Martin Frost

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this is the seventh time in 7 years that the House has considered this same constitutional amendment. We appear to have some slower learners on the other side of the aisle. This is an amendment that would require a two-thirds majority to pass any provision that raises revenue for the government. The House has rejected it six times before, and I hope today will mark its seventh consecutive failure. Before we get into a debate Members have heard before, I want to begin by putting it in context. Late last week the President finally agreed to make homeland security a Cabinet-level priority, something Democrats have been pushing for months, and called on Congress to get to work creating an entirely new structure. It is a huge job, one that raises a lot of questions and will take a lot of work. Meanwhile, prescription drug prices are still sky high nearly 2 years after many Republicans got elected promising to do something about it; and still there is no credible Republican plan to help senior citizens who cannot afford their pharmaceutical bills. There is no question that the House has a tremendous amount of important work left to do this year, including all 13 appropriations bills, none of which has been considered yet. Instead of addressing these and other important issues this week, Republican leaders are once again wasting the House's time on a gimmick they call the Tax Limitation Constitutional Amendment. We know it is a waste of time because, as I mentioned before, it has failed each of the previous six times the Republicans brought it to the floor: in 1996, in 1997, in 1998, in 1999, in 2000, and in 2001. And we know it is irresponsible because of what it does. For instance, this amendment would make it nearly impossible to close any of the countless loopholes that shameless tax dodgers use to avoid paying their fair share. For example, right now the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Maloney) are trying to close the loophole that allows big corporations to flee overseas to avoid their tax obligations. This amendment would make it even harder to stop these tax evaders, which is probably what Republican leaders want anyway. After all, they have repeatedly blocked the Neal-Maloney bill in the Committee on Rules. If that were not bad enough, this amendment would do serious harm to America's democratic system. The Founding Fathers designed our government around the principle of majority rule. Writing in ``The Federalist Papers,'' James Madison wisely argued against supermajorities like the one Republicans are advocating today, stating that, ``The fundamental principle of free government would be reversed. It would be no longer the majority that would rule: the power would be transferred to the minority.'' Make no mistake, this is exactly what this constitutional amendment would do. It would allow a relatively small minority, one-third plus one, to stop widely supported, meaningful legislation. Mr. Speaker, right now we are in a global war to protect the American way of life, and Republican leaders are trying to undermine our democratic system of majority rule here in the House of Representatives. I urge my colleagues to defeat this misguided constitutional amendment and preserve majority rule in the United States of America and allow the House to get on with the real business before it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. I have been sitting over here trying to figure out why are these people so antagonistic to majority rule and it finally occurred to me. They are worried that they are not going to be in the majority after this election and they are going to be in the minority, and so they want minorities to be able to have a veto power over the will of the majority. It is very interesting. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Tanner). (Mr. TANNER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of J. Frank Moore III, President of the International Association of Lions Clubs. Deeply involved in the community and sincerely committed to service, President Moore brings a unique passion and spirit to his duties, and truly lives the mission of Lions International: ``We Serve.'' Lions have a strong commitment to community service, and are recognized internationally for their service to the blind and visually impaired, as well as their commitment to helping youth throughout the world. An educator by profession and former Superintendent of Education for the Daleville, Alabama city schools, President Moore brings a wealth of experience as well as a unique perspective to the Association's service work. A member of the Daleville Lions Club since 1975, President Moore has held many positions within the organization, and received numerous awards in recognition of his commitment and service to the organization and its mission. President Moore has won two Lion of the Year Awards, a 30 Member Key Award, the Henry W. Sweet Outstanding Past District Governor Award, two International President Leadership medals, seven International President's Award, and the Ambassador of Good Will Award, the highest honor the Association bestows upon its members. In addition to his Lion activities, President Moore is active in numerous professional and community organizations. He is Chairman of the Daleville City Planning and Zoning Commission, a member of the Board of Directors of the Army Aviation Center Federal Credit Union and a member of the Army Aviation Museum Foundation executive committee. As you may be able to tell by now, President Moore is a busy man. More importantly, however, President Moore is a well-respected, hard- working, and dedicated individual. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Oak Cliff, Texas Lions Club myself, I have seen firsthand how tirelessly President Moore works on behalf of the International Association. I know my colleagues, many of them Lions themselves, will join me in honoring a remarkable man and a tireless advocate. I salute President Moore today, and wish him continued success in all of his endeavors.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Mr. FROST. Madam Speaker, we have no further requests for time. I urge adoption of the rule, and I yield back the balance of our time.

Mr. FROST. Madam Speaker, I yield 8 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders).

