Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is correct, there is no honor in this. Think about what you are doing tonight. Your majority leader said, and I will read quickly, Between now and the next Presidential election, through the end of the fiscal year 1996, the public debt will increase by almost $1.3 trillion. During President Reagan's first term, the debt ceiling was increased from $935 billion to $1.8 trillion. That is an increase of $889 billion. It took us over 200 years to get to $1 trillion in debt, over 200 years, and in the last 10 years we have gone to over $4 trillion of debt. All of that so-called stimulus package is deficit spending. None of that spending, none of it is paid for. All of it borrows money to pay for it. That is part of why we are raising the debt ceiling. He was speaking in opposition to the kind of action you are taking tonight and then the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) said this, ``We need to do other things to balance the budget. Let us do it. But first and foremost, we have to shoot straight with the American people, and hiding things like this debt ceiling increase is not the way to do that.'' How many of you campaigned and said you were against raising the debt limit? How many of you campaigned on the fact that you were going to balance the budget? I voted for the balanced budget amendment. I believe in balancing the budget; and very frankly, under the Clinton administration, we took the Reagan-Bush deficits into surplus for the first time for 4 years in a row, the first time in 80 years. Do you have no honor? Are you not ashamed of the hypocrisy that this budget resolution that you bring before us represents? Is there no honor in this House? Is there no fiscal integrity? Is there no concern for generations yet unborn who, as the gentleman from Tennessee says, will have to pay this bill and the young men and women we have in Iraq today will have to return here to pay the bill? Can we not stand up as Americans, proud of our country, proud of our objectives and say to them, we will pay as you fight, and together, we will win this battle for a better America?

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, this is the dirty secret that Republicans do not want to admit. We did not control spending. That is Chairman Nussle, some 15 days ago. The Committee on the Budget says Republicans believe repaying the debt is the right thing to do. It says, in its report dated March 13, 2001, it is wrong for this generation to saddle future generations with debt. It has taken them some less than 2 years to change that view and proceed to create gargantuan debt. And my colleagues, we considered this budget some days ago, and the sun did not set for six times until they came to this floor and for 40 minutes railed against the gentleman's motion to instruct, the motion of the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt). For 40 minutes the Republicans railed against it, and then they voted for it. They voted for it because they knew the cuts that were proposed in that budget were not sustainable, were not supportable. Yet they all voted for it and they flip-flopped 6 days later. How short a memory my colleagues have. My Republican colleagues say they are against debt. The chairman of the Committee on the Budget has gotten up on this floor time after time and said, we need to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse. Let me just say that the waste is the time and the paper we have used to consider this resolution, which sadly simply reflects a deep division within the Republican Party reflected by this fiscal irresponsibility. This budget will not be followed. Hear me. My colleagues will not follow it any more than they followed the budget that the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) offered last year and for which my colleagues voted last year. It was never adopted. Eleven appropriation bills sat in our committee. Why? Because Republicans could not get the votes on their side of the floor to pass them, consistent with their budget, because they were not real. The fraud is on the American people. The fraud is on the young people of America. The fraud is on the veterans, I say to my friend from New Jersey. The fraud is in the rhetoric that Republicans have used seeking support from their constituents seeking fiscal responsibility. And the abuse, my friends, of the fraud, waste and abuse, the abuse is the abuse of process which the consideration tonight of this budget with just hours' notice reflects. Yes, there is fraud, waste and abuse, and it is within this budget. Reject it. We can do better. We should do better. We must do better.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, our Republican friends are desperate. House and Senate Republicans are so far apart on their tax proposals that GOP leaders are actually considering writing two reconciliation tax numbers into the budget resolution. That is an outrage. It is unprecedented, and it is a farce; and GOP leaders have no one to blame but themselves. Senator Grassley, the chairman of the Senate Committee on Finance, is quoted as saying: ``It's a pipe dream to think you can get above 350 (billion dollars) without dramatic changes of position.'' In response, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), majority leader, warns that House Republicans may reject the budget resolution that fails to include the President's tax proposal, and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) added: ``It probably would not be the worst thing in the world to not have a budget resolution.'' Imagine that. One year after hammering, hammering Senate Democrats for failing to pass a budget, congressional Republicans say that is not such a bad idea after all. Situational ethics. My, oh, my, how Republicans have changed their tune.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to instruct. Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this Democratic motion to instruct House conferees on the supplemental appropriations bill. It's just. It's fair. And it enjoys bipartisan support in both the House and the Senate, even if the Bush administration has labeled it ``objectionable.'' In short, this motion would instruct House conferees to recede to the Senate provision providing an additional 26 weeks of unemployment compensation to workers in the air transportation industry. This industry and its workers have borne the brunt of the continuing war on terrorism and have been wracked by our sluggish economy. In fact, the industry is expected to lose $6.7 billion this year. Approximately 200,000 airline workers have lost their jobs since September 11, 2001, and another 70,000 workers are expected to be laid off. Last week, the world's largest carrier, AMR Corporation's American Airlines, averted Chapter 11 bankruptcy by negotiating $1.8 billion in labor concessions. And U.S. Airways only recently emerged from bankruptcy after winning approval for $900 million federal loan guarantee. Last week, I also had the opportunity to meet with representatives of the industry and airline workers. And they know that their fate is inextricably linked; that one cannot survive without the other. Today, through this motion, we recognize that and say: What's fair for the industry is fair for workers. In fact, members on both sides of the aisle want to help. This motion would instruct conferees to agree to a provision that is very similar to bipartisan legislation introduced last week by our colleagues, Mr. English of Pennsylvania and Mr. Oberstar of Minnesota [H.R. 1553, the ``Air Transportation Employees Assistance Act'']. The Senate has already passed a plan to extend unemployment insurance benefits in its version of this legislation. The Members of this body should do the same thing to aid this struggling industry, and its workers and their families. That's precisely what this motion to instruct seeks. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his information. First, if I might, Mr. Leader, you indicate that we may also consider a motion to go to conference on the Armed Services Tax Fairness Act on Monday. Do you know whether that is more definite now? The reason I ask that is we may want to have a motion to instruct on this side. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. HOYER. Thank you, Mr. Leader. Will there definitely be votes next Friday?

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) for the purposes of informing the body as to the schedule for the coming week.

Mr. HOYER. The gentleman certainly has outlined some very significant pieces of legislation that may be on the floor.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for reminding me. Is that the same Gephardt rule that the minority, when the Democrats were in control, thought was undemocratic, masked the desire of Democrats to raise the debt limit and spend more money; is that the same rule you are talking about reinstituting and you have reinstituted and are going to apply? I just want to clarify and make sure that is the same awful rule that you attacked so vigorously when you were in the minority.

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

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for his comment and I hear him talking about the supplemental. Does the leader believe that the budget conference report is a necessary piece of legislation for us to pass before we leave? I know you mentioned that you might want to try to do that, but does your side believe that is necessary before we leave next week?

Mr. HOYER. A rule by any other name, my friend. The energy bill, Mr. Leader, do you have a pretty good estimate as to which day of the week that bill might come to the floor?

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that information. May I also ask him, and I see the chairman of the Committee on Rules on the floor, you correctly observed, Mr. Leader, this is a complicated bill, a lot of different subjects, very important subjects, very consequential subjects. What, if you know, perhaps the chairman of the Committee on Rules knows, do you contemplate an open rule such as the rule we had on the floor today?

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, we share the leader's hope. I yield to the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that information, and I would appreciate as soon as you know how you are going to handle this if you would let us know.

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, I would say again in all sincerity to my friend, the chairman of the Committee on Rules, and the leader, this is the kind of legislation, which you are absolutely correct, which is very serious, very complicated, and ought to have the fullest airing on the floor of this House. Obviously, it has had a full airing in a number of committees. We would urge and very strongly hope that the goal that the gentleman has expressed as his will, in fact, be followed so that alternatives can be offered by committee or individual Members on this side of the aisle as well as that side of the aisle when this bill comes to the floor.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that comment. Related to the budget conference, Mr. Leader, do you expect that we will have a debt limit vote on the floor either as a part of the conference report or as a freestanding bill of some type or other in the week to come?

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support Mr. DeFazio's amendment to provide an additional 26 weeks of unemployment compensation to workers in the air transportation industry. This industry and its workers have borne the brunt of the continuing war on terrorism and have been wracked by our sluggish economy. In fact, the industry is expected to lose $6.7 billion this year. In addition, approximately 200,000 airline workers have lost their jobs since September 11, 2001, and another 70,000 workers are expected to be laid off. This week, the world's largest carrier, AMR corporation's American Airlines, averted Chapter 11 bankruptcy by negotiating $1.8 billion in labor concessions. And U.S. Airways only recently emerged from bankruptcy after winning approval for a $900 billion Federal loan guarantee. Last week, I had the opportunity to meet with representatives of the industry and just hours ago I met in my office with airline workers' representatives. The industry and workers know that their fate is inextricably linked; that one cannot survive without the other. Members on both sides of the aisle understand this and want to help. The fact is, this amendment would incorporate into this supplemental appropriations bill bipartisan legislation that was introduced yesterday by Mr. English and Mr. Oberstar--H.R. 1553, the ``Air Transportation Employees Assistance Act''. The Senate Appropriations Committee has already passed a similar plan to extend unemployment insurance benefits in its version of this legislation. The members of this body should do the same thing to aid this struggling industry, and its workers and their families. Let's help this vital industry and its workers navigate unprecedented turbulence. That's precisely what this amendment extending unemployment insurance benefits would do. I urge my colleagues to support it. Point of Order

Mr. HOYER

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

Mr. HOYER. I understand the gentlewoman's argument. It may be a good argument. Why does your rule not allow us to debate that on the floor?

