Dave Obey

Mr. OBEY

Mr. OBEY. As is often the case, the gentleman's understanding is faulty.

Mr. OBEY. You do not want an answer, do you?

Mr. OBEY. I see. If the gentleman would yield, when you want to raise IDEA it is okay; but when we want to add money to special education, then it is not okay. Is that it?

Mr. OBEY. No, I believe we need $4 billion additional in IDEA.

Mr. OBEY. The gentleman knows very well what the issue was.

Mr. OBEY. What I find amusing is that the majority party insisted on raising the military budget by $20 billion above last year. They insisted on passing appropriation bills that had some $9 billion above the President's level for a variety of items, especially projects for Members in their districts, but then when it comes to education, which is where the final division lay, you were objecting in conference, or your representatives were, to our raising Pell grants to the amount that you yourself said you wanted them funded at in May. And your representatives were objecting to our raising funding for special education to the same level that you said on the floor you wanted it raised to in March of this year. So we were simply trying to prevent hypocrisy from having a bad name.

Mr. OBEY. If the gentleman would yield, he is misinformed on that.

Mr. OBEY. Would the gentleman yield further?

Mr. OBEY. Would the gentleman yield on that question, because those numbers are wrong.

Mr. OBEY. Well, Richard Nixon knew an awful lot about it, did he not?

Mr. OBEY. Is the gentleman suggesting the President should not try to deal with the laundering of drug money?

Mr. OBEY. I would be very happy to answer that question, if you would yield me some time.

Mr. OBEY. No, it was not.

Mr. OBEY. If the gentleman will yield, the gentleman is misinformed. That item was not even in the Labor-H appropriations bill.

Mr. OBEY. That is in the State-Justice-Commerce bill, and each side has recognized that bill is going nowhere. The only issue that had a chance of passing was the Labor-HHS appropriations bill.

Mr. OBEY. Would the gentleman yield me some time so I can answer the question?

Mr. OBEY. The issue was whether or not the Congress should be allowed to block the President's effort to institute protection for workers against repetitive motion injuries.

Mr. OBEY. I would like to simply state that, first of all, your leadership made clear at the beginning of the year that they had no intention of getting in a room with Bill Clinton because they said that when Newt Gingrich got in a room to negotiate with Bill Clinton that the President stole his socks, I think was the term of your majority whip. With respect to some of the items you just mentioned, is the gentleman aware that the item in conference to add the funding for food stamps for the children of immigrants was offered by a Republican subcommittee chairman? The gentleman has questioned the expenditure for money laundering. Is the gentleman for illegal money laundering?

Mr. OBEY. I thank the gentleman. Let me point out with respect to IDEA, the fact is what was at stake in conference is whether or not we would be allowed to add an additional $300 million to the level that you appropriated in the House-passed bill. Your negotiators consistently resisted that until the last day when we finally obtained support for an additional $300 million above the House bill. That means that we are still only funding 17 percent of the promise that the Congress made on IDEA when we should be under 40 percent under the authorization.

Mr. OBEY. Would the gentleman like me to give him an instance?

Mr. OBEY. The gentleman asked a question. Would the gentleman like an answer on that?

Mr. OBEY. No, that is not correct.

Mr. OBEY. I would be happy to tell you that on three successive days, the majority negotiators on the appropriation bills in question made it quite clear that representatives from the White House were not welcome in those meetings until other items were first negotiated. And on the night that the agreement was put together, the representatives of the White House, and it was Mr. Lew from the budget office, Mr. Lew was specifically told that he was not welcome in those meetings until after 10 o'clock at night. The President is not a part of those negotiations. He has delegated Mr. Lew to represent him in all instances, and Mr. Lew was available at all times requested by your party. You know that as well as I do.

Mr. OBEY. I did not think the gentleman wanted a real answer.

Mr. OBEY. I would be happy to give the gentleman the rest of the list if you would yield.