Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, hundreds of thousands of our fellow citizens in our gulf coast region have been devastated and displaced by the worst natural disaster in our Nation's history. The needs of the survivors and affected communities are great and our willingness to respond must match the challenge. This great Nation must respond in a manner that the American people expect and demand. I have every expectation that every Member of this House will vote today for this emergency supplemental appropriation because our paramount concern must be to assist the victims of this catastrophe, our brothers and sisters in the gulf States. But it pains me to say, Mr. Speaker, that once again we have abrogated our obligation to conduct real, meaningful, effective legislative oversight of the executive branch. We want to help, but we have an obligation to assure ourselves that the help is going where it is needed. Ten and one-half billion dollars by unanimous consent; I was for that. Fifty-two billion, plus; I am for that. No hearings, no oversight, no questions. No examination of when and how and where and who will spend the money and who will get it. As I understand it, neither the chairman nor the ranking member of the Committee on Appropriations was consulted in the drafting of this legislation. The unfortunate truth is, Mr. Speaker, this compliant Congress has acted more like an adjunct to this administration than the co-equal branch that the Constitution demands we be. Now, more than ever, the American people deserve honest answers to hard questions about the inadequate Federal response to this disaster. For example, why did Federal agencies and officials fail to appreciate the magnitude of this disaster, even as they were being warned by hurricane experts of the potential devastation? We all watched it on television being reported to us. Why was the Federal response too slow and initially too inadequate? As the columnist David Broder wrote on Sunday, ``The majority of Republicans see themselves first and foremost as Members of the Bush team and do not want to make trouble by asking hard questions.'' I close, Mr. Speaker, by simply saying that, of course, we are going to support this, but, Mr. Speaker, I urge us to have oversight. Fifty- two billion dollars is a lot of money, and we are going to spend whatever is needed, but let us make sure we spend it right and let us make sure the right people get the money.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the leader for those comments. On a more immediate basis, next week we are scheduled obviously to come in on Tuesday at 12:30, and Friday is on the schedule. Is it the majority leader's expectation that we will probably be in on Friday or is Friday there if we need to be?

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the leader's remarks. We have advised our Members to be available for Friday, and they will be, obviously, if we have a session. In addition, the gentleman has indicated and just reiterated the possibility of doing further legislation as a result of Katrina and responses to Katrina. Can the majority leader give us an idea of what legislation might be possible in response to Katrina next week?

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the leader's observations and his comments. Again, we will certainly respond to that. We have a lot of ideas on this side, as all the Members have, in trying to respond to this and trying to anticipate what the needs will be in this crisis situation. As the leader pointed out in his closing remarks on the supplemental, we have had literally millions of people whose lives have been adversely affected, displaced, moved, and some whose lives have been put at great disruption; so I am sure Members on all sides have ideas of how we can best respond. So we will do that. Let me say, Mr. Leader, and I appreciate your remarks about working together on this, that there is not a person on this floor on either side of the aisle who does not want to work together to have an effective response so that we can help our brother and sister citizens who have been traumatized. I would hope that we would have an opportunity on whatever the legislation might be that we come up with over the next 48 hours, or by Monday, to have that perhaps reviewed. And because of the crisis and the need to move expeditiously and quickly, even if it is an hour or two notice to have a subcommittee or committee or, frankly, the bipartisan leadership look at a piece of legislation to discuss what is in it and what could be in it and what should be in it, I think that would be very helpful. The gentleman observed that the American people want us to act together on this, and I agree with him. Not only do I agree with the gentleman, but we want to do that. So that would facilitate that, and I hope we can do that. Let me ask something else, and I say to the leader that, unfortunately, there was not the kind of discussion that I think would have helped us on this. I agree with you, and every Member here I think agrees with you, that today or tomorrow or next Monday is not the time to look at what went wrong and how do we make it right. What we need to do is respond, rescue, and recover. On the other hand, it is hurricane season. We still have threats, as the gentleman knows. There is a tropical storm off Florida right now that is forming, so we do need to ensure that we have the best opportunity to respond in an emergency manner. The Speaker and Mr. Frist met yesterday and announced a committee. We believe that perhaps a commission might be more appropriate, with both parties participating equally to respond to this and to see how we can do better. Can the gentleman tell me anything about the status of either the joint committee or commission that the gentleman's side might be thinking about?

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the leader, and reclaiming my time, I think I have suggested this before, but I believe it would be useful, perhaps at some point in time in the near term, that the Speaker convene the leadership of both sides of the aisle to discuss how we are going forward. I understand there were precedents for the action that was taken, but it was not taken after discussions with this side of the aisle. And as the majority leaders know, both on the Senate side that was the case and on the House side it was the case. Again, I agree with the gentleman's proposition that the public wants to see us move ahead together and respond to this crisis together because those who have suffered are our focus, not party politics or ideological differences, but helping those who are hurting and making sure that we protect those who may still yet be vulnerable. I think we can best do that by working together. On another subject and moving on, can the majority leader tell me where we stand on reconciliation? Press reports indicate that there is a delay in the development of those bills, as called for in the budget resolution, at least for some period of time. Can the gentleman bring us up to date on what the present status of reconciliation is?

Mr. HOYER. I appreciate the gentleman's comments, Mr. Speaker. I am sure the gentleman is familiar with the letter that the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) and Mr. Conrad and others have sent with reference to reconciliation. We are concerned, of course, because of Katrina and for the exact reason we have postponed reconciliation, we are very concerned that the needs are so large at this point in time that we need to be very careful about the issue of Medicaid and, frankly, the issue of additional tax cuts. In light of the fact we have just spent $62 billion additional, which we did not anticipate and which will exacerbate, therefore, our budget deficit, and which absolutely had to be done, everybody, almost everybody supported that effort, including the majority leader and myself, but we hope that we can perhaps have discussions about that issue as well. Lastly, Mr. Leader, I talked about the long term and Thanksgiving. October. We have a number of holidays in October. Could the gentleman perhaps amplify on what his expectation is of the first 2 weeks in October? My understanding is the probability is that we will be in Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday of the first week of October, but the second week of October, can the gentleman give us some thoughts on what that might be in light of the Jewish holidays and the Christopher Columbus holiday?

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that comment, Mr. Speaker, and presume, therefore, that we are reasonably safe in advising our Members that the second week of October we will probably not be in session; is that accurate, Mr. Leader?

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the majority leader for his information.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this Joint Resolution calling on President Bush to issue a proclamation recognizing the 30th anniversary of the signing of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, commonly known as the Helsinki Agreement. The Helsinki Final Act--which was signed on August 1, 1975--was the first international agreement to accord human rights the status of a fundamental principle in regulating international relations, and has been widely credited with helping to expose human rights violations in the former Soviet bloc. In fact, I firmly believe that the political process set in motion by the signing of the Helsinki Final Act laid the groundwork for the forces that consumed the former Soviet empire. In 1975, many of the Final Act signatory states viewed the language of the act dealing with human rights and the obligation that each state had toward its own citizens, as well as those of other states, as essentially meaningless window dressing. Their objective was to secure a framework in which their international political position and the then-existing map of Europe would be adjudged a fait accompli. They were proved wrong. The Helsinki process, which provided a forum and international backing for Refuseniks and others fighting behind the Iron Curtain for fundamental freedoms and human rights--led inevitably to the collapse of Soviet communism. Today, we celebrate the freedom yielded by our steadfast commitment to the Helsinki process and by our demand that the former Soviet bloc countries adhere to and implement the human rights standards enshrined by the accords. The fall of the Berlin Wall transformed the world and demonstrated without reservation that respect for the dignity of all individuals is fundamental to democracy. As we reflect on this 30th anniversary, we understand that the countries and peoples of the region are still in transition and will be for decades to come. Great strides have been made by many former communist countries in building democratic societies and market economies. But in my view, Mr. Speaker, it is critical that the United States remain engaged with the peoples and governments of Europe and the countries that emerged from the former Soviet Union, especially Russia. We must remain committed to a Europe whole, free, democratic and at peace. It is in our strategic and national interest to do so. And by doing so, we honor the memory of all those who sacrificed so much to hold high the banner of freedom. Finally, let me note that this Joint Resolution reasserts the commitment of the United States to fully implement of the Helsinki Act; urges all participating states to abide by their obligations under the Act; and encourages Americans to join the President and Congress in observing this 30th anniversary. I urge my colleagues to support this important Resolution.