David Dreier

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reynolds), for yielding me this time and for ably taking on what obviously is a challenging situation. This was not our first choice to be here under what is considered an expedited procedures rule, but we are here because negotiations were not going on into the night; it was staff paperwork that was really being completed well into the night. And while the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) prides himself on working the Committee on Rules at 1:00, 2:00, 3:00 in the morning, the fact of the matter is that some of the rest of us like to sleep at that hour, but the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) we let him have that chance to sleep last night and obviously it ruffled his feathers so he came down to oppose this expedited procedures rule. We are doing the right thing. As my friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), knows very well, we have spent years working on this legislation. My very good friend from California (Mr. Royce), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa, and the chairman of the Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane), have worked long and hard on this. This is a very important piece of legislation. We have 700 million people in sub-Saharan Africa who are going to be impacted by this. We have a chance to improve the quality of life for the American people, and I believe that we have done the right thing in proceeding with this rule. The reason is that last night at 10:30 when we found that we were going to be doing this and we were assured that we could first thing in the morning make available on the World Wide Web a copy of the conference report, we did just that. If we had met at 5:00 this morning, the difference would have been just a few hours, and while the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) would have, of course, after his morning run been at his desk at 6:00 to carefully scrutinize the conference report, most of the rest of our colleagues would most likely have waited until 10:00, which is exactly when it was filed. So this is really a question of whether or not we are going to proceed with important legislation that my friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane) and many of the rest of us have strongly supported for years and years and years, or are we going to try and block it because, guess what, Mr. Speaker, this is the one chance that we had to do it. This is our opportunity to do this. Why? Because we have lots of important legislation that we need to consider in the coming weeks. We have scheduled it for this week; and unfortunately, it took a little more staff time than we would have liked overnight to get the work completed. We have this procedure so that we can move ahead in an expeditious manner on very important legislation. So I encourage my colleagues to support both rules that we have and then to vote in favor of the conference report so that we can finally lay the groundwork for a win/ win/win issue, which is going to improve the quality of life for the American people and our friends in Africa, and I believe make great strides in blazing the trail for an even more important trade vote that we are going to be having the week of May 22.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reynolds) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the House for its perspicacity in casting an overwhelming vote, 300 Members supported the last rule. And I suspect we will have a similar vote on this rule and I hope on the conference report itself. It is a very good and important piece of legislation. We as a Nation have stood for promoting economic reform and global prosperity and leadership. And leadership is a very important quality that we need to make sure we do not in any way jeopardize. People who vote against this conference report will be undermining our future economic prosperity and undermining the very important role that we play as global leader. When we think about the issue of trade, it is obviously a very tough one. It is tough because protectionism is an easy thing to engage in. In fact, protectionism thrives on anxiety. I find that the moment people become anxious about any issue, the response is to pull up the draw bridge and say: Oh, no, we cannot proceed with this. The other thing that I often find when we engage in these debates is that the most strident protectionists always stand up here in the well and say: I am a free trader, but not this agreement. Mr. Speaker, I will tell my colleagues there are things in this package about which I am not absolutely ecstatic, but I do know that when we think about those 48 nations in sub-Saharan Africa; when we think about the millions of people in the Caribbean; the 700 million people in sub-Saharan Africa; and what obviously is our top priority, when we think about that single mother here in the United States of America who is struggling to make ends meet and is going to a store to buy clothing for her children, we want to make sure that the quality of life for that single mother is enhanced. That is what this is all about. It is a win/win/win all the way around. A win for the United States of America. It is a win for those people struggling to emerge in developing nations in sub-Saharan Africa to the economic prosperity about which they dream. And it is a win for the people in the Caribbean. So I believe, again, that we today are going to be laying the groundwork with this vote for an even more important vote that will take place the week of May 22 when we decide whether or not the United States of America is going to maintain its role as the paramount global leader, or whether or not we are going to cede that to other countries throughout the world. So, I compliment, again, the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane), and so many others who have been involved in fashioning this very important piece of legislation; and I urge support of the rule and the conference report itself.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the following resolutions be laid on the table: H. Res. 356; H. Res. 375; H. Res. 382; and H. Res. 383.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order at any time without intervention of any point of order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3615) to amend the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 to ensure improved access to the signals of local television stations by multichannel video providers to all households which desire such service in unserved and underserved rural areas by December 31, 2006; that the bill be considered as read for amendment; that in lieu of the amendments recommended by the Committees on Agriculture and Commerce now printed in the bill, the amendment in the nature of a substitute that I have placed at the desk be considered as read and adopted; that the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) 1 hour of debate on the bill, as amended, equally divided among and controlled by the chairmen and ranking minority members of the Committees on Agriculture and Commerce; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without instructions; and that House Resolution 475 be laid on the table.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order at any time for the Speaker, as though pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, to declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3439) to prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from establishing rules authorizing the operation of new, low power FM radio stations and that consideration of the bill proceed according to the following order: (1) the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with; (2) general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Commerce; (3) the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Commerce now printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the 5-minute rule and shall be considered as read; (4) points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute for failure to comply with clause 7 of rule XVI are waived; (5) during consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the Member offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as read; (6) the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may: (1) postpone until a time during further consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request for a recorded vote on any amendment, and (2) reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any postponed question that follows another electronic vote without intervening business, provided that the minimum time for electronic voting on the first in any series of questions shall be 15 minutes; (7) at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute; (8) the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions; and that House Resolution 472 be laid on the table.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I simply rise in strong support of this rule and the budget conference report itself. We are making history here by, on time, proceeding for the first time in the quarter century since we have had the 1974 Budget Impoundment Act with doing back-to-back budgets on schedule. I believe that that is a very clear signal that this Congress, under the leadership of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert) is on track towards doing the kinds of things that he said when he stood in this well in January of 1999. He has proceeded with regular order following with the rules and the structure that we have in place here. What is it that we are doing? Well, we have established the priorities the American people very much want us to address. Education is a great concern to the people whom I am honored to represent in Southern California. It is a concern all across this country. We need to make sure that, as we deal with this global economy, that the American people have the expertise that is necessary to be competitive. The best way to do that is to enhance the education level that we have in this country. This measure goes a long way towards doing that. We have a priority. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kasich) who came before the Committee on Rules last night made it very clear in his testimony that, what is it that the Federal Government can do and has the responsibility to do that no other level of government can do whatsoever? That is those very, very important words right in the middle of the preamble of the Constitution, ``provide for the common defense.'' That is exactly what this budget does by dramatically enhancing our ability to deal with our national security and the security of our interests around the world. Ensuring that we get our very brave men and women off of food stamps, that is a priority that we have here. So as we look at this budget, it is a very, very important conference report. I will say, since I am standing here in the well and I am looking at the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kasich) who is in the back of the Chamber, that he will be sorely missed. It has been his leadership over the past several years that has played a big role in getting us to the point where we are today, and I look forward to great things from him in the years to come. The best way that we could send him off when he does leave here months and months from now is to overwhelmingly pass this rule and to pass this budget conference report with strong bipartisan support.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. That is what we are hearing.

