Doc Hastings

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop), my colleague on the Rules Committee.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 832 is an open rule providing 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of H.R. 5427, The Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of 2007. Under the rules of the House, the bill shall be read for amendment by paragraph. House Resolution 832 waives points of order against provisions of the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI, prohibiting unauthorized appropriations or legislative provisions in an appropriations bill except as specified in the resolution. The rule authorizes the Chair to accord priority in recognition to Members who have preprinted their amendments in the Congressional Record and provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions. The House Rules Committee reported by voice vote an open rule for consideration of H.R. 5427, The Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of 2007. The underlying bill provides over $30 billion to the Corps of Engineers, the Department of Energy, the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Reclamation and several independent agencies. The underlying bill provides nearly $5 billion to support vigorous civil works programs that focus limited resources on completing high- priority projects. The Department of Energy constitutes the bulk of the bill with funding of over $24.3 billion. Included in the Department of Energy's budget is over $4 billion for the American Competitiveness Initiative to strengthen basic research by increasing funding for the Department of Energy's Office of Science. The bill also supports the Advanced Energy Initiative by increasing money for a variety of clean energy technologies including biomass, hydrogen, solar, wind, and clean coal. Mr. Speaker, this bill also includes funding important many projects in my central Washington district. After getting the Bureau of Reclamation engaged in funding solutions for the depletion of the Odessa Subaquifer 2 years ago, I am pleased that this bill continues the effort to ensure the Federal Government keeps its commitment to the Columbia Basin farmers at risk of losing their water supply. For the fifth straight year, I am pleased that the funds are provided to keep the study of additional water storage in the Yakima River Basin moving forward towards completion. 2007 is a critical year for this study and this gives the Bureau the funds needed to keep it on schedule to get the study done by 2008. Having authored the law that created the study, I am dedicated to ensuring it stays on course. No storage has been built in this Yakima River Basin since the mid-1930s. And after several serious droughts in the last 5 years, it is vital that this study provide answers on more storage. Over $24 million is provided for 2007 to ensure 1,000 Federal lab scientists and workers continue their important work at the Pacific Northwest National Lab. The funds are needed to transition the lab personnel into new lab buildings. Some lab buildings dating back to the mid-1940s are slated for demolition and cleanup due to radioactive contamination of the structures, soil and ground water. With coordination and planning, this transition can possibly be accomplished in a manner that could save the taxpayers over $100 million. Within the Department of Energy, the Office of Environmental Management is responsible for the cleanup at the Nation's nuclear sites. The largest and most contaminated of these sites is Hanford in my district. This bill provides needed Hanford cleanup funds for the River Corridor Closure project, the K Basins and other projects managed by the Richland Operations Office. An increase of $20 million is provided for ground water contamination cleanup and technology development. At Hanford's Office of River Protection, $20 million is restored to the tank farm budget for the bulk vit demonstration project. This funding is necessary for DOE to confirm alternative treatments for millions of gallons of hazardous and radioactive tank waste. Mr. Speaker, the largest component of Hanford's budget is the waste treatment plant. This project is critical to the Federal Government's obligation to uphold its legal cleanup commitments to the State of Washington. For well over a year this project has been undergoing extensive review by the Department of Energy, the Army Corps of Engineers, and GAO. In addition, an independent group of the Nation's best and brightest nuclear and construction experts have been looking into the project's technical issues and estimates of the projects costs and schedule. These reviews are providing both recommendations and validations that will assist the Department of Energy in setting a path forward for this project. It is my hope, Mr. Speaker, and expectation that DOE will provide a detailed plan for the waste treatment plant before Congress writes a final conference report on the energy and water appropriations act for this year. A final path forward from DOE is critical for making decisions on this project for next year and for the future. Mr. Speaker, I cannot stress enough the importance of Congress getting this information from DOE in a timely manner. I also want to thank the subcommittee chairman and the ranking member for the time and attention they have dedicated to the waste treatment facility, specifically into preparing a bill that enjoyed strong bipartisan support in the subcommittee and full Appropriations Committee. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 832 is an open rule that gives all Members a chance to express their views on how our Nation should be prioritizing its spending. I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I advise my friend from California I have no more requests for time, so I will reserve my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 832 and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to strike all after the enacting clause of S. 2349 and insert in lieu thereof the provisions of H.R. 4975 as engrossed by the House.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the Senate bill (S. 2349) to provide greater transparency in the legislative process, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am going to urge my colleagues to vote for the previous question and for the resolution. I want to make two points. The gentleman says that one reason to vote against the previous question is to have a chance to have a say on the DeLauro amendment. I would advise my colleagues that the DeLauro amendment was offered in the full committee, notwithstanding the fact that it is legislating on an appropriations bill, and even the members of the Appropriations Committee rejected the DeLauro amendment. As I mentioned earlier in my remarks, there is a long-standing tradition that when an authorizing committee has an objection to a provision in an appropriations bill, that provision is not waived. With that, Mr. Speaker, this is a good rule. It allows for open debate. It is an open rule.