David Dreier

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to simply say my good friend from Sugarland, Texas, has just informed me that the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) referred to some omnibus bill that is out there, and none of us on this side are aware of that at all. I do not know that we are going to be considering anything like that. We are not planning to consider anything like that at all. The second thing I would like to say is that I was very happy to encourage all of the majority Members to support the Moakley amendment upstairs last night when we considered this, and I only assumed that having done that that my friend would enthusiastically join us in helping move these suspension measures, as is always the case at the end of the year. I would also add that on both the D.C. and the Labor, Health and Human Services bills, we did see full committee action on both of those, and there are clearly, on the D.C. bill modifications that have been made, but we know the chairman of that Subcommittee on the District of Columbia spent a lot of time on the D.C. bill, and on the Labor-HHS bill, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Porter) did. So we are doing what is very much the norm for trying to move legislation towards the end of the session. So I think there should be very strong bipartisan support of this measure.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by extending my great appreciation to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) and to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) and to the hard-working members of their staff who have helped us put together this very important piece of legislation. The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) very appropriately described it at the outset. We all know that we live in a global economy; and, as such, it is very important for our young people to be prepared to compete. One of the issues that we have dealt with in this House is to make sure that we have qualified expertise to deal with the high-tech industry, the industry that has created 45 percent of our gross domestic product growth in the past 3 years. I think that education can, in fact, allow us to ensure that in the future we will have qualified Americans to do not only those jobs in the high-tech industry but a wide range of other jobs. There is a very important component of that, and it is financial literacy. For a number of years, an organization known as the Jumpstart Coalition has been focusing on this. I have been working with a number of people to make sure that we would get this legislation moved, and that is why I again express my appreciation to those on the committee who have provided us with very important assistance. It is unfortunate that bankruptcy filings are very high. They continue to move up. Consumer debt is at an all-time high. And, as we all know, the rate of savings in this country is at a very low level. So it is more important now than ever, I believe, for us to teach young people about the importance of how to manage money and their credit. The survey that was done by that organization I just mentioned, the Jumpstart Coalition, which is a private nonprofit group that promotes financial literacy, gave only 5 percent of the 12th graders a C grade or better when asked about their financial management skills. However, financial management instruction, based on empirical evidence that we have, does work. The National Endowment for Financial Literacy conducted a study and found that as little as 10 hours of classroom instruction can affect how teens handle their money. Fifty-eight percent of the students who had that 10 hours, in fact, we were able to see improvement in their spending habits, and 56 percent of those students who benefitted from that 10 hours of training actually improved their personal savings habits. Now, this resolution, as was pointed out by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri), simply encourages the Secretary of Education to give our teachers and schools extra resources to teach financial literacy to our kids. The measure is a common-sense approach to addressing educational needs at the Federal level by providing States with resources while also, something that is very important in this 106th Congress, ensuring that the flexibility is there in designing and implementing those education programs that they deem absolutely necessary. Now, there was a survey that was done by the American Savings and Education Council that found that 79 percent of students have never taken a personal financial course; and of those who took a 3-month course, 41 percent then began saving, 28 percent increased their savings, and 19 percent of them developed their own budget. Right now, about 94 percent of students learn about money from their parents. So, keeping in mind this last statistic and the fact that personal savings rates are at a very low level and bankruptcies are high, it seems to me that financial instruction outside of the home is a very important thing. This resolution is aimed to educate our youth in the importance of financial literacy, but it also aims to serve the disadvantaged youth who need to be equipped with financial management skills as they tend to enter the workforce at an even earlier age. The measure does not create or encourage a new program. It does not encourage a new program to address these needs. It simply allows the Secretary of Education to provide assistance to those high schools seeking to fill a void in knowledge thought to be obtained in the home. So again, let me just say in closing, as we charge towards the millennium and look at the importance of our remaining competitive globally, we need to ensure that financial literacy is a component of that. I want to express my appreciation to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) and to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) and again to the hard-working members of their staff and to say that we are moving ahead with what I think is a very important measure.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, since 1937, American workers have been forced, through no choice of their own, to pay into the Social Security Trust Fund. Today, 75 percent of the American people pay more in payroll taxes than they do in Federal income taxes. In light of that, it seems to me that there is a very important obligation that needs to be met, and that obligation is one that the Speaker of the House, when he stood here on the opening day of the 106th Congress, made very clear. He said that we, in fact, were going to save Social Security and Medicare, and that is one of the four-point priorities that we put forth. Now, we very much want to do that, and I believe, if one looks at the appropriations bills that we have been able to pass in this House, including the most recent one which completed our work, we were able to do it for the first time since 1967 without dipping into the anticipated surplus for Social Security. That is something that underscores our very strong commitment to make sure that the United States Government stands behind that obligation which it forces the American people to pay into. We are doing the right thing in pursuing that.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, this afternoon a Dear Colleague letter was sent to all Members informing them that the Committee on Rules is planning to meet the week of November 1 to grant a rule for consideration of H.R. 2389, the County Schools Funding Revitalization Act of 1999. The Committee on Rules may grant a rule which would require that amendments be preprinted in the Congressional Record. In this case, amendments must be preprinted prior to their consideration on the floor. Amendments should be drafted to an amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) which will be printed in today's Congressional Record and numbered 1. It is the intention of the Committee on Rules to make in order the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) as base text for the purpose of further amendment. Members should use the Office of Legislative Counsel to assure 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.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding to me. We are going to have an extraordinarily fair and balanced rule that will allow this House to, as has always been the case under this majority, work its will. We will look forward to the debate. We will welcome the gentleman's input on any recommendations to the rule.

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

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule. I would like to commend this House, because when we move from this rule to the debate on the conference report and then vote it out, we will have, for the first time in a heck of a long time, passed all 13 appropriations bills without touching social security, and we will have sent them down to the President. There has been a great deal of rhetoric that we have heard during this debate, but I have to say that we are going to be making history when we proceed with this. We are trying to make some tough decisions. It is very easy to simply advocate a tax increase when we are advocating more spending. What we are saying is that we are not going to increase the tax burden on working families, we are not going to touch social security, and at the same time, we are going to make sure that we do not increase spending. It is tough to do that. We are the ones who proposed doing it responsibly. That is why so many of my colleagues on this side have argued eloquently on behalf of a very responsible 1 percent cut. My friend, the gentleman from Dallas, Texas, has justifiably talked about the fact that we are going to see problems within the Department of Defense. That does not have to happen. It does not have to happen. We will, with this 1 percent cut, have, as has been pointed out, $1.8 billion more than the President's request for national defense, and those priorities can clearly be established within the Pentagon and by the President. We all acknowledge that there has to be waste, fraud, and abuse in every level of government. We are going to be doing it right here in the United States Congress, as well. We know that when it comes to education, $34.7 billion was requested by the President. What is it that we had? We had $35.03 for education, and with this 1 percent cut we end up with $88 million more than the President's request for education. So if we look at what it is we are trying to do, we are doing it very, very responsibly. I hope very much that my colleagues will join in helping us make history by giving us a bipartisan vote on both the rule and on the conference report.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order at any time to consider in the House the joint resolution, H.J. Res. 73, making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2000, and for other purposes; That the joint resolution be considered as read for amendment; That the joint resolution be debatable for 1 hour, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on Appropriations; and That the previous question be considered as ordered on the joint resolution to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, it is a special honor for the gentleman from California (Mr. Gary Miller) and me to welcome Pastor Stuart York and his wife Alicia into the Chamber. We want to express our appreciation to him for the very inspiring words of prayer that he offered us. Pastor York has dedicated his life to spiritual guidance and to public service. He served as pastor in churches in Missouri, Oklahoma and California, and in California he has been pastor, as the Speaker said, of the Rosemead Christian church for the past 11 years. He also was President of the Missouri Christian Convention and is chairman of the board of trustees at St. Louis Christian College where he graduated. Pastor York and his wife Alicia have five children, Anna, Tammy, Wendy, Joshua and Rebekah. As a resident of West Covina, he has been active as a leader in local government and various charitable organizations. In fact, I on more than a few occasions have seen him play the role of Santa Claus. I am very proud to have him here in Washington, D.C. I join my colleagues in the House in thanking our distinguished guest chaplain for bringing us this very inspirational message today.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my friend yielding this time to me. I thank the gentleman from Washington for his fine leadership on our committee. I rise in very strong support not only of the rule but of the stellar work that has been done by our friend from Ohio, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Interior (Mr. Regula). Every year there are millions of Americans and foreign tourists who come from all over the world to take advantage of what is clearly the best park system on the face of the Earth, whether it is the Everglades in Florida, part of which is represented by members of the Committee on Rules, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart), or the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), or the Angeles National Forest, which I am privileged to represent along with my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Rogan). Incidentally, the Angeles National Forest happens to be the most utilized of our national forest system. These are very, very important, very, very precious items that need to be addressed; and I will tell my colleagues that the work that has been done by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) is very key to the continued success of that important system. I want to specifically express my thanks for dealing with the problem that we in southern California regularly face, and that is fires. We know that as we approach the fire season, we have now seen $24 million for the National Forest Service state fire assistance program, which is a $3.2 million increase over last year; and I want to again express my thanks for the attention that has been focused on that important problem that we have. Now I finally would like to raise one issue of concern that the gentleman from Ohio and I have discussed on more than a few occasions, and I would like to say at this point I offer what is at best sort of wavering support for the adventure pass; and it is in large part due to some of the issues which I suspect the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) will raise during debate on this issue, and that is the question of whether or not people who are in the area paying into the adventure pass are actually seeing any kind of tangible