John Linder

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 would like to just take enough time to remind the gentleman that the 1986 tax act was called the Bradley- Gephardt bill. 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 myself such time as I may consume. I merely point out that the majority party will be here to discuss the merits of the bill. The last debate has been on the rule, irrespective of the debate we heard from the other side, which was neither on the rule nor on anything in the rule nor on the merits of the bill. So I will urge my colleagues to come and pass the previous question, pass the rule, and get on with the debate on the bill, which is the extension of the AMT exclusion. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule, and I thank my friend and colleague from the Committee on Rules, the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick), for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, this is a traditional rule for legislation that amends the Internal Revenue Code, and I am pleased the House will have the opportunity to consider the merits of the underlying legislation and also an amendment from the ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel). Mr. Speaker, our Nation's Tax Code remains hopelessly complex. Just a few years ago, it was so convoluted from years of tax changes that it punished married taxpayers merely because they were married. Unfortunately, only under this current monstrosity of a Tax Code could the marriage penalty that this House eliminated reappear in the very near future. This rule before the House, H. Res. 607, will give Members of the House an opportunity to consider legislation that not only makes the Tax Code fairer but also ensures that we can halt a targeted tax increase on married Americans. I want to commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gerlach) for introducing this important legislation, H.R. 4181, which extends indefinitely the tax relief that the Congress and President Bush enacted in 2001 and 2003 to help married couples. Previously, our income tax code penalized couples who got married, frequently forcing them to pay higher taxes than if they had remained single. If we fail to enact H.R. 4181, tax rates will revert to their pre-2001 levels, and the marriage tax penalty will be reinstated at the end of this year. As a Nation built on strong families, we should promote marriage, not penalize it. Our tax system should not discourage getting married and raising a family. Therefore, it is imperative we pass H.R. 4181 today. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this rule so we may proceed to debating the underlying legislation.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule, and I thank my friend and colleague from the Rules Committee, Doc Hastings, for yielding me this time. H. Res. 602 is a fair, structured rule, which House members on both sides of the aisle should strongly support. It makes in order a total of four amendments, all of them offered by members of the Minority Party. Debating these amendments will allow the House to work its will on some of the key issues raised by H.R. 2844. I also rise in support of the underlying legislation, H.R. 2844. In his Second Treatise on Government, John Locke wrote ``the first and fundamental positive law of all commonwealths is the establishing of legislative power. Itself is the preservation of the society and of every person in it.'' Today, we examine whether the current mechanisms by which our government is created and maintained sufficiently provides for the continuation of representation in the event of a horrific disaster. Our efforts should answer the question of whether we are, in modern times, prepared to provide a rapid governmental response if and when disaster strikes that very government. The executive branch has made contingency plans so that in a dire emergency it would be able to continue functioning on behalf of the American people. This is a prudent thing to do. The House in its opening day rules package included significant positive rules changes stemming from the recommendations made by the bipartisan Continuity of Congress Task Force. Today, with the consideration of H.R. 2844, the U.S. House of Representatives begins to put in place a new system for ensuring the continuity of the Congress in the aftermath of a catastrophic event. H.R. 2844 provides that, if more than 100 House Members are killed, the Speaker of the House can declare that ``extraordinary circumstances'' exist. Such a declaration would trigger expedited special elections in those districts whose Members have been killed within 45 days. The political parties are given 10 days within which to nominate candidates for these elections. The important constitutional principle that this bill upholds is the unique nature of the People's House. The government should neither exist nor change but with the express will of the people by whom and for whom it was created. Without an elected House, legislation could be passed by a Federal Government composed entirely of the unelected. We must continue the tradition of the People's House, and H.R. 2844 does so. With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this important rule.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from California, the chairman of the Committee on Rules, for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 593 and urge the House to approve this rule so we can move on to consideration of the underlying legislation, H.R. 3550, the highway funding bill. As the gentleman from California (Chairman Dreier) described, this is a fair, structured rule that makes in order a total of 23 amendments, 14 Republican and 8 Democrat, and one very important bipartisan amendment. Thus, the Committee on Rules has crafted a rule that will allow the House to have a lively debate and work its will on a number of key issues that these amendments raise. H. Res. 593 should receive bipartisan support for doing so. With respect to H.R. 3550, this legislation reauthorizes our Nation's highway and transit programs for the next 6 years and covers a variety of important transportation needs. While I am pleased that the House is moving forward with its consideration