Doc Hastings

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Neumann).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Bob Schaffer).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Staten Island, New York (Mr. Fossella).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) 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. Speaker, yesterday the Committee on Rules met and granted a closed rule for S. 1502 which provides for 2 hours of debate equally divided between the majority leader or his designee and an opponent of the bill. The rule also provides for one motion to commit. Mr. Speaker, let us make no mistake about it. The intent of this bill is to provide a better education for the children of Washington, D.C. The bill allows the most needy families of this city to choose what school is best for their child, and it provides them the resources to do it. In short, the bill empowers the families of Washington, D.C., who now have no choice but to send their child to an often inadequate local school. At the same time, though, this bill will help the children who remain in the District's public school system. It provides Federal funding to help local public school students pay for private tutors. In addition, as some students begin to choose scholarships, spending per pupil in District public schools may go up, while class sizes go down. Our intent is not to drain Federal funds from public schools. Instead, we are striving to help out accountability back into the public school system. A parent who notices that a neighbor's child has blossomed under the scholarship program will have the same opportunity for their child. The scholarship funds in this bill are in addition to the more than $568 million that Congress provides every year to the District of Columbia public schools, a school system that spends more money per pupil than almost any other school system in the country, approximately $10,000 per pupil. Mr. Speaker, the D.C. Student Scholarship Act helps the children of this city. I strongly support this legislation because I firmly believe that it enables parents to send their children to a more structured, more disciplined environment. It is their choice. At the same time, the bill allows the local public schools to focus on the children who remain and allows each school to spend more money for each child. I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 413 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I want to urge my colleagues to support this rule, and the underlying bill. This is clearly a product that is bipartisan in nature and that is something I think we can be proud of. 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 reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Roukema). (Mrs. ROUKEMA asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on each side?

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul). (Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) the chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, H.Res. 411 is a modified open rule waiving all points of order against consideration of the bill. The bill provides 1 hour of general debate to be divided equally between the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce. The rule also provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and the Workforce now printed in the bill, as modified by the amendments printed in part 1 of the report of the Committee on Rules, shall be considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, the rule provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered by title and that each title shall be considered as read. All points of order are waived against the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The rule provides that before consideration of any other amendment, it shall be in order to consider the manager's amendment printed in part 2 of the report of the Committee on Rules, if offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) or his designee. All points of order against that amendment are also waived, it shall be considered as read, and shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent. It shall not be subject to amendment and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. If that amendment is adopted, the provisions of that amendment in the nature of a substitute as then perfected shall be considered as original text for the purpose of further amendment. Mr. Speaker, H.Res. 411 provides that no other amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in the Congressional Record. The rule allows the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to postpone votes during consideration of the bill and to reduce votes to 5 minutes on a postponed question if the vote follows a 15-minute vote. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit, with or without instructions. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 6, the Higher Education Amendments of 1998, reauthorizes existing programs that provide Federal aid to students. It is designed to help to make college more affordable, simplify the student aid system and improve academic quality. Most importantly, Mr. Speaker, this legislation will ensure that all Americans wishing to pursue a higher education will continue to have that opportunity. First and foremost, H.R. 6 safeguards the student loan program by ensuring that student loans will remain available for all students and that students will receive the lowest interest rates in 17 years. Moreover, once this bill is enacted into law, deserving students from disadvantaged backgrounds will have more Federal support to attend college than ever before. H.R. 6 improves campus-based aid programs such as Work Study, Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants, and Perkins Loans. It also expands flexibility in the Pell Grant program that provides vouchers to needy students, by permitting a larger portion of the grant to be used for purposes other than tuition, such as child care for parents attending classes. Mr. Speaker, encouraging students and their parents to work and save for educational expenses is a priority in this Congress. Accordingly, H.R. 6 increases the amount of income students may earn before it impacts their eligibility for financial aid. The bill also exempts veterans' benefits from being counted against students when they apply for financial aid. Incredibly, Mr. Speaker, the current financial aid formula treats the assets of students and their parents differently and separately, as though they are not part of the same family. H.R. 6 changes this provision by combining the assets of the student and his or her parents when calculating the total ability of the family to contribute towards college expenses. Finally, this legislation contains a number of administrative changes designed to streamline aid to education and eliminate bureaucratic red tape. In that regard, H.R. 6 can truly be described as a good deal for taxpayers as well as a good deal for students. I commend the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and in particular the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon), the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) for their efforts in bringing this important legislation to the floor. The rule before the House today is designed to provide full and fair consideration of the committee's work product, while limiting the opportunity for Members desiring merely to score political points with this bipartisan legislation. Mr. Speaker, the quality of our higher education system in the United States has long been the envy of the entire world. At the same time, access to higher education for all deserving young people has been one of the driving forces behind two centuries of innovation and economic growth. I urge my colleagues to continue this tradition by putting America's students and their education first and adopting both this rule and H.R. 6, the Higher Education Amendments of 1998. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purposes 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 411 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. 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. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I have no requests for time, 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, for the purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall), 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. Speaker, House Resolution 388 is an open rule providing for the consideration of H.R. 2870, the Tropical Forest Protection Act of 1998. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate, equally divided between the Chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on International Relations. The rule makes in order as an original bill for the purpose of amendment the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute now printed in the bill, which shall be considered as read. The rule also allows the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to accord priority and recognition to Members who have printed their amendments in the Congressional Record. Such amendments will be considered as read. In addition, the rule permits the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to postpone votes on any amendment and to reduce to 5 minutes the time for voting after the first of the series of votes, provided that the first vote is not less than 15 minutes. Finally, the rule provides for 1 motion to recommit, with or without instructions. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2870 would amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to facilitate the protection of tropical forests by reducing the debts owed to international development banks by certain foreign countries, in exchange for commitments by those countries to preserve, maintain and restore tropical forests within their borders. Thanks in no small measure to the leadership and vision of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman), the House will have before it later today an innovative proposal that addresses two very serious problems: the large volume of uncollected debts owed by foreign countries experiencing difficulties repaying those debts in a timely fashion; and the disappearance of some tropical forests throughout the world. The legislation of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) recognizes that the two problems are in many cases directly related. All too often, Mr. Speaker, developing countries in which many of the tropical forests are located feel they have little choice but to sacrifice their magnificent forests in response to mounting financial pressures at home and abroad. By authorizing what had become known as ``debt-for-nature'' swaps, this Congress can ease the financial burdens now hampering economic and social advancement in many of these countries while, at the same time, preserving for current and future generations essential natural resources. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on International Relations reported H.R. 2870 to the House with broad bipartisan support. The Chairman and the ranking member of that committee are to be commended for requesting an open rule on this bill in order that Members of the House wishing to offer germane amendments may do so. House Resolution 388 reported by the Committee on Rules is consistent with the request of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), chairman of the committee, and accordingly, I urge my colleagues to support both the rule and the bill we will shortly consider, H.R. 2879, the Tropical Forest Conversation Act of 1988. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 388 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced a bill today that would correct a mistakenly drawn boundary between the Lake Chelan National Recreation Area and the Wenatchee National Forest. This measure would move the boundary that divides one land owner's property into two different federal jurisdictions, the National Park Service and the National Forest Service. While the land owner was originally assured that his property was located completely within the Wenatchee National Forest, it is now apparent that due to an error in the original boundary designation, that only part of his property is so designated. This bill would retroactively change this oversight to the original intent.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my reluctant opposition to this resolution, which I believe proposes the wrong means of achieving the right end. I opposed the President's original decision to deploy our troops in Bosnia because I believed that neither the goals of the mission nor the exit strategy was clearly defined. Furthermore, I strongly suspected that the Dayton Agreement would not easily or permanently resolve the disagreements dividing groups in the region, and that the conditions of the Dayton Agreement could only be enforced through a long-term U.S. presence. As a result, I have voted on numerous occasions to put an end to this seemingly endless deployment of troops. Unfortunately, my reservations have become reality. A mission originally characterized by President Clinton as a temporary implementation measure has turned into an open ended mission with U.S. troops serving as everything from peacekeepers, to traffic cops, to construction workers. For that reason, I have supported efforts in the House to fix a date certain for the withdrawal of our forces through the use of our Constitutional authority to control funding for such missions. I must confess that because of my strong desire to see our troops returned home I considered supporting H. Con. Res. 227. However, in the end I cannot in good conscience endorse a process which I believe to be unconstitutional simply to settle a policy difference with this President. I have consistently opposed the War Powers Act as contrary to the intent of the framers of the Constitution, who reserved leadership in foreign policy to the Presidency. I have always viewed the War Powers Act, enacted in 1973, as a partisan gimmick devised and used by liberal Democratic Congresses seeking to tie the hands of Republican presidents with whom they disagreed. To change my position now that we have a Congress controlled by Republicans in order to score points against Bill Clinton would be politically opportune, but counter to my basic opposition to the War Powers Act. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject the unconstitutional mechanisms of the War Powers Act and defeat this resolution. Instead, I encourage my colleagues to vote their consciences on the Bosnia issue when we consider the President's request for additional funding to continue this deployment. Let us bring our troops home in an orderly, but timely manner. I have voted to do so before and I will do so again, but not in a way that I believe does such great damage to the doctrine of separation of powers enshrined in our Constitution.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 382 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I also urge adoption of the rule. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.