Martin Frost

Mr. FROST

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

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 gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis). (Ms. SOLIS asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, if the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule. My amendment will provide that immediately after the House passes the economic stimulus bill, it will take up two bills: the airline safety bill introduced by the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and the unemployed airline industry worker benefits bill introduced by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt). My amendment provides that the bills will be considered under an open amendment process so that all Members will be able to express their views and offer amendments that they feel are important to these two bills. Mr. Speaker, 2 weeks have passed since the other body took up and passed the airline safety bill by a unanimous 100 to 0 vote. It is time for the House to do its work and pass both of these important bills. Let me make clear that a ``no'' vote on the previous question will not stop consideration of the stimulus package. A ``no'' vote would allow the House to get on with the much delayed airline safety and airline industry worker aid bills. On the other hand, a ``yes'' vote on the previous question will prevent the House from taking up the airline safety bill and the airline worker relief bill. I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the amendment be printed immediately before the vote on the previous question.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, it is with a sense of deep disappointment that I rise today, not because it is difficult to oppose this rule and this bill. Republican leaders have presented the House with a bill that is so partisan, so unfair to laid-off workers and so fiscally irresponsible that there is little doubt about the harm it would do to the economy, to Social Security and Medicare and to public health and other homeland security problems. A person could not write a more dangerous piece of partisan posturing if they tried. No, Mr. Speaker, my deep disappointment today is with the fact that we are considering this bill at all. At a time like this, as Americans pull together to fight anthrax in the mail and to support our troops in Afghanistan, does anyone really believe we need more billion dollar corporate tax breaks? At a time like this as American cities cry out for bipartisan leadership, does anyone really believe we need more partisan posturing and politics as usual? It does not have to be this way, Mr. Speaker. Over the past 6 weeks, Americans have pulled together to rebuild from the horror of September 11. Here in Washington, Democrats and Republicans strongly support the President and the men and women of the U.S. military as we wage this war against evil. On the economy, we started off in the right direction. Democratic and Republican leaders joined the President in committing ourselves to build bipartisan consensus around an economic security package. Unfortunately, Republican House leaders have today forgotten bipartisanship on the economy. Today they hope to ram through a bill that simply repackages a whole host of expensive tax breaks that Republicans have been pushing for years. Mr. Speaker, one hardly knows where to start with this bill. It violates all the economic stimulus principles identified by the bipartisan leadership of the House and Senate budget committees. President Bush's Secretary of the Treasury called it ``show business'' for Republican special interest friends. One Washington lobbyist called it ``a bag of goodies.'' Mr. Speaker, America's economy is slumping now, but this bill provides precious little immediate stimulus. Instead, it hurts long- term economic growth by squandering the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds and driving up long-term interest rates and families' credit card and home mortgage payments. Hundreds of thousands of hardworking Americans have lost their jobs since September 11. Many laid-off workers do not get the unemployment assistance they need to take care of their families while they look for work, and many cannot afford health insurance after they lose their jobs. This bill pretty much leaves laid-off workers and their families to fend for themselves. Instead, it provides a $20 billion tax refund to the biggest corporations in America, and it does it retroactively to 1986. Let me repeat, it provides $20 billion of tax breaks to the biggest corporations in America and does it retroactively to 1986. Shame on the other side of the aisle. Shame. It gives these corporations and corporations like them another $20 billion in tax benefits when they decide not to invest in the U.S. economy but keep their money abroad. Finally, this Republican bill shortchanges America's homeland security needs to pay for special interest tax breaks. The first duty of the Government is the safety of the American people, and winning the war on terrorism will be expensive; but this bill would not make a single American more secure. Instead, it spends $160 billion of Social Security money on tax breaks for corporations and special interests. Unfortunately, tax breaks will not pay for airport security or public health. The truth is, this stimulus bill only stimulates special interests; and it does it by sacrificing Social Security, the economy and homeland security priorities. The truth is some Republicans believe the public is distracted by the war on terrorism and sees an opportunity to slip in a grab bag of special interest goodies that will neither stimulate the economy nor make a single American safer. Mr. Speaker, the American people deserve better than that, and the Members of this House in both parties can do better than that. We still have the opportunity to agree on a bipartisan economic security plan; and the Democratic substitute, which is based on the principles outlined by the Democratic Caucus Task Force on the Economy, was designed to serve as a basis for bipartisan consensus. It is balanced, ensuring resources for homeland security priorities, critical assistance for laid-off workers, and direct economic stimulus like tax relief for those most likely to spend it, and it is fiscally responsible. Every dollar is paid for by freezing the top tax rate at 38.6 percent. Our plan puts security first by setting aside $20 billion for immediate homeland security needs. Our plan ensures all laid-off workers have the unemployment insurance and affordable health insurance they need to strengthen families and stimulate the economy by putting money in the pockets of the people who need it most. It provides for 26 additional weeks of unemployment benefits. It provides for 75 percent of the COBRA costs of health insurance for 1 year for laid-off employees, something that Republicans do not even begin to do. Our plan includes a holiday tax relief for the millions of Americans who pay taxes but did not receive a full rebate check and, in some cases, did not receive any rebate check earlier this year. These new rebate checks, $600 for couples, timed to coincide with the holiday shopping season, could give the economy a crucial shot in the arm. It also includes meaningful tax relief for small- and medium-sized businesses. Short-term help, focused on encouraging immediate investment, will help jump start the economy without threatening long- term fiscal discipline. Finally, our plan is fiscally responsible and paid for. So we protect America's long-term economic health and strengthen Social Security and Medicare. To win the war on terrorism and restore our economic strength, we have to pull together and share fiscal responsibility. These should not be Democratic or Republican priorities. These are American priorities, and Americans deserve political leaders who work together to achieve them. Democrats are committed to doing that. It is my sincere hope, Mr. Speaker, that Republicans will join us in defeating this rule and this partisan bill Republican leaders have put together today. We can get back to the bipartisanship that America deserves from us. And let me say in conclusion, Mr. Speaker, the people on the other side of the aisle should be ashamed to show their heads in this Chamber today when they provide $20 billion of retroactive tax breaks going back to 1986 for the largest corporations in America. We should be providing unemployment benefits and health care benefits and jobs for the people who are suffering, not retroactive corporate tax breaks. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark). (Mr. STARK asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee). (Mr. INSLEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. The gentleman talks about small business. We all agree that small business should be helped. The retroactive tax cuts going back to 1986 include the following: General Motors, $832 million; General Electric, $671 million; IBM $1.424 billion; Ford Motor over $2 billion. Certainly we want to help small business. The gentleman on the other side of the aisle wants to give retroactive tax cuts to the biggest corporations in America. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Matsui).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones). (Mrs. JONES of Ohio asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes 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 1 minute 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 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Borski). (Mr. BORSKI asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks, and include extraneous material.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Wu).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), a member of the Committee on the Budget. (Mr. SPRATT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, we have no additional speakers. I urge adoption of the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me start by saying that I am glad that today the House of Representatives will complete this bill, H.R. 2586, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2002. It is a good example of the bipartisan support America's Armed Forces enjoy. It passed the Committee on Armed Services on a bipartisan vote of 58 to 1. That is because Democrats and Republicans are strongly committed to a first-rate military that will protect this Nation and its people and that will maintain our position as the chief protector of democracy and the rule of law throughout the world. Since the horror of September 11, Mr. Speaker, America's commitment to the finest military in the world has only become stronger. That is clear from the hard work that went into reaching bipartisan consensus in this rule. In the interest of national unity, several of the military's strongest defenders on the Democratic side agreed to forego important priorities. For example, I am disappointed that the manager's amendment strips out the provision of the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie) to make contracting procedures more equitable for Department of Defense civilian employees, a provision that was passed by the Committee on Armed Services. Last night, Democrats on the Committee on Rules tried to restore this important provision, but failed in a party line vote. I hope that we can revisit this issue at a later date. On the other hand, I am pleased that there is bipartisan support for the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Stump) and the ranking member, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton). It provides $400 million for intelligence and counterterrorism initiatives by reducing the President's request for national missile defense. It reflects how America's national defense priorities have changed since September 11. The rule also makes in order an amendment by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez) to restore equal access to health services at overseas military hospitals for service men and women and their dependents stationed overseas. Finally, I personally appreciate the work of the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Stump) and the gentleman from California (Chairman Dreier) to recognize the sacrifice of Defense Department civilians killed or injured at the Pentagon on September 11. The amendment of the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Stump) is a sense of the Congress resolution commending the Defense Department's decision to create a new award, a medal for the defense of freedom, to be awarded to Defense Department civilian employees killed or wounded as a result of terrorism. Mr. Speaker, we urge the Secretary of Defense to move quickly to produce and present this new medal. These medals are typically awarded about the time of burial, and the Defense Department is now in the process of identifying the civilians killed in the September 11 attack on the Pentagon. Until 1998, Mr. Speaker, civilian employees of the Defense Department were eligible for the Purple Heart, an honor begun by the Kennedy administration and continued during the Reagan Administration. The amendment of the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Stump) would ensure that once again they can receive the recognition they deserve for their service to America. As for the bill itself, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that it makes crucial quality of life improvements by raising military pay, improving military housing, and ensuring medical care for military retirees for the men and women of the Armed Forces and their families. I am also pleased that the Committee on Armed Services has continued its commitment to the wide range of weapons programs that ensure our military's superiority throughout the world. The bill includes $865 million for research and development of the F-22 Raptor, the next generation air dominance fighter for the Air Force, as well as $2.7 billion for 13 low-rate initial production aircraft, and $379 million for advance procurement of 24 LRIP aircraft in fiscal year 2003. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2586 also includes $1.5 billion for continued development of the Joint Strike fighter and $1 billion for the procurement of 12 MV-22 helicopters. These aircraft are important components in our national arsenal, and moving forward on their research and development sends a clear signal that the United States has no intention of relinquishing our air superiority. Mr. Speaker, the first duty of the Congress is to provide for the national defense and the men and women who protect it. This bipartisan bill does a great deal to improve military readiness and to improve the quality of life of our men and women in uniform, as well as for their families. For that reason, I urge the adoption of this rule and of the bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Puerto Rico (Mr. Acevedo-Vila).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Snyder).

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez).