistance dollars, to coordinate with federal, state, and local agencies to assist in the recovery effort, and most importantly, to engage in preventing further damage from potentially damaging winter storms. Mr. Speaker, I encourage all my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution today.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, that kind of hyperbole, ``corporate buddies,'' that is absolutely ridiculous. I am as concerned about American workers as anyone, and I know the corporate leaders in this country are concerned about American workers. Mr. Speaker, let me say in response to my friend that we need to do everything that we can to realize that we are in a global economy. If we, as the United States of America, do not shape the global economy, we will be shaped by the global economy. That is why it is correct for us to pursue these reforms, do everything that we possibly can to make sure that it happens, and, at the same time, to look at policies which can encourage the expansion of our manufacturing base right here at home.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, if I might reclaim my time, I will answer by saying yes, I do believe it is very important for us to focus on the manufacturing base in this country, and that is why with the tax and regulatory legislation that we are looking at here, we will play a role in encouraging that. My view, Mr. Speaker, is that rather than simply pointing the finger at economies that are growing to the point where they can consume U.S. goods and services, we need to encourage reform right here at home, as well as encouraging reform there.

Mr. DREIER. I am happy to yield to my friend, the gentleman from Vermont.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 414. I want to congratulate my good friend, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English), with whom I have had the privilege of working for nearly a decade on the very important relationship between the United States and the People's Republic of China. Now, I have heard a lot of things said, and my friend from Vermont says that he is going to take the opportunity to bring back some comments about our debate on PNTR. You do not have to do it, because I am going to talk about them right now and the benefits that has created, Mr. Speaker. I believe that it is very important for us to realize again that the single most powerful force for positive change in the 5,000 year history of Chinese civilization has been economic reform, and I believe that we need to do everything that we possibly can to continue to encourage that kind of economic reform, and this resolution does help us down that road. Passage of permanent normal trade relations did, in fact, allow the People's Republic of China to move into a rules-based trading system by becoming a member of the World Trade Organization. It is obvious we still have very serious challenges as we continue down that road. But, Mr. Speaker, I am a glass-half-full sort of guy, and I happen to believe that what we need to do is realize that encouraging these reforms, as this resolution offered by my friend from Pennsylvania will do, is the right thing for us to do. We also need, Mr. Speaker, to realize the benefits of imports. We obviously can talk about stuffed animals and furniture, and we are on the verge of Halloween, Halloween costumes, a wide range of very important consumer products that are available to children in this country. The fact that products come from China in fact play a role in enhancing the economic standing of the 1.3 billion people of China. And what does that create? It creates for them an opportunity to become consumers of U.S. goods and services. Mr. Speaker, I think it is very important for us to note that as we look at the challenges that exist for us today, anything that would undermine that route that is being taken toward greater economic reform would be wrong. That is why, Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this resolution, and to do everything that we possibly can to make sure that even greater reform does take place in the future.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I just said that I am not planning to use the 9\1/2\ minutes. First of all, let me thank my friend, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings), and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) for ably managing this measure; and I am glad we were able to correct the record for the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) on his vote last night. But I am proud of the fact that he did indicate and he does plan at the end of the day to vote in support of this measure. The reason is because it struck me, a friend of mine the other day stopped me and said, how in the world can you be supportive of our troops and not be supportive of this package, which my friend from Mississippi and my friend from Georgia earlier both said is very important to defend and protect our troops. So at the end of the day, it is my hope that we will be able to continue this strong bipartisan spirit in passing this measure, which is so, so critical, not only for the protection of our troops, but for the stabilization of the region. The President has, I think, made a very strong and effective case that if we look at neighboring countries in that very troubled region of the world, bringing about a free, democratically elected leadership in Iraq will go a long way towards encouraging the kind of positive moves that we need throughout that part of the world and, frankly, in other parts of the world. The President, the other night, reminded a group of us to look at Kim Jong-il in North Korea and realize that he poses a great threat. But the fact that he now knows that behind diplomatic words from the United States of America stands strength is an important signal to him and any others who are not considered to be friendly towards the United States. I urge strong support of this rule and, of course, before that, passage of the previous question. My good friend, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the ranking member of the Committee on Appropriations, has, on a regular basis, come before the Committee on Rules on appropriations measures; and, in fact, on seven of the 10 measures which we have reported out of the Committee on Rules on appropriations, he has made a request similar to the one that he is making on this supplemental appropriations bill. I respect him for proceeding with it, and I admire his tenacity; but I think that he understands that it would require a waiver which would move into the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means, and so this is nongermane. The structure around which we will be considering this is an open rule. It is an open amendment process; and it is what the Democrats, when they were in the majority, used as the normal consideration for appropriations, the structure for consideration on appropriations bills; and it is what we have done, Mr. Speaker. I believe that it is proper for us to do that. Any amendment that any Member wants to offer that complies with the rules of the House will be in order, and that is why we are going to have a very full day ahead of us with, I am sure, a lot of different amendments