Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for that information. I share his view on that issue that whether or not we have a budget or not, the enforcement bill ought to come to the floor. Can I ask him another question about that particular bill? Would the gentleman know or be inclined to assure us that we would have an alternative? As he knows, the dispute on the pay-as-you-go is whether it affects taxes as well as spending. We believe that is a very substantive issue that ought to be considered and voted upon by all the Members. Would the majority leader be inclined to ensure that that alternative will be in order for us to offer at the time, if it is not included in the bill that is reported out of committee, at the time it is considered on the floor?

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

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the leader for that representation. Lastly, Mr. Speaker, we passed some weeks ago the transportation reauthorization bill. I think both sides feel that is a critical piece of legislation. We have noted that there seems to be some disagreement between the White House and the House and the Senate on this piece of legislation, but we are very concerned that it has not moved forward. We believe that this is, as the gentleman knows, the single most important piece of jobs legislation that we have under consideration by this Congress. And I am wondering if he can give us some thought as to when that bill may come to the floor and under what form it will come to the floor. We would very much like to see it on the floor, and we think, frankly, that given the votes on the bill as it passed the House, with well over 300 voting for it and with a very substantial vote in the other body, that clearly we have the votes to pass a bill, whether it is at 275, 318, or, frankly, the gentleman from Alaska's (Mr. Young) 375. But I would like to have some information because we think this is, and I know the gentleman does as well, a very critical piece of legislation which is now 6 months, 7 months, 8 months, I guess, past the date that we hoped to pass it on and we are in 60-day extensions, which we have a very distinguished Governor on the floor. I do not know whether I am in order by saying this, but I am going to say it anyway. I want to acknowledge the presence of our former colleague, Governor Ehrlich, on the floor, but I know he is very concerned about it because he and I have worked on a lot of transportation issues in our State, and I am sure that as soon as we finish the colloquy, he would like to talk to the gentleman about this bill. I yield to the gentleman on his response to where the bill is.

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, I want the leader to know how happy I am to hear that that is the purpose of conferences and that nobody would want to reach outside deals outside of the configuration of a conference. He will recall, I think, we had months of discussion about the prescription drug conference to which no Democrats on this side were invited. That is the concern. Mr. Daschle was not invited. Mr. Reid was not invited. Other Members were not invited. There were a couple of people who participated. But that is our concern. We could go back and forth.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished majority leader for the purposes of informing us of the schedule for the week to come.

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

Mr. HOYER. The articulation I missed. That was the problem. With respect to the budget, do we expect to see a budget next week? It is not on the list, and I know we have been waiting with bated breath for many weeks now for the budget, as has the leader. Can the leader comment on the status of the budget?

Mr. HOYER

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

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman certainly makes a point that we do not want to delegate to the executive branch. I think the gentleman makes a good point: We ought not to delegate.

