John Linder

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 263 is a structured rule that provides for the consideration of H.R. 2143, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Funding Prohibition Act. This is a fair, structured rule that merits the House's approval. This rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Financial Services. This rule makes in order only those amendments printed in the Committee on Rules report accompanying H. Res. 263. It provides that the amendments printed in the report may be considered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated by the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for a division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. This rule waives all points of order against the amendments printed in the report, provides one motion to recommit, with or without instructions. With respect to the underlying legislation, H.R. 2143, I want to acknowledge the efforts of my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), chairman of the Committee on Financial Services, in bringing this important bill to the floor today. This rule we have before us today will give the House the opportunity to consider H.R. 2143 and three additional amendments made in order under the rule. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 263 is a structured rule that will give the full House an opportunity to work its will on the major issues it raises, and I urge my colleagues to support the rule so that we can move on to consideration of the underlying legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus).

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 263 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Concurrent Resolution 190 to establish a joint committee to review House and Senate rules, joint rules, and any additional issues of importance pertaining to the continuity and security of congressional operations. The Rules Subcommittee held a hearing yesterday to hear testimony from the chairman of the Committee on Rules and our ranking minority member, the sponsors of this proposed joint committee. It is a serious proposal. It is timely, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) deserve great credit for their leadership on this issue. We are considering this kind of procedural proposal here today because any review of our parliamentary rules and procedures must now be evaluated in a post-September 11 atmosphere that incorporated once implausible circumstances into how the legislative branch will operate. Following the horrendous acts of terrorism perpetrated on the American people on September 11, our Nation realized it had entered into a new era in which liberty and freedom would be under attack from a new kind of enemy. Those of us representing the American people in this Chamber also rededicated ourselves to meet our obligation to act for the protection of our citizens and the institutions that govern them. As a result, it is imperative that the Federal Government be in the most effective position to protect the American public, and the most visible sign of our Nation meeting this obligation has revealed itself in our efforts to find and eliminate enemies at home and abroad. It is also our obligation to ensure that the continuity of our representational government continues. The House took action on the opening day of this Congress to implement some appropriate institutional mechanisms in case of an emergency. In light of the critical nature of the considerable responsibilities of the United States Congress, the time is right to continue to reevaluate our procedural requirements that affect the manner in which our legislative duties will be conducted in the House and Senate in an emergency. Mr. Speaker, the mission of this joint committee will be to undertake a comprehensive review of House and Senate procedures, one, to ensure the continuity and authority of Congress during times of crisis; two, to improve congressional procedures necessary for the enactment of measures affecting homeland security during times of crisis; and, three, to enhance the ability of each Chamber to cooperative effectively with the other body on major and consequential issues related to homeland security. By passing this concurrent resolution today, we put the wheels in motion for an internal assessment to help ensure the continuity and security of congressional operations. This represents a serious step in the right direction for modernizing congressional procedures, elevating parliamentary preparedness, and having the House and Senate think about what needs to be done to ensure the legislative's branch continued viability in the face of any emergency situation. I thank the House leadership for recognizing the importance of these security and continuity of operations matters and for swiftly advancing this proposal to the House floor. I urge unanimous support for this bipartisan proposal.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 257 is a fair rule that will permit the full House to work its will on H.R. 760, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. This rule makes in order the Greenwood-Hoyer amendment to H.R. 760 and provides for one motion to recommit, with or without instructions. Why is the House debating this legislation yet again? Unfortunately, the answer to that is those who oppose it have claimed that Congress has no power to legislate a ban on partial-birth abortion because of the Supreme Court's Stenberg v. Carhart ruling. Many of these same House Members, however, had no objection to standing up to the Supreme Court on other issues. For example, 413 House Members voted to ban child pornography even after the Supreme Court held that the 1996 Child Pornography Prevention Act was unconstitutional. Mr. Speaker, with respect to the underlying bill, any taking of innocent life is wrong. This procedure is demonstrably offensive and wrong. When a Nation puts people in jail and fines them for destroying the potential life of an unborn loggerhead turtle or bald eagle, and pays people for taking the potential life of unborn babies, that Nation has lost its way. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for the rule and the underlying bill.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, when individuals abuse the time limit, is there an arrangement by which that time can be applied against their side's total time left?