of the highway bill, there is one outstanding issue that concerns me, the issue of minimum guaranteed funding. Georgia has, unfortunately, been a highway funding donor State for far too long. The two previous highway bills in 1991 and 1998 made good progress toward improving donor States' rates of return, but more still needs to be done in order to treat Georgia and other donor States more fairly. In the 1998 Transportation Equity Act For the 21st Century, TEA 21, I worked hard, along with other key members of the Georgia delegation, to achieve the present rate of return of 90.5 percent. With these efforts, Georgia was able to raise its average rate of return from 76 percent to approximately 86 percent of their share of contributions over the 6- year life of the bill. Unfortunately, H.R. 3550 in its current form is not a step forward toward the current goal of 95 percent. It does not even maintain the current level of minimum guaranteed funding provided under TEA 21. Although H.R. 3550 maintains the TEA 21 rate of return of 90.5 percent, the bill would mandate that only 84 percent is available for minimum guaranteed funding, unlike TEA 21, which sets aside approximately 93 percent of the Highway Trust Fund for minimum guaranteed needs. As such, the issue of minimum guaranteed funding under H.R. 3550 must be addressed more satisfactorily. In this respect, I am very pleased that the rule we crafted in the Committee on Rules will provide Members the opportunity to consider amendments offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Isakson) and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Burns) and others which is designed to address this very concern. Mr. Speaker, this is a good rule. It provides all Members the opportunity to debate a wide variety of transportation related issues facing our Nation. I urge my colleagues to support the rule, so we may proceed to debate the underlying legislation.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 585 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose 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. 585 is a closed rule that provides for the consideration of H. Res. 581, expressing the sense of the House regarding rates of compensation for civilian employees and members of the uniformed services of the United States. The rule provides for 1 hour of debate in the House equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Government Reform. The rule also provides one motion to recommit which may not contain instructions. Mr. Speaker, with respect to H. Res. 581, the underlying resolution, I want to commend the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), chairman of the Committee on Government Reform, who has spent significant time working on this important issue for this Nation's Federal civilian employees and military personnel. The Committee on Government Reform has held several hearings on the state of the Federal workforce. At the conclusion of those hearings, it determined that some managers may not be able to attract or retain skilled employees to the Federal workforce due to a pay gap between Federal civilian employees and their private sector counterparts. The concept of pay parity is based on two factors: first, an acknowledgment that the pay for civilian Federal employees and military personnel has not kept pace with the private sector; and, second, a belief that there is a need to reduce the disparity in pay between civilian Federal employees and military personnel. The pay parity issue was not addressed in the House-passed fiscal year 2005 budget resolution. Therefore, H. Res. 581 offers every Member of the House the opportunity to express their opinion on whether or not they believe that pay for civilian Federal employees should be adjusted at the same time and in the same proportion as pay for the members of the uniformed services. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this rule so that we may proceed to debate H. Res. 581. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule. I urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting House Resolution 574, which provides for the consideration of the fiscal year 2005 budget resolution. H. Res. 574 is a fair, traditional rule for consideration of the annual budget resolution. The Rules Committee listened to hours of testimony yesterday and we have focused on making in order a selection of amendments submitted in the nature of a substitute. The rule before the House today provides for the consideration of four amendments in the nature of a substitute--three of which are Democrat substitutes--including the Blue Dog budget, the Congressional Black Caucus budget, the Democrat Leadership's and the Republican Study Committee budget. With respect to H. Con. Res. 393, the underlying resolution, I want to commend Mr. Nussle, chairman of the Budget Committee, for all of his effort in bringing this very carefully-balanced resolution to the House floor. This budget reflects our commitment to the Nation's principles of strength, growth, and opportunity--to fund our Armed Forces and protect the people of the United States; to create jobs and strengthen the American economy; and to strengthen the foundation of this Nation that provides all Americans with unlimited opportunities, all while ensuring long-term fiscal responsibility. H. Con. Res. 393 is an important step in the right direction toward balancing the budget. This resolution is designed to cut the deficit in half over the next 4 years. In addition, it protects President Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax relief proposals in order to ensure that the economy will keep moving forward and create more jobs. The Budget Committee's resolution is in line with President Bush's FY 2005 budget request and seeks to hold the line on higher spending for most domestic discretionary programs, while increasing defense and homeland security spending to protect our citizens. Once the budget resolution is passed, our next challenge is making sure that the 13 regular FY 2005 appropriations bills are within this budget's limits. It is extremely important for Congress to ensure our fiscal policy is sound in order to allow the Federal Reserve to maintain its current monetary policies, which can collectively serve to encourage job creation and growth in the economy. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the rule so that we may proceed to debate the four substitute amendments as well as H. Con. Res. 393.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), my friend and colleague, for yielding me this time. I rise in support of the rule and urge my colleagues to join me in approving it. H. Res. 566 is a structured rule that makes in order a total of six amendments. Of that total, three are sponsored by Democrats and three by Republicans. This is a fair and balanced rule that will allow the House to work its will on a number of different issues, and this rule should be overwhelmingly approved by the House. With respect to the underlying legislation, H.R. 1375, it would streamline the regulatory compliance process for banks, thrifts, and credit unions and would eliminate or alter outdated, ineffective, and duplicative regulations. Removing existing burdens on depository institutions has become even more necessary since the enactment of the 2001 USA PATRIOT Act which mandates that depository institutions, in addition to other functions, focus compliance efforts on combating money-laundering and terrorist financing. Some highlights of H.R. 1375's provisions relating to credit unions include streamlining procedural requirements and voluntary mergers between healthy credit unions, providing an exemption to existing law to allow private insured state-chartered credit unions to join a Federal Home Loan Bank, and increasing the general limit on the term of Federal credit union loans from 12 to 15 years. H.R. 1375 would also remove ineffective regulations governing banks and thrifts. Under the legislation, the prohibition on national and State banks expanding across State lines to open branches would be eliminated, bank merger application requirements would be simplified, limits on thrifts for small business and auto loans would be removed, and thrifts would be given the same authority as national and State banks to make investments primarily designed to promote community development. In conclusion, H.R. 1375, sponsored by the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), streamlines some of the outdated and ineffective regulations that have been hindering the financial and business activity of depository institutions. Removing these burdensome regulations will not only encourage productivity but will also save depository institutions valuable time and money. 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 ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 3800.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Committee on Rules for yielding me this time, and I rise in support of this rule and urge my colleagues to join me in approving this resolution. H. Res. 561 will allow the House to work its will on the underlying resolution. It is an appropriate procedure, given the nature of H. Res. 557, which is a simple resolution. H. Res. 557 was introduced to recognize the Iraqi people's suffering under Saddam Hussein, the significant advancements being made in Iraq since last March, and the courage of U.S. and Coalition Forces as they strive to bring order and stability to the country. The media is accurate in its reports of the difficulties that still face U.S. and Coalition Forces in Iraq. But there are also positive events taking place every day that deserve recognition and are largely ignored by the media. Probably the greatest accomplishment is that the Iraqis are returning to their lives and are enjoying freedoms that never could have existed under Saddam Hussein. Under his regime, the Iraqi lived in terror on a daily basis. Now, the people of Iraq have an opportunity to shape their history as they choose. The Iraqi people recently took their first step in shaping their future with the recent signing of the Iraqi interim constitution into law. Other notable advancements in Iraq over the last year include the rise in oil production to roughly pre-March 2003 levels, the circulation of the new Iraqi currency, and the repair of critical infrastructure and roads. Additionally, the electricity supply has become more stable, and many Iraqi hospitals are up and running. The number of Iraqis that have joined the Iraqi police force, border patrols, and army has also increased, allowing Iraqi citizens to participate in protection of their very own infrastructure. Iraq is still a dangerous place, not only for Iraqi citizens but also for U.S. and Coalition Forces. I commend the U.S. and Coalition Forces for their dedication, sacrifice, and service in Iraq; and I salute them for helping to make our world a safer place. The task of rebuilding Iraq will be no easy feat, and it will certainly take time. However, I am encouraged by the positive events of the last year, and I believe it is in the U.S.'s interest and the world's to persevere and create a stable and democratic Iraq. 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, again a horrendous act of terrorism has been perpetrated on freedom-loving people in the world. Today, our friends in Spain are in mourning in the face of another cowardly attack by the enemies of freedom. News reports indicate that at least 173 people were killed and more than 600 injured in a series of explosions on Madrid's railway network at the height of morning rush hour. Spain has suffered terrible losses from terrorism for decades, and the United States stands by its side today in grief. Our hearts go out to the Spanish people in this difficult time. As I stated in September 2001, we--and our allies around the world-- will show our resolve to our enemies. The free nations of the world will remain steadfast in our commitment together to ensure that those who hate freedom and liberty will not succeed. There are only two sides in this war: Ours and the enemy's. We reaffirm this today in light of the attacks in Madrid. Lastly, it was President Franklin D. Roosevelt that stated that this Nation and its allies will defend ourselves to the uttermost and work to make certain that acts of war should never be permitted to endanger freedom-loving people again. Quote, ``With confidence in our Armed Forces--with the unbounded determination of our people--we will gain the inevitable triumph--so help us God.'' This quote remains just as true today, as it did in December 1941.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 554 is a fair and balanced rule that will provide House Members with the opportunity to consider a number of issues affecting our efforts to get indecent material off our airwaves. Under this rule, the House will have the opportunity to consider a manager's amendment by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) and an amendment by the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky) to strike the increased fine limit on entertainers, and an amendment by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) to direct the General Accounting Office to provide a detailed report to Congress about the number of complaints about indecent broadcasting and the processes and procedures that the FCC has implemented to investigate these complaints. With respect to H.R. 3717, the underlying legislation, I want to commend the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, for all of the time and effort he has invested in bringing this very important and well-crafted legislation to the House floor. Vulgarity, profanity, and even obscenity are an all-too-common trend on our television and radio airwaves today. Originally, the Golden Globe Awards incident last year appeared to be an isolated event; however, the subsequent profanity during the Billboard Music Awards broadcast and the grossly inappropriate halftime show of the 2004 Super Bowl made clear that Congress needs to take action and give the FCC the tools it needs to crack down on such tawdry programming. H.R. 3717 provides some of these tools for the FCC and is a step in the right direction. This legislation increases the penalties imposed for broadcast indecency, which allows the FCC to more authoritatively regulate on-air programming. Also, this bill makes it easier for the FCC to hold individuals subject to the same fines as broadcasters for indecent actions. In conclusion, families must be able to watch prime-time TV together without the fear of watching obscene, profane, or vulgar programming; and H.R. 3717 will help make this a reality. Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to support the rule so we may proceed to debate the underlying legislation.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 2136.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment that I have placed at the desk be considered as the amendment printed in House Report 108-431 and numbered 1 and that the amendment be considered as read for purposes of this unanimous consent request.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 547 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose 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. 547 is a fair, structured rule that provides for the consideration of H.R. 1561, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Fee Modernization Act. This rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary. H. Res. 547 provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment, and shall be considered as read. The rule waives all points of order against the Committee amendment in the nature of a substitute. H. Res. 547 makes in order only those amendments to the Committee amendment in the nature of a substitute which are printed in the Committee on Rules report accompanying the resolution. The rule provides that the amendments made in order may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in 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 division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. H. Res. 547 waives all points of order against the amendments printed in the report and provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions. With respect to the underlying legislation, H.R. 1561, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Fee Modernization Act, represents the beginning of the implementation of the revised Strategic Business Plan to transform the Patent and Trademark Office's operations by improving patent and trademark quality and reducing application backlogs and delays. The bill incorporates a revised fee schedule previously submitted by the PTO that would generate an additional $201 million in revenue. Specifically, H.R. 1561 amends Federal patent law to lower patent filing and basic national fees; increase appeal, excess claims, disclaimer, extension, revival, and maintenance fees; and add new fees for application examination, patent search, and patent issuance. As our former colleague and former director of the PTO, Jim Rogan, noted, the implementation of the revised Strategic Plan hinges on the passage of H.R. 1561. He stated, ``Without the ability to hire and train new examiners and also improve infrastructure, our hands will be tied . . . The consequences of failing to enact the fee bill and giving the (PTO) access to those fees will mean quality and pendency will continue to suffer. We will be unable to hire needed examiners, and over 140,000 patents will not issue over the next 5 years. The inventory of unexamined patent applications will skyrocket to a backlog of over 1 million applications by 2008, more than double the current amount, and pendency (as measured from the time of filing) will jump to over 40 months average in the next few years. This would represent the highest pendency rates in decades.'' I agree with former Director Rogan's account, and I believe that H.R. 1561 will benefit our Nation in the processing of patent and trademark applications. I have always supported the rights of independent inventors to seek protections under Federal patent laws. Undoubtedly, some of the world's greatest innovations have come from America's great independent inventors, including Thomas Edison and Alexander Graham Bell. Nevertheless, it is also necessary to expedite patent applications to help protect small independent inventors. Mr. Speaker, this rule was approved by the Committee on Rules last night. I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble).

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 529 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick), my colleague on the Committee on Rules.