Tom Price

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I have a point of order.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, did the gentlelady just not state that she had no more speakers?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Isn't it true, Mr. Speaker, that under the motion to recommit there is nothing that precludes the Judiciary Committee from dealing with the bill when it goes back to the committee and sending it back to the floor of the House?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this legislation because, at its core, its purpose is to punish thought; and to respectfully suggest that this new majority continues to bring sad and divisive legislation to the floor. All violent crime is wrong. All violent crime is founded in hate. This legislation will easily move us to the point of punishing thought and punishing motive. Hate crimes have already been used to suppress speech opposed by cultural elites. In New York, for example, city officials recently cited hate crime principles to force a pastor to remove billboards containing biblical quotations on sexual morality. Many pastors and ministers from around this Nation adamantly oppose this legislation. And to bring this forward on the National Day of Prayer adds insult to injury and may, in fact, be hateful. The hate crimes bill creates a new Federal thought crime. The bill requires law enforcement officials to probe, infer, or deduce if a crime occurred because of a bias towards a protected group. A criminal's thoughts will be considered an element of the crime. Mr. Speaker, I respectfully suggest that one can never reliably determine the true thought or motive of a criminal. And with thought crimes come thought police. What a sad day.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, yesterday the majority party sent a plan for failure in the war on terror to the President, and the President did the right thing. He sent it right back. It's now time for Congress to pass a funding bill that supports our troops and doesn't undermine their mission. The political maneuvering done by the majority over the last 2\1/2\ months has done nothing, nothing, but delay the delivery of tools and resources to our troops in the field, while outlining a very specific and dangerous blueprint for defeat. Let's stop wasting time. Let's stop trying to rewrite the Constitution and the role of the Commander in Chief. We have a choice. The majority can continue to play these partisan games, or we can get down to work. We have that choice. The brave men and women in our Armed Forces do not. Let's honor their sacrifice with leadership rather than political partisanship. The American people are watching, and so are our allies and our enemies around the world. We have a choice.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Delaware for allowing me to come and chat on a little different topic, a topic that we tried to bring to the floor today on this bill, and a topic that I think would truly expand and protect children in the Head Start program, but a topic that wasn't allowed to be brought to the floor because an amendment wasn't allowed. I think this issue truly demonstrates where the priorities of the majority party are. This issue that I attempted to bring to the floor would have resulted in significantly greater safety for the children who are transported in Head Start programs. In 1992, Mr. Chairman, Congress required the issuance of regulations that related to rear-door emergency exits and safety restraints on Head Start transportation. That was in 1992. Since the final rule for these new regulations was published, the effective date has been delayed three times. Last week, buried deep in H.R. 1591, the emergency supplemental for Iraq, was language that delays these transportation safety requirements for Head Start programs once again. The fine print reveals that the rear emergency exit requirements are delayed for another year, and a seat belt safety requirement is delayed until another study is done. Well, Congress required these regulations to ensure the safe operation of vehicles by Head Start agencies; and currently, the leading cause of death for children ages 3 to 7 is motor vehicle, traffic crashes. The reason why these transportation requirements were put forth is that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does not approve of the use of vans or cars or vehicles of other types for the purpose of providing planned transportation services. School buses are the safest form of transportation because they include many special features. Further delaying these requirements means authorizing that Head Start grantees can transport children using vehicles that are not designed specifically for the purpose of the safe transportation of children. My amendment, which wasn't allowed, would have ended this delay and make the regulations for emergency rear-door exits and seat belts on vehicles used to transport children effective immediately. Mr. Chairman, as you know, on the first day of this Congress, children were paraded in front of the American people, and the new majority claimed that the House would come to order for the children. Well, today, if it is truly about the children, then the majority would have allowed this amendment to be entertained. Any further delays endangers lives of children. So I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that the hypocrisy of this process is telling, and that if we truly are interested in making certain that our greatest resource, our children, the future of our Nation, are protected, then we would have allowed this amendment, and I am distressed it wasn't allowed. I encourage through the process the majority party make certain that we address this as this bill moves forward.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to offer this amendment. I would urge my colleagues to support it. This is an amendment of expansion and educational opportunities for our young children. In 1965, when Head Start was implemented, State-run early childhood development programs didn't exist. Since then, and most recently, and in the past 15 years, States have invested considerable resources into early childhood initiatives. This amendment seeks to provide an incredible opportunity for eight States to participate in a 5-year demonstration program and leverage their resources and experience to improve school readiness. It would allow eight States to coordinate Head Start and early childhood State-run programs, thus improving coordination, preventing duplication and expanding the number of children that can be served by the early childhood services. To carry it out, safeguards would be put in place. States would have to ensure that participants receive services that are as good or better than those in the Head Start program, including health, nutrition, mental health services on top of the educational services. Enacting a demonstration program will result in expanding the number of children that can be served, which is not possible in Head Start or just a State-run program alone. This is an innovative program that would help more children in our Nation, and I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time remains.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. The gentleman from California?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the chairman's passion on this, but his testimony bears little resemblance to reality. I would urge him to read the amendment which states clearly on page 11, ``Head Start services furnished in a State program under this section shall include all Head Start services.'' Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my good friend from Delaware (Mr. Castle).

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, how much time remains?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the perspective of the other side, but I would suggest, respectfully, that that's an old argument. It's an old argument about a block grant. This is not a block grant. This is a demonstration program that would allow States to serve more children, not fewer children, more, more than is currently possible than just with Head Start or with State-run early childhood development programs. Economies of scale, it works. Funding levels for Head Start and early childhood services would be protected. Demonstration program States will be able to eliminate overlap, eliminate duplication of services, and participants must have access to services that are as extensive or greater than those found in Head Start. That's what the amendment states. I urge my colleagues to read the amendment. I appreciate the fact that they have had previous amendments in legislation before them, but I urge them to read this amendment. I think they will find the common- sense aspect of it. I appreciate the opportunity to offer it, and I urge my colleagues to adopt the amendment.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, isn't it true that under the rules adopted by this House, the number of votes allowed in the Committee of the Whole is different than the number of votes allowed when the House sits?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, further parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Isn't it further true, Mr. Speaker, that because of the rules, any re-vote in the House on an amendment that passed in the Committee of the Whole with full participation, the total votes cast would be different?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank the Speaker.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I would just simply point out to my friends on the other side that this amendment was duly and appropriately presented to the Rules Committee. The Rules Committee has all of the availability of the parliamentarians and the appropriate expertise to be able to determine whether or not the amendment should be made in order. They determined, in their wisdom, that it should be made in order. And therefore, I would hope that the Chair would rule that, in fact, this amendment is appropriate, and that it addresses an issue that is of importance to the gentleman from Florida and importance to this Nation; and I would hope that we'd move forward with the amendment.