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman's bill is not within the rules. The gentlewoman waived the rules.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding time to me, and I rise in opposition to this rule. Mr. Speaker, there is a pattern in this rule. That pattern is to gag approximately 140 million Americans, to not allow their Representatives to offer amendments which the majority has made in order for themselves, but not for the 140 million Americans represented by the minority. There appears to be no shame in that. It appears to be the arrogant exercise of pure political power. They can laugh if they will; but the American public will, over time, recognize that half of America is being shut out. The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) seeks to offer an amendment. That amendment is to invest in homeland security, the safety of our cities, the safety of our ports, the safety of our railroads, the continuing safety of our airlines, and the safety of our neighborhoods. What this rule says is, we will have points of order. That is esoteric. What does that mean? The American public does not know. Essentially, what it means is we will allow ourselves, we Republicans who are in charge, the ability to offer an amendment like the gentleman from Wisconsin's (Mr. Obey). Now, somebody on the Committee on Rules is shaking their heads. It is their bill that I refer to. It is their bill that is not consistent with the rules. In the rule, they say it does not matter for them, they can exercise the power to jam it; but we will not give to Democrats the ability to offer an amendment to adequately fund the security of New York City; of Baltimore, Maryland; of each and every community in our country. I regret that. It is a bad rule, and I join the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) in urging Members to vote against the previous question so that we can provide a rule which will allow for fair and full consideration, and let that proposal, if it is deemed by those in the majority not to be consistent with the security of the American public, vote against it; but at least have the courage, have the courage and good sense and consideration for the 140 million people represented by this side of the aisle to allow them to be heard. Allow them to have an amendment to be considered on this floor. That is democracy. That is what the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) seeks.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, there is not anybody in here who is not against waste, fraud and abuse. Ronald Reagan ran in 1980, and he said he was going to save a lot of money by eliminating waste, fraud and abuse. The Republicans were in charge of the Senate. Ronald Reagan was President of the United States. Not once, not ever did Ronald Reagan have a veto of any appropriation bill overridden, not once that asked to spend more money. He was in charge of the executive department. George Bush was in charge of the executive department for the 4 years following, for 12 years in a row. And, Mr. Nussle, you know what happened to waste, fraud and abuse? You quadrupled the national debt, I say to my friend who is trying to ignore me. You quadrupled the national debt from $985 billion to $4 trillion. Why did Mr. Reagan and Mr. Bush not eliminate waste, fraud and abuse? And then what happened? Bill Clinton came to town, elected President of the United States, and what happened in those 8 years? For 8 years in a row the deficit came down, for 4 years; and then the surplus started going up until 2001. We had 4 years of surpluses for the first time in 80 years. And then what happened? President Bush came to office. Mr. Nussle became the chairman of the Committee on the Budget, and we have reescalated the debt. This budget proposes the largest debt in the history of this country. This budget is an April fool, a cruel hoax and joke on the American public. And what does the chairman of the Committee on the Budget do? He brings these little blue books. They are important books. The question I wanted to ask you, Mr. Nussle, and just an answer, is I am sure your committee staff has added up how would the savings if every piece of waste in those blue books was effected would it provide us. How much, Mr. Nussle? Would it provide the 18 billion you want to take away from farmers who are attacked by drought? Would it take away the money that you are going to reduce school lunches by? Student loans by? Would it provide for the Medicaid that you want the Committee on Energy and Commerce to cut? Would it provide for the Medicare that your own committee has jurisdiction over? Now, Mr. Nussle, it is April Fool's Day but do not take us for fools, because with all due respect, you offered a budget last year. Now you complained it did not pass, but in years past we have deemed adopted the House-passed budget and passed bills. Again, the chairman of the Committee on the Budget ignores me. It is a shame because, my friends, 11 of the appropriations bills did not pass this House last year. Why? Because they could not get them within the budget. The budget that Mr. Nussle offered is not a real document. It is an April fool's joke. It will never be adopted. Never. And, Mr. Nussle, I believe you know it. I believe you know that the document that you have provided is unsustainable politically because the American public will reject it out of hand because they do not believe that that railroad retirement and people who work hard for their retirement should be cut. They do not believe that Social Security should be cut. They do not believe that Medicaid should be cut. They do not believe that Medicare should be cut. The motion to instruct will make it a real budget and turn an April fool's joke into a real document for America. Mr. Speaker, it is indeed fitting that on this, April Fool's Day, we're voting on this motion to instruct on the House GOP's phony and foolhardy budget. Why? Because the fact of the matter is: This GOP budget is a dishonest document designed solely to fool the American people. To fool them into believing that this Republican Party really does care about balancing the budget, controlling deficits and reducing debt. To fool them into believing that our nation--which is now prosecuting a war of unknown duration and undetermined costs--really can afford the President's $1.4 trillion tax plan. And, to fool them into believing that the Members who sit on the Republican side of the aisle really have the courage of their convictions. Let me ask you: will you really vote to cut Medicaid funding and the Children's Health Insurance Program by $94 billion? Will you really vote to cut school lunches for poor children and student loans by $9.4 billion? Will you really vote to cut railroad retirees' pensions and Agriculture programs such as Food Stamps and Farm Support Payments? And, with our brave armed forces now on the field of battle risking their lives to defend freedom and combat tyranny, will you really vote to cut veterans' benefits by $14.6 billion? Some of you actually might. But we all know that most of you have absolutely no intention of walking the plank and voting for legislation that would implement these draconian funding cuts. Thus, today, we're engaged in nothing more than a cynical charade. You get to pretend that you're for balanced budgets and enormous tax cuts, too. That's not leadership. That's a conscious evasion of the responsibility to level with the American people--to tell them that we cannot afford everything--and a deliberate decision to pass the costs of this reckless tax plan onto the next generation. I urge all of my colleagues--including those on the Republican side of the aisle who are still nursing sore arms after the vote on the budget resolution two weeks ago--to vote for the Spratt motion to instruct. That motion--which instructs conferees to reject these proposed and clearly unpassable and untenable funding cuts--is an honest one and based in reality. Everyone of us knows that this GOP budget is not.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time, and I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), the ranking member of the Committee on the Budget.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. We will discuss this with the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), the ranking member. I am sure the gentleman will want to discuss it with the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) as well. Hopefully, we can reach an agreement so all Members can be accommodated to participate in that important debate. Mr. Leader, the partial birth abortion bill, I understand that was marked up yesterday. Does the gentleman know when that will be coming to the floor? Is it going to be next week or the week after?