Jack Kingston

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.

Mr. KINGSTON. I yield to the gentleman from New Mexico.

Mr. KINGSTON. If I understand the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Kanjorski], if I move from Georgia to California as a rapist, under the crime bill then very soon, when everything is promulgated and the rules are in place, I will be tracked, is that correct?

Mr. KINGSTON. One final question. If this bill passes, and I as a rapist move from Georgia to California, under this bill, when it becomes law, will I still be tracked, with or without the amendment?

Mr. KINGSTON. I appreciate the learned gentleman's advice on that.

Mr. KINGSTON. Yes; I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I have been impressed with the brilliance of the lawyers on both sides of the House on this, and I must admit while I am impressed with the brilliance, I am not a lawyer myself and have gotten a little bit muddled down in some of the jargon here. So I would like to engage in a colloquy with my friend, the gentleman from New Mexico [Mr. Schiff]. Let me ask, if I was a rapist in the State of Georgia, which I represent, and I moved to California, right now am I tracked on a database?

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, you know, each month, sometimes at the beginning of the month, sometimes at the end of the month, but surely during the course of the month, the American middle-class families must sit down and assess their finances, and as a result of these assessments, many new dresses and suits and weekends out and stereos and want-to-have type purchases yield to such mundane purchases as new dryers, new washing machines, automobile repairs, new roofs for the house, other type things like that. The American middle class must do this, because their expenses cannot exceed their revenues. It is essential. It is common sense. And now the U.S. Congress can join them in this effort. We have ignored this for too long. The last balanced budget was in 1969. This week we can change everything by the passage of a balanced budget amendment. Let us pass it and do what middle-class America has to do each month.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Well, to my friend, I would say that if we can get their vote on the Stenholm amendment, that is a good positive step. I, as you know, am not part of the party leadership over here. Although I do support the Republican version with the three-fifths majority vote provision, I still think that the Stenholm amendment, which I supported last year on the floor, is a good step, and I am glad to hear it.

Mr. KINGSTON. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. KINGSTON. I always yield on special orders because I feel it is a good time to have a little debate, and through the debate some camaraderie. I just wanted you to know I am back if you had any questions or anything that I could add to. If I heard you correctly, you said you are for the balanced budget amendment.

Mr. KINGSTON. I am pleased to hear that. Can you tell me how many folks on your side of the aisle might be voting in support of it?

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, kind of a disturbing thing happened this week in so many ways that makes me wonder if the folks at the White House get it yet. The President appointed a very liberal member of the Washington political establishment to run the National Democrat Party, and in his first press conference he personally told the Washington press corps elitists that he was against the balanced-budget amendment because he did not want to wait 7 years to balance the budget. Well, neither does the American middle-class public. They are tired of it. The middle class in America are in a situation where they may need a new carpet, they may need a new washing the month, when you do not have the money, you do not get to buy these things. What the middle class said to the U.S. Congress on November 8 is ``We want you to start living under the same constraints that we do. We want you to learn how to say no. We want you to tighten your belt and we want you to balance the budget.'' Under the current course that we are on, the President's budget, as estimated by his own budget folks, will add to the national debt $1 trillion over the next 5 years. That is not what the middle-class public wants. They want a balanced budget amendment, and I will say to the President's newly appointed Democrat Committee Chairman, ``If you don't want the balanced budget amendment, where are you going to cut?'' I have heard from so many Members of the other party who say, ``Show us your cards. What are you trying to hide?'' as if it is the sole responsibility of one party. We got into this debt situation not because of Democrat irresponsibility, but because of Democrat and Republican irresponsibility. This is a bipartisan debt. It is a bipartisan problem. And I resent members of the minority party saying ``what are you going to do?'' Yes, there are some proposals out there. What are your plans? So far all I have heard is attacks, personal and maliciuous attacks on Speaker Newt Gingrich. All I have heard are talks about the Committee on Ethics that haven't been formed because their party has not appointed anyone, and all I have heard is their new frequent flier fetish, as if mainstream America at civic clubs raises their hands, and right after asking about the national debt, they say ``And what are you going to do about the frequent flier problem in America?'' Well, that is real big farsighted legislation. But I certainly hope that before this debate goes any further, that the Democrat Party will come up with substantive ideas to contribute to the debate, to say ``Hey, here are some ideas that might balance the budget, and, you know, I might not be for a balanced budget amendment, but I think we can get there this way,'' instead of just being against it. You know, just because a party is not in the majority does not mean they do not have any responsibility to come up with ideas. The best thought, the best concept in America, is when both parties get together and work for the better of the country, rather than just the petty politics as usual. So, Mr. Speaker, as we approach the balanced budget amendment coming up in a very few weeks, I hope that all members of both parties will come forward and say ``Here are my ideas.'' If I am against the balanced budget amendment, I have an alternative. Rather than just swinging away at Newt Gingrich and the book deal, rather than just attacking frequent flier points, and rather than just getting mad at the Committee on Ethics, which their side hasn't appointed yet, let us hear some substance, because that is what we are elected to do, Mr. Speaker. The middle class of America wants a balanced budget. The middle class of America wants less spending. The middle class of America wants a smaller government. And I hope that members of the Democrat Party will join us in that effort.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. You know, if you cannot argue substance, attack the person; if you cannot argue substance, you make outrageous and frivolous claims; and if you cannot argue substance, you throw out smokescreens and red herrings. That is what seems to be the tack of the Democrat Party today. You know, we need your help, we need it on the balanced budget amendment. You cannot balance the budget by frequent flyer points. We need your help on unfunded mandates. Granted, most of them came from your party. The mayors and the county commissioners across America want relief. We need your help on ethics. Maybe you can find time to talk to Mr. Gephardt to get your side of the aisle moving on ethics. We need your help on welfare reform. Maybe you have some ideas. you have great rhetoric. We are now interested in your ideas. I hope you will put your ideas in front of your party interests and work for the betterment of America.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, as taxes increase, as government regulations get more and more burdensome, as the bureaucracy becomes more and more expensive, America's middle class has had to tighten their belts. Even though they are out there working as hard as they can, year after year, because of our actions in spending in Congress, they have to squeeze in a little bit more. But now it is our turn. It is time for us to match our revenues with our expenses. We need to have a balanced budget amendment. Our last balanced budget was in 1969, and since then Congress has decided that it could defy gravity by spending indefinitely more money than we take in. The balanced budget amendment will put an end to this fantasy. It is not a new concept. State, city, and county governments all over America have had a balanced budget. They have to have one by law. It is now our turn. If we had had one all along, we would not have the $4.5 trillion debt we must now contend with.