Kendrick Meek

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Let me say, just to back up what you were saying and be a third-party validator on that, I have the facts here. You want to talk about abuse of power? It was printed just this afternoon a story that was posted around 7 p.m. tonight about what is going on in the back Halls of Congress. I mean, we have leaders in the Senate saying that we have an agreement with a said Senator, but I do not want to go into details. That is what our leadership says here in the House. At the appropriate time when I find the cover sheet to this one story, I will enter that into the Record because I think that needs to go into the Congressional Record so that when folks start backtracking on what happened in the 109th Congress at the closing of the first session of the 109th Congress, I want them to clearly know what the thinking was on behalf of the majority. These are two majority leaders that are talking about this kind of ``we have a deal worked out, but we do not want to go into details,'' meanwhile holding up the Defense authorization bill. Not only that, holding up the Defense appropriations bill. There are other bills that we would like to get through this Congress. Mr. Ryan talked about abuse of power. Let me take you down memory lane for a moment. October 7, the Republicans held open a 5-minute vote on Gasoline American Security Act. It lasted over 40 minutes to pass an energy bill that does nothing to lower gas prices, and that bill actually passed only by two votes. The Republican leadership, they have bills that even Republicans do not want to vote for. I think it is important that the American people are made aware of that and also Members that may need to freshen their memory. November 22 of 2003 in the 108th Congress as it relates to the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill: 3 hours we stood in this Chamber, Mr. Speaker, waiting on this bill, waiting on us to close the board. When we say ``the board,'' we are talking about the voting board. We sat here for 3 hours while the arm twisting went on. Leader Pelosi came to the floor and put forth a resolution in detail talking about some of the activities on that given evening here on this floor that I am speaking on. I think it is important we go down memory lane to make sure that people understand when folks talk about fairness and inclusion and that Democrats have access to the process, we just need to go down a brief history of what is going on. And that is the purpose of the 30- something Working Group, that the American people understand exactly what is going on here. You want to talk about arm twisting? Just recently, July 24 and 28, on those two dates the vote was held open for so long. Leaders held the vote open for 1 hour, well past the 15-minute voting time as they rounded up enough votes to pass CAFTA, which was in the final vote 217- 215. Even some Republicans on that side of the aisle could not vote for that piece of legislation because it did not meet the merit to be able to be a sound free trade agreement the American people can embrace. It took an hour for that to happen. Let us go down memory lane once again. Veterans Affairs, the chairman being pro-veteran, goodness gracious, if you are pro-veteran in the Republican majority, you are going to lose your chairmanship. This is not just our report that we have in the back room here and we said, let us see if we can fabricate something. January 6, this year, 2005, House Republicans ousted Mr. Chris Smith as chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs for bucking his leadership and being a tireless advocate on behalf of veterans rights. He was not only removed as chairman, which he served on the committee for 24 years, but he was kicked off of the committee, off of the committee.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. You never heard of a measure coming before the Armed Services Committee dealing with elections. Maybe absentee ballot access for troops or something, but that is about the extent of it, I am pretty sure.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I just want to ask you a quick question, Mr. Spratt. I think it is important not only for the Members to know, but for everyone to know: How much work has gone into this Defense authorization bill? It just was not something that one meeting took place. I am pretty sure hours and hours of testimony and also committee work.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Ryan, I just wanted to say when you talked to that marine, we were actually in Mosul at the time, and I am going to be a third-party validator as it relates to your discussion with them. Also, it was a bipartisan delegation, and we heard it on both sides of the aisle. One thing that I want to say, even Mr. Spratt as we talk about the authorization bill, as you know, defense seems to be the vehicle to pass all pieces of legislation or thoughts or ideas that the majority has problems in passing under regular order. They have problems passing drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, so they want to attach that onto a piece of legislation and try to push it through the process. But I can tell you that this abuse of authority is stepping in the middle of national security at this point, and it is very, very unfortunate. And it is not like coincidence; it is not like something that is blowing through the air conditioner vents here. I am so glad, sir, once again, that you came down. We are talking about this subject. Many times some Members may not know what is going on. The American people may not know what is going on. That is the reason why we are here, to make sure they do know what is going on.