Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman. The GSE, the GSE bill was initially, our thought was that would be on the floor this coming week. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), the ranking Democrat on the Committee on Financial Services, is on the floor and has been very involved in this bill. I am not sure you even know this, but the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) informs me that there are very significant sums that would be available to the gulf area for housing in the GSE bill, which will be regular order, and the benefit would be that this money would be available, and we know we are going to have to spend money in that area. Can you tell me why the GSE bill is not on the floor? This deals, as you know, with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, if the gentlemen from Texas (Mr. DeLay) does not object, let me yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), the ranking member, because I know he has worked very hard with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), as you well know, in a very bipartisan way. You mentioned 63 to 5, 65 to 5; and so we did not perceive there to be much opposition to the bill.

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, I know the leader understands those were largely rhetorical questions. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), however, does express a view that a bill that can be very helpful to us that came out 65 to 5, overwhelming agreement, came out months ago. We do hope that this bill can be brought to the floor, certainly before, hopefully if not the end of next week, the week following. Because we believe it is the kind of legislation that people would be proud of. Democrats and Republicans came together, worked on it, came out with a bill, and it is a very good bill.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, does the gentleman have any thoughts at this point in time regarding the length of time of the initial CR that we would consider? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I am presuming, and there was some discussion about this last week, that at some point in time in the next couple of weeks, we are going to have to do some sort of continuing resolution. Is that the gentleman's belief as well? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. I realize the problems of doing that; but many of our Members, particularly those who come from far away, are concerned about traveling on that Wednesday, as the gentleman knows, which makes it problematic because we will have to be very late Thursday. We will obviously accommodate what the majority believes it is going to do. In that regard, last week, we had thought we probably, or might, be in tomorrow. We are not going to be in tomorrow. Can the majority leader give us a view on what might be the status of next Friday? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, the last bill I would ask you about is the subject matter that has been one of the biggest subjects that we have been considering this year. The President put it on the agenda, the Social Security privatization, private accounts act. Can you tell me whether or not we anticipate a Social Security bill coming to create private accounts or privatize in some way Social Security coming to the floor this year.

Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, and I agree with you that is not a problem. Please convey the Democratic congratulations to the chairman and more importantly his wife, the mother. Two last bills I will ask you about, Mr. Leader, and I appreciate the time we are taking on this. Reconciliation: There was a discussion about putting off reconciliation. We have put off reconciliation at least until the end of the month, as I understand it probably until October. Can you tell me whether or not we still anticipate reconciliation moving forward and, if so, are there going to be two bills? One the $35 billion in mandatory spending cuts among which is $10 billion in Medicaid cuts, and/or the $70 billion in tax cuts that was included in the budget reconciliation instructions.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman. Do you have any idea what ``as soon as possible'' is, the time frame? Next 3 weeks, next month, late October, November? Do you have any idea on that?

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that information. Now, there is some speculation about an energy bill being considered. Obviously, gasoline prices are extraordinarily high. The American public is very concerned about their energy costs, about the policies of this country. Do you anticipate an energy bill coming to the floor any time within the next 2 weeks or 3 weeks?

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman. I would simply add again that as the gentleman indicated, trying to go regular order, obviously, both sides understand that these are things we need to move with great dispatch so we can help the people that need help and get it to them when they need the help. We are all for that. On the supplemental, the President has indicated there is going to be a need for another supplemental. Do you know when we might consider such a supplemental; how much that supplemental might be for? And if we start considering it early, while the $52 billion is still available to be expended to assist those, it will give us a little bit of time to go through the process that the gentleman indicates is the best process. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time. I thank the leader for that observation and information. I would urge the leader, as we bring additional bills to the floor, that we give the opportunity to have these bills fully considered by the floor. We want to move them. We want to move them quickly. The overwhelming majority of us on both sides of the aisle have voted for all of the bills that you just referenced on the theory, as you said, that we need to move ahead on the Pell Grants and TANF and on the dollars themselves, on liability issues. But the failure to give full consideration to them, assuming full consideration does not mean days and weeks delay but a full day of consideration of these pieces of legislation, we believe is appropriate, particularly if we deal with another very large money bill. We hope it goes through committee, and we hope it comes to the floor with an opportunity for Members to make suggestions in forms of amendment, either cutting or adding or shifting, as the case may be, those resources. Because we think that is, you know, the theory of the process is, our collective judgments are better than our individual judgments. And that is what democracy is.

Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time. I appreciate the majority leader's response. There obviously is a difference of view of how soon that those dollars could flow from the ranking member of the subcommittee and the ranking member of the full committee. You mentioned days. I would certainly hope it could be days. Because I think we would all be advantaged in a bill, particularly if we could pass it with the overwhelming majority that was received both in the subcommittee and in the full committee. Moving on, Mr. Leader, in addition to the bills you have listed for next week, do you anticipate any Hurricane Katrina-related legislation will come to floor? And if so, will those bills go through the committee of jurisdiction and be considered under rules on the floor that allow full debate? You mentioned, as a preface to that, obviously almost all of us voted for the $52 billion. But I think everybody on the floor was concerned about the level of information we had about what had been spent of the $10 billion, how much was going to be spent, on what, of the $52 billion. In that context I ask that question.

Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the majority leader for that information. First of all, on the general proposition for the month of October, we had had discussions last week; and it is clear that the second week of October, it will not be practical to meet because of the various important dates on that week. The first week was somewhat in flux at that point in time. Could the majority leader bring us up to date on where currently the thinking of the leader's office is on where we will be on the first week of October?

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise for the purposes of inquiring of the majority leader the schedule for the week to come, and I am pleased to yield to the distinguished majority leader, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay).

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, Democrats want to make sure that we help the victims of Katrina first; secondly, we want to make sure that there is oversight on the money that we are spending, a lot of money; and, thirdly, we want to have an oversight, meaningful, in depth, honest, searching, courageous as to why the Federal Government was so inept in its response and so late. The good news is that the men and the women of the National Guard, the Coast Guard and other elements of the Federal Government are now acting so courageously and effectively. That is what we want, and that is why we oppose this bill which would create a partisan congressional committee to investigate the inept Federal response to Katrina. Because we believe it is imperative to establish an independent commission modeled on the highly regarded 9/11 Commission. I will ask my friend who chairs the Rules Committee, who used to come to this floor on a regular basis and say, when Democrats were in the majority, why will you not allow us to consider an alternative? Are you afraid that the majority of this House will say, yes, a commission is the right way to go? Are you afraid that you cannot keep your Members in line? Are you afraid and therefore do not give us an amendment, do not give us a motion to recommit with instructions? What is the fear? It is the fact that you are so focused on not having meaningful oversight, of keeping it in-house, of not having independence, that you do not allow us and the American public's representatives to have that alternative considered on the floor. Ladies and gentlemen, oppose this resolution and continue to demand an independent commission, just as the American people want. We did it with 9/11. We can do it with Katrina. We can do the work that the people expect us to do. Vote against this resolution. Madam Speaker, let no one be mistaken about why Democrats oppose this legislation. We oppose this bill--which would create a partisan congressional committee to investigate the inept Federal response to Hurricane Katrina--because we believe it is imperative to establish an independent commission modeled on the highly regarded 9/11 Commission. We are not alone. In fact, a Washington Post-ABC news poll revealed this week that 76 percent of Americans support an independent commission. Some Republicans support such a commission, as well. Just this week, the Republican Senator Vitter of Louisiana--whose constituents were directly affected by this devastating hurricane-- expressed his support for a commission. Yet, Madam Speaker, this Republican majority today has denied Democrats the opportunity to even consider the bill offered by Mr. Hastings, which would create such an independent commission to investigate the local, State and Federal response. Let's be clear: There is not bipartisanship coming from the other side of the aisle regarding the creation of real oversight. The Speaker and Senate majority leader announced this proposal without even consulting Democrats. The reality is, if this Republican majority were charged with investigating the actions of a Democratic administration, there is no doubt in my mind that its oversight would be real and vigorous. But as the columnist David Broder pointed out recently: ``Majority Republicans see themselves first and foremost as members of the Bush team--and do not want to make trouble by asking hard questions.'' This majority has refused to conduct oversight over this administration during the last 4 years. Why should we believe that it is prepared to fulfill its constitutional responsibilities now? We have no basis for believing that. And, that is why an independent commission is needed. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the leader for the information. If I might start with perhaps a general question, I noted in the paper that the leader indicated that he thought we would probably be here through at least the week before Thanksgiving, which is what I related to my Members in the whip's meeting this morning; but I wonder perhaps if he could amplify that. The gentleman has had a few days to discuss it with the leadership and with the administration and perhaps the Senate leadership to have some better idea of where we might be going. Obviously, with Katrina and other challenges, I know it is very flexible, but I appreciate and I know the Members would appreciate getting my colleague's further thought on where he sees the possibilities for the balance of the session. I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, with all due respect, I hope that is not the case.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise for the purpose of inquiring of the majority whip the schedule for the week to come. Oh, I am sorry. I was told that the leader was not going to be available, but the leader is available. So I am pleased to yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), my friend, the leader.