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 376, which expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that the Federal Trade Commission should investigate the publication of the video game ``Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas'' to determine whether the publisher deceived the Entertainment Software Ratings Board to avoid an ``Adults- Only'' rating. I believe that the government should always tread lightly and carefully in taking action that evaluates the content of video games, music, movies, books and similar materials. I also believe that parents have the primary responsibility for evaluating and monitoring the content available to their children. However, the content industry--movie studios, television networks, record labels, book publishers, and video game developers--also has a responsibility to accurately, honestly and responsibly label and market their products. Thus, I believe it is appropriate and necessary for the Federal Trade Commission to inquire and investigate the development and marketing process for ``Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.'' There is no question that pornographic material was embedded in this video game, and that it has been marketed to teenagers and sold in stores in every community in America. The developers and publishers of this video game owe an explanation. Were they aware that the game contained embedded scenes that would inevitably be revealed? And, did they purposely pursue a rating from the Entertainment Software Rating Board of ``Mature'' rather than ``Adults Only'' to ensure that the game could be sold teenagers and thus a broader market? This is the purpose of this investigation and this bill. Intentional deception must not go unpunished.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, as we commemorate the fifteenth anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which occurred this week, I would like to share the attached Statement of Solidarity, signed by 170 national organizations and numerous state and local organizations. This Statement of Solidarity demonstrates the strong commitment in our nation for building upon the progress achieved in the first fifteen years after passage of the ADA, and continuing to strive to improve the lives of all Americans with disabilities. Statement of Solidarity on 15th Anniversary of Americans With Disabilities Act--July 26, 2005 Fifteen years ago today, with bipartisan support in Congress and broad endorsements from the civil rights coalition, President George H. W. Bush signed into law the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), calling for the ``shameful wall of exclusion'' to come tumbling down. As we mark this significant anniversary, we celebrate improvements in access to polling places and the secret ballot, government services and programs, transportation, public places, communication and information technology. Parents pushing strollers, workers delivering packages, and travelers pulling roller bags have grown accustomed to curb cuts, ramps, and other accessibility features less common in 1990. Our country is more accessible today thanks to the ADA, and all Americans are better off. Although substantial progress has been made, we are reminded every day of the significant remnants of the ``shameful wall of exclusion'' that continue to prevent this great country from realizing the full promise of the ADA. The majority of Americans with disabilities continue to live in poverty and unnecessary isolation. Most adults with disabilities are either not working or not working to their full potential, robbing the economy of the contributions of tens of millions of would-be workers. Children and youth in special education continue to drop out of school in alarming numbers before obtaining a regular high school diploma. The promises of higher education, accessible and affordable housing and transportation, quality affordable healthcare, and a living wage continue to elude many adults with disabilities and their families. The ADA is slowly driving policy changes that have enabled more people with significant mental and physical disabilities to live independently in the community, but the ongoing institutional bias in the Medicaid program keeps too many people trapped in nursing homes and other institutions, unable to enjoy the freedoms and personal choices about where and how to live that other Americans take for granted. New technologies are increasing the independence and productivity of many Americans. Yet, advances in technology alone are not guaranteed to improve the lives of people with disabilities. As we develop applications like Voice-over- Internet-Protocol (VOIP) telephony, wireless telecommunications, widespread broadband internet connectivity, new medical devices, new computer applications, and a plethora of new genetic tests, it is critical that these technologies be designed and used in a way that increases the inclusion, independence, and empowerment of Americans with disabilities as well as America's growing senior population. The ADA has begun to change the landscape of our cities and towns, but a civil rights law alone does not create the kind of transformation of attitudes that Americans with disabilities, their families, and allies are fighting to achieve. This kind of change requires widespread discussion, education, and consciousness-raising. In 2005, how do fears, myths, and stereotypes continue to artificially limit understanding and acceptance of disability as a form of human diversity? What role do the mass media and entertainment industries play in forming public perceptions of disability, and how can decision makers in these important fields be influenced to produce more content that depicts the actual life experience and first person perspectives of people with disabilities? What can be done to further improve accessibility at the design stage of new products and programs? How can disability awareness and disability- friendly practices create more productive places of business and learning? What concrete actions can worship communities and sports and recreation programs take to foster full participation of children, youth, and adults with disabilities in these activities? Why do so many Americans continue to view disability as a fate worse than death, and how do these views affect surrogate medical decision making and the application of new genetic testing technologies? These questions form the basis of an American conversation that still needs to take place. Widespread social change cannot simply be legislated, and it will not occur without bold leadership from all sectors of American society. Public and private employers, in particular, must make a serious, concerted effort to recruit and advance qualified workers with disabilities within their labor force. Election officials must take the necessary actions to ensure that every adult is able to enter his or her polling place and cast a secret and independent vote. School administrators and university presidents must embrace their responsibility to deliver a worldclass education to all their students. It is time for leaders across America--business owners, little league coaches, moms and dads, sheriffs and clergy--to reject exclusion, paternalism, and segregation and to take personal responsibility for removing barriers to full participation that still exist in every community in this country. With the aim of making America work better for everyone, the undersigned organizations pledge to build on the progress of the last 15 years and join together to promote the full participation and self-determination of the more than 50 million U.S. children and adults with disabilities. We believe that disability is a natural part of the human experience that in no way should limit the right of all people to make choices, pursue meaningful careers, live independently, and participate fully in all aspects of society. We encourage every American to join us in this cause, so that our country may continue on the path that leads to liberty and justice for all. Signed (as of July 25, 2005): National Organizations AAPD (American Association of People with Disabilities); AARP; Abilities, Inc.; ABILITY Awareness/ABILITY Magazine; ADA Watch/National Coalition for Disability Rights; ADAPT; AFL-CIO; ALDA, Inc. (Association of Late-Deafened Adults); Alliance for Children and Families; Alliance for Public Technology (APT); Alliance for Retired Americans; American Academy of Audiology; American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation; American Association for Active Lifestyles and Fitness; American Association of Leisure and Recreation; American Association of Mental Retardation; American Association of the Deaf-Blind (AADB); American Association of University Women; American Association on Health and Disability; American Congress of Community Supports and Employment Services; American Council of the Blind; American Counseling Association; American Dance Therapy Association; American Diabetes Association; American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; American Foundation for the Blind; American Institute on Domestic Violence; American Medical Student Association; American Medical Women's Association (AMWA); American Music Therapy Association; American Network of Community Options and Resources (ANCOR); American Occupational Therapy Association; American Psychological Association; American Public Health Association; American Therapeutic Recreation Association; Americans for Democratic Action (ADA); Amputee Coalition of America (ACA); APSE: The Network on Employment; Assistive Technology Industry Association (ATIA); Association of Assistive Technology Act Programs (ATAP); Association of State Independent Living Councils (ASILC); Association of University Centers on Disabilities (AUCD); Brain Injury Association of America; Campaign for America's Future; Center for an Accessible Society; Center for Disability Issues and the Health Professions (CDIHP); Center on Disability and Health; Central Conference of American Rabbis; Chemical Sensitivity Disorders Association; Child Care Law Center; Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation; Coalition of Religious Communities; Common Cause; Consumers Union; Council of Citizens with Low Vision International (CCLVI); Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF); Disability Service Providers of America (DSPA); Easter Seals; EIN SOF Communications; Enable America; Epilepsy Foundation of America; Ethel Louise Armstrong Foundation, Inc. (ELA); Exceptional Parent Magazine; Exploding Myths, Inc.; Family Voices; Fannie Lou Hamer Project; Federally Employed Women; Federation of Families for Children's Mental Health; Friends Committee on National Legislation; General Federation of Women's Clubs; Gerontological Society of America; Hadassah, The Womens Zionist Organization of America; Inter-National Association of Business, Industry and Rehabilitation (I-NABIR); Judge David L.; Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law; Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law; Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR); League for the Hard of Hearing; League of Women Voters of the United States; Legal Momentum; Lift, Inc.; Little People of America; Medicare Rights Center; MindFreedom Support Coalition International; Mobility Golf; Mobility International USA (MIUSA); NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc.; National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium (NAPALC); National Association for Visually Handicapped; National Association of Councils on Developmental Disabilities; National Association of Social Workers; National Association of State Head Injury Administrators; National Association of the Deaf (NAD); National Business & Disability Council (NBDC); National Center for Environmental Health Strategies; National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence; National Chronic Fatigue Immune Dysfunction Syndrome Foundation (CFIDS), Inc; National Coalition Against Domestic Violence; National Congress of American Indians; National Consumers League (NCL); National Council of Jewish Women (NCJW); National Council of La Raza; National Council on Independent Living (NCIL); National Council on Rehabilitation Education. National Council on the Aging; National Disability Rights Network; National Down Syndrome Congress; National Down Syndrome Society; National Employment Lawyers Association; National Empowerment Center (NEC); National Federation of Temple Youth; National Federation of the Blind; National Gay and Lesbian Task Force; National Health Law Program, Inc; (NHeLP); National Home Visitability Organization; National Indian Telecommunication Institute; National Industries for the Blind (NIB); National Multiple Sclerosis Society; National Organization For Women; National Organization of Nurses with Disabilities (NOND); National Organization on Disability; National Recreation and Park Association; National Rehabilitation Association; National Research Center for Women & Families. National Spinal Cord Injury Association; National Women's Law Center; National Women's Health Network; 9to5, National Association of Working Women; NISH; Not Dead Yet; On a Roll Communications, LLC; Paralyzed Veterans of America; Parent Project Muscular Dystrophy; People for the American Way; People Who; People with Disabilities Broadcasting Corporation; Physically Challenged Bowhunters of America (PCBA); Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Washington Office; Progressive Coalition; Research and Training Center on Independent Living at the University of Kansas; RESNA (Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of North America); Rock the Vote; Screen Actors Guild--Performers With Disabilities Committee. Self Help for Hard of Hearing People (SHHH); Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund (SALDEF); Spina Bifida Association of America; Stop Family Violence; TASH; TDI (Telecommunications for the Deaf, Inc.); Telecommunication Services for the Deaf; The Arc of the United States; The Mitsubishi Electric America Foundation; The National Coalition on Self Determination, Inc; The National Coalition to Amend the Medicare Homebound Restriction; The National Women's Conference; The Rolling Rains Report; The Silent Witness Project; Tourette Syndrome Association, Inc; Union for Reformed Judaism; Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations; United Cerebral Palsy; United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW); United Spinal Association; USAction; Vocational Evaluation and Career Assessment Professionals (VECAP); WGBH National Center for Accessible Media; Women In Media & News (WIMN); Women of Reform Judaism; Women's Committee of 100; Workplace Fairness; World Institute on Disability. To see a listing of state and local organizations, please visit www.aapd.com.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from California, the chairman of the Committee on Rules, for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, those of us who have been here for some period of time quickly learn that those who serve this House, this institution, who may not speak in the well, who may not introduce legislation, who may not participate in debates, nevertheless are absolutely critical to the legislative process. As a group they bring a degree of love of country, love of the House of Representatives, and commitment to their work that surely if paralleled somewhere, it is only in a few places. I have had the privilege of working with the desk officers, the reporters, the parliamentarians for now over a quarter of a century, less time than Susan Hanback has served this House. She was here when I came here in 1981. Her decision to retire as Chief of the Office of Official Reporters is, of course, wonderful news for her and her family. We had an opportunity to discuss it on the floor just the other evening about how she is going to enjoy her Virginia residence, perhaps much more peaceful, less hassled, but from time to time perhaps a little less interesting as well, but certainly more restful. And she deserves the rest because her service has been extraordinary. As has