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. And, Mr. Speaker, we wish you a Merry Christmas, too, sir.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Well, first Ms. Wasserman Schultz.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Once again, I just have to point out, and this is going to take me about 10 seconds to do it. They cannot get Republicans in this House to vote for drilling in ANWR. They cannot get them to do it. So I do not blame Republicans, and I do not even blame the Republican Party. I blame the Republican leadership that is leading the Republican side of the aisle and even giving the oil companies and the special interests the thought that they can invade the Defense appropriations bill of all bills. Republicans, their stomach is all messed up over this. The Republicans need to ask elected Republicans when they go home, why did you change on me? You changed uniforms in the middle of the football game. I am not an advocate for the majority, but I am just saying, there is something fundamentally wrong here. I want to know, what is the problem, and who is whispering in whose ear? I did find the article, Mr. Speaker, and I would just like to insert it, but it is, Plan to Move ANWR to Defense Bill Moves Budget Deal Forward. That is CQ Today, December 17 article, Mr. Speaker, and I will enter that into the Record at this point. [From the CQ Today, December 17, 2005] Plan to Move ANWR to Defense Bill Moves Budget Deal Forward (By Steven T. Dennis and Liriel Higa) A conference report on a $45 billion budget savings package was nearly complete Saturday evening after House leaders reached an agreement with Senate Defense Appropriations Chairman Ted Stevens to move a provision allowing drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) out of the legislation and into the Defense bill. The agreement on moving ANWR came on a day of negotiations on multiple fronts. On Saturday night, the House by voice vote passed a stopgap spending measure (H J Res 75) to temporarily fund Defense programs and other government operations after a day-long dispute between Republican leaders in both chambers over when the measure would expire. A new stopgap measure must be cleared by Congress and signed by President Bush by midnight, when an earlier stopgap spending measure (H J Res 72) expires. On Sunday, House leaders expect to bring the budget package (HR 4241, S 1932) to the floor for a vote. And they expect Stevens, R-Alaska, to sign the budget conference report. Stevens, a staunch supporter of ANWR energy exploration, had vowed not to do so until the lawmakers cleared the Defense spending bill (HR 2863) with drilling provisions intact. But he later agreed to allow the budget conference to move forward provided that the House passes the Defense bill with ANWR attached. ``We have an agreement with Sen. Stevens, but I don't want to go into all of the details,'' said House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, R-Ill. House Budget Chairman Jim Nussle, R-Iowa, said Saturday afternoon that his panel was expecting final reports from authorizing committee chairmen by the evening and that once the final bill is scored by the Congressional Budget Office, the budget savings package should come close to the $45 billion goal set by House leaders. Nussle said that they ``need, want, expect'' Stevens' vote on the budget bill. He said the House would vote on the Defense spending bill Sunday before voting on the reconciliation bill. The Senate also would likely vote on the Defense bill with ANWR attached before voting on the budget reconciliation package according to a senior Senate GOP leadership aide. The timetable for Senate action is unclear. It is uncertain if Democrats would attempt to filibuster the Defense measure. But they were hoping to muster the 51 votes needed to reject attaching ANWR drilling to the conference report. The budget savings package is protected from filibuster in the Senate under special budget reconciliation rules, but the Defense spending measure has no such protection. ``This language has the potential, in my opinion, to sink the package once it reaches the Senate.'' The ANWR provision, which was included in the Senate's version of the budget package but not the House bill, has been a sticking point in finishing work on the legislation-- especially for House moderates and Democrats. Negotiators hope that moving the proposal to the must-pass Defense bill makes the budget legislation easier to pass while making it harder politically for Democrats to filibuster. A number of other provisions in the Budget savings bill opposed by House moderates--including savings in food stamps, child support enforcement and welfare--would not be in the final bill either, Nussle said. But a $3.2 billion House provision shifting trade dumping penalties to the U.S. Treasury instead of aggrieved companies was still in the package, Nussle said. Medicaid and Medicare provisions were still being hashed out late Saturday afternoon, as negotiators awaited scoring of the provisions. The package still needed to go through a so-called ``Byrd bath,'' to ensure that it does not run afoul of the Byrd rule. Named for Senator Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., the rule prohibits provisions in budget legislation that would have a negligible spending impact. Meanwhile, Republican moderates in the House began to worry that their victory in stripping ANWR from the House budget package was becoming a fleeting