Mr. HOYER. Of course, the gentleman knows something else is coming.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, before I discuss the legislation that will be considered on the floor this week, I want to comment briefly on the continuing revelations about the abuse of Iraqi detainees in American custody and the need for vigorous congressional oversight through full and open committee hearings. I could not disagree with my friend, the majority leader, more when he says the idea of a congressional investigation is like, and I quote, ``saying we need an investigation every time there is police brutality on the street.'' The abuse of Iraqi detainees, as we are learning, is, unfortunately, not isolated, and responsibility extends up and down the military chain of command. We must not abdicate our constitutional responsibility as an independent, coequal branch of government, as some Members of the other body have stated. For example, the Senate majority leader is quoted today in Congressional Quarterly as saying, ``The Senate will continue to do its duty. We had several hearings last week. We will continue to maintain a close watch on the unfolding situation.'' In fact, they are having hearings this week. This shocking episode demands a full and open inquiry. It demands a bipartisan approach. I urge the Republican leadership to work with this side of the aisle in getting to the bottom of these abuses, in holding the responsible parties accountable and ensuring that it never happens again. The world expects no less, and we should expect no less ourselves. Now, Mr. Speaker, while the other body exercises vigorous oversight, this body will consider a Republican bill that will actually increase the budget deficit, which is projected at more than half a trillion dollars this year alone, and three health care bills that would do virtually nothing to help the uninsured. This Republican majority is not responding to America's needs. We can, we must, do better. The Republican bill to make the 10 percent income tax bracket permanent could win overwhelming, perhaps unanimous, support if it were paid for. Instead, it would add an estimated $218 billion to the national debt. Our children and grandchildren will pay that debt. The Democratic substitute, in contrast, is paid for. Unfortunately, Republican leaders believe that tax cuts are a freebie. In fact, the chairman of the House Committee on the Budget, the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle), said in March, and I quote, ``We don't believe that you should have to pay for tax cuts.'' It is that mathematically challenged philosophy, that denial of reality that continues to stall negotiations on the 2005 budget. House Republicans refuse to pay for tax cuts. House Democrats, a bipartisan majority of the Senate and the chairman of the Federal Reserve, Mr. Greenspan, fully support pay-as-you-go budget rules. In fact, if my Republican friends missed the comment of Chairman Greenspan last week, let me repeat it. He said, ``The free lunch has still not been invented.'' This week, the Republican leadership will also put three health care bills on the floor, apparently in recognition of Cover the Uninsured Week. Today in America, the richest, most powerful Nation on the face of the Earth, 44 million Americans do not have health insurance; and that figure has increased by 4 million since President Bush took office. Yet none of the Republican health care bills directly addresses this growing problem. We have already passed two of these three bills, on medical liability and associated health plans, almost in exactly the same form; so we are simply repeating that which we have already done, presumably for political purposes as opposed to substance. The third, on Flexible Savings Accounts, would mostly benefit those who are already insured. House Democrats, by comparison, will introduce three health care bills this week that, together, would provide health insurance for more than half of the 44 million uninsured. These bills are aimed, Mr. Speaker, at three growing groups of uninsured: those with low income, retirees, and small businesses and the self-employed. I say to my friends on the Republican side, our constituents did not send us here to pretend to legislate, to repeatedly pass legislation so that it could go to the Senate. They sent us here to solve problems and fulfill our duty. This week, there is ample evidence that we are doing neither.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to do a Special Order today that I will not be able to do, but I join the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda) and the rest of my colleagues on the occasion of Asian American Heritage Month. During this month, we celebrate the important contributions Asian Pacific Americans have made to our great country. The gentleman from California (Mr. Honda) is head of the Asian Pacific Caucus, and the gentleman has helped all of us learn more about the concerns and issues facing Asian Americans and the Pacific Islander community, and I salute the gentleman's work on these issues. More importantly, I thank every Asian American for the extraordinary contribution they have made to this country. I have a list which I will not have time to read, but it will be included in the Record. Mr. Speaker, suffice it to say I am pleased that the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda) took out this very appropriate Special Order to honor Asian Americans during Asian American Heritage Month.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker. Today I join my distinguished friend from California, Mr. Honda, and the rest of my colleagues on the occasion of Asian Pacific American Heritage Month. During this month, we recognize and celebrate the important contributions Asian Pacific Americans have made to our great country. Mr. Honda, as the leader of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, has helped all of us learn more about the concerns and issues facing the Asian American and Pacific Islander Community and I salute his work on these issues. I would also like to commend the leadership of Representative Robert Matsui, who has devoted his time and energy not just to the excellent representation of his constituents, but also to assisting the Democratic Caucus as chairman of the Democratic Congressional campaign committee. Mr. Speaker, this year's theme, ``Freedom for all, a nation we can call our own'', speaks to both the hopes and the challenges Asian Pacific Americans face in America. Asian Pacific American families, whether they have lived in this country for generations, or have recently emigrated, have worked as farmers, teachers, and business people, pioneering in the sciences and arts, and serving with distinction on the battlefield. But achieving the American dream is not always easy for any group of immigrants seeking to establish roots in the United States. Asian Pacific Americans have fought to overcome discrimination, language and cultural barriers, and even internment by their own government. Today the Asian Pacific American Community is rightly proud of their rich heritage and the innumerable contributions they have made to the development of our nation. During the last century, as America's frontier expanded west, hundreds of thousands of Asian citizens worked to build the first transcontinental railroad. And Chinese and Japanese immigrants answered the need for laborers and agriculture workers in California and Hawaii. The descendants of these settlers are now leaders in virtually every industry in the United States, from medical research to music education to professional athletics. In fact, Asian Pacific Americans have the highest proportion of college graduates of any race or ethnic group. Mr. Speaker, there are now more than 11 million Asian American and Pacific Islanders in America, comprising 5 percent of the total U.S. population. Over 213,000 Asian Pacific Americans live in my home state of Maryland. Immigrants from the countries of Asia and native peoples of Hawaii and the Pacific Islands form one of the fastest growing minority groups in the United States today. And Asian Pacific Americans have the most diverse background of any minority population, tracing their roots to almost 50 different countries and ethnic groups. The impressive list of notable Asian Pacific Americans is far too lengthy to read here. To name just a few: First, The Honorable Patsy Mink, the first Asian Pacific American woman elected to Congress, who many of us had the honor to know. Prince Jonah Kuhio Kalanianole, who in 1903 was the first native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander to serve in Congress. Maya Lin, the accomplished architect, whose striking memorial to those killed in Vietnam lies close by on the National Mall. Yo-Yo Ma, the internationally acclaimed cellist. Tiger Woods and Michelle Kwan, both young champion athletes. Charles Wang, chairman emeritus of Computer Associates and co-owner of the New York Islanders. Jerry Yang, who co-founded Yahoo.com in his 20s. In every profession, it seems, Asian Pacific Americans have made their mark. Mr. Speaker, let me again say that it gives me great pleasure today to recognize the significant advances and contributions made by the Asian Pacific American Community to our country during Asian Pacific Heritage Month.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the information. Mr. Leader, you have listed for next week legislation regarding the 10 percent tax bracket expansion. Is it safe to assume the bill will not be considered in the Committee on Ways and Means, but will come directly to the floor instead, just as was the case with the AMT bill last week and the marriage penalty bill the week before that?

