Frank Pallone

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and urge support of the bill.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, could I ask for a copy of the legislation at this time? We seem to be concerned about the fact that changes have been made that we were not aware of on the Democratic side.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Reserving the right to object, I would just like to ask the chairman if the bill as amended now is the version that we have dated December 8 at 11:35 p.m.?

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, I have to rise in opposition to this legislation, and the reason is very simple. Those of us on the Democratic side were very supportive of the PREEMIE Act, S. 707, when it was given to us in the last few days, and we were prepared to support it. However, the bill that I have in front of me now, S. 707, which has a time of 12:44 a.m. and we received it after 1:00, which was less than an hour ago, has 10 pages that have been added by the majority, much of which does not seem, on first reaction here, to even be related to the issue, and we simply cannot support something that has been changed this dramatically without having the opportunity to see it at 1:45 a.m. in the morning on the last day before we adjourn sine die.

Mr. PALLONE. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I would say, again, the problem that we face right now is we have 10 pages that have been added to this bill within the last hour, much of which does not seem to relate to the PREEMIE Act whatsoever. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Again, I want to repeat, just having the cursory look at this additional 10 pages right now, it refers to contact lenses, Medicare changes with regard to hospitalization, a number of other things that do not relate to the PREEMIE Act. So, again, I would say that at this point, because we have not had a chance to review this, I continue to oppose the bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Understand that we are very supportive of the PREEMIE Act and the underlying legislation. It is just these additional provisions that have been added. I was going to suggest that the majority simply take out those 10 pages or so at this time because without having the opportunity to further review it we cannot support the legislation at this point.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, again, I would urge opposition to the legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Massachusetts and also join in the remarks that he made. I rise to express my strong opposition to the rule and my serious concerns about the substance of the bill we are about to consider. First off, we are considering complex pieces of legislation that affect a wide variety of U.S. policies and we are doing so after getting only a few short hours to read the actual bill text. I suppose we shouldn't have expected more from this Congress, but it is still reprehensible that the Republican leadership has chosen to throw so many bills together at the very end of the session without giving Members the opportunity for amendments. I will say that on behalf of the doctors and patients in my district, I am glad to see that Congress is taking action to avert a drastic 5.1 percent cut in Medicare payments to physicians. It is a shame, however, that we have to wait until the end of the last week of this Congress in order to address a problem we saw coming from far away. What really needs to be done is a permanent fix that will avoid Congress from having to correct the Medicare reimbursement rate on an annual basis. If doctors face annual cuts, seniors may lose access to physician services, and that is why it is important to permanently fix the formula by which we pay physicians under Medicare. On the other hand, I strongly oppose the offshore drilling language in this bill. It is inconceivable given what we know about our current energy problems and the looming threat of global warming that we are considering another proposal to do nothing more than drill, drill, and drill as the gentleman from Massachusetts said. I have said many times before, the United States consumes a quarter of the world's oil but contains only 3 percent of the world's known reserves. There is simply no way we can drill our way out of our dependence on foreign oil. What we need instead is a more comprehensive solution that focuses on increasing the efficiency of our cars, our homes and businesses and promotes the use of clean, renewable technology. We see more and more evidence every day that our dangerous addiction to fossil fuels is threatening our national security, causing volatile prices at the pump and exacerbating global warming. Instead, we are given the choice of more oil rigs in offshore waters which is little more than a sop to the oil and gas industries that have gotten so many favors already from this Congress. Apparently, the Republican leadership can't help giving them one more favor as they go out the door. It is my sincere hope, Mr. Speaker, that next year we can start this process over and work in a bipartisan fashion on legislation to address all these issues. I hope Members realize that next year the new Democratic Congress will not resort to such tactics as the rule we are dealing with today and will choose to deal with important matters such as energy legislation and physician payment schedules in a timely and rational manner. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this ill-conceived rule.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Massachusetts for yielding me time. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and in strong support of the U.S.-India Nuclear deal conference report. I would like to thank Chairman Hyde and incoming Chairman Lantos for their hard work to help ensure passage of this bill after the agreement was announced. I would also like to thank the House and Senate conferees who negotiated throughout the night to reconcile differences and reach a compromise. The U.S. has an important strategic partnership with India, and this civilian nuclear cooperation deal is a critical component to a continued successful partnership. The agreement strengthens energy security for the U.S. and India, and promotes the development of stable and efficient energy markets in India to ensure adequate and affordable supplies. This deal is also the foundation of a promising U.S.-India alliance that will serve as a defense against terrorism and nuclear proliferation. The U.S. has an important stake in ensuring regional stability in South Asia, even as Pakistan continues to produce and test nuclear weapons without proper safeguards. With the rising power of Communist China in the region and Osama bin Laden continuing to hide in Afghanistan or Pakistan, we need India as our strategic ally. The bill before us today has a new policy that will solidify the U.S.-India bilateral relationship. India has been a responsible nuclear power and deserves to be treated that way. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on both the rule and the conference report

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, the differences between this session of Congress and the one that will begin next month will be vast. In this tale of two Congresses, let us compare the current ``do-nothing'' Congress, led by the Republican Majority, and the upcoming Democratic New Direction Congress. The Republican ``do-nothing'' Congress that ends this week has set abysmal records for the fewest number of days worked and for defeating numerous important bills, or simply not bringing them forth at all. Now they will adjourn for good at the end of this week, long before they need to, without passing a budget for 9 of the 11 appropriation bills. It is shameful, Madam Speaker, but fortunately it is about to change. In January, when the Democratic Majority takes control of this body, we will immediately begin to pass legislation that will benefit working families all across our country. Democrats will raise the minimum wage, pass ethics reform, lower the price of higher education and prescription drugs, and repeal the needless tax breaks to big oil all within the first 100 hours of the next Congress. Madam Speaker, Democrats will turn this do-nothing Congress into a body that works hard for all Americans.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, if I could just reserve. My concern at this point is whether or not the legislation before us, as amended, with the amendment the chairman just mentioned, is in fact the version that I have that is timed at 12:50 a.m.

Mr. PALLONE. The 12:50 a.m. is the amendment that you just asked us to consider?

Mr. PALLONE. All right. Thank you. I have no objection.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, reserving an objection at this time, again I was going to ask the chairman, the version I have now is December 8 at 5:25 p.m. Does that include the amendment that the gentleman now proposed? Or is this something new?

Mr. PALLONE. So the amendment that you proposed would be the version that I have now for December 8 at 5:25 p.m.?

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, again on this one, I would ask the chairman if the bill we are considering now, as amended, is the one timed 12:24, November 30, 2006, 12:24 p.m. Again, I am concerned at this hour about what we are actually considering.

Mr. PALLONE. So this is something that was changed within the last hour or so again?

Mr. PALLONE. I would appreciate that.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the lead sponsor of this legislation, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard).