Martin Frost

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I urge Members to defeat the previous question. If the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule which will allow the House to consider a number of important amendments which Democratic Members proposed to this bill.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield the remaining time to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt), the Democratic leader. (Mr. GEPHARDT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt). (Mr. SPRATT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the text of my proposed amendment be printed in the Record immediately before the vote on the previous question.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall). (Mr. RAHALL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks and include extraneous material.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining?

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 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On behalf of the Democratic Caucus, I would like to welcome all of you. It is good to see many of you I served with, and some of you I did not. You will be welcomed, I believe, in a few minutes also by the current majority leader, Mr. Armey, who will be a former Member next year. Mr. Armey is not running for reelection. The work that you do on college campuses I think is particularly important. I know a number of you have devoted a great deal of time to that. I was just with former Speaker Jim Wright this last weekend, who teaches a course at TCU in Fort Worth; and each year he keeps saying he is not going to do it again. But I asked him is he going to go back next fall, and he said, yes, he is. I can tell you, I am one of his guest lecturers. He lets me come in and speak to one of his classes once a year. I have gotten some very good former students of his working on my staff both in Washington and in my Texas office. So I want to encourage all of you to continue to do this. I know our former colleague, Dan Glickman, is taking this to the extreme. He will be at Harvard 4 days a week starting in August, and maybe some of us will come up and visit Dan in that capacity. Again, I want to thank you for the work you do when called upon to help us in the House of Representatives. Former Speaker Foley, as well as some other former Members, is currently working on a task force that Chris Cox and I will chair dealing with the question of what happens if the unthinkable should occur and that there would be a disaster in which a large number of Members of Congress would be killed all at one time and how would the government continue. We hope that never happens, of course. But having the guidance of former Members, particularly former Speakers, is very helpful as we contemplate how the country would continue in the event that occurred. Again, I want to greet all of you and welcome you here. It is good to see so many of you. I know you will have a great day here. All of the current Members value your help, value your knowledge and your experience and guidance for us. Thank you very much.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Speaker, the strength of a democracy is to be able to have full public debate on important national issues such as national defense. We stand for a strong national defense. Many of us in this caucus have a long history in that regard; but we also stand for the proposition that the American people can be trusted with the facts, and that there should be a full discussion on important issues of national defense. The majority has ignored that and ignored the past practices of this House of having a full airing of national defense issues, and having a bill that would be on the floor for several days, perhaps even a week. That is in the best tradition of this country. We stand for a strong America, and we stand for a strong and complete discussion of the issues that make America strong, not the kind of rule which has been presented today. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the ranking member on the Committee on Armed Services.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, after September 11, the world saw something that we have known for a long time: Ensuring the security and liberty of the American people is not a partisan issue. Regardless of our differences on domestic issues, like Social Security and education, Democrats and Republicans are united behind our troops and committed to providing them the resources to defend the people of this great country. We are all Americans, we are all patriotic, and we are all here to promote the best interests of this great Nation. A strong national defense stands as one of the great pillars of the might of our country, and this bill largely reflects America's bipartisan support for national defense, the war on terrorism, and our men and women in uniform. In light of this bipartisan cooperation in the war on terrorism, it is particularly outrageous that the Republican majority has given us such an unfair and one-sided rule on this important bill. Mr. Speaker, the ranking minority member and the chairman of the House Committee on Armed Services, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump), respectively, deserve real credit for this bill. The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) in particular has fought very hard to keep this process bipartisan. Mr. Speaker, in a nutshell, this bill provides the resources to win the war on terrorism and to ensure America's military remains the world's finest. It meets the President's overall defense request, which is a large increase over current spending, and it provides substantial resources to fight terrorism. Additionally, Democrats and Republicans have again worked together to make significant improvements in the troops' quality of life. The bill provides for another substantial military pay raise, at least 4.1 percent for all servicemen and women, and up to 6.5 percent for mid-grade and senior noncommissioned officers. It authorizes $10 billion for military construction and family housing because our troops and their families should not have to live in substandard conditions. And for military retirees, the bill ends the current practice of reducing veterans' retirement pay when they seek disability compensation. I am disappointed, Mr. Speaker, that the Committee on Rules rejected my amendment to remove some of the obstacles faced by more than 15,000 legal immigrants in the armed services who want to become citizens. Their service reflects the tremendous pride and patriotism of our immigrant communities, particularly among Hispanic immigrants, and I will keep working to make sure this becomes law. I am also disappointed Republican leaders did not make in order the amendment offered by the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), one of the strongest supporters of the military in this Congress, to allow the House a clean vote on another round of base closures, something we have not yet had. And the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Shows), another pro-defense Democrat, had a worthy amendment to allow military retirees the same health coverage as Federal employees, but Republican leaders refused to allow it. This bill does, however, continue our bipartisan approach to ensuring America's military superiority throughout the world, providing $3.7 billion more than the President requested for important weapons programs. In particular, it authorizes over $5.2 billion for the F-22 Raptor, the Air Force's next generation air dominance fighter. It includes $1.6 billion for the services' various versions of the Osprey aircraft. It provides $562.3 million for the Global Hawk UAV. And the bill provides $3.4 million for the Joint Strike Fighter, the high tech multi-role fighter of the future. As you can see, Mr. Speaker, the majority of this bill reflects the bipartisan support our armed forces enjoy in this Congress. So I am frankly mystified that Republican leaders are insisting on using the war on terrorism as an excuse to continue their long-time attack on the environment. It verges on ideological war profiteering, and they should be ashamed of themselves. Some Republicans have squirreled away in this bill provisions to exempt the Pentagon from landmark environmental protections that have been on the books for decades. America has fought and won numerous wars while respecting the Endangered Species Act, for instance, but now some Republicans insist on undercutting it. Since Republican leaders know they cannot defend in the light of day their attack on the environment, the Committee on Rules last night refused to allow the House to even vote on Democratic amendments to strike these environmental rollbacks, as well as many other amendments offered by Democratic Members. Additionally, there are several very important issues in the bill that the Committee on Rules majority has given short shrift to by limiting debate to 10 or 15 minutes. Given the magnitude of nuclear weapons testing, missile defense, and other matters of global reach, it seems irresponsible to give Members of this body so little time to debate. In years past, the defense authorization bill has taken several days, if not a full work week of floor time. So I am disappointed the Republican leaders are rushing through this bill in one day so they can get out of town. Mr. Speaker, it is my intention to oppose the previous question so that this bill can be improved in a way that will make it truly bipartisan. If the previous question is defeated, it is my intention to offer an amendment to the rule that will allow the House to consider amendments addressing the environmental issues in this bill as well as the other issues proposed by Democratic Members. I urge Members of both political parties to join me in opposing the previous question when it is ordered. In that way we can protect the environment and preserve the bipartisanship that has been so important to the war on terrorism. Then we can overwhelmingly pass this bipartisan bill for the troops. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I offer a resolution (H. Res. 413), and I ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps). (Mrs. CAPPS asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey). (Mrs. LOWEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ackerman). (Mr. ACKERMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

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

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller). (Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman). Ms. Harman. Mr. Speaker, my father was a refugee from Nazi Germany. If he had not made his way here and not made his way in America, I would not be standing here. My story is the story of many Members, themselves refugees, like our friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), or the sons and daughters of refugees from oppressed places all over the world. The only country in the world which always, always provides a homeland for Jewish refugees is Israel. As anti-semitism is on the rise all over the world, shockingly in France and Germany, Israel's existence and security becomes even more important. President Harry Truman courageously recognized Israel 54 years ago and every administration since has strongly supported her. We must do so again today by strongly supporting this rule and this resolution. It is the moral thing to do. It is the strategic thing to do. It is the right thing to do.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green).