Martin Frost

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, my wife often watches these proceedings; and she always tells me to make it simple, make it so that a person out there in my district can understand what is going on. I will try to do that. What we have here is a situation where 2 years ago, the Republicans ate dessert with their tax bill, with their big tax cut; but they have refused to eat their vegetables. They would not consider the appropriation bills. They would not give the people's representatives the opportunity to vote on the appropriations process. So I am glad they enjoyed their dessert. I wish they would have given us the opportunity to take part in the rest of the meal. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FROST asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), a member of the Committee on Rules. (Mr. HASTINGS of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I would just like to ask the gentleman what the House is being asked to consider.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Coach Robert Hughes of Dunbar High School in Fort Worth, one of the greatest legends in Texas sports history. Last night, before 7,000 fans, Coach Hughes earned his 1,275th win, surpassing legendary Coach Morgan Wooten of DeMatha High School in Maryland, to become the winningest high school boys basketball coach in U.S. history. During that time, his team has lost just 248 games. Coach Hughes' remarkable career began almost half a century ago, in 1958, at I.M. Carroll High School in Fort Worth. Coach Hughes won his first State championship in 1963. More State titles would follow in 1965, 1967, and 1993. Coach Hughes has been coaching for Dunbar since 1973, and he continues to serve as a role model for young players and students who take pride in calling themselves Wildcats. After more than 20 district titles, Coach Hughes clearly is not finished yet. Last night Dunbar earned its fourth consecutive Texas Division 7-4A basketball title and is off to the playoffs. His team is 39-1 this year. It is a pleasure to honor Coach Hughes. Go Wildcats in the playoffs.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleagues in expressing this body's deep grief over the loss of Columbia and her brave crew. I was privileged to attend the memorial for our seven astronauts in Houston yesterday. The deeply moving words in honor of the Columbia revealed how profoundly this tragedy has affected people in Texas and across our country. Today in my district in north Texas, one of those astronauts, Dr. Kalpana Chawla, is being remembered at her alma mater, the University of Texas at Arlington. K.C., as she was known by her friends at UTA, was a true pioneer and a role model for young people on two continents. K.C. was the first Indian American to travel into space and her achievements brought great pride to people in her home country of India and her adopted home in north Texas. While aboard the Columbia, K.C. sent an e-mail to students in her hometown, Karnal, India. She wrote: ``The path from dreams to success does exist. May you have the vision to find it, the courage to get onto it and the perseverance to follow it. Wishing you a great journey.'' There can be no doubt that K.C. and the other astronauts aboard the Columbia had the vision and the perseverance to follow their dreams. Those dreams led them into space on a mission of discovery that made them heroes. As we reflect upon the lives of Dr. Chawla and her fellow crew members, we have a shared responsibility to forge ahead with their mission. After the House passes this worthy resolution honoring our fallen heroes, it will be our duty as Members of Congress to commit our government to a full investigation of the causes of this tragedy, and, just as importantly, to recommit America to our mission exploring the frontiers of space.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, two important things will happen today on the floor of this House. First, we will debate and pass yet another continuing resolution, the eighth temporary stopgap measure for a fiscal year that began almost 4 months ago. This continuing resolution represents an abdication of responsibility that has become almost run- of-the-mill under Republican control. Today's resolution, which extends the date of the current CR through February 7, means that Republicans will be 4 months late in addressing priorities like homeland security and the economy. America is struggling through dangerous, uncertain times; but the Republican Congress may as well still be on vacation. Republican leaders are hoping this shameful failure will be obscured by today's second important event: the President's State of the Union address. The Republican majority is expecting to hide behind the glib rhetoric we have all come to expect from President Bush. But political slogans only go so far, especially in the face of the wide and growing credibility gap facing a Republican Party that has spent the past 2 years saying one thing and doing another. And no matter how eloquent President Bush may be tonight, words alone cannot fix the primary problem this Republican government has created for the Nation at this difficult time. Simply put, there are two states of the Union in America today. For the vast majority of Americans, these are difficult and anxious times; but for the Republican politicians and the privileged few they represent, like the corporate lobbyists