one. Representative Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y., said he and other moderates would consider voting against the budget savings package unless ANWR is removed from the Defense bill. ``The my way or the highway crowd'' has been winning, and moderates need to consider changing tactics, he said. House Appropriations Chairman Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., said appropriators were close to a deal on additions to the Defense appropriations bill, including hurricane relief, flu prevention funding and a 1 percent across-the-board cut that would apply to Defense but spare veteran's benefits. That cut would save about $8 billion a year. Stopgap Funding Lewis lost in an intraparty dispute Saturday with Senate leaders over how long to temporarily fund government operations covered by spending bills have not yet cleared, including Defense. Since the fiscal year began on Oct. 1, Congress has twice enacted such stopgap spending measures. On Saturday, Lewis introduced a third continuing resolution lasting until Feb. 15, but the Senate insisted that the measure expire sooner, on Dec. 31. The continuing resolution would fund programs covered under the Defense bill and the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations measure (HR 3010)--the only two spending measures that have not yet cleared. Lewis had said he was seeking a Feb. 15 extension because of concerns that the Senate would not be able to clear the Labor-HHS spending measure before adjourning. Lewis rejected a proposal floated Friday by Senator Arlen Specter, R-Pa., chairman of the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations Subcommittee, to tack the bill on to the Defense Appropriations measure.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Really, to get to the nitty-gritty of the whole veterans, they instruct the Republican majority, which I must say, when the budget came through this House, Mr. Speaker, not one Democrat voted for the budget. Not one Democrat said, well, maybe I need to vote for this reduction and maybe I just need to do it because of the folks back home; I just do not want to vote against the budget. Not one Democrat voted for the budget that they passed on the backs of the American people, and to come here with a straight face and talk about how we are going to borrow as much money as we have to borrow to give billionaires the majority of the tax breaks of a proposal that we put forward, and these are the very individuals that are standing up with all kinds of markers behind them and charts and everything, fiscal responsibility, ``trust us'' kind of thing, and I can tell you right now, Mr. Speaker, we should have as much trust and confidence within our government. But when we see our leaders act in such a way legislatively, I think it is something that should be quite alarming. I want to come to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) for a second, but I want to hit this chart since we are talking about being responsible. If I could, I would like to kind of get a billboard placed probably right where the Members come in to vote, if I could. If I could talk to House Administration to see if I could do that, I think it would be helpful for the financial well-being of every American. So when the Republican majority is driving in here and saying, I want to borrow as much money as I can to make sure that oil companies have the subsidies that they would like to have, even though they are making record profits, we are going to give them more than we are giving to the American people or more than we are giving to Leave No Child Left Behind to improve that Act. There are going to be 11 States that have filed suit against the Federal Government because it is underfunded, but meanwhile, here we are speaking of, let us borrow as much as we can to give billionaires their tax break, $1.05 trillion this President has borrowed with the Republican majority, in just 4 years, from foreign nations such as China, Saudi Arabia, Japan, you name it. They have a piece of the American pie now because we have borrowed $1.05 trillion. Forty-two Presidents before this President and before this overwhelming so-shall- it-be-written-so-shall-it-be-done Republican majority, 42 Presidents in the past, $1.01 trillion, 42 Presidents, 224 years of a country and trying to be as fiscally responsible as possible. I think it is important that the Members pay very close attention to this chart, and unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, this is continuing to go up and up and up and up and up.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise to draw the attention of my colleagues to the growing tragedy in Kashmir, a northern region of Pakistan located along the Indian border. In early October of this year, an earthquake devastated that area, killing tens of thousands of people and leaving millions more homeless. Each passing day brings new heartbreak to that remote region as exposure, illness, and famine continue to wreak havoc on the population. These people are desperate, and they need our help. The earthquake's epicenter hit Muzaffarabad, the regional capital, and registered a magnitude of 7.6 on the Richter scale. For comparison, the 1989 earthquake that hit San Francisco had a magnitude of 7.1 and its epicenter was more than 70 miles away. The Pakistani Government has reported that at least 73,000 people have died, 15,000 they believe to be school children. The World Bank and the Asian Development Bank reported in their assessment after the quake that at least 3.5 million people have been dislocated, and