been said by the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), she has worked in the House since the late 1960s. She witnessed during that time some of the most important events that have occurred on the House floor, including debates on legislation affecting every aspect of Americans' lives as she transcribed innumerable speeches and statements of hundreds of Members of Congress. Those who transcribe history are critically important because future generations will learn from the historic record that they have set down, and the accuracy of that reporting is critically important not only to the deliberations of this body today, but it will be critically important to the precedents of tomorrow. Mrs. Hanback has dedicated her career to serving the American people just as surely as every one of us who serves here in elected office. Those who serve as reporters and at the desk and as the parliamentarians and in every other aspect of making sure this House runs correctly serve America, serve America's citizens, serve America's freedom. By accurately reporting for and helping oversee the production of the Congressional Record, Susan has helped ensure that there is a government accessible to the people and is, therefore, a government for the people, of the people, and by the people. Susan was critical, as so many of you are whose names are not known to the public and, indeed, whose names may not be known to many who serve here by your sides every day. But because your names are not known, it does not mean that the service you perform is not absolutely essential to our democracy. Susan Hanback was offered a job, Mr. Speaker, as a Senate official reporter in 1987. As testimony to the love of this House, she turned that offer down and chose to stay in the House because she thought it was more interesting, and the people said, Amen. We are all, of course, very grateful, Susan, that you made that decision. We have been advantaged not only by the skill with which you have performed your job, but by the warmth of your personality and the grace that you have served this body. I would like to wish you all the very best. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), minority leader, and the leadership on this side joins with the Speaker, the majority leader, the majority whip, and all the officers, including the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), on that side of the aisle to say in a nonpartisan, bipartisan, unanimous way, Susan, you have served us well. You have served your country well. We wish you the very greatest of happiness as you now retire from this body to serving so well your family as you have done for so long, but now will do so much more present with them, and we wish you the very best.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I have been a strong advocate for free trade and open markets because I believe that the American businesses and workers can compete in a global market. The United States is the most powerful Nation in the world, and it is incumbent upon us to lead, to foster global trade, to engage our partners in a system based on rules and law and to work to raise the living standards of working men and women both at home and abroad. However, the centrality of free trade in our interdependent world cannot relegate our commitment to working men and women to the peripheral. We must seek to provide a level playing field for American workers and improve living and working conditions for foreign workers by guaranteeing fair wages and basic workplace protections. I have consistently supported legislation and trade agreements that have furthered these goals. I was hopeful the Bush administration would pursue these objectives in negotiating CAFTA and that we would ultimately be presented an agreement that advanced the cause of free trade, promoted the rule of law, and generated economic development in countries in great need, and extended to U.S. workers, farmers, and businesses the advantages of expanded access to new markets. Regrettably, the agreement before us does not meet these goals. Specifically, CAFTA fails to ensure the implementation and enforcement of the five core internationally recognized labor rights. Compounding the problem is the failure to allow trade sanctions to enforce the deal's modest labor provisions. In other words, the enforcement structure is absent. I am, therefore, regrettably unable to support the Central American Free Trade Agreement for its failure to guarantee basic workplace protections for Central Americans and a level playing field for American workers. It is interesting, Mr. Speaker, that given the problems that we have with CAFTA, given the questions that have been raised, that the majority is unwilling to give sufficient debate to develop the arguments. This is a critically important issue. NAFTA was an important issue. It was 8 hours of debate. This is one-quarter of that. We are unable to fully develop the deficiencies in this bill with the 1 hour of debate that the minority will be given. Perhaps that is the point. Perhaps that is the objective. Perhaps the meaning of this rule is to shut us up, shut us out, and shut us down. That is a shame, that my colleagues do not have the confidence in their proposition that they put on this floor to give it a full airing, a full debate in the light of day. Why do these issues always come up in the late of night? I do not understand that. Oppose this rule. Oppose this bill. It is not good for America. It is not good for the countries that have signed it.