Jerry Lewis

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 additional minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Barton].

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. LEWIS of California. I want to say to all the gentlemen involved that I have the deepest respect for the work that they are involved with here. If we can provide opportunity to enter our marketplace in a way that allows for growth and job opportunity----

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Ohio [Ms. Pryce].

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle].

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I very much appreciate the cooperation of my ranking member. Even though this is not all that both of us may want, at least we are moving in the right direction. Mr. Chairman, it is my privilege to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio], the chairman of the subcommittee of the Committee on Banking and Financial Services that deals with housing, and a very effective and cooperative Member in establishing the provisions of this bill.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, the manager's amendment is an attempt, working with Members of both sides of the aisle, to deal with some very specific problems while returning some funding to several accounts. Mr. Chairman, my amendment restores $10 million for VA health professional scholarships, $64 million for VA medical care, $440.7 million for HUD's special needs housing account, $100 million for homeless assistance, and $69.6 million for credit subsidies associated with two FHA multifamily loan programs. All of the costs associated with increasing these amounts are fully offset within the bill. To accomplish this, we have reduced FEMA's disaster relief by $85 million, and transferred moneys within salaries and expenses associated with the Federal Housing Administration. Additionally, we have offset the costs associated with unobligated reserves in the section 8 contract renewal account. The amendment also strikes two HUD administrative provisions which have no immediate budgetary effect in terms of our 1996 bill. We have removed provisions relating to minimum rents in public housing as well as a suspension of the Brooke amendment which deals with limiting the amount of tenant's income which must go for rent. These changes were carefully negotiated with the chairs of the appropriate authorizing committees and the leadership and leave the bill within its 602(b) allocation. I urge an affirmative vote. The priorities addressed by these changes should meet with your strong and bipartisan support. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, first I want to express my appreciation for the cooperation of the Members dealing with this very, very difficult bill. We have had within our allocation great difficulty in dividing up these accounts in a way that is equitable to all. There is little question that everyone who is used to government continuing to grow is most disconcerted by the effort to reduce those historical levels of growth. Nonetheless, let me address two basic subject areas of this bill. I want to make sure that it is clear in the Record that, while we have been through some very difficult times with housing, we have had great cooperation from the key members from the authorizing committee in connection with the way we have distributed these funds. It is a fact that housing accounts have increased by 50 percent in the last 4 years, so there is some room for flexibility as we address those problems. In terms of actual spending in the 1996 year, the outlays for housing will actually increase over 1995. Those programs will have both time and a good deal of flexibility in terms of responding to the future pattern that we hope to see in these accounts. Beyond that, I want to mention to my colleagues that the one account within this bill that has been treated differently than all others has to do with Veterans Administration medical services. There is an increase of some $553 million over the 1995 outlay account for medical services. The House has indicated its concern about making sure that we do not have cuts in medical services available to our veterans. As my colleagues look throughout the bill, while there is very, very tough decisions that have been made, there is little doubt that the membership has helped the committee a great deal to make sure that we have treated each of these responsibilities as fairly as possible. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of our time.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Jersey [Mrs. Roukema].

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Stump]. (Mr. STUMP asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Walker], chairman of the Committee on Science.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington [Ms. Dunn].

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Frelinghuysen], a member of the committee. (Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, first I want to express my appreciation to the gentleman from Wisconsin for cooperating relative to the time difficulties that we have. While we have much agreement, there is some disagreement regarding this amendment. It is suggested by way of the author's recommendation that there is some cost to go in terms of our space station completion and operation, somewhere around $94 million. According to NASA's evaluation, the dollar figures really should be $26.2 billion including $13.2 billion for final development and construction and $13 billion for 10 years of operation. Setting that aside, it really is no small bit of irony that we are considering an amendment here today that would eliminate space station funding. It was just last evening that I had the privilege of being at the White House where the President was giving a medal to Comdr. Jim Lovell, one of our best known and most talented and successful astronauts. The effect of this amendment in the final analysis would do two things that I would suggest are very, very important for all Members to consider: First, the amendment would eliminate space station and thereby all those flight operations that relate to space station. It would undermine the President's effort to further develop an international cooperative effort between friends in Eastern Europe as well as with Russia. There are those suggesting that if you eliminate space station, then in some way that money is suddenly going to become available for any number of other priorities. I would suggest the latter is a total misconception of what would likely occur. It is my view that NASA's support flows around the public's interest in man's space flight, the public's interest in station. Indeed, if we eliminate those programs, it is my view that NASA would all but be eliminated itself. To presume that with the other priorities that we see in this bill, such [[Page H 7850]] as housing, such as veterans, such as EPA, that suddenly a huge flow of dollars would be available for scientific research and other science programs, some would suggest is at least a bit naive. This amendment would kill space station. In my judgment it would kill NASA's total program. Indeed it would terminate our American mission in space. I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Yes, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that we have a limitation of 1 hour, divided equally on each side, the gentleman from Wisconsin controlling part of the time, and I will control the other half of the time.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Frelinghuysen]. (Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest there is $2.5 billion for public housing modernization in this bill and there is $6 billion in the pipeline of unexpended, unobligated funds.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment, because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill, and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Roth].

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Harman]. (Ms. HARMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. Cramer].

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I am not even sure that is appropriate. It certainly does not fit the discussion. For now, I have to object.