Mr. DREIER. We would like to allow the Committee on Rules to work its will as we proceed with the deliberative process here, as my friend, a former member of the committee, knows very well.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, they are spectacular this time of year.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding, and I hope he has a wonderful weekend and is able to get back to Mount Clemens.

Mr. DREIER. The Sunset Tax Code, we are hoping to do that on Thursday; and again, we do not know exactly what the structure for consideration of that will be either.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my very dear friend from Mount Clemens for yielding, the very distinguished minority whip. I am very pleased to announce to the House that we have completed our legislative business for the week and that the House will not be in session tomorrow. We will meet for legislative business on Monday, April 10 at 12:30 p.m. for morning hour, and at 2 o'clock for legislative business. We will consider a number of bills under suspension of the rules, a list of which will be distributed to Members' offices tomorrow. Mr. Speaker, we expect that the other body will be able to complete consideration of the budget tomorrow. That being the case, after suspensions on Monday, we expect to go to conference on the budget resolution. Now, on Monday, no recorded votes are expected before 6 p.m., and that is basically what we are looking for at this point.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, as a former member of the committee, he is certainly entitled to provide us with any recommendations that he would like to offer as to how we effectively deal with it. We are planning to bring the measure up, and I am not sure exactly what the structure will be at this juncture.

Mr. DREIER. That is up to the committee on which the gentleman used to sit.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, we are scheduling that, we hope, for Tuesday of next week.

Mr. DREIER. How many late nights are expected next week. As the gentleman knows, we are anxiously looking forward to the Easter District Work Period, and we have conference reports coming up. We have a number of measures that we are expecting, and I cannot tell the gentleman right now as to how late we will be in the evening.

Mr. DREIER. Next Friday, we are hoping that we will be able to pass a conference agreement on the budget resolution, and we would very much like to do it before Friday, but there is no guarantee that that will happen.

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.

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 debates.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. It is not Mount Clements either.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, no.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, no.

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

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, it is San Dimas.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, this afternoon a Dear Colleague letter was sent to all colleagues informing them that the Committee on Rules is expected to meet the week of April 3 to grant a rule which may restrict amendments for consideration of H.R. 1776, the American Homeownership and Economic Opportunity Act of 2000. Any Member contemplating an amendment to H.R. 1776 should submit 55 copies of the amendment and one copy of a brief explanation to the Committee on Rules no later than 5 p.m. on Tuesday, April 4. The Committee on Rules office is located upstairs in H-312, as the presiding officer knows very well, here in the Capitol. Members should use the Office of Legislative Counsel to ensure that their amendments are properly drafted and should check with the Office of the Parliamentarian to be certain that their amendments comply with the Rules of the House.