Sue Myrick

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Just a couple of things in relation to the comments from the gentleman. I suggest that you ask the Apache crew if there was not a loss of life and also the Kosovo funding amendment passed overwhelmingly in the House. It was a bipartisan agreement, too, I might say. So I want to say that this is not a partisan rule that is being brought to the floor because we are going to have this discussion. There were 99 amendments total presented and 47 of them were made in order. I will say based on the percentages of each Republican and Democrat body that were presented, the percentages are very, very fair. We will have about 20 hours, anyway, of debate on this over the next couple of days. So it is very encouraging to me that we are going to be expressing the will of the House again and the debate that will go on will be very fair and open and allow us to give great discussion for this very fair rule. I also urge all of my colleagues to support the rule so we can have this open and fair debate on the floor. General Leave

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the rule under consideration.

Mrs. MYRICK. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), the chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. (Mr. GOSS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Chairman, this amendment makes sense. I can understand why a cultural and economic relationship with China can improve human rights, but China is not a military friend. The events of last month have made that clear. After the Tiananmen Square massacre, we discontinued military cooperation with China, and then in 1993 President Clinton reinitiated military-to-military contacts. Now we have learned that as early as 1996, national security adviser Sandy Berger knew that the Chinese had stolen our nuclear secrets and were continuing to practice espionage in the United States. Yet, in 1998, for the first time ever, we engaged in a joint military exercise with China's Peoples' Liberation Army. What has occurred during these military-to-military contacts scares me almost as much as the Cox report. We have recently learned China is now attempting to purchase torpedoes specifically designed to explode directly under our ships. Why? Because at one of the visits last year they learned that our U.S. aircraft carriers had a thin hall and were vulnerable to these types of torpedoes. At these exercises the Chinese saw our military's dependence on satellites and digital systems and AWACs aircraft. It does not surprise me that they are now seeking new ways to attack American satellites and to disrupt communications. We should not be allowing any national security secrets to be given away to any potential adversaries, much less China. We would not invite a thief to observe our home security system as it was being installed and tested. This administration continues to show its inability to even attempt to keep our national security secrets from China. As a result of this ineptness, I support the amendment of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Delay) to prohibit most military-to-military contacts with the People's Liberation Army.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Chairman, I think most of us agree that we would like to be seeking alternatives to abortion, rather than making abortion more accessible. But the one issue that I wanted to speak on today is what has been shown scientifically as an increased risk of breast cancer. Supposedly there is a link between breast cancer and abortion. This should be examined much more thoroughly before any new forms are approved. Ten out of 11 studies on American women report an increased risk of breast cancer after having an induced abortion, particularly among women with a history of breast cancer in their families. We know this is already a major problem which we are trying to effectively deal with because currently cancer is the leading form, or breast cancer is the leading form of cancer among middle-aged American women. In the few countries in which RU-486 is available, it is strictly regulated by the government's health care systems. However, in the U.S., control of abortion drugs is more lax, and sometimes they are often dispensed without a doctor's approval, which again potentially endangers women's health. But because of the potentially dangerous side effects of abortion, and this is not just physical, this is emotional, as well, these drugs should not be administered without consultation and medical follow-up with a doctor. So I hope we give this serious thought.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to assure the gentleman from South Carolina that there is going to be a lot of discussion on the nuclear labs problem on this House floor.

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw the resolution.

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Metcalf).

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook).

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes). (Mr. HAYES asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon).

