Doc Hastings

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I thank the majority leader for yielding. Under the rules of the House, the Members have the right to vote if they're in the well. You're certainly not suggesting that the presiding officer or the Speaker is going to not abide by that privilege that a Member has when they're in the well of the House.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. If the gentleman will yield, I think every Member should allow every Member the opportunity to address these issues.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. If the gentleman will yield, the gentleman is correct.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlelady from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), a member of the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that each side get an additional 2 minutes so I can engage the gentleman and so he can have the time to yield to me.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, this is an oppressive rule, written to restrict debate in the House and to strip away rights from the minority. This rule makes in order four Democrat amendments and only three Republican amendments. This means that 80 percent of requested Democrat amendments were made in order, but just 33 percent, or one-third, of Republican amendments filed with the Rules Committee were made in order. Mr. Speaker, this isn't balanced. It's restrictive and not in the tradition of having an open debate on important issues. Last night at the Rules Committee, Financial Services Committee Chairman Frank said that he supported allowing debate on an amendment relating to illegal immigration and legitimate concerns of ensuring that persons illegally present in this country do not benefit from the new Federal program created by this bill. Rules Committee Democrats responded by making in order the least substantive, most meaningless and unenforceable immigration amendment possible. A Republican amendment by Representative Ginny Brown-Waite. of Florida had very clearly and explicitly made certain that anyone illegally present in this country cannot rent or buy a house from this new government program. That amendment was not made in order. Every Democrat on the Rules Committee voted to deny the House voting on this meaningful amendment. Mr. Speaker, when Democrat leaders aren't totally shutting down debate, they are giving the House window dressing instead of substance on important issues. Not content with blocking two-thirds of Republican amendments and restricting the opportunity of every Member of this institution to come to the House floor and offer amendments to improve, fix or alter this bill, House Democrat leaders went even further to shut down the minority, squelch dissent and take away their parliamentary rights. Section 2 of this rule takes away the right of any Member of this House to make a motion that the House rise out of the Committee of the Whole and places it solely in the hands of the Democrat majority leader or the Democrat chairman of the Financial Services Committee. Mr. Speaker, the new majority promised to run the most open, honest House in history. Instead of keeping their promises to the American people, Democrat leaders are acting with impunity as they shed any semblance of openness, fairness or regular order. I don't believe many of the freshmen Democrat Members who were elected in the last election came to Congress to block debate and prohibit Members from offering amendments on the House floor. Yet, Mr. Speaker, they have joined lock-step with Speaker Pelosi in stooping to a level of oppressive partisanship that far exceeds the sins of any previous Congresses. It's a shameful record that shatters the promise Democrat leaders made to the American people to run an open, honest House. Mr. Speaker, all this is being done to pass a bill that would create a brand new, Big Government, $15 billion Federal program to buy, remodel, resell or rent thousands and thousands of houses across the country. Who will profit from this new $15 billion government program are the lenders who made the bad loans and then foreclosed on families who didn't make their mortgage payments. It's a bailout for home lenders that knowingly took risks. It's terribly unwise and wasteful of taxpayer dollars to create a new government program that invites other lenders to take gambles on home loans because the American taxpayer will come along and wipe away their bad decisions. Mr. Speaker, why should American taxpayers be footing the bill for calculated mistakes made by others? Why should American taxpayers, who are making their mortgage payments each month or who are paying rent, have to come along and fund billions of dollars to give away grants and zero interest loans for those who speculated, gambled and lost? Mr. Speaker, taxpayers should not take this hit. Now I recognize that this bill is titled the Neighborhood Stabilization Act and that its stated intent is to help rehabilitate neighborhoods in metropolitan cities and urban communities that have multiple foreclosed homes sitting vacant and empty. But, Mr. Speaker, why should rural and middle America be forced to have their tax dollars used to bail out lenders in big cities and urban areas? I believe, Mr. Speaker, we should work to find incentives for people to purchase these homes and improve these neighborhoods. But we should oppose a new $15 billion spending program so the Federal Government can be involved in flipping houses or renting out homes. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this oppressive rule and the bad underlying bill. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Florida (Ms. Castor) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, on April 21, CNNMoneyline.com had a poll, and the things that Americans were most concerned about from a financial standpoint were: the cost of gasoline, 65 percent; the cost of food, 16 percent; the cost of health care, 13 percent; and the cost of housing, 6 percent. Mr. Speaker, that makes the case in my view for defeating the previous question so we can respond to the 65 percent of Americans who are concerned about the rising price of gasoline. This will give the House of Representatives an opportunity to debate ideas to reduce the cost of gasoline. So I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so we can consider this vitally important question for American families, for workers, truckers, small businesses, and for the entire economy. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time. Mr. Speaker, 2 years ago Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised Americans a Democrat plan to lower gas prices at the pump. Democrats have controlled Congress for 16 months but we have still not seen the plan. Meanwhile, the cost of gas has gone so high it is setting record after record. Since Democrats took control of Congress in January of 2007, the cost of gasoline has gone up by more than 50 percent. In fact, the cost of gasoline has gone up more in 16 months than it had gone up in the prior 6 years. Despite Speaker Pelosi's promise of a ``commonsense plan'' to ``lower the price at the pump,'' this Democrat Congress has put forward no plan, taken no action, and passed no bills to lower gas prices. It is time for the House to debate ideas for lowering prices and it is time for Democrats to reveal their promised plan. By defeating the previous question, I will move to amend the rule to allow any amendment to be made in order on the underlying bill that ``would have the effect of lowering the national average price of gasoline.'' Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the text of the amendment and extraneous material inserted in the Record prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I again inquire of my colleague from Florida if there are any more speakers on her side.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California, the ranking member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on both sides?

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleague if she would be willing, since she has time and she is the last speaker, if she would yield time to us so we may control that time for the speakers we have.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I inquire of my colleague from Florida if there are any more speakers on the other side.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, clearly there is enough to talk about here, and so I ask unanimous consent that each side have an additional 5 minutes.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on both sides?

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois, a classmate of mine, Mr. LaHood.