John Linder

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent again that we vacate the vote.

Mr. LINDER. I ask unanimous consent that the vote be restarted.

Mr. LINDER. I ask unanimous consent that we vacate this vote.

Mr. LINDER. So moved.

Mr. LINDER. That wasn't the motion. The motion was to appeal the ruling of the Chair.

Mr. LINDER. Would you tell me who changed the ruling from ``appeal'' to ``sustain''?

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. I would object.

Mr. LINDER. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. LINDER. As a matter of fact, I was in the Chair and I was accused of shutting down the vote while people were in the well seeking to vote. And the next day the C-SPAN tapes proved you were wrong and I was right. The people coming in to vote were not even not only in the well, they were not even on the floor. They were shouting ``one more.'' But Dick Armey reviewed the tapes to critique me and concluded that you were wrong and I was right.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I was a friend of Charlie's for over 30 years. We met in the early 1970s when he was the president of the Georgia Dental Association and I was a practicing dentist and a young State legislator. Charlie never ever was in neutral, and he rarely ever backed up. It was full go ahead. The great story about him in the Army was he changed the way they were doing business, moving dentists to forward-fire bases. His commander called him and said, I want a daily report of what you are doing there that is out of the ordinary. Charlie said to him, Well, I have got a chair here. You come down here and set your own butt on it and write your own report. I just don't have time. The colonel did come down, and they changed the entire way the Army did business because of Charlie's ideas. When he got involved shortly thereafter in the Georgia Dental Association, he did the same thing. He just took charge and became president. He traveled all over the State of Georgia fighting for important things for patients' welfare. His campaign in 1994 was a joy to watch, just a joy to watch, yard signs everywhere and him moving as fast as he could from one house to the next, from one hand to the next. He was just a remarkably good campaigner. Then he came here and he introduced a very important bill. I didn't agree with him on the bill, but he didn't slow down at all. The fact that the House and the Senate did not sign the patients' bill of rights did not mean it wasn't important. The changes it brought in the relationships between HMOs and patients are there today because of the pressure of that legislation and will be there forever. Charlie was a remarkable human being and one whom I have loved for a very long time and will miss.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, today, I want to pay tribute to the United States Air Force, on the occasion of its sixtieth anniversary. This special day provides us with an important opportunity to recognize and honor the men and women who have made our Nation's Air Force the greatest air power in the world. As a former Captain in the U.S. Air Force myself, I shared a willingness to protect and defend the United States of America with all my fellow airmen and airwomen. On September 18, 1947, the National Security Act of 1947 was enacted, and the U.S. Air Force was officially formed. Although it is the newest unit of the four military branches, the U.S. Air Force has rapidly evolved into a segment of our armed services that embodies the fundamental core values and aptitude of our Nation's military foundation. In the fifth century B.C., Chinese military theorist Sun Tzu said that the ``The art of employing troops is that when the enemy occupies high ground, do not confront him.'' Drawing on the teachings of Sun Tzu and nineteenth century military historian and theorist Carl von Clausewitz, military leaders over the past 200 years have sought to perfect their craft in warfare. Until the 20th century, however, the might of a country's military forces was still incomplete. While nation-states throughout the world had successfully developed their ground and sea forces, it was not until the advent of aircraft that the nature of warfare would be altered dramatically and permanently, thus finally permitting our armed services to confront the enemy on high ground. Still, it took time to develop the technology and practice of air power so that it matched its theoretical potential. Even though the technology for capable air power existed for the U.S. Air Force during the Vietnam and Korean wars, the United States had not developed the capability of air power thoroughly enough to derive full benefit from its use until the Gulf War. Retired U.S. Air Force Colonel John Warden, the initial architect of the gulf war's air campaign, ``Instant Thunder,'' once theorized that the most important effect that air power would have in war would be its ability to destabilize the will and morale of the enemy's military leadership. The use of American air power in the gulf war and Operation Iraqi Freedom successfully proved Colonel Warden's theory true. The U.S. Air Force is unmatched in its technological prowess, providing air and space superiority on demand, and playing an important role in America's nuclear deterrence. The U.S. Air Force is revolutionary in that it is an expeditionary air force: It gets our ground forces to the fight, and gets our air power in the fight. Our Nation's Air Force has essentially provided our ground and naval forces with the tools necessary to successfully fight asymmetrical warfare by turning the landscape into a symmetrical one. The Great Narrative of the next 25 years will be the contest between globalization and parochialism. As communications and technology continue to flatten the world, the connected first-world nations will benefit and their vested interest in the global order's continued smooth functioning will encourage political stability and economic development. Those nations left behind will see globalization as a hostile force and may fight against it. It is those same countries that also tend to serve as fertile breeding grounds for radical ideologies. The challenge ahead lies in folding these countries into the new global order. The battle we face today in the global war on terror is the same battle we will face tomorrow, and it is a war we will continue to fight throughout our lifetime. In some ways, this war is not unlike the cold war between the U.S. and the Soviet Union; a monumental surgical strike will not immediately and forever decimate the enemy. This war will take time, and will require the prolonged use of a clear, inclusive, and engaging national military strategy. Currently, our armed services continue to focus on ``muddy boots'' requirements in Iraq and Afghanistan. We must remember that this would not be possible without the work of our Nation's Air force. In the initial stages of Operation Iraqi Freedom, the U.S. Air Force paved the way for our men and women on the ground so that they could conduct military to-military training, counter-drug, counter-terrorist, and homeland defense missions in Operation Enduring Freedom. It is my hope that as we celebrate the sixtieth birthday of the United States Air Force, we will be reminded of the tremendous sacrifices that our Air Force personnel and their families have made throughout the history of air power so that we may all continue to enjoy and pursue the opportunities afforded us by their significant role in protecting our democratic values. We must encourage innovation in the field, and I will do my part to ensure that our Air Force will be ready to meet the future with the tools they need to capitalize on new technologies, to maximize transport of equipment and military personnel, and to provide our boots on the ground with the landscape necessary to continue to deter, prevent, and punish acts of terrorism and piracy in the U.S. and around the world.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. LINDER. Would you tell us how much time they have combined, the two committees and our two committees combined, left?

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Thank you for yielding. Mr. Speaker, about 2 years ago, the Government Accountability Office brought before the Ways and Means Committee a study that said if we continue to tax at the current percentage of the economy and continue to spend in discretionary spending at the current percentage of the economy that just 33 years from today the entire Federal revenue stream will be insufficient to just pay the interest on the debt. I know the Democrats will say raise taxes. In 100 percent of the time in the last 60 times that we have raised taxes, we have slowed the economy and slowed revenues. This Congress will not reduce spending. So what is their solution to our dilemma? The problems are, as the GAO said, three entitlement programs, Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid. They propose to give us another one, with no caps, expanding coverage to illegal immigrants, by the language from the CBO, expanding coverage to adults with no children, by the definition of their act, and allowing the States to lift the ceiling on eligibility entirely. This is a back-door or front-door entrance for Hillary care, national health care. You will recall that in that program if a doctor treated a patient for free outside the system, they are liable for criminal fines. That isn't in this bill, yet.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. It is my understanding that any intervening business requires a 15-minute vote on the following vote under the rules of the House, and there was intervening business.

Mr. LINDER. Is it the result of a unanimous consent request?

Mr. LINDER. First of all, is this a 5-minute vote?

Mr. LINDER. Is this a 5-minute vote that occurred because of a unanimous consent request?

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. In 1928, two gentlemen in Congress by the names of Smoot and Hawley drafted a bill to reduce tariffs to broadly increase markets, particularly for farmers. And after 4 years, it became not a tariff reduction bill, but a tariff increase bill. And all our trading partners responded in kind, leaving us a dust bowl in the ``Grapes of Wrath.'' If you don't think they're going to respond in kind to this, you're nuts. Toyota is not located in Barbados. Honda is not located in the Caribbean islands. These companies pay huge American taxers and hire millions and millions of our neighbors. They sell product in this country, they sell product for dollars. And the only value that dollar has for them is to spend it in a dollar-denominated economy, and they spend in America and they buy companies. If you don't believe that this 4 to $6 billion tax increase on foreign capital is going to cause a response, you're simply not paying attention to history. Vote this tax increase down.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry. Isn't it true that the motion to recommit was passed by a recorded vote?

Mr. LINDER. Isn't it further true that the motion to recommit was brought back with the bill for final passage and that last motion was on final passage and you called the vote a ``no''?

Mr. LINDER. Actually, the amendment was already agreed to and it came back with the final bill. There was no call for a separate vote on the amendment again.

Mr. LINDER. By vote about 20 minutes ago.

Mr. LINDER. With instructions, with the amendment included in it. So the only vote left for you to put before the House is the vote on final passage, and you called it a ``no'' vote.

Mr. LINDER

Mr. LINDER. Parliamentary inquiry, please.