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder). (Mr. SOUDER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would just like to clarify that for the last 15 years this bill has always been structured. There are over 16 hours of debate. There are 39 amendments, the same as always, on this defense bill. As to the question of the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) regarding that subject, there are 10 amendments that have been made in order on that subject, one of which is the gentleman from Washington's. I would also like to say that yesterday in the Committee on Rules that the ranking minority member, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), said it was the best defense authorization bill he had ever seen except for one provision regarding Kosovo which we have dealt with. According to the ratio, also there are more Republican amendments filed than Democrat amendments that were filed, which is the norm. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost), 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. Yesterday, the Committee on Rules met and granted a structured rule for H.R. 1401, the Fiscal Year 2000 Department of Defense Appropriations Act. The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided between the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Armed Services. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill. It makes in order the Committee on Armed Services' amendment in the nature of a substitute now printed in the bill, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the Committee on Rules report, which shall be considered as read. The rule also waives all points of order against the amendment in the nature of a substitute, as modified. The rule makes in order only those amendments printed in the Committee on Rules report and pro forma amendments offered by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Armed Services for the purpose of debate. Amendments printed in part C of the Committee on Rules report may be offered en bloc. Except as specified in section 5 of the resolution, amendments will be considered only in the order specified in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, and shall be considered as read, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. Unless otherwise specified in the report, each amendment printed in the report shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent and shall not be subject to amendment, except that the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Armed Services each may offer one pro forma amendment for the purpose of further debate on any pending amendment. The rule waives all points of order against amendments printed in the Committee on Rules report and those amendments en bloc described in section 3 of the resolution. The rule provides for an additional 1 hour of general debate at the beginning of the second legislative day of consideration of H.R. 1401, which also shall be equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Armed Services. The rule authorizes the Chairman of the Committee on Armed Services or his designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting of the amendments in part C of the Committee on Rules report or germane modifications thereto, which shall be considered as read, except that modifications shall be reported, shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally divided between the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on Armed Services or their designees, and shall not be subject to amendment or demand for a division of the question. For the purpose of inclusion in such amendments en bloc, an amendment printed in the form of a motion to strike may be modified to the form of a germane perfecting amendment to the text originally proposed to be stricken. The original proponent of an amendment, included in such amendments en bloc, may insert a statement in the Congressional Record immediately before the dispositions of the en bloc amendments. The rule allows the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to postpone votes during consideration of the bill and to reduce voting time to 5 minutes on a postponed question if the vote follows a 15- minute vote. The rule allows the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to recognize for consideration of any amendment printed in the report out of order in which printed, but not sooner than 1 hour after the Chairman of the Committee on Armed Services or a designee announces from the floor a request to that effect. Finally, the rule provides for one motion to recommit, with or without instructions. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1401 is a good bill. It is a bill that will allow all of us to rest a little easier at night knowing that our national defense is stronger and that we have taken good care of our troops. We now know that China has stolen our nuclear technology, something the Soviet Union could not do during the entire Cold War. We live in a dangerous world, but Congress is doing something about it. We are working to protect our friends and family back home from our enemies abroad. We are helping to take some of our enlisted men off of food stamps. It has been absolutely ridiculous that our enlisted men are on food stamps to survive. We are giving them a 4.8 percent pay raise. We are providing for a national missile defense system so that we can stop a warhead from China if that day ever comes. We are boosting the military's budget for weapons and ammunition, and we are tightening security at our nuclear labs, doing something to stop the wholesale loss of our military secrets. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Rules received 89 amendments to this bill. We did our best to be fair and to make as many amendments in order as we could. The rule allows for a full and open debate on all the major sources of controversy, including publicly funded abortions and nuclear lab security. It allows for debate on a lot of smaller issues, too. I urge my colleagues to strongly support this rule and to support the underlying bill so we can have this good discussion on the floor today. Now more than ever we must provide for our national security. Mr. Speaker, I include the following letter for the Record: Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC, May 26, 1999. Hon. J. Dennis Hastert, Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Speaker: In his recent letter, the President indicated that the Administration considers unacceptable Section 1006 of the House Armed Services Committee's FY 2000 National Defense Authorization bill, which restricts FY 2000 funds available to the Defense Department to be used for supporting Kosovo military operations. Thus, the President indicated that if Congress were to enact a Defense Authorization bill that included Section 1006, he would veto it. In an effort to resolve this issue, you asked for my thoughts regarding the Administration's possible actions to ensure that our military forces in Kosovo receive adequate resources. Throughout the debate on the recently passed emergency supplemental for Kosovo and other activities, the Administration was clear about its objectives for funding Department of Defense needs--that our forces involved in the Kosovo military operation are fully funded to conduct their mission and that the military readiness of all other U.S. forces is protected. We believe the President's supplemental request achieved these objectives. Consistent with current practice, the President must retain the flexibility to access various DoD funding sources to respond to immediate needs, much as he has done in the past. We, of course, will work with the Congress to ensure that any contingency requirements are fully funded, as well as to ensure that other priorities--such as military readiness and modernization--are protected. With regard to Kosovo funding requirements that may develop beyond the FY 1999 Emergency Supplemental Appropriation, to the extent that these requirements exceed an amount that could be managed within the normal reprogramming process without harming military readiness, we will submit either a budget amendment or a supplemental appropriations request. Sincerely, Jacob J. Lew, Director. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 195 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul). (Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen). (Mr. HANSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mrs. MYRICK. Reclaiming my time, we had 89 amendments to consider in this bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon). (Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend the debate for 30 minutes.