that another 1.6 million are without adequate food supplies. This mountainous region of Pakistan lies at the foothills of the great Himalayan Mountains. The area receives as much as 10 feet of snow during the winter months, and nighttime temperatures can easily drop to 50 degrees Fahrenheit below zero. As winter quickly approaches, the severe potential for further catastrophe grows for the millions of homeless Pakistanis living in makeshift tent communities. Mr. Speaker, the earthquake that devastated the capital city and surrounding communities disastrously separated brother from sister, parent from child, and destroyed the lives and livelihoods of countless families. International aid organizations have speculated that the tragedy of the quake's aftermath could surpass that of the tsunami that struck just months earlier given the region's severe climate, remoteness, and the shortfall of international assistance. Without immediate action by the international community, thousands more will surely perish. The World Bank estimates that $5.2 billion will be needed to adequately rebuild the region and care for the quake's victims. The Bush administration has provided $50 million in emergency assistance and pledged another $150 million; however, more is needed. For this reason I have written to President Bush requesting that he double his request to Congress, and provide $300 million towards Pakistani reconstruction. The United States and Pakistan have long worked together, and jointly we are fighting the ongoing war on terror. In addition, additional aid from our country would send a signal to other nations that the United States stands ready to help in times of need. Mr. Speaker, I call upon my colleagues in the House to strongly support measures that would send addition aid to help alleviate the suffering the Pakistani people.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Can I amend that chart and say Hurricane Republican Majority, because we represent Republicans that believe in what we are talking about here tonight. Goodness gracious, the average Republican's stomach would turn if they even knew half of what is happening in this House. You can have a convention or you can have a pep talk or you can go on a radio show and give one side, but these are facts, not fiction. There are third-party validators behind all of these numbers. They can go on the U.S. Treasury Web site and find that we are borrowing more in the history than any of the other 42 Presidents before this President from foreign countries. The deficit is higher than it has ever been before. The Republican majority is saying we are not going to leave until we pass this budget on the backs of the American people. I added ``backs of the American people.'' We are not going to leave until we pass this tax cut for millionaires and billionaires and special interests. We are not going to leave until they get what they want or what we want them to have. Instead of them saying, We are not going to leave until we make sure that Americans do not have to pay three times as much for heating and oil. We are not going to leave until we put forth a bipartisan health care plan. We are not going to leave until veterans get their fair share out of the Federal Government and we do what we are supposed to do. And we are not going to leave until we pressure this administration to come up with a strategy for Iraq because as we were talking earlier, the bottom line is is it for everything that has happened in Iraq, and maybe Mr. Ryan will want to elaborate on this little more, there has been a time line. But when we start talking about our troops, our men and women that are in harm's way, oh, we cannot talk about time lines now. Talk about the Iraqi elections, the President just gave a speech saying, well, the elections, this is happening and a permanent parliament will be in place. They will be seated sometime in March, and it is going just as planned. Well, guess what, the insurgency knew about the elections, the insurgency knew of every other benchmark that we put forth; but when it comes down to our men and women, four marines died today. When it comes down to our men and women we cannot ask any questions? Excuse me, we all salute one flag I think. I think just as the President has the prerogative to say that this Member is wrong or Congress is wrong or that Senator is incorrect, we can say the same thing under this democracy, Mr. Speaker. I think the American people have risen up. It is not a question if they have arrived yet to this conclusion, that we need a plan. We need a plan so our troops know clearly what we are asking of them, so the Defense Department can stop acting like the State Department and replace them with diplomats. Just like Mr. Murtha has said, we need a diplomatic solution to Iraq. Yes, we can do things on the horizon. Yes, we can come in and carry out operations here and there, but to have our troops carrying out convoys on the grounds of Iraq so that the insurgency can continue to pick off 10 and five and eight, these are American families. I think we all in this House should be passionate as if we had children in harm's way. Period. Dot. If my son or daughter were there, I would want a plan, a plan to where it just does not move based on what the President says about stay the course. Stay the course for what? Stay the course for what? For the elections? We have a plan there. We know when the elections are going to happen. The insurgents know when their government is going to be placed. But to say if we reveal that then it will hurt our operations there. Rhetoric. So I think it is important if we are going to stay here, and I am prepared to stay, I am prepared to stay until we deal with the real energy crisis that we have here at home, until we deal with health care, until we make sure that jobs are secure here in America, until we make sure that we get a real budget that is going to decrease the budget and we are record breaking. I want to say this in closing out the comments here, an editorial from the Lafayette Daily Advertiser. I talked this out with the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz) because we went through Wilma. We were here fighting on behalf of Hurricane Katrina victims and survivors. Meanwhile, while we are fighting, a hurricane hits our district. Now we are having to talk about not only Katrina, but Rita, Wilma, and a number of other storms. This could be in a paper in a Member's district soon: ``Tax Cuts to the Rich Shouldn't Come At Gulf Coast Expense.'' Let me take one paragraph from here: ``We can't afford a levee protection system for south Louisiana, but we can afford to give away $56 billion over the next 5 years to people who don't need it.'' Now this is what the paper is saying. It is not what I am saying. There is not enough money to help the people pay their mortgage on uninhabitable homes that insurance companies will not pay for, but we will give millions to millionaires, $32,000 extra each year in tax breaks. Like I said, if it was a perfect world at this point, I would assume that it would be okay, but it is not. We have Americans living in tents. We have Americans thinking about, I heard some Members coming to the floor talking about Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanza, you name it, the high religious season that we are getting into now. Meanwhile, we are giving notices to Americans that you are going to be evicted, a judge had to step in and say not so. A judge had to step in. We have Members here that are throwing rocks at the judiciary. I say thank God for the judiciary in this case. Someone needs to stop this culture of corruption and cronyism and incompetence. And I would add incompetence as it relates to evicting Americans. Meanwhile, we are record breaking spending money over in Iraq right now with no plan, no plan to say we need to take the training wheels off the Iraqi Government and let them know. Just like we can have elections on time, we can have a redeployment plan on time and we are offering that option. I ask some of my Republican colleagues on the other time, and some of them are, a very small group, but I asked them to be able to rise up because when historians in the very near future, and I do say the very near future, when they start looking at what we were doing and, guess what, what the Republican majority was not doing under the circumstances, I think that there is going to be a price to pay politically for the inaction that they have not taken.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Incompetence.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, we would like to thank the Democratic leader for the time tonight.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, there was a time and a place that we could say future generations, but we are talking about right now. We are talking about taking and cutting out of the budget child enforcement, Mr. Speaker, enforcement that State attorneys have to go after deadbeat dads, that mothers will lose money out of, deadbeat parents. Let me say that children will go without. We are talking in this budget about cutting free and reduced lunches for children. We are talking about cutting money out of the veteran affairs. The Republican majority in this budget is instructing through legislation the Veteran Affairs Committee to cut over $650 million out of veteran affairs. I do not understand. We can talk about future generations as it relates to the budget and the $27,000-plus that they already owe at birth, but let us talk about what is happening right now. The lines are going to get longer for veterans. Under Medicaid, children will not get eye examinations because of this cut. I could see it if we were to say, Mr. Speaker, we did not have the money for this. But we are giving the money to millionaires. We are giving the money to billionaires.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to address the House once again. I would like to thank not only the Democratic leader but the Democratic leadership for allowing the 30-Something Working Group to come to the floor again not only to address the Members but also interested parties in how our country conducts its business and how we operate this government that the American taxpayers have allowed us to oversee. There is a lot going on, Mr. Speaker. I must add a lot of it is quite discouraging when we start looking at how we are conducting business here in Washington, D.C. But I think it is very important and very appropriate for not only Mr. Delahunt but Ms. Wasserman Schultz and also Mr. Ryan of Ohio to come to the floor to share with the American people things that the Democratic side of the aisle are working on to improve their lives. I can tell the Members try, day in and day out, not only in the committees but here on the floor working on behalf of Americans, protecting Americans here at home, dealing with issues as it relates to implementing the recommendations of the 9/11 reports. As Members know, the 9/11 Commission has given this government failing grades across the board of implementing some of the projects that they would like to see implemented to protect Americans. Also, we have been standing up for Americans that have served in harm's way, veterans, making sure that they are able to get improved health care benefits. But in this particular budget that the Republican majority passed, we know the lines are going to get longer and services are going to be cut back or veterans are going to have to pay more. We released a report today dealing with Hurricane Katrina. In the same week that the Republican majority, Mr. Speaker, is going to pass a budget on the backs of working Americans to give millionaires tax breaks, we still have families living in tents. Tents. While we are kicking others out of hotel rooms, we are giving tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires. And I think it is important that we understand what is happening right now in the moment. I do not want to wait for the book to come out, Mr. Speaker. I want to do something about it before one can write the book. And if they are going to write a book, it is going to talk about Americans and Congress came together. Hopefully, we can get some of our Republican colleagues in a bipartisan way to save the American taxpayer and to save the Americans that are in need right now. There is a lot of concern and focus on what is going on hundreds and thousands of miles away as it relates to a group of individuals that we have done quite a bit for recently in Iraq. Americans simply ask for, not just Democrats in the House but also the Senate has asked the President for a clear plan as it relates to dealing with the issue of Iraq and our troops and making sure that we can bring families together in the very near future. I think it is important that we continue to hit on these issues. I do not know what the American children and families have done to the Republican majority, but I can say that if they passed this budget, what the majority would like to do on the backs of Americans and in the same week give the wealthiest Americans an unprecedented tax break in the history of this Republic, I think it is something that the American people are going to have to evaluate. The Democrats, on this side, we are trying very much to protect access to health care for Americans. Not a mumbling word, not a mumbling word, from this Congress on this issue of the health care crisis here in Congress. But I am glad that the 30-Something Working Group does not find it robbery to come to the floor to bring light to these issues and make sure that not only Independents, Republicans and Democrats know what is happening here under the Capitol Dome but also know what is not happening. And with that, I yield to the gentlewoman from the great State of Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Well, Mr. Delahunt, I must add to just say this, that we are compassionate to the oil companies. We are giving them money when they are making record-breaking profits. So when folks say, well, Congressman, when we get an e-mail or so to Members of Congress, well, what are you so alarmed about? We are in the majority. What are you concerned about? You gain the majority on the Democratic side, and you can do something different. We have reams of plans where we want to put American people first. We want to put our troops first, our troops' families first. We want to put our veterans first. We want to put a child that did nothing but was born as an American child first. That is what we want to do. We want to do away with the culture of corruption and cronyism and incompetence. What is wrong with that? So, Mr. Delahunt and Mr. Ryan and Ms. Wasserman Schultz, when we talk about future generations, we have to talk about now in the present. We are not talking about Republican families will not suffer under this. They will suffer just as bad as independents and Democratic families. So I think it is important that we should be alarmed, that Americans should be alarmed. These are the very same individuals, I am sorry, I have to pull my chart out; Mr. Delahunt, you can't say this enough, these are the folks that are saying, Trust us, we know how to operate the government. Then you have a President that could not do it by himself with a Republican majority who made this country more dependent on foreign countries like China, Saudi Arabia, Japan, borrowing $1.05 trillion. I cannot say that enough. In 4 years, that has trumped 42 presidents before him, $1.01 trillion. In 224 years of presidencies, of all the crises we have had, this President seems to have done it in 4 years. You would think that cities would be a shining example of the Federal commitment after all of this money has been borrowed from foreign nations. No, cities are putting levies and millage and going out to the taxpayers asking for more money, a penny here, a penny there. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, people are getting tax cuts, millionaires are getting tax cuts on the backs of the very people that we are trying to provide a government for. So, Mr. Delahunt and Ms. Wasserman Schultz and Mr. Ryan, if we could talk about the present, because we talk about future generations and some folks will say we will have time, we will recover. But this is unprecedented. The deficit has never been this high.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. $1.05 trillion.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I thought so.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. You mean what the majority did?

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I ask the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan), who would be happy tonight, based on the passage of the bill that passed today? Who would be happy?

Mr. MEEK of Florida. No. Some have left and have pled. Forget about a trial. They have said, oh, I am guilty. So that is not an issue. Some of it is alleged, ongoing now; but some of it is actually proven. So that means that we have a lot of work to do in a bipartisan way. And I am going to be honest. Like it or not, Mr. Speaker, I am glad that this Speaker took some steps as it relates to talking about the issue that we do have a problem and we need to do something about it. Is it almost like many people that are struggling with substance abuse, they have to first say they have a problem for them to even get on the road of recovery. I talked last night about the fact that how can you operate a government in a fiscal way, in a responsible way, in a way that Democrats, Republicans, independents and other party members would like for their government to function in this democracy; how can you do it under a culture of corruption, cronyism and incompetence. You just cannot do it. This is not the 30-something Working Group report, this is not your report, it is not my report. It is what the American people know, and that is what people are reporting about, and we have all of these investigations going on.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I would also add corporations that have influence and power. What is it, K Street?

Mr. MEEK of Florida. It is important. Anytime anyone can get information between right and wrong, I think it is good. I think it is good. I think it is good that we have this discussion. But we need action. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) had a colloquy with a Member on the other side talking about the war in Iraq and the kind of action that we have to take as it relates to the corruption and cronyism and incompetence in contracting. He said that it was important, and he yielded to this distinguished Member of this House. And he said, yes, we should have a discussion on it. Mr. Delahunt reclaimed his time and said, no, we should not have discussion on it, we should have action on it, because that is what the American people want. And I think it is important that we get to the bottom of it. I think it is important. We have to. We must get to the bottom of it. It is important that we start taking steps in a bipartisan way. Now, I am going to tell you that the Democratic leader brought up a privileged resolution today that basically talked about the spirit of the rules of the House being violated, talked about the fact that we had issues here of former Members that served in this Congress and the previous Congress, in the 108th Congress, that were a part of not only questionable, illegal activities.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I just want to say that it is alleged activity.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Well, let me just say this, and I say this is something that I have read in the paper today, and I am pretty sure some sort of memo is going to come out on it: when you are in a culture of corruption and cronyism and incompetence, you have to start, I guess, somewhere. Apparently, Federal prosecutors and other investigating bodies here in this Capital City have taken steps to try to help those of us here in Washington, D.C. that need help as it relates to that kind of training. But let me just make this point. Do we need ethics training? I think we need to be reminded of that, because as I said last night, Mr. Speaker, 33 percent of Americans feel that we are doing the right thing here in Washington, D.C. I saw a poll today that said 28 percent of Americans agree with what we are doing.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am so glad that Mr. Ryan set the pace here and he laid the foundation for continuing our discussion as it relates to responsibility. I can tell the Members the ideas that we had here on this floor as it relates to sensible tax policy that will not drive us further into debt. What happened today on the floor, not because of our votes, but because of the majority vote, the Republican majority, they took this country further into debt. They made it so we are going to have to change our board here, because we are going to be borrowing more money from foreign countries, Mr. Speaker, because of the deficit. I will say this again. President Bush, with the Republican majority, I guarantee you he could not do it by himself without the Republican majority here in this House, has borrowed a record-breaking, mind- boggling $1.05 trillion in the last 4 years, more than 42 Presidents prior to the President taking office. 42 Presidents, Republican and Democrat. Some of the gentlemen here on this board were once members of the Whig Party. But I can tell you they were only able to achieve borrowing from foreign nations $1.01 trillion over 224 years. This is the same majority and the same President that says that we know exactly what we are doing as it relates to putting this country on the right track. Well, I can tell you, Members of the Congress, that I am very, very concerned. We used to have a discussion about future generations and putting the burden on their back. We are putting the burden on this generation's back. It is going to cost more for kids to go to school. It is going to cost more for parents to send their children to school. It is going to cost more for those young Americans that would like to educate themselves to be able to save enough money to be able to go to college, because we cut it by $14.3 billion. So I think it is important that we take all of this into account. But what I would also like to say, Mr. Speaker, in my opening comments, I cannot help but commend our Democratic leader for her privileged resolution here today, outlining a culture of corruption and cronyism and incompetence in Washington, D.C. I think it is important that we say that out loud so that individuals understand that we must not only police ourselves in how we conduct business, but what we are doing when we have investigations, unprecedented here in this Congress and investigations over in the White House, dealing with national security breaches. It is important that we make sure that the American people know exactly what is going on and that we take appropriate action in a bipartisan way. Right now we are not taking any action. There is discussion about action. And I just want to commend the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz) and the Speaker about having ethics training here in the House. I just wanted to say that. That is something. That is something. That is better than what we had yesterday.