Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, as I understand it, from your announcement, the tax reconciliation bill will also be on the floor next week? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding, and I urge my colleagues to vote for this important motion to instruct on the PATRIOT Act. Like so many, I voted for the PATRIOT Act the first time and the second time. But I agree with the gentleman from California and the gentleman from Virginia, and as I understand it, perhaps the chairman as well. I simply do not understand the reticence to include sunset provisions on a law that affects the civil liberties of every American citizen. In fact, when we reauthorized the PATRIOT Act in July, the Republican bill permanently authorized 14 of the 16 provisions. The other two provisions, one for roving wiretaps and the other dealing with the FBI's power to demand business records, were extended for 10 years. Democrats fought to sunset these provisions last summer; and we do so again today, apparently successfully, because, I think, people have, upon reflection, thought that this is a better policy. Because when it comes to the government's power to intrude on the private lives of citizens, the United States Congress should not give the government unchecked power to do so. Just last Sunday the Washington Post documented, and it has been referenced here, the hundredfold increase in the issuance of national security letters seeking information about U.S. citizens and visitors who are not even alleged to be terrorist or spies. There are terrorists. Terrorism is a serious threat, and we need to be serious in our response. But privacy concerns must not be casually dismissed. In fact, it was not until several sections of the PATRIOT Act were set to expire that the Justice Department began to respond to congressional inquiries and we had the opportunity to assess, examine, and recalibrate our policies. I submit to my colleagues they have given the Justice Department carte blanche. No matter how good the leadership is in the Justice Department, it is not a policy that we ought to pursue and would be an abdication of our congressional oversight responsibility and contrary to the interests of the American people. Madam Speaker, this motion would recede to the Senate and create a 4- year sunset on the most controversial provisions in the PATRIOT Act, orders by the secret Foreign Intelligence Court, blank wiretap orders and the surveillance of agents of a foreign power who act alone. This motion, in my opinion, is a step in the right direction, and I hope the Members support it. As I said, and I will echo the comments of so many here, terrorism is an immediate and proximate threat, as we lawyers say; and we need to respond effectively to keep America safe. But in the process, we must also protect the basic rights that our Founding Fathers knew were the bedrock of the United States democracy.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the success of the first ever Recording Arts Day on Capitol Hill, which was held on September 7, 2005. This grassroots advocacy day for music was organized by The Recording Academy, in conjunction with the Recording Arts and Sciences Congressional Caucus, of which I am proud to co-Chair with Representative Mary Bono. Recording Arts Day brought 20 music associations and more than 100 music professionals to the Hill to discuss a variety of issues with Members of Congress, including protecting intellectual property rights, bolstering music education and emphasizing the importance of music preservation. Musicians, songwriters, singers, producers and other key members of the music community shared their experiences and raised awareness of the important role that the recording arts play in our culture and economy. Music is one of our country's greatest and largest exports, in addition to touching millions of lives around the world. Recording Arts Day seeks to ensure that the private and public sectors are working together on these causes in order to nurture future artists and support music. Mr. Speaker, I would once again like to recognize Recording Arts Day and thank The Recording Academy, and its president Neil Portnow, for organizing this great event.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, this is not the appropriate forum for debate on fiscal actions that have been taken or will be taken, so I will not enter that debate. I will, however, make the observation that the gentleman mentions that going back to 1977 there was a bill on this floor. Of course, in 1993 there was a bill for which 218 Democrats voted and no Republicans voted that I will remind the gentleman cut over $250 billion of spending. I know you would want to be reminded of that and not forget that. I am prepared to get into a debate, but I wanted to correct that observation because very frankly your side tends to ignore the cuts that were effected in 1993 and look only to the revenue which was raised in 1993 which, of course, ultimately from our perspective, and I think accurately, created significant surpluses in this country for 4 years in a row. I will yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Had Jefferson been questioned on that observation, he would have said it does not necessarily mean that both conclusions are correct.

Mr. HOYER. I will yield to my friend for the purpose of quoting Thomas Jefferson.

Mr. HOYER. As a matter of fact, I would be glad to engage my friend in that debate. We can take an hour out and debate that.

Mr. HOYER. In nominal terms it was larger. In actual terms, not in nominal, in actual terms if you made $5 in 1993 and you make $5.10 now, you are technically making more money. Nobody in the world believes you are making more money. And that misrepresentation, we should not have gotten into this debate because it is the subject of a long debate with significant disagreements between the sides, on fiscal responsibility.

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, the gentleman says any time is a good time to talk about fiscal responsibility. We have Rosa Parks that we need to really address and that is critical, but I do not want to let it go. The gentleman has made a mistake, but it is a mistake that is made regularly, and it is a misrepresentation. In fact, if the gentleman will look to the record, if you use honest nominal numbers, the 1982 Dole-Reagan tax increase was larger, larger than the 1993 revenue enhancement, or tax increase, as you call it, which tried to pay for the things we were buying.

Mr. HOYER. And then given the fact that the Speaker's Office obviously is making these arrangements, I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Could the gentleman give some idea as to when you believe that Members who attend the 11 o'clock funeral would be able to get back to Washington vis-a-vis votes?