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reynolds).

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Rules is expected to meet the second week of June, when we return, to grant a rule which may restrict amendments for consideration of H.R. 45, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1999. Any Member contemplating an amendment to H.R. 45 should submit 55 copies of the amendment and a brief explanation of the amendment to the Committee on Rules no later than noon on Tuesday, June 8. The Committee on Rules office is in H-312 of the Capitol. Amendments should be drafted to the text of the bill as reported by the Committee on Commerce on May 20. Members should use the Office of Legislative Counsel to ensure their amendments are properly drafted and should check with the Office of the Parliamentarian to be certain their amendments comply with the Rules of the House.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this commonsense legislation. It is that. This is the effort to protect social security. We have made a promise to every American that social security is going to be there for them. It is a promise that many of them do not think we will ever keep. My own children are in that group. They say to me every day, sure, mom, give me a break. It is not going to be there for me. I have to take care of myself. I understand why they think that way, because Congress has continued just over all the years to raise social security to pay for pork barrel projects and even transportation projects, just spending. It has been an easy pot of money to go to whenever we needed a little extra. It is time to stop the foolishness. We are supposed to be responsible and dependable, and we are supposed to be here to protect the future of our seniors and our kids. This is a real important step in making sure that that happens. It is time that social security taxes are used for social security. We have not been truthful. We are not being truthful if we say we are balancing the Federal budget, and it is not balanced because we continue to borrow from social security. Let us not pretend that it is. It is time for us to exercise true fiscal discipline. We need to pass the bill and guarantee that this Congress keeps its promises to save social security. I strongly support the bill offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger), and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Coburn amendment because I just believe it is time to keep our promise, and this is one place we have to start. We have told the American people that we balanced the budget, and I really believe that now we need to stick to our word, because otherwise we are not being true to them. I understand and sympathize with the American farmers; I understand the committee's concerns and problems. In fact, we just passed a supplemental bill that added additional dollars for farmers. But since this year's budget resolution calls for $10 billion in discretionary spending cuts, we have to make the cuts to stick to the balanced budget agreement and protect and preserve Social Security, and the time to start is now. There is never a good time. That is the difficult thing about this place, because it is always hard not to spend money in a culture that is set up to spend, spend, spend. That is what Washington does and does well. It is always easy to stick pork in bills to spend more money; it happens every day. I think that is wrong. Mr. Chairman, we have to stand up for our principles of lowering taxes and protecting 100 percent of Social Security for our children and our grandchildren. They are depending on that. They look to us to be responsible, and as we do our bills, as this whole appropriations process goes forward, we have to be really conscious of that. It is time to put the good of the country ahead of personal ambition and tighten our belts. Without cuts now, and this is a relatively noncontroversial bill, if we cannot do it here, how in the world are we going to reduce spending in the other 12 appropriations bills? Mr. Chairman, for years, Congress has raided Social Security and funded pork barrel spending, and I believe it needs to stop; and today is a good time to stop it. I support the Coburn amendment, and I support fiscal responsibility.