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would just like to comment that I am surprised that, for as long as the previous speaker served on the Committee on Veterans Affairs, he has allowed it to go on this long. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest).

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham), the sponsor of the underlying legislation. (Mr. CUNNINGHAM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul). (Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon).

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 255 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for purposes of debate only. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 255 is a modified closed rule that provides for the consideration of H.J. Resolution 4, legislation proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing the Congress to prohibit the physical desecration of the American flag. This rule provides for 2 hours of debate in the House, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary. House Resolution 255 waives all points of order against consideration of the joint resolution. It makes in order an amendment in the nature of a substitute, if offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) or his designee, which shall be separately debatable for 1 hour, equally divided between the proponent and an opponent. Finally, this rule provides for one motion to recommit, with or without instructions. With respect to the underlying legislation, H.J. Res. 4, I want to commend the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham) for introducing this legislation and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, for his persistent leadership on this important legislation, of which I am proud to be a cosponsor. The gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner) has done a fine job in bringing this legislation to the House floor in the years since my very good friend and former chairman of the Committee on Rules, the late Jerry Solomon, originally sponsored this proposal in the 104th Congress and the 105th Congress. As it should be, House Joint Resolution 4 is a simple, straightforward measure. It proposes to add an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would simply give the Congress the authority to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States, if it chooses to exercise such power. The proposed amendment contains a grand total of 17 words. To the credit of the House as an institution, we have passed proposed constitutional amendments of this nature with more than enough bipartisan support in the 104th Congress, the 105th Congress, the 106th Congress, and the 107th Congress. In each of those sessions, the U.S. House approved the proposed constitutional amendments with more than the two-thirds majority required to approve such modifications to the Constitution. Unfortunately, as has been the case too many times in recent years, the other Chamber has failed to approve the legislation and forward it to the States for consideration by their legislatures. Indeed, if the Senate could approve this proposed constitutional amendment, I understand from the Committee on the Judiciary that all 50 States have passed resolutions calling on the Congress to approve an amendment of this nature. This is an ample reason to believe that if this amendment were sent to the States for ratification, more than three-quarters of the States are poised to ratify this measure, thereby making it a formal part of our Constitution. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 255 is a modified closed rule that will give the House an opportunity to work its will on a substitute put forward by the ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), or his designee. I urge my colleagues to support the rule so we can move on to the underlying legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to simply say that after that litany of spending measures, I believe the gentleman from Florida has forfeited any future opportunities to complain about deficits. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Rules may meet this week to grant a rule which could limit the amendment process for floor consideration of H.R. 2143, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Funding Prohibition Act. The Committee on Financial Services ordered the bill reported without amendment on May 20, 2003, and filed its report with the House on June 2, 2003. Any Member wishing to offer an amendment should submit 55 copies of the amendment and one copy of a brief explanation of the amendment to the Committee on Rules in room H312 of the Capitol by 3 p.m. on Wednesday, June 4. Members should draft their amendments to the text of the bill as introduced on May 19, 2003. Members should use the Office of Legislative Counsel to ensure that their amendments are drafted in the most appropriate format. Members are also advised to check with the Office of the Parliamentarian to be certain their amendments comply with the rules of the House.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Rules may meet later this week to grant a rule which could limit the amendment process for floor consideration of H.R. 1119, the Family Time Flexibility Act. The Committee on Education and the Workforce ordered the bill reported on April 9, 2003, and filed its report with the House on May 22, 2003. Any Member wishing to offer an amendment should submit 55 copies of the amendment and one copy of a brief explanation of the amendment to the Committee on Rules in room H-312 of the Capitol by 10 a.m. on Wednesday, June 4. Members should draft their amendments to the text of the bill as reported by the Committee on Education and the Workforce. Members should use the Office of Legislative Counsel to ensure that their amendments are drafted in the most appropriate format. Members are also advised to check with the Office of the Parliamentarian to be certain that their amendments comply with the rules of the House.