Mr. HOYER. I appreciate the gentleman's observation. However, I might say that we believe fair is not gracious, but fair and appropriate. We appreciate their graciousness from time to time. I am trying to remember when that last happened. We appreciate the fact that it has been done and hope it will continue to be done. Am I correct in assuming that the week after next the child tax credit will be on the floor?

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, we are going to do the 10 percent bracket next week. Would it be safe to assume the week following we will do the child tax credit?

Mr. HOYER. With respect to the associated health plans, the medical malpractice, and the flexible savings account bills, can you tell us what procedures will be employed for consideration of these three bills?

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for his comments. Before yielding back my time and with the leader on the floor, Mr. Leader, I have said this before, I mean it as sincerely as I can say it: this side of the aisle intends to participate to the extent we are allowed in a bipartisan way to put forth and enhance the interests of this country. There are many of us on this side of the aisle who are supportive of our efforts in Iraq. We now have had, unfortunately, two instances, the instance we just dealt with today and the instance of support of the troops some weeks ago, in which essentially this side of the aisle was not included in those deliberations. This is not an issue about process. It is an issue about substance because substantively we want to project to the world the unanimity that you have indicated on the floor you would like to effect as well. In light of that, Mr. Leader, I would respectfully request that as we consider issues of great importance and gravity as it relates to the prosecution of our efforts in fighting terrorism and in Iraq, efforts which we ought to be united on notwithstanding our differences in terms of implementation and success of our troops and our objectives, that you and the leaders on your side of the aisle give us the time and the opportunity to be included so that they may in fact be, notwithstanding the votes, but in actuality be bipartisan. I thank the gentleman for consideration of that. We have been disappointed that that has not occurred. We have lamented that fact on numerous pieces of legislation. We do not believe it is in the best interest of the American public; but when we are dealing with domestic issues, that is not as important. But it is critically important in dealing with the issues of international policy of our troops abroad, their safety, security, and the support we give to them. So we would urge that those items perhaps be treated more sensitively as it relates to the interests of the minority and the role of the minority in forging those resolutions and policy statements. I appreciate the majority leader's consideration of that request.

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

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I will take a back seat to no one. You, Mr. Leader, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), or anybody else in this House on support of the troops, support of our efforts, and support of this country, period. But we do see things differently, Mr. Leader. I think I have a reputation in this body of being able to work in a bipartisan fashion with the speaker, with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) with whom I worked as ranking member on the Committee on House Administration, with the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt), and with others. And, yes, Mr. Leader, with you on some very issues of great importance to this institution. And I continue to be in that posture, but, yes, we do see it differently. The leader got, at 10 p.m. last night, the opportunity to review this in a meaningful way

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

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, this was of great import. Every speaker that came to the floor expressed outrage, expressed deep concern about what this had done and the impact it would have on America and our image abroad but, more importantly than our image, on our ability to continue to lead on issues of freedom and justice and human rights throughout the world. At 10 p.m., whether it was same time he got it or not, I would suggest to the leader is not a time frame in which we can thoughtfully try to reach a bipartisan agreement. We do not expect nor do we ask for you to accept without question our position or our changes. But we do expect to have the opportunity to discuss them. I did not have an opportunity to discuss it with you, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt), or the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter). I saw the resolution at 9 a.m. this morning. I had no ability to put input nor did others. And the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), I think, is on the floor and I would be glad to yield to him if he would want to make a comment. If not, in my discussions with the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), he believes there was not the full opportunity that he would have liked to have considered in a bipartisan fashion. And that committee, as you well know, and that gentleman from Missouri has been one of the most bipartisan Members of the House.

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

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I have been in a position where I was one of four voting against something if I thought it was appropriate to do. So he can keep saying there were only 50 as long he wants. There should have been zero. His side believes that and our side believes that. Our side is as deeply committed to supporting the troops as is his side. That is good news of this day. Everyone has expressed that. It does not serve our purposes further, related to staff here, they did not get a draft from their perspective until after 6 p.m. last night when, as you know, we had adjourned. I was at the Fire Service Caucus with the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), with whom I work in lockstep, and have for 13 to 14 years in a bipartisan way. We understand bipartisanship. We have a Fire Service bill on this floor totally bipartisan. So I understand bipartisanship, Mr. Speaker. It does not serve our purpose to further discuss procedures. I agree on that. We have a different view. But what it does serve our purposes for is trying to come together not in a way that will divide the House, but in a way that will bring the House together. That, I believe, is the best interest of our country. I would hope we could do that, and I will work with the gentleman to accomplish that objective, and I presume he will work with me as well.

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