invited to the White House today for a special sneak preview of the State of the Union, the good times just keep on coming. It is a tragedy, Mr. Speaker; but it is the truth. Just take a look around the country. We will see hard-working Americans struggling to make it through the weakest economy in a generation. Since President Bush took office, 2.3 million private sector jobs have been lost, the worst jobs record for any President since the end of World War II. The unemployment rate is stuck at a 6- year high. We will see millions of Americans whose retirement plans have been crushed by the fall of the stock market. The Dow dropped below 8,000 again yesterday; and overall, the market has lost trillions of dollars in value since President Bush took office. We will see firefighters and police officers who still sit exposed on the front lines of homeland defense, desperate for help from this Congress. It has been nearly a year and a half since September 11, but Republicans have done shockingly little to increase America's defenses here at home. Mr. Speaker, Democrats have fought for these priorities. We have proposed economic stimulus plans to create at least 1 million new jobs this year, put money and purchasing power in the hands of consumers, and provide relief to struggling small businesses; and we have tried time and again to make Americans safer at home by meeting critical homeland security needs. Unfortunately for the American people, Mr. Speaker, Republicans have the power in Washington, and just take a look at the government they control. We will see an out-of-touch Republican Congress that arrogantly refuses to do the job they have been elected to do: address critical needs like homeland security and education. Republicans will not help firefighters or increase port security, but they have relaxed their own ethics rules in the House of Representatives. Mr. Speaker, we will see a Republican Party that has but one answer for every problem: budget-busting tax breaks for millionaires that will do nothing to stimulate the economy this year. Soldiers and firefighters are putting their lives on the line to keep Americans safe at home, and President Bush is pushing $90,000 tax breaks for everyone making $1 million or more a year. Middle-class Americans are struggling through the worst economy in a generation, but the Bush plan would provide half of all taxpayers with less than $100. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, it appears that Republicans just do not understand the real state of the Union for the vast majority of America, because if they did, they would not insist on sacrificing the security interests of all Americans to pay for tax breaks for the most privileged few. That is just wrong. It is time that Republicans stopped stiffing homeland security to pay for tax breaks for millionaires, and it is time they stopped using their political power to divide this great Nation. Mr. Speaker, last week I attended a mobilization ceremony for a reservist in Grand Prairie Texas who had been called to active duty. These brave men and women are making a great sacrifice for their country, leaving their families and jobs to support our troops overseas. I was struck by their courage and by their willingness to put aside their own personal concerns to serve their country. That spirit of unity and sacrifice has made America great for the past 2 centuries. I hope it is the spirit President Bush remembers tonight during his State of the Union and that the Republican Congress puts into practice so that we can finally address our economic and homeland security challenges.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FROST asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, we all remember how partisan, divisive and, most importantly, unproductive the last Congress was. Despite the President's campaign promise to change the tone in Washington, nothing really changed in the way Republicans ran the House of Representatives. In fact, over the past 2 years, the Republican majority had a well- established and easily documented track record of denying the minority a voice in proceedings and deliberations of the House, and that, unfortunately, played a large role in the failure of the Republican Congress to address America's critical concerns, from the economy and homeland security to health care and retirement security. But, in the spirit of the new year, Mr. Speaker, Democrats came to the floor today hoping that Republicans might turn over a new leaf, that they might agree to a rules package to operate the House as a deliberate, democratic institution in which all points of view have a right to be heard. Unfortunately, the package before us only makes things worse, making changes that only assure that the voice of the minority will be heard less and less. For that reason, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 5. I will offer a motion to commit at the end of this debate, and I urge every Member of this body who believes that all of the American people have a right to be heard and a right to participate in a democratic, small ``d'', institution to vote for it. Mr. Speaker, this is not the Politburo; this is the United States House of Representatives. It is high time that the majority remembered that very clear distinction. We are not here to raise our hands in unison; we are here to debate what is in the best interests of this country, and there are many differing views in this body about how to achieve that end. Those views should and must be heard. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a few minutes to explain why I and the Democratic Caucus oppose these rules changes proposed by the Republican majority. As I said, we see these changes, along with the majority's record of stifling dissent, as counterintuitive to the notion of the democratic process. We see some of these changes as fig leaves or, as my good friend the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) is often heard to say, giving Members a chance to pose for holy pictures. We see some of these changes as attempts to cover up what is really happening in terms of the Federal budget, both on the spending and tax sides. And finally, we see some of these changes as allowing Members to skirt the intent of the ethics rules in this body, something that only sullies the reputation of an honorable institution. For example, the majority took great pains in 1995 to abolish the practice of proxy voting. I am not here to pass judgment on that old practice. I can only say that the Republican majority condemned Democrats when we held the majority for allowing Members to vote by proxy in committee. However, the Republican majority has encountered some of the same problems that made proxy voting a useful tool for committees to get their work done. Because the Republican majority has refused to negotiate committee ratios that accurately reflect and fairly reflect the numbers in this body, their Members have been spread too thin and oftentimes must choose between one committee's proceedings and another. Consequently, there have been a number of markups held where Democrats have been able to pass amendments because some Republicans have voted for those amendments and because other Republican Members have been absent. The majority has decided that the best way to deal with those rare occasions in which Democrats actually win a vote is to ensure that votes cannot be taken until the Chair of the full committee or a subcommittee has all the votes in the room, somewhat akin to proxy voting. This change proposed by the majority would allow those Chairs to postpone indefinitely votes on ordered questions. There is no definition in the rule about when votes must be called by, and there is no definition in the rule for what constitutes reasonable notice. Frankly, Mr. Speaker, this rule is a recipe for autocracy in the committees of this body. My motion to commit will delete this provision from the package of the rules for the 108th Congress. Secondly, the Republican majority seems intent on cooking the Federal budgetary books in so many ways that a new recipe was sure to find its way into this package, and so it has. The majority has now included a rule providing that no tax bill may be considered unless the Joint Committee on Taxation has included an analysis in the report accompanying that bill on the macroeconomic impact of such legislation. And just what is the macroeconomic impact? Why, it is nothing more than dynamic scoring, a methodology that has been discounted and outright dismissed by any economist worth his or her salt, including the chairman of the Federal Reserve. As Chairman Greenspan has said about dynamic scoring: ``The analytical tools required to achieve it are deficient . . . no model currently in use can predict macroeconomic effects without substantial ad hoc adjustments that effectively override the internal structure of the model.'' In other words, Mr. Speaker, it does not work, an example of what President Bush had called ``fuzzy math.'' Yet, the Republican majority persists in believing that this bogus economic analysis of tax policy is real and reliable. But I would contend the only real thing that is real and reliable about dynamic scoring is that it will serve as a cover-up for the true impact of the losses of revenue to the Federal Treasury generated by tax cuts endorsed by this White House and the Republican majority. My motion to commit will delete this provision from the package of the rules of the 108th Congress. Motions to instruct conferees have been successfully used by Democrats and, may I add, by the Republicans when they were in the minority, to fight for important issues like aviation security when otherwise denied that ability by the Republican majority. Because Democratic Members are far too often shut out of the deliberative process when a bill reaches the floor, a motion to instruct is sometimes the only way a Member might be able to bring an issue up for discussion. But the Republican majority, who did not seem particularly anxious to do much work in Washington in the past 2 years, considers these attempts to open the discussion in the House as a nuisance, rather than as a means to bring democracy back to the institution. So Republicans have an amendment in this package that further restricts the right of any Member, Republican or Democrat, to offer a motion to instruct by requiring that in addition to the 20 calendar days from the time a conference is appointed, 10 legislative days must elapse. The new rule is so loosely drafted that it is questionable whether those 20 calendar days and 10 legislative days run concurrently or not. Either way, since this body is in session so seldom, 10 legislative days would fill up an entire month, further delaying the ability of Members to bring up legitimate issues relating to those bills submitted