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the remarks of the distinguished ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, but we have a long-standing tradition in the Rules Committee that when the authorizing committee has a problem with amendments or policies that are put on the Appropriations Committee that they feel is under their jurisdiction, they ask that that not be protected. That was the case here as you pointed out in your remarks with the peanut program and the milk program. So as you suggested, if somebody from the Agriculture Committee or the chairman stands up and asks for a point of order then, of course, the Chair will have to make his ruling by what the rules are. I will also say this, and I know that the gentleman from Wisconsin has been working just because of the nature of his committee on a lot of milk programs, I too have a lot of dairies in my district. There has been a gravitation towards those dairies in my district. When I talk to my dairy farmers, I have essentially one message for them and that message is at some point, and I know this is a very difficult thing to do, but at some point the dairy industry in this country has got to try to speak with one voice as much as they possibly can. I know that is very, very difficult. They are cognizant of that. When this provision was put in place several years ago, there was an attempt to do that. So we will have to see. But the Rules Committee has a tradition and that is the reason why we did not protect that portion of the bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 830 is an open rule providing 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of H.R. 5384, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and Related Agencies Appropriation Act of 2007. Under the rules of the House, the bill shall be read for amendment by paragraph. House Resolution 830 waives points of order provisions in the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI prohibiting unauthorized appropriations or legislative provisions in an appropriation bill, except as specified in the resolution. The rule authorizes the Chair to accord priority in recognition to Members who have preprinted their amendments in the Congressional Record and provides one motion to recommit, with or without instructions. Mr. Speaker, I am proud that yesterday the House Rules Committee reported by voice vote an open rule for consideration of H.R. 5384, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2007. As with most appropriation bills, the Rules Committee has once again afforded Members an opportunity to offer amendments to this legislation that comply with the rules of the House. Members of the House may bring forth an idea or change they wish to see and express their views on how our Nation should prioritize its spending. Mr. Speaker, the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee reported out a bill that provides important resources for the U.S. Department of Agriculture and various other agencies. Specifically, H.R. 5384 makes available nearly $95 billion to fund agriculture, rural development, drug safety, food nutrition programs for the fiscal year 2007. Mr. Speaker, this legislation provides the funding necessary for the programs and activities of USDA while at the same time maintaining fiscal discipline and reflecting our Nation's priority spending needs. Mr. Speaker, the USDA carries out widely varied responsibilities through about 30 separate internal agencies and offices staffed by some 100,000 employees. Important programs covered under the agriculture spending bill include the food nutrition programs such as the Food Stamp Program, the Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children or WIC, and child nutrition programs, farm and foreign agricultural services, certain mandatory conservation and trade programs, crop insurance, farm loans, foreign food aid programs. Additionally, it includes natural resources and environmental conservation programs and food safety and rural development activities. The underlying bill provides essential funding for agriculture research activities which include USDA's Agriculture Research Service as well as university research and extension programs. I have visited, Mr. Speaker, several agricultural research centers in central Washington, and I am impressed by the innovative work being accomplished to equip farmers with the tools they need to improve the quality and production of their agricultural products. Agriculture research enables American farmers to reap the benefits of science and technology they need to remain competitive in an ever- changing international marketplace. H.R. 5384 also provides several programs that seek to protect human health and safety. Avian flu pandemic countermeasures and monitoring are funded at $80 million. The Food Safety and Inspection Service is funded at $853 million. The Animal Plant and Health Service Inspection Service activities are funded at $904 million, with $90 million going to BSE detection and prevention activities. One program of importance to farmers in my area of central Washington is the Department of Agriculture's Market Access Program, which is aimed at creating, expanding and maintaining foreign markets for U.S. agriculture products through consumer promotions, market research and technical assistance. One of the biggest challenges facing American agriculture, especially the specialty crops, is the need to expand overseas markets in the face of often subsidized foreign competition. By opening foreign markets to American agricultural products and breaking down trade barriers, the Market Access Programs help local farmers and our Nation's economy, while improving our balance of trade and creating jobs. I am pleased that the underlying bill fully funds the Market Access Program, which is particularly important for many of the specialty crops that I mentioned, including apples, cherries, hops, pears, potatoes and wine grapes. With a proven track record of success, it is clear that this program's return on investment is far greater than the cost of the Market Access Program to the Federal Government. Mr. Speaker, this is a fiscally responsible bill that will help American farmers and ranchers respond to the challenges of the global market and provide a wholesome food supply for our Nation. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of House Resolution 830, and the open rule provided by the Rules Committee by a voice vote. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 830 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, this has been an absolutely fascinating exchange between my friend from Florida and the distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee, and I have been enjoying it. This is exactly, I think, what our Founders thought the House should be is a time to debate great ideas and come to conclusions and so forth. Let me make a few points here that were made and just kind of, hopefully, put things into perspective. I think this rule that will support the underlying bill is a very good rule. I think the underlying bill is a very good rule. My friend from Florida talked several times about the deficit. I am concerned about the deficit too. But I think you have to put this into some sort of a historical perspective. Right after the war, Second World War, the percentage of the deficit as it related to GDP was extremely high. I think it was well in excess of 10 or maybe even 15 percent. This year, according to CBO, the deficit as a percentage of GDP is 2.6 percent. To put that into perspective, during the 1980s it was in excess of 5 percent before the economy started to grow. If we maintain this policy, and we certainly have a responsibility in this body to control the spending, not only discretionary spending, but mandatory spending, which we did last year in our budget resolution, and which we want to do again this year with our budget resolution, if we stay the course on that, the percentage of debt, as opposed to GDP, will be down to less than 2 percent. I think that is a trend in the right direction. Mr. Speaker, I think this, as I mentioned, is a good rule. The underlying bill is a good rule. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the chairman of the Rules Committee.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 805 waives all points of order against the conference report and against its consideration. The resolution also provides that the conference report shall be considered as read. Mr. Speaker, in 2001, 2003 and 2004, Congress enacted responsible tax relief to help create jobs, grow America's economy and allow workers, families and small businesses to keep more of their hard-earned money to save, invest and spend for their future. I believe individuals and families are best able to make these decisions, not the Federal Government. These tax relief policies are clearly working, Mr. Speaker. Over the last 5 years, tax relief has helped spur economic and job growth. The economy has expanded for 18 consecutive quarters, reaching 4.8 percent growth in the first quarter of this year alone, and the forecast for continued growth is positive. Since enacting tax relief, national unemployment has dropped over a full percentage point and is now down to 4.7 percent which is lower, Mr. Speaker, than the average of the 1960s, the 1970s, the 1980s and the 1990s. We have experienced 31 consecutive months of job growth, and during that time more than 5 million new jobs have been created. The Department of the Treasury reported that Federal revenues for fiscal year 2005 totaled $2.15 trillion, the highest level ever; and the increase is 15 percent over last year, which amounts to over $320 billion this year alone. Homeownership is at nearly 70 percent, and the stock market is soaring. Yesterday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average surged within 85 points of its record high, which was reached in January of 2000. A new all-time high could happen any day now. It is clear that encouraging investment leads to significant job growth which leads to a more prosperous America for America's working families. The Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation conference report before us today protects families, small businesses and investors from tax increases and provides taxpayers with additional certainty. This certainty is vital to continued economic growth. I would like to take this opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to highlight a few provisions in the conference report that allow small businesses to grow and hire more workers, encourage investment by extending capital gains and dividend income tax relief, and continued relief for millions of middle-income taxpayers from the alternative minimum tax. Mr. Speaker, small businesses are the backbone of our economy, employing over half of all private sector employees, paying 45 percent of total U.S. private payroll, and generating 60 to 80 percent of net new jobs annually over the last decade. In 2003, Congress allowed small businesses to keep more of their money through enhanced business expensing. It is vital that we extend tax relief to small business in order for them to grow and hire more workers. This conference report provides small businesses that tax relief. The alternative minimum tax was originally enacted to ensure that all taxpayers, especially high-income taxpayers pay at least a minimum amount of Federal taxes. However, the alternative minimum tax is not indexed for inflation, and more and more middle-class families are adversely affected by this tax. In 2001, 1.8 million taxpayers were subject to the alternative minimum tax. And it is estimated, over the next 5 years, 33 million, or one-third of all taxpayers, will be subject to this tax. This conference report will extend the alternative minimum tax exemption levels through the end of 2006 and at a higher level than 2005. It also will allow taxpayers to claim nonrefundable personal tax credits such as dependent care credit, the credit for the elderly and disabled, and the credit for interest on certain home mortgages against the alternative minimum tax. This will help families continue to receive the full benefit of these tax credits. This conference report extends reduced tax rates on capital gains and dividend income for an additional 2 years. This extension will continue to encourage investment by lowering the tax burden of 24 million families, including 7 million seniors who depend on dividend income to pay their bills. Mr. Speaker, the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act Conference Report before us today is part of a commitment we made to taxpayers last year when Congress passed a responsible budget that called for spending restraint, slowing the currently unsustainable growth of automatic spending programs and extending tax relief to families and small businesses. However, let me be clear that this conference report is not our final commitment to taxpayers. Last year, the House and Senate approved extending additional tax provisions that are not part of this conference report, including State sales tax deductibility for those States that do not have an income tax. I look forward to working with my colleagues to quickly bring a bill to the floor that will extend this important provision as well as others that have expired, such as tax incentives to enhance affordability of higher education and spur innovation in our country through research and development. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 805 and the underlying conference report. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 805 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4975, the Lobbying Accountability and Transparency Act. Mr. Chairman, the American people have every right to expect the highest ethical standards here in the people's House. In order to uphold the integrity of Congress as an institution, we must go a step further to enhance transparency and accountability with respect to lobbying activities. The Lobbying Accountability and Transparency Act does just that while preserving the right of Americans to petition their government. Much like other bills that are brought to this floor, this bill is a compromise, and I would like to commend Chairman Dreier for seeking input from Members on both sides of the aisle, but especially for the long, hard work that he has worked on this issue since the turn of the year. This was no easy task. And as the chairman said, this is only the start of the process. But because this is a compromise, I believe that there are areas in which this bill can be improved. For that reason, I am pleased that we will have an opportunity to consider an amendment later today that I have cosponsored that will further improve the bill with regard to privately funded travel for Members of Congress. Much concern has been raised in recent months over abuse of House rules that permit Members and staff to accept privately funded travel connected with the performance of their official duties. Upon passage by the House, the legislation before us today would temporarily suspend such travel and direct the Ethics Committee to propose to the House new rules for approving and disclosing privately funded travel. As several of my colleagues will note later on, I am sure, and have noted in the past, privately funded travel often serves a very useful purpose, and the temporary suspension is not intended to signal that something is inherently wrong with these private trips. Instead, the temporary suspension recognizes that, until a new travel system can be put in place, Members taking such trips do so at considerable risk of public criticism that is in many instances unwarranted. For that reason, the bipartisan Lungren-George Miller-Hastings- Berman-Cole amendment was proposed as a stop gap measure designed to protect Members and staff who have already made plans to travel during the 6 weeks between now and mid-June when the House is expected to act on recommendations for new travel rules to be proposed by the Ethics Committee. Very simply, our amendment provides that privately funded travel may be accepted during this interim period whenever two-thirds members of the Ethics Committee vote to approve the proposed trip. This mechanism, which will be in place for only a relatively short period of time, will make it possible for worthwhile trips to go forward while ensuring that all privately funded travel is carefully scrutinized for compliance with applicable House rules. I am pleased that several of my distinguished colleagues on both sides of the aisle, including the new ranking minority member of the Ethics Committee, Mr. Berman, have had a hand in crafting this interim travel approval mechanism. I look forward to working closely with Mr. Berman not only to ensure that this process runs smoothly but also on a bipartisan basis to develop clear and workable rules for approving privately funded travel that the Ethics Committee will communicate to all Members and staff. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the bill.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, a primary duty of our government is to protect and defend our Nation--and that includes controlling our borders. This bill aims to strengthen our border control through increased manpower, new technology and smarter law enforcement coordination. These critical components to border control have my full support. However, by leaving out a reformed guestworker program, this bill is not the comprehensive solution that we need. If we fail to address why many people from other countries seek to enter our country illegally, we make the job of securing our Nation more difficult. I cannot fault anyone for wanting to come here to work for a better life for themselves and their families--most of us have family members who came to America for that very reason. That is the American way--and it's a tradition deeply rooted in our Nation's history. Central Washington is the top producer of labor intensive agriculture products like apples, pears, cherries and grapes and is heavily dependent upon immigrant labor. To stop illegal immigration and fix our broken immigration system, we must strengthen our borders and create a legal channel for workers to come here and fill jobs that Americans are not. The existing H2A guestworker program is unworkable--as evidenced by chronic labor shortages in many agricultural areas. There simply is not a ready pool of American workers to fill most of the jobs currently held by immigrant farmworkers. Without a legal channel for hardworking individuals to fill these jobs, many American industries would be left with no labor force. Our entire economy would feel the punch. The United States would be at serious risk of losing our fresh fruit and vegetable farms to foreign countries. And, the cost of construction and basic services would increase--raising prices for every American. A functional guestworker program means our government decides who enters our country, where they are, when they must leave, and what rules they must follow. A guestworker program makes certain that the Federal Government is in control of immigration. Providing a legal way for honest, willing workers to fill these jobs reduces the number of people trying to enter our country illegally. A reformed guestworker program is critical to our Nation's security, to our economy and to preventing illegal immigration. Without a guestworker plan, I must withhold my support for H.R. 4437 and continue working for the comprehensive solution we need.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.