offered. So we have provided protection for the bill and not made in order these other amendments which do, as I say, violate the rules of the House. The proposal that the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) has, while an interesting one, as I said, would, I believe, have a very deleterious effect on the small business sector of our economy. Mr. Speaker, we are very, very gratified that the tax and economic growth package that we worked so hard on and passed out of this House was a bipartisan measure and passed the other body, and we got the President's signature on it; and we are already beginning to see the benefits of that. We have seen improvements take place in markets. We have seen a lot of very, very clear benefits. One of my colleagues earlier today was talking about increased earning reports from a number of large companies; and if we look at the proposal that the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) has that he would like to have made in order, if we were to, in fact, defeat the previous question, it would have a very negative effect on that important small business sector of our economy. I know we talk about people in upper income levels, but we have to realize the tremendous numbers of those who are small business men and women, the backbone of our economy, where 95 percent of the creativity emanates from. So that is why I believe it is important for us to make sure that we pass the previous question, pass this rule, and then move ahead with what will be a very interesting debate; and at the end of the day, at the end of the day, I hope and pray that we will have strong bipartisan support, so that we can stand behind our troops, so that we will be able to do the kinds of things that can bring about the goals that we all, in a bipartisan way, share for the people of Iraq.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I arise to extend congratulations to the people of California and our next Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger. California has undergone some extraordinary turmoil in the last several months and years, and we have gone through a process that led last night to a victory for Mr. Schwarzenegger by a margin of 1 million votes. But, as has been pointed out by many, now the real work begins. I want to extend hearty congratulations to Governor Gray Davis, who provided an extraordinary concession speech last night, recognizing the will of the people of California. I believe that as this real work begins, proceeding with this important transition process to the Schwarzenegger administration, it will be important, and it is especially important for the people of California as we seek to bring back the kind of job creation and economic growth machine that is absolutely necessary to improve the quality of life for all. So, I extend thanks to Governor Davis for his two decades of public service to the people of California, thanks to him, Mr. Speaker, for his gracious remarks, and hearty, hearty congratulations to all the people of California and to Governor-elect Schwarzenegger.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleagues today to honor and remember the legacy of one of the greatest entertainers, humanitarians, and patriots this country has ever known, Bob Hope. Whether it was his early vaudeville routines, his many movies, or his numerous television specials, Americans always knew they could count on Bob Hope for a good laugh. But perhaps more impressively, Bob Hope selflessly dedicated himself to nearly 50 years of entertaining our men and women in uniform. It is estimated that `G.I. Bob' performed for over 10 million American soldiers between World War II and Operation Desert Storm, an astonishing number that speaks to the depth of his dedication to our troops. In 1997, in recognition of his unfaltering commitment, Congress unanimously voted to name Bob Hope an Honorary Veteran--the first individual so honored in the history of the United States. I was privileged to have known Bob Hope, and have many memories of time spent with him and his wonderful wife, Dolores, and their family. When you were in his presence, you could not help but be in awe of an individual who was virtually unparalleled in his commitment to the United States of America. During one of his many commencement addresses, Bob Hope reminded graduating seniors that they would soon take up the torch of freedom and knowledge and that, someday, they would pass that torch, burning stronger and brighter, on to others. Bob Hope carried that torch for over 100 years and has passed on to all of us a flame that continues to burn as a shining example of the virtues of humor, love, and patriotism. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join in honoring the life and legacy of Bob Hope.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Rules may meet next week, the week of September 22, to grant a rule which could limit the amendment process for floor consideration of H.R. 2557, the Water Resources Development Act of 2003. The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure ordered the bill reported on July 23, 2003, and filed its report with the House on September 5, 2003. 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 Committee on Rules up in room 312 here in the Capitol by 1 p.m. by Tuesday, September 23. Members should draft their amendments to the text of the bill as reported by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Mr. Speaker, Members are reminded that earlier in the year the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure set forth a specific process regarding the submission of projects for inclusion in the Water Resources Development Act. The Committee on Rules does not intend to accord priority to amendments that have not gone through the aforementioned process. Members should use the Office of Legislative Counsel to ensure that their amendments are drafted in the appropriate format. Members are also advised to check with the Office of the Parliamentarian to be certain their amendments comply with the rules of the House.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would continue to yield, I know I speak on behalf of my colleague from Texas when I say we both appreciate that the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) welcomed us into the Union.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I simply would like to say at this moment we have seen the distinguished majority leader and the distinguished minority whip in their first year in these important positions go through an exchange of issues on which there was quite a bit of agreement and the most recent one some disagreement. I would like to point out to my colleagues that 216 years ago today, the framers signed the U.S. Constitution and began that laborious task of ensuring its ratification. And to hear the distinguished majority leader talk about exercising our constitutional prerogatives as the first branch of government is very inspiring to me, and I know will continue to inspire all of those who have worked so hard to ensure the success of this, the greatest deliberative body known to man.