to conference. Mr. Speaker, this provision is such a blatant slap in the face of the democratic process in the House of Representatives, the Republican majority should hang its collective head. For that reason, my motion to commit will strike this amendment from the rules package. Mr. Speaker, since I have been in Congress, I have had the opportunity to serve on two special committees created for the purpose of revising and strengthening our ethics rules and regulations. The Republican majority made much of past abuses in this body, in spite of the fact that Members on both sides of the aisle were caught in these situations. Yet, now the Republicans believe they have such a safe and secure majority for the foreseeable future, they want to undo some of the significant strides that were made by these two special committees. The Republican majority has opened a proverbial can of worms by including several items in their package. The first might be called the ``pizza rule.'' Because some outsiders like to provide large quantities of free food and drink to Members' offices night after night, this new Republican provision would carve out an exception to the gift rule. We also have the ``I have a second job and I want to get paid for it'' rule. Members are currently prohibited from acting in certain fiduciary capacities and thus are not allowed to receive compensation for practicing a profession that offers services involving a fiduciary relationship. Mr. Speaker, no matter how worthy a profession might be, why should we create a special exemption in the rules for the practice of medicine? If we do it for one, why not everyone? I think this House would be far better served if we just kept the rule the way it is now. For these reasons, my motion to commit will strike the provisions in the rules package that relate to ethics rules. My motion to commit also strikes two separate orders contained in section 3 of the resolution. The first provision I will seek to strike establishes the budget resolution adopted by the House in the second session of the 107th Congress as in effect in this Congress until such time as a conference report establishing a budget for fiscal year 2004 is passed. Mr. Speaker, my Republican colleagues will say this will merely allow the House to finish work on the appropriations bills for fiscal year 2003. Perhaps we should have done that in the 107th Congress rather than waiting to do it in the 108th Congress, with budget numbers outdated and unrealistic given the current economic circumstances. In addition, the appropriations number in the House-passed budget resolution of the 107th Congress is $749 billion; yet, the Republican leadership has agreed with the White House on budget numbers exceeding that figure. In addition, the budget resolution of the second session of last Congress maintains highway numbers that are also outdated and which, frankly, are not good policy. For example, those numbers will not allow for increased highway construction money that might be prudently spent throughout the country to create jobs and restore crumbling infrastructure. Secondly, in furtherance of the Republican majority's agenda to stifle debate by cutting debate, cutting off amendments, and staying out of town as much as possible, this package contains a separate order that will make Wednesday a suspension day through the second Wednesday in April. Now, this order will certainly cut down on the work of the Committee on Rules, since one of our best work products has been a rule making Wednesday a suspension day. But Democrats believe that far too many bills are considered under suspension already and that the House is thus denied the opportunity to fully debate and amend legislation. In my motion to commit, this provision would be stricken; but we have also included language that calls on the Republican majority to bring up fewer, rather than more, bills on suspension, and that no bill should be considered on suspension if it authorizes or makes appropriations in excess of $100 million. There is ample time in our calendar to spend on the floor debating legislation. We should not be institutionalizing shortened weekdays and cutting off debate. We have also included in the Democratic motion to commit language calling on the Republican leadership to ensure that the minority party will be able to fully participate in the legislative process. We have recommended that they strive to ensure that five ``good government'' ideas are followed in the House. First, so that Members might know what they are voting on when they vote, we call on the Republican leadership to ensure that Members have conference reports available to them 3 calendar days before such a conference report is considered in the House; and at the very least, at a bare minimum, no conference report should come to the floor unless every Member has had 24 hours to review it; not exactly a revolutionary concept. Second, we asked the Republican leadership to reduce the number of waivers contained in rules reported from the Committee on Rules. This is especially important in the consideration of bills that have been reported and that go straight to the floor. Many times, even members of the committee of jurisdiction are not sure if the bill that comes to the floor is the same bill that was reported, and it would only enhance the legislative process and democracy if Members had adequate time to review legislation. Third, we call on the Republican leadership to allow the House to debate and amend legislation by reducing the number of important bills that are considered on the suspension calendar. In that regard, we are, fourthly, asking that the majority ensure that more alternatives and substitutes be allowed in rules adopted by the Committee on Rules. Finally, we ask the Republican leadership to allow more legislation to be considered on the floor under open rules so that more Democrats may offer amendments. Finally, Mr. Speaker, Democrats must raise strong objections to the manner in which the Republican leadership has gone about creating a Select Committee on Homeland Security. This provision was added last night with no consultation with the minority, and we believe that is no way to begin a new Congress when the issue of homeland security is one that does not belong to either party. We are all Americans here, and we should be involved in the deliberations surrounding the provisions of the Homeland Security Act. Mr. Speaker, I know our motion to commit will not pass today; but I do believe it is important that we talk about these issues, because in the long run it is for the good of the institution. I am proud to serve here, and I am proud to represent the people of my congressional district. I think that I, along with every other Member of this body, should be able to fully participate in the process of making laws, setting policy, and determining the course of this Nation in the years to come. While I recognize that he with the most votes wins, I also know that if someone has the most votes, they should not fear an opposing point of view. For too long the Republican Party has seemed, through their words and actions, to fear dissent among their own ranks, as well as the opposing view that may be held by the minority. We are a democracy; and we should never forget that, for in a democracy the rights of the minority are protected while at the same time advancing the will of the majority. I hope my Republican colleagues will remember that in the 108th Congress. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FROST asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as we have heard, there is controversy on this rule. This matter has been pending for some time. I personally support the rule and the bill, and I urge adoption of the rule. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texax asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this conference report and urge my colleagues to support this rule so that the House may proceed to the consideration of the conference agreement. The House has, in the past two Congresses, consistently supported bankruptcy reform. In the 107th Congress, the House passed its version of the bill by a vote of 306 to 108. This agreement, which is the product of months of negotiations, makes sensible changes in the law that will save American consumers millions of dollars a year. This conference agreement adheres to the principle that if an individual has the capacity to repay a substantial portion of their debt, then that debtor should have an obligation to repay. This conference agreement will rein in abuse of the system and ensure that those debtors who cannot pay are given the fresh start they need. Mr. Speaker, I commend the conferees for their hard work on this issue and for bringing the House a conference report that is worthy of support. I would point out, Mr. Speaker, that there are Members on our side of the aisle who strongly object to this conference report, and we will be hearing from them in the course of this debate. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Boucher). (Mr. BOUCHER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Eunice Breazeale, a lifelong Texas resident celebrating her 100th birthday this week on November 17th. Over her lifetime, Eunice has seen America and the world change around her again and again. Yet, through it all, one constant in her life has been her love of education. I know of very few people who have two high school diplomas--but Eunice does! Due to the demands of World War I, Eunice's high school dropped its senior year, and she graduated as a junior. She later returned to complete one last year--thus earning her second diploma. All that education must have lured her into teaching, because she enrolled in Baylor Female College in September 1922 to become a certified teacher, and subsequently obtained a position in the Mt. Olive CSD of Mills County, Texas. So began her 29-year-long career as an educator. Yet, as she taught, pursued a higher education for herself, and raised a family of her own, Eunice found time to lend her talents to service, and quickly became a leader in her community. Among her accomplishments, Eunice helped start the Teachers' Retirement in Texas, served as Adult Sunday School Superintendent for 10 years and Children's Sunday Coordinator for 2 years. She also worked in the Baptist W.M.U. for 27 years while holding a number of offices, worked in the PTA for 25 years, and played piano for the Kamay Baptist Church for 10 years. Even today, Eunice is active in her community and church. Mr. Speaker, as Eunice's friends and family gather this weekend in Lampasas, Texas, I know my colleagues will join me in honoring this remarkable woman. I salute Eunice Breazeale today, and wish her a very happy 100th birthday with many more to come.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.