benefit from the fact that they have put dollars into that adventure pass. In the Angeles National Forest, as I said, the most utilized of all in our Nation's system, many of my constituents have been obviously in, just going through, been forced to pay for the adventure pass; and yet they do not see any kind of real tangible benefit, and that is why I am pleased that there is an additional $1.1 million that has been added for the Angeles National Forest to improve the basic infrastructure there, which is a concern. So I will say that we look forward to further reports on the pilot program of the adventure pass, and I am going on record, as I have before, raising the concerns that many of my constituents have pointed to; and I hope that we are able to work closely with the Forest Service so that we can see real tangible benefits from that. So, having said all of those things, I strongly support the rule, urge my colleagues to vote for it, and I also urge strong support for what I think is the best possible conference report that we could get at this juncture.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of both the rule and the conference report, and I thank my friend, the gentleman from Atlanta, Georgia (Mr. Linder), for yielding me the time. I want to compliment the gentleman from Kentucky (Chairman Rogers) for the superb job he has done in what is obviously a very difficult and challenging situation. This bill is a very important measure as we look at a number of critical items that are out there for us to address. First and foremost for me, as a Californian, I have got to say that the $585 million that is included in here for the State Criminal Alien Assistance Plan, known as SCAAP, is very, very high on our priority list, because if we look at the problems of illegal immigration, which have been very great, the Federal Government has a responsibility to step up to the plate and meet those obligations. They should not be thrust onto the shoulders of State and local taxpayers. The other issue that is very key is that of international trade. Also as a Californian, I have got to say that our State is the gateway to the Pacific Rim and Latin America. Within this bill are very important items dealing with the facilitation of international trade, creating new exports for new markets for U.S. products and services. We have just gotten the report this morning of the strengthening of economies in the Pacific Rim; and through that, they have been able to purchase more U.S. goods and services. We need to do what we can to facilitate that, and that is done in this bill. Also, another issue that is of very great importance to me and for us nationally in looking at situations that exist around the world, back in 1985, Ronald Reagan envisioned the establishment of the National Endowment for Democracy. It was to say that simply dealing with weapons systems was not going to bring about freedom and political pluralism. We had to put into place the infrastructure, the institutions that are necessary for political pluralism to succeed. In fact, this bill does just that. The National Endowment for Democracy has had great success all over the world. One of the countries we spend a great deal of time talking about happens to be the problems that exist in the People's Republic of China. One of the core groups within the National Endowment for Democracy is the International Republican Institute. Last night, there was a very important freedom dinner that was held. I will say that I serve on the board of that organization, and we have participated in 50 village elections since 1994 in the People's Republic of China. We have been encouraging non-Communist candidates there. We have had success at letting people see for the first time that they can participate in those kinds of political organizations. So this is a very important measure. It deserves our support. The rule is a very fair and standard rule for consideration of this sort of conference report, and I hope my colleagues will support both.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce), for yielding me this time. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this very fair and balanced modified open rule. Improving public education, when we put together the list of priorities that we wanted to address in the 106th Congress, was number one. We went through the issues of providing tax relief to working families, rebuilding our defense capabilities, saving Social Security and Medicare; but when we began that list, we had improving public education up there because we know that if our Nation is going to remain competitive globally we have to do what we can to bring about that kind of improvement. We moved forward earlier in this Congress by passing the Education Flexibility Act, and I am very pleased that the President agreed to sign that measure. It took a little while to get him there, but I am very pleased that he did. This legislation is similar in that it enjoys bipartisan support, and I hope it will gain the President's signature also. The public education improvement bill is based on four very simple basic and easily understandable principles: quality, accountability, public school choice, which is very important, and flexibility. The bill will improve educational opportunities available for children that already face the many challenges that accompany poverty in this country. It is simply not acceptable that the public education system is failing our Nation's disadvantaged children. It is clearly time to shift our focus to a results-based education system. For the sake of the children, we cannot accept anything less than the best. We need clear improvements in academic achievement at the local and the State level. As we focus on actual results, we need to reward progress. This legislation will allow States to reward the schools that are successful at closing the achievement gap between children of different income levels. We are moving in the right direction on education; and, again, it is good that we are enjoying bipartisan support in that quest. We are investing in quality public schools, and we are demanding real results. We are showing that Congress is committed to success, but we are giving State and local leaders the flexibility to develop the solutions. Most important, we are relying on parents, teachers, and principals to make good choices because we trust them to do what is best for our Nation's young people. This is a very, very good piece of legislation. I know that we are going to be dealing with several amendments on it; but when we finally get through with it, I hope we will have a very strong, overwhelming vote and that we will be able to again get a presidential signature on it.