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, we talk a lot about families on this floor, and properly so. We talk a lot about caring on this floor, and properly so. We talk a lot about relationships on this floor, and properly so. And I am proud to rise today to say how pleased I am, and I know all Members of the House will be, the youngest Member on our side of the aisle is the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Boren), and the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Boren) this weekend took to himself a beautiful bride from South Dakota, Andrea. Let us wish them well as they embark upon this new family.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and rise in support of H.R. 22. It is a good bill that should be enacted this year. I applaud the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) and the ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), and the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh). The gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh) has made a career of this bill, and we are thankful for that. He is not on the floor, but I want to congratulate him on his efforts. Just a few months ago, the Committee on Government Reform marked up and passed this bill 39-0. Given the current political environment, that is amazing. An extraordinary achievement. Such bipartisanship on Capitol Hill is all too rare these days. When it happens, we should take note. The fact that every Democrat and Republican on the committee embraced H.R. 22 testifies to the need for postal reform that puts politics aside and focuses on pressing issues. It is also a tribute to the hard work and energy that postal employees, business groups, and postal customers brought to bear educating lawmakers about the merits of reform. Let me say something as an aside. The United States Postal Service is the most efficient and productive postal service in the world. It may surprise some to learn that some years ago when I took testimony in the Treasury Postal Subcommittee as chairman, the United States Postal Service was 40 percent more efficient than the number two postal service in the world which was Japan. I observed if we had that kind of productivity efficiency with respect to VCRs, we would not be buying JVCs, we would be buying RCAs made in America or Emerson or some other manufacturer. Why has H.R. 22 earned my support and the support of a bipartisan group? Simply put, because it satisfies four areas. First, it protects universal service. That is absolutely essential. Secondly, it protects collective bargaining. Since the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 established collective bargaining as a fundamental right, there has not been a single work stoppage or significant disruption in service as a result of labor-management discord. It is appropriate to protect it and continue it. I noticed the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh) is back on the floor. I congratulate the gentleman. I said how steadfast you have been in the face of coming right up to the brink of passage and then having to withdraw. We all owe you a debt of gratitude and appreciation for the work you have done on this particular piece of legislation. H.R. 22 ensures the Postal Service is treated exactly the same way every other Federal agency is in the area of military pensions. Our postal workers who served in the military served America, not the Postal Service, America. It is the U.S. Government that ought to compensate those military veterans. H.R. 22 mandates that the proportion of their retirement that comes from military service will be paid for by the Treasury, as it should be. Lastly, H.R. 22 provides the Postal Service the flexibility it needs to set postal rates in a competitive manner. This is a difficult area. I know the committee has grappled with it, but I think the committee has come out with a solution that ought to be supported. There is no legislative reason why postal reform should not be enacted before the end of the year. Unfortunately, however, I understand the administration has signaled its opposition to key provisions of H.R. 22 and its Senate counterpart S. 662. It is my hope and, yes, my expectation, that the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) will be successful in resisting efforts by the administration to weaken or repeal provisions that are the product of years of hard bipartisan work. I urge support of this product. I again congratulate the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh) on the work he has so ably led for so long.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for that information. Realizing that next week is a busy week and there are a number of very important items on the agenda, how likely, Mr. Leader, do you think it is that we will be in on Friday? I yield to the distinguished gentleman.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, thank you for that information, Mr. Leader. Mr. Leader, obviously next week I suppose the most controversial and most focused-upon piece of legislation will be the Central American Free Trade Agreement. This week, of course, the PATRIOT Act, which we thought was going to start Thursday and go through today, in fact was accelerated and NASA was taken today, clearly to ensure full consideration of the PATRIOT Act. Might it be possible with some assurance to let the Members know when the CAFTA bill will be on the floor, in effect adopting a similar procedure? I yield to the majority leader.