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me time and I rise in strong support of this rule. As we all know, this rule does in fact make in order the Democratic substitute, which was offered by the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin), and I believe that the rule itself should enjoy broad bipartisan support as I hope at the end of the day the legislation will. This is bipartisan legislation authored by our good friend, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt), the distinguished majority whip, and the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ford), who have worked forming a bipartisan compromise on this. I will say that the goal is a very simple one, and that is to encourage greater philanthropy in contribution. My friend, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder), regularly points to the fact that people in this country were contributing large amounts before the Internal Revenue Code was put into place in 1913, and we do have many people who do step up and voluntarily provide large contributions. We have a lot of foundations that, frankly, do not take the tax ramifications of their contributions into consideration. But there are also incentives that do exist and we need to recognize that and the idea of saying to people who do not itemize, meaning those who are lower, middle income taxpayers, that they should have an opportunity to qualify for a deduction for their charitable contribution is the right thing to do. This measure also goes a long way towards encouraging corporate philanthropy by increasing from 10 to 20 percent the cap on corporate contributions, so we want to see even greater support from the business community. Also, the legislation does go a long way towards addressing private foundations, and I think that is an important thing and it deals with the 5 percent minimum for contributions and distributions from those private foundations. Mr. Speaker, I think that we have here a piece of legislation which will allow us to do something that is very important. We have so many people looking to the Federal Government to provide assistance in a wide range of areas and we, according to Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution, have the responsibility to appropriate dollars. It seems to me that rather than constantly focusing on appropriating the hard earned tax dollars of the American people, what we should do is we should provide an incentive for every American to participate philanthropically by making contributions to meet societal needs that are out there, and I believe that H.R. 7 will go a long way in our quest to do just that. I urge my colleagues to support the rule and to support the underlying legislation at the end of the day so that we once again can get even more and more people involved in the very, very important decision making process of meeting the needs in their communities and in our Nation.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, as an original co-sponsor of H.R. 49, the Internet Tax Nondiscrimination Act, I want to congratulate Chairman Cox and Chairman Sensenbrenner for their work in bringing before us this very significant electronic commerce bill. After two temporary moratoriums in the last 5 years, we have the opportunity today to finally pass a permanent ban on Internet access taxes, as well as multiple and discriminatory State and local taxes on electronic commerce. It is important to note that the primary reason it took us 5 years to make this moratorium permanent was the linkage between two issues that are truly unrelated: (1) keeping down the cost of consumer access to the Internet; and (2) the issue of streamlined sales taxes and remote tax collection authority by States. H.R. 49 now moves us away from that linkage. However, during Judiciary Committee debate on this bill, a number of Members continued to voice their belief that we still need to address the State tax simplification issue and ``level the playing field'' between brick-and-mortar and online sellers. While the State sales tax simplification debate should be considered in Congress--and I know that Chairman Cannon will be holding hearings on that issue--I want to caution my colleagues who believe that leveling the playing field between offline and online sellers is a quick and easy policy decision. We need to be very careful that we do not create a precedent that would allow States and localities to tax a transaction, simply because the seller sells something to a purchaser in their jurisdiction. One of the fundamental principles motivating America's struggle for independence from Britain was the idea that citizens should to face taxation without representation. To require that sellers pay taxes to a governmental body that in no way represents its interests is contrary to that basic premise of our democracy. In continuing to pursue a resolut8inon of the streamlined State sales tax issue, it is important that we continue to be guided by that principle.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1284, a bill that amends the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 to increase the Federal share of the cost of the San Gabriel Basin demonstration project. The San Gabriel Basin Demonstration Project was originally authorized in 1992 under the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's Title XVI program. This initiated the Federal-local partnership for this project, which is an integral component in cleaning up the San Gabriel Valley's drinking water supply. The San Gabriel Demonstration Project is unique among the projects authorized by Title XVI in that it does not focus on water reclamation or reuse. Rather, the project will remove harmful contaminants, including volatile organic compounds, for the San Gabriel Valley Superfund site in order to provide the Valley with a safe supply of drinking water. The project further involves monitoring of water wells, construction of treatment facilities, and development of systems to convey, pump, and store water. H.R. 1284, championed by my good friend, neighbor, and colleague, Congresswoman Grace Napolitano, recognizes the critical funding needs for this project's sustainability and success. By increasing the ceiling of this authorization by $12.5 million, the Federal Government's commitment to safe drinking water supply in our region will continue. I commend Chairman Ken Calvert and his Subcommittee on Water and Power for moving this bill through the committee process, and urge my colleagues to vote for this measure.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Rules is planning to meet next week to grant a rule for the consideration of H.R. 2622, the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003, which may require that amendments be printed in the Congressional Record prior to their consideration on the floor. The Committee on Financial Services ordered the bill reported on July 24 and filed its report with the House yesterday. Members should draft their amendments to the bill as reported by the Committee on Financial Services. Members should also be noted to use the Office of Legislative Counsel to ensure that their amendments are drafted in the most appropriate form. Members are also advised to check with the Office of Parliamentarian to be sure that their amendments comply with the rules of the House.