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for that information. Regarding Wednesday's schedule, which I know has become somewhat complicated, first of all, it is my understanding that the majority has some meetings on that morning. In addition, as you know, and you mentioned the resolution that we are going to consider on Rosa Parks, Rosa Parks' funeral in Detroit is on Wednesday. Obviously, therefore, many, many Members will want to be attending that funeral, I am sure, on both sides perhaps. And we are wondering whether or not we can structure Wednesday's schedule to accommodate attendance at the funeral so that Members will not miss votes. It is my understanding that the funeral is at 11 o'clock. I might yield to the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, who was very, very close to Mrs. Parks, to perhaps give us a thought on the time frame in which Members could be back from the funeral.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I think most of the public believes that we hopefully are servants. The adjective I am not sure that they always agree with.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California, chairman of the Rules Committee, I am not sure what the other titles are, for the purposes of informing us of the schedule for the week to come.

Mr. HOYER. Let me go to another subject because the gentleman and I could go on all day about this, and that is what the Members fear. Immigration. This is an issue on which many of us have focused, on which great concern has been expressed. I am wondering whether or not you believe that prior to Thanksgiving we will have some type of immigration legislation brought to the floor.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, you do not mention Friday. There is one bill mentioned, plus perhaps conference reports on appropriations bills. Do you anticipate that we will be meeting Friday next, or that Members can be reasonably confident that we will complete our work for the week by Thursday night?

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his information.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for those comments. In light of the fact that the Speaker is arranging for the aircraft to get Members there, I presume that they will schedule votes consistent with the leaving and the returning of Members from the funeral. That is my presumption. I understand that is a little bit up in the air, but we certainly hope that can be done. As the gentleman observes, Members on both sides of the aisle I am sure will be attending. I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. I appreciate the comments of both the ranking member, Mr. Conyers, who has been so involved in the life of Rosa Parks and such an advocate of civil rights, which was her cause and her life, as the gentleman from California has observed, and I thank him for his comments.

Mr. HOYER. As I said, my presumption is that we will try to make sure, I say we, the Speaker's Office will try to make sure that we accommodate Members who are going, because I presume there will be a substantial number.

Mr. HOYER. I am sure that all of us want to work this out, and I appreciate that comment. Let me go, if I might now, to appropriations conference reports. They are not listed here, other than obviously we anticipate that there may well be appropriations conference reports. Do you know which ones we might expect next week and when they might be considered? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that. Do we have any read on where the defense appropriation bill is at this point in time?

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, we have been talking about budget reconciliation now for a number of weeks and the possibility of a budget amendment bill coming to the floor. Over the last 2 weeks that has not come. But, as you know, committees are marking to a figure substantially above the current budget resolution which was adopted by the House and the Senate. Can you tell me whether or not we are going to have a budget amendment bill on the floor either next week or the week after, and whether or not we will have a reconciliation tax bill on the floor in the near future?

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, you believe it will come, but you are not sure that it will come before Thanksgiving. Is that I what I get from what you just said? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, the new President of Iran made comments that chillingly confirm the hate, intolerance and militant intent to destroy Israel and her people that is shared by too many in the Arab world. Speaking to 4,000 students at a conference called ``The World Without Zionism,'' the Iranian leader declared, ``Israel must be wiped off the map.'' He went on to say, ``Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic Nations' fury.'' This Congress and the American people and all civilized, freedom- loving people around the world must emphatically and unequivocally denounce these poisonous comments as outrageous incitement to international criminal acts. Mr. Speaker, as my colleagues know, we just passed a resolution a little over an hour ago unanimously expressing that sentiment. All who seek international security, stability and respect for the rule of law must collectively and publicly reject these comments of the President of Iran, and not only reject them, but condemn them as well. The silence in too many of the Arab capitals loudly testifies to the sympathy with which such despicable remarks were received. I am pleased, however, very pleased, that the prominent Palestinian negotiator Mr. Erekat reportedly told the media, ``We have recognized the State of Israel. We do not accept the statements of the President of Iran. This is unacceptable.'' That was said by one of the major Palestinian leaders. I congratulate him for those comments. It is that spirit that will allow us to pursue peace on the roadmap set forth by President Bush. However, I am compelled to ask, where is the public outrage among other responsible respected leaders in the Arab world? Mr. Speaker, I have been to Israel 8 times, 3 times in the last 2 years, and on each of those most recent visits, our Israeli allies have expressed increasing concern about Iran's support for terrorism and its continuing effort to develop and acquire nuclear weapons. The President of Iran's dangerous comments only confirm our worst suspicions and fears about the Iranian government's intentions and malevolence. These remarks must inspire a renewed commitment by the United States and by our allies to do everything within our power to prevent Iran from acquiring weapons of mass destruction. Those who rationalize acts of terrorism against Israel should reassess their opinion as to why Israel must be ever vigilant and must take all measures necessary to respond to terrorism and ensure the safety, security and sovereignty of its people and its land. Mr. Speaker, we were right today to overwhelmingly and unanimously express our outrage at the President of Iran's suggestion that Israel would be wiped off the map. Peace will be possible in the international community only if the international community overwhelmingly, emphatically and without any tempering rejects and severely criticizes such comments when they are made.