Dave Obey

Mr. OBEY

Mr. OBEY. Yes, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to a point of order against the amendment. There are no funds in this act for testing. I would make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law, constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill, violates clause 2 of Rule XXI. The amendment proposes to include language in the bill that would prohibit the expenditure of previously appropriated funds made available in fiscal 1997 and prior appropriation acts. The amendment clearly seeks to change existing and prior laws. Deschler's Precedents contains the following language: ``Language in a supplemental appropriation bill which is applicable to funds appropriated in another act constitutes legislation and is not in order.'' I would urge a ruling of the Chair.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, is it appropriate to ask whether or not the gentleman can stop reading if the Committee concedes the point of order?

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, as I told the gentleman earlier, we tried in the full committee to provide funding for CDBG. We were asked to withhold, and we have been. I will not press this issue to a vote as well, but let me simply suggest I do think there are some problems with the gentleman's amendment that are going to have to be fixed in conference. I do not understand, for instance, why it was necessary to make a permanent change in law, forcing the Secretary of HUD to waive the requirement that HUD's disaster assistance benefit only low and moderate income persons. I am also concerned about forcing the Secretary to waive the requirement to hold public hearings. I am also concerned about what appears to be an intent to allow HUD to make grants, not loans, to privately owned for-profit utilities. Lastly, I am concerned about what appears to be the intent of the amendment to change the longstanding process of assuring that CDBG funds can be used to assist businesses damaged by disasters, to the extent such businesses are declined loans by the SBA administration or because they need assistance above the SBA loan limits. I do not want to hold up this amendment, so I will not object at this point, but I think that these are problems that are going to have to be worked out, I would say to the gentleman, before people are going to be comfortable; in addition to the fact that I think the money is taken out of what we would consider to be the wrong pot, because it also means that FEMA will have less than $200 million available for any pending hurricanes that occur for the rest of the year which could cause considerable problems to other parts of the country. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Peterson].

Mr. OBEY. I am, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds. I would simply say that, again, we support the idea of using CDBG money. The President requested this money the right way. I think there are some problems with this, but I hope we can correct it in conference. Mr. Chairman, I yield 50 seconds to the gentleman from North Dakota [Mr. Pomeroy].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Price].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. OBEY. Provided that the flogging occurs here on the floor, we have no objection either, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds. Mr. Chairman, 45 years ago Franklin Roosevelt said, ``The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.'' That is the simple test before us today. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from Ohio [Ms. Kaptur].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller]. (Mr. MILLER of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Fattah]. (Mr. FATTAH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Maryland [Mrs. Morella].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee]. (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Millender-McDonald].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. Velazquez].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I must confess some concerns about this amendment.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr. Riggs].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman refuses to be unconfused by the facts. The fact is if we are wrong, all that happens is we can appropriate less money next year. If you are wrong, 150,000 kids are going to get hurt. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman I yield myself 10 seconds. Mr. Chairman, there is a very big difference between carryover funds and surplus funds. There are no surplus funds in the WIC Program. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Ohio [Ms. Kaptur] to explain why.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New Jersey [Mrs. Roukema]. (Mrs. ROUKEMA asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio [Ms. Kaptur].

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2\1/2\ minutes. Mr. Chairman, let me simply say I am offering this amendment on behalf of the gentlewoman from Ohio [Ms. Kaptur] and I very much appreciate the cooperation that we have had from a number of people on both sides of the aisle on the amendment. Basically the situation is this: The administration indicated that based on numbers it was receiving from the various States around the country, that there would be a shortfall of approximately $100 million in the WIC program, which would necessitate knocking a large number of women and children off the rolls. When they were asked to rescrub those numbers, they came back with a hard estimate that they would need about $76 million. The committee chose to refuse to fully fund the administration request. The instead provided $38 million. Since that time, a number of us have been trying to get that number up to the number estimated by the States as being necessary in order to prevent people from being knocked off the rolls. That means that we are asking today to provide an additional $38 million above the amount provided by the committee. Very simply, without this action, unless the administration goes through elaborate actions that would in fact shortchange other important programs to rural America, the fact is that some 180,000 women and children would be knocked off the payroll. When we offered this amendment, we were at first told that our numbers were disingenuous and that we knew it. The fact is these are not our numbers. These are the numbers which to the best of our knowledge are accurate based upon estimates that we received from the various States around the country. I would point out that most of the States who would suffer the shortfalls if this funding is not provided are States being run by Republican Governors. They have not handled this in a partisan fashion. I do not think we should, either. It seems to me that the question is very simple. If Members want to make the early investments that are necessary to protect the health of pregnant mothers and their young children, they will support this amendment. If they do not, they will oppose it. I would urge support for the amendment.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.