Tom Latham

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the Agriculture Committee for his leadership. Mr. Chairman, I am holding in my hands a 700-page document just released by the Clinton administration that purports to contract Federal EBT services and equipment through a little-known procurement process called IEI or Invitation for Expression of Interest. It is my understanding that only financial institutions, large banks are able to apply. It totally eliminates current electronic transfer companies from bidding. I am deeply concerned that this document would create a Federal EBT system that will inhibit the individual States from setting up their own EBT systems. As I understand it, 6 States have already set up EBT systems for themselves, and over 20 States are currently moving to do the same. With all the efforts we have made to give more flexibility to the States, I am deeply concerned that the Clinton administration is moving to develop a new Federal bureaucracy to deliver benefits to recipients, and I wish to commend the chairman of the Committee on Agriculture, Subcommittee on Department Operations and Nutrition, for including in the welfare reform package language that will prohibit the Federal Government from doing anything that would stand in the way of States creating and implementing their own EBT systems.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation requiring each committee of the House to report a comprehensive regulatory relief plan during this session of Congress. We are currently in the process of considering the Contract With America's long-overdue regulatory relief and reform provisions. However, we need a vehicle for addressing existing excessive regulations that are costing our States, cities, and businesses hundreds of billions of dollars. This bill will provide that vehicle, free of the arbitrary schedules of reauthorization bills. Under this proposal, every Member of the House would have the opportunity to offer amendments to their committees' regulatory package in order to streamline or reduce the costs of existing regulations, eliminate or reduce unfunded Federal mandates, and apply cost-benefit analysis review to existing regulations. In the tradition of openness of the A-to-Z spending cut plan, I call this bill the regulatory A-to-Z bill. I hope all Members will join me as a cosponsor of this comprehensive regulatory reform bill.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to commend our Ways and Means Committee Chairman, the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Bill Archer on his outstanding efforts to retroactively reinstate the 25 percent deductability of health insurance for self-employed. Small business people and farmers. This is one of the most important issues in my congressional district where tens of thousands of working families must purchase their own health insurance policies. More than a dozen other freshmen representatives joined me late last week in sending a letter to the leadership in both Houses requesting the earliest possible movement on this issue. I understand that there are great time pressures we have imposed on ourselves with the Contract With America and members of the minority party want to delay our timetable with a motion to recommit. However, restoring this tax deductability before March 1, in time for farm families to file their returns should be a point of bipartisan cooperation, and I hope we can move forward quickly.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise to encourage my colleagues to take the next step forward on fulfilling the Contract With America and approve the Presidential line-item veto. During meetings with constituents over the last several weeks, I have been extremely pleased to hear their message. They say ``We see you working hard, making real changes and keeping your promises, and we like what we are watching.'' The line-item veto is the next step in making it harder for Congress to tax, spend and pile up debt. Asking the President to cut unnecessary spending without line-item veto is like asking a surgeon to do this work with a meat ax. His prospects for success are so slim, the most likely result is that he will not take the chance. That is why we need to provide him with a precision instrument, the line-item veto. Members of Congress should not be afraid of the line-item veto or any other tool that increases accountability. By making ourselves more accountable, we are winning back the people's trust. And that is the most important tool in any democracy.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding this time to me. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the Orton amendment to the Line-Item Veto Act. The line-item veto is, as many Members of this House have stated, an idea whose time has come. The American people have reached their boiling point over unnecessary and wasteful Federal spending; $10 million here, $20 million there of special interest spending have added billions to our national debt over the years. No part of discretionary spending should be off-limits to the line-item veto. The Orton amendment, however, shoots at the wrong target. Discretionary transportation spending is already on the table and will be scrutinized under the line-item veto. The President will be able to wield his veto knife against special interest transportation spending that comes at the expense of veterans, children, the elderly, or other important highway projects. However, no money would be saved under the Orton proposal. Program transportation funding is allocated from money in the highway or aviation trust funds, and spending for these purposes is the only allowable purpose for these funds. Thus, a Presidential veto of contract authority spending would merely send money back to the trust funds. Rather than sending money back to the Treasury, these contract authority funds would continue to collect in the trust fund. Adding the Orton amendment to the line-item veto bill would be giving the President a deficit-masking tool, not a budget cutting tool. This amendment would move us in exactly the wrong direction. I know that my colleague from Utah has been an advocate for fiscal responsibility in this House, but this amendment is simply off-the- mark. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Orton amendment and yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained in my return to Washington from my congressional district on Tuesday, January 18 due to weather conditions. I request to state for the Record that had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on the resolution before the House, the Congressional Accountability Act.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for H.R. 5, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. On November 8 the American people sent a clear message that they were tired of having Washington pile ever-increasing mandates on their backs. The types of smaller rural communities such as those I represent bear the heaviest proportional burden of unfunded mandates. Instead of using their tight budgets to improve schools, police forces, or infrastructure, they have increasingly found themselves spending scarce dollars to satisfy Federal rules and regulations that have no positive impact on their communities. Mr. Speaker, we owe them our prompt support of this important reform bill. I hope we can lay aside the gutting amendments that have been next important item on the people's agenda, the balanced budget amendment.

Mr. LATHAM

Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank the people of Iowa's representing them in the U.S. House of Representatives. On the first day of this Congress, I was proud to help make a downpayment on restoring the public's faith in Congress by passing long overdue congressional reforms. When the balanced budget amendment comes to the floor of the House this month, we will have an opportunity to make another installment on our contract with the American people. As I ran for Congress, families stressed to me their fear that the enormous debt that the Federal Government has run up will destroy their children's and grandchildren's future. We have a moral imperative to bring an end to the deficit spending that has become a way of life in Washington. Congress has lacked this restraint to the tune of over $4 trillion. The time has come to commit to a common goal of a balanced budget amendment. It is for our children's and grandchildren's sake.