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 334 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Louisville, Kentucky (Mrs. Northup), a very, very distinguished colleague and a hard working member of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I very much appreciate the overly large and enthusiastic crowd here to enjoy this debate. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my very dear friend, the gentleman from south Boston and extend condolences to him with the outcome of last night's game, and pending that I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, all time yielded will be for the purposes of debate only. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise, obviously, in strong support of this rule; and I am here to say that we, in fact, are meeting our constitutional obligations. In my opening statement, I talked about the fact that we are ahead of schedule. We are ahead of schedule because, if we look at the number of years that we have had to go well into Christmas before we had settled the appropriations bills, there are numerous times when we have had to do that. We are looking today at a one-week extension going to the 29th of October. The chairman of the Committee on Appropriations (Mr. Young) has worked long and hard, and we are trying to have a bipartisan consensus here. We vetted this continuing resolution with our friends in the other body, with the White House. So we are simply proceeding with what is the proper constitutional role for dealing with our important work of completing these 13 bills. So I urge my colleagues to support it. We have a chance to make history here by making sure that we do not go into the Social Security Trust Fund. We are working very hard to ensure that that does not happen, that we do not go into the Social Security Trust Fund. I hope my colleagues will first support this rule and then support the continuing resolution so that we can get this work down. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Kentucky (Mrs. Northup) to make at least one more salient, important point.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, this rule provides for the consideration of H.J. Res. 71, making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2000 and for other purposes, under a closed rule, waiving all points of order. The rule provides that the joint resolution shall be considered as read. It provides for one hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations, and it provides for one motion to recommit. As my colleagues know, Mr. Speaker, the previous continuing resolution expires at the end of the day on Thursday, the day after tomorrow, and a further continuing resolution is necessary to keep the government operating while Congress completes the few remaining appropriations bills that have yet to be sent to the President or have been vetoed. H.J. Res. 71 simply extends the October 21 deadline to October 29. Mr. Speaker, contrary to what some may contend and I suspect what we may hear in the next hour, we are, from an historical perspective, ahead of schedule. Let me say that again. We are ahead of schedule on our appropriations work. Congress, under both Democratic and Republican majorities, regularly utilize continuing resolutions as a method of keeping the government functioning while negotiations continue. In fact, only three times, let me say that again, Mr. Speaker, only three times in the last two decades, the last 20 years, has Congress passed all 13 appropriations bills by the fiscal deadline. And, with the constraints that we are dealing with now, the Balanced Budget Agreement of 1997, I think that it is very, very appropriate that we are exactly where we are. Despite the best efforts of the President and some of the minority, we are committed to passing all of the appropriations bills without borrowing one dime of the Social Security Trust Fund, again an unprecedented issue, and this very short-term continuing resolution is necessary so that we can, in fact, achieve that very important objective. The continuing resolution was thoroughly vetted by the joint leaderships of the House and the Senate, the Committees on Appropriations, and the White House. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I am going to urge my colleagues to support it, and I urge them to try and keep the rhetoric at as low a level as possible. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Indian Rocks Beach, Florida (Mr. Young), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, who has worked long and hard; he and his committee have worked long and hard.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Westerville, Ohio (Mr. Kasich), the chairman of the Committee on the Budget, to explain this to the American people in an honest way.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the Chair how much time is remaining on each side.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to yield 1 minute to the very distinguished and hardworking gentleman from Scottsdale, Arizona (Mr. Hayworth), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to tell my friend, as he and my Democratic colleagues know very well, the R&D tax credit was in the bill the President vetoed, and the President requested $34.7 billion for education, the Labor-HHS bill has $35 billion for education. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Savannah, Georgia (Mr. Kingston), the leader of the theme team.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Langley, Washington (Mr. Metcalf).