Mr. FROST. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I am pleased this conference report is on the floor today. It has strong bipartisan support, and I expect that it will pass overwhelmingly. Since 1934, the Export-Import Bank has played a vital role in creating and sustaining millions of high-paying American jobs by supporting more than $400 billion in U.S. exports. As American business and jobs have become more dependent on trade over the years, the importance of the Ex-Im Bank has only increased. In today's world of global trade, the Export-Import Bank serves as an indispensable lender of last resort, filling financial gaps that would otherwise hurt many American businesses and their employees. Perhaps most importantly, the bank levels the playing field for many U.S. companies, allowing them to compete with foreign companies that have significant support from their own governments. But Ex-Im Bank financing does more than support jobs at exporting companies. It helps sustain and create jobs at tens of thousands of U.S. suppliers around the country who participate indirectly in Export- Import Bank-financed exports. These indirect exporters, many of which are small businesses, supply components, services, and technology to U.S. exporters of a wide range of products and services as diverse as environmental technology, construction and agricultural equipment, amusement park rides, aircraft, furniture, and computer and telecommunications technology. Export-Import Bank financing has a ripple effect. It sustains jobs at companies large and small throughout the U.S. economy in almost every State and the great majority of congressional districts. Moreover, the bank makes good, sound investments for America. In fiscal year 2000, for example, the Ex-Im Bank used $759 million as leverage to support more than $15.5 billion in U.S. exporters. That has a tremendous bang for the buck. In my north Texas district, where tens of thousands of jobs are directly dependent on exporting quality American products, we have seen firsthand just how important the Ex-Im Bank is to America's economy. For all these reasons, I am pleased that this conference report reauthorizes the bank for 5 years. That will provide U.S. companies and their workers with the certainty they need. I urge the passage of this rule and of the underlying conference report. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley).

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds. Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear about what the people on the other side are arguing in favor of. They are arguing in favor of a 3-day week. They are complaining, oh, gee, we have spent 16 hours on that. We just finished Thursday. Most people work on Fridays. These folks do not want to work on Friday. They want a 3-day week, because we came in at 6:30 on Monday evening. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer). (Mr. ROEMER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, it is very late, so I will not mince words. Democrats are as eager to vote for the bill that came out of the Committee on Appropriation as Republicans are. The underlying bill is still a good, bipartisan measure that supports the war on terrorism and homeland security. But by resorting to extraordinary, arrogant, and deceptive procedures tonight, the Republican leadership has sunk to a new low. Mr. Speaker, the second rule is no better than the first rule the Committee on Rules reported out yesterday. Republicans are still using the war to hide from the American people their raid on Social Security. They are still trying to secretly turn your Social Security card into their credit card. They are still trying to charge billions of dollars more without even putting it through the credit card reader because they do not want a tell-tale receipt for their spending spree. The only change, Mr. Speaker, is that Republicans have resorted to outrageous procedures to completely shut off debate tonight. Let me say that again: to completely shut off debate. Simply put, they do not like the fact that Democrats are exposing their attempt to politicize the war, drive the Nation into deeper debt, and keep raiding Social Security. That is right, Mr. Speaker. As America prepares to celebrate Memorial Day, Republican leaders are shutting down democracy in the House of Representatives, and they are so ashamed that they waited until the cover of darkness to do it. Well, they should be ashamed. Right now, the brave men and women of the U.S. military are halfway across the globe fighting for freedom and democracy in Afghanistan, and tonight the Republican leadership is here in Washington stomping out democracy in the House of Representatives. But I suppose we should not be surprised, Mr. Speaker. After all, this has been a very bad 10 days for the Republican House. Republican leaders are scared to death by the vulnerability of their slim majority, so scared that they seem to be willing to do anything to cling to power. Last week, the press caught them using as a cheap fund- raising prop an official photograph of the President taken on September 11. That, I think we would all agree, was a disgraceful display of political opportunism, one that does a tremendous disservice to the President and the country. But Republicans never apologized to the American people, so I assume they are still selling a piece of September 11 in order to pay for their congressional campaigns. Then yesterday, Republican leaders brought their strategy of political war profiteering to the House floor. And they got caught once again. That was undoubtedly painful for the Republican leadership, Mr. Speaker; but it was good for the House, because it has given us one more chance to stop them from politicizing the war. Mr. Speaker, we all know it is wrong to use soldiers and seniors as political pawns. And we all know that that is precisely what this rule does. So I urge my Republican friends to join me in opposing this rule, to join me in urging Republican leaders to stop holding this wartime spending bill hostage. Then we can all vote together, as a unified House of Representatives, to pass the original bipartisan bill that Democrats and Republicans both support. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Speaker, if the country of Cuba had a parliament or a legislature, they would be attempting to do exactly what the Republicans are doing tonight. They would give the dictator of that country the right to prevent that parliament from voting on an issue of whether or not to raise the debt, whether or not to put the country in debt. All we are asking for is the right to vote squarely on whether to put this country deeper in debt. The Dallas Morning Newspaper in my home city, a very conservative newspaper, editorialized today against what the Republicans are doing, saying, shame on them. The Congress should vote directly on the question of putting this country deeper in debt, something which this rule prohibits us and prevents us from doing, just as they would in the Cuban parliament if there happened to be one. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds. If I understand the last speaker correctly and the other speakers before him, too much democracy in defense of democracy is a bad thing. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield two minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield two minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

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 myself 30 seconds. Before the gentleman from Alabama leaves the floor, I would point out to the gentleman that I know where his amendments are. They are in the wastebasket up there in the Committee on Rules. They did not give the gentleman from Alabama a vote on any of his five amendments. Mr. Speaker, I yield one minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have been in this House for a while and I seem to remember a former Speaker of this House on the other side of the aisle standing up repeatedly when he was in the minority and talking about the corruption of the majority. Corruption. That was his word, not mine. And I think what we see here today is the exact same situation that Speaker Gingrich complained about repeatedly when talking about Democrats. We were in power for 40 years. He complained about the way we used our power. The Republicans have only been in power since 1995, for seven years. The Republican leadership, the Republican majority in this House, as evidenced by this rule today, is a corrupt majority. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the ranking member of the Committee on Appropriations.