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 247. The Committee on Rules has listened to hours of testimony and made in order 39 total amendments, nine amendments in yesterday's first rule and 30 amendments under the new rule before us today. We made in order 22 majority amendments, 14 minority amendments, and three bipartisan amendments. And while everyone will not be pleased by these decisions, it is a fair rule that will give the House the opportunity to debate a wide variety of national security issues. Mr. Speaker, the underlying legislation, H.R. 1588, is entirely consistent with what the founders envisioned when they wrote article I, section 8 of U.S. Constitution, to ensure that Congress shall have the power to support, maintain, and provide for military to provide for the common defense. First, this legislation provides adequate funding to help continue the U.S. military's transition to the 21st century. H.R. 1588, for example, authorizes funding for the U.S. Army to procure weapons and tracked combat vehicles for the U.S. Navy for shipbuilding and conversion and for the U.S. Air Force to procure additional aircraft, including language to maintain the important F/A-22 program. The authorization for these programs, along with others, will help the U.S. military remain the most efficient, most lethal, and most effective fighting force on Earth. But, Mr. Speaker, we cannot possibly hope to maintain the level of excellence obtained by the U.S. military without the achievements of men and women who proudly wear the uniform. As a former captain in the U.S. Air Force myself, I continue to draw inspiration from the resolve, patriotism, and strength of commitment exhibited by our servicemen and women. This Congress must work to reinforce that strength, and I believe H.R. 1588 works to that end. I am pleased that the underlying legislation contains a 4.1 increase in base pay for military personnel. H.R. 1588 also recommends a reduction from 7.5 to 3.5 in the percentage of out-of-pocket expenses military personnel must contribute toward housing cost. Both of these provisions will not only help ease the burden placed on military personnel and their families, but should also help ensure that the U.S. military is able to retain these highly trained personnel.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings), my friend and colleague on the Committee on Rules, for yielding to me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the modified closed rule and the underlying legislation, the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003. In crafting this rule, the Committee on Rules has worked to maintain the bipartisan coalition of support this important legislation has gathered while also providing the minority the opportunity to offer a substitute amendment drafted by the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) for the consideration of all the Members of the House. I commend the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis) for introducing this bill and the House Committee on Resources, Committee on Agriculture, and the Committee on the Judiciary for the time and effort they have invested in bringing this very important and well-crafted legislation to the House floor. I support balanced forest management designed to protect plant and animal habitats, while ensuring that forests are still available for the enjoyment of local communities. One way I believe we can attain this goal is through President Bush's ``Healthy Forests Initiative,'' which has been introduced as H.R. 1904. The fire seasons of 2000 and 2002 were by most standards the worst the United States has seen in the past 50 years. Many scientists argue that these wildfires occurred because many forest have unnaturally high fuel loads, such as dead trees and dense undergrowth. Unfortunately, it currently takes Federal land managers upwards of several years to carry out forest health projects such as controlled burning and thinning, as there are various bureaucratic and judicial obstacles that must be dealt with before a project can begin. H.R. 1904 would empower local land managers with the tools they need to expeditiously carry out forest health projects and would increase the speed and efficiency with which the United States Forest Service and other Federal agencies make regulatory decisions. Furthermore, this legislation would improve the capacity of the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to plan and conduct hazardous fuel reduction projects on National Forest System and Bureau of Land Management lands to help protect communities and forestlands from catastrophic wildfires. It would also direct Federal land managers to establish early detection programs for insect and disease infestation in forests before they reach epidemic levels. Maintaining the health of our forests is critical and should not be impeded by needless bureaucratic obstacles. If forest health projects are not carried out, a forest will naturally cleanse itself through wildfires that can cause damage to the health of the forest ecosystems, endangered species and air and water quality. The American people, their property, and our environment are threatened by catastrophic fires and environmental degradation. These unnaturally extreme fires are caused by a crisis of deteriorating forest and rangeland health, the result of a century of well- intentioned but misguided land management. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the rule so that we may proceed to debate the underlying legislation.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer).

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 230 and ask for its immediate consideration.