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Leader, I take it that in light of the fact you have not mentioned it, at this point in time it is not on the schedule. But there is a lot of discussion on this side of the aisle about that bill. Do you think it would be possible that it might be added to the calendar? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the postal accountability bill, you seem to indicate that that might be considered earlier in the week rather than later. Is that accurate? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. I appreciate that. On the bill of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg), I think it is H.R. 2355, dealing with the insurance issues, there is a lot of interest on our side of the aisle. Will that bill be considered? Did you list that as one of the health bills that would be considered?

Mr. HOYER. In terms of motions to go to conference, do you anticipate motions to go to conference on any appropriations bills next week?

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the leader. Reclaiming my time, you mentioned appropriations bills. Are we likely to have motions to go to conference on appropriations bills next week; and if so, can you anticipate what bills that might be?

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I take this time for the purpose of inquiring of the majority leader the schedule for the week to come. I yield to my friend, the majority leader.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I congratulate the Science Committee and Chairman Boehlert and Ranking Member Gordon on bringing to the floor a fair, balanced NASA authorization bill. The unanimous vote to report the bill out of the committee is testament to the positive outcome that results when Members work together in a bipartisan fashion to make good public policy. And this is a good bill for NASA, for Goddard Space Flight Center in my district, and the American people. The bill restores our investment in a more vigorous, forward-looking space agency and provides multi- year funding and detailed policy guidance to NASA at a critical time in the history of space exploration. NASA has a unique set of challenges as we seek to return to flight and expand our reach in space. What we do now will determine how well we meet those challenges in the future. That's why I was pleased to see that the bill included $150 million for a new servicing mission to the Hubble Space Telescope and a directive to NASA to devise a plan to send a crew to repair the Hubble Telescope after completion of the currently planned space shuttle mission. This funding is a clear recognition by the Committee of the unique role that the Hubble Space Telescope plays in broadening our scientific understanding of the observable universe. I applaud the call for a manned servicing mission to repair Hubble and extend its life so that future generations will be able to further understand and explore distant galaxies and the mysteries of space. I look forward to working with my colleagues to make sure that a new servicing mission is adequately funded and supported. The bill also renews focus on the significance and future of science research. While Mars/Moon exploration also continues to be a major focus of the work at NASA, we must not lose sight of the needs and promise of a core area of future inquiry such as science. This bill finds the right balance. Not only does the bill provide increase funding for NASA science programs, but it also directs NASA to develop a comprehensive science policy through 2016, complete with proposed missions, priorities, budget, and staff to bring much-needed focus back onto science research. This will go a long way in bringing new focus to science in the 21st Century. Finally, the bill provides funding and brings attention to such important areas as aeronautics, education, and space operations and exploration activities that will help our nation further understand and explore distant galaxies and develop breakthrough technologies important to our health and security. This is a big step forward in our efforts to maintain innovation and ingenuity at NASA and in space and technology industries in the years ahead. Working together, Congress will pass a bill that would make NASA stronger and better prepared to face the future challenges that it may confront. I urge a ``yes'' vote on this bill.