Thomas Reynolds

Mr. REYNOLDS

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) for yielding me time, and I certainly want to pay great respect to her and her leadership on the Committee on Armed Services and on the defense budgets. For years she has led a fight, not only in the Committee on Rules, but throughout the entire Congress to increase important funding. There will be a lot of rhetoric on this rule today. I am used to that and I am used to being in the minority in New York. I know the loyal opposition never has enough. I know many of us who are defense hawks, there is never enough money for defense. There is never enough money for homeland security. We changed the whole direction of how America thinks. For those of us who have toured and worked closely with the great State of Israel, we have seen time and again what they have looked at for homeland defense that we took for granted here. Yes, we will continue to have to invest in a rational sense those types of important money. I think my colleague as she spoke today, the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) talked about the fact that is pure and simple. A vote against this rule is to vote against and to table money for the war on terrorism, homeland security, and New York recovery. And the part I want to address in the time I have allocated is on New York recovery. There are 435 Members of the House of Representatives. There are 100 Senators. There is a President. There are 536 different solutions of how we ought to do something. Now, some of my colleagues believe the law in their view says that $20 billion should be in this budget right now because it said so. And they want the $20 billion. They want to put it under their mattress so they can look at it and know that it is there. There are others of us who have looked at what do we have, what do we need. And as the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) said, the Mayor has indicated he has the money he needs to do the job as he continues on New York recovery. When I looked Mr. Daniels in the face as the Director of OMB, he says, Do you know that 600 million has been drawn down on FEMA on the 7 billion set-aside? So there is enough there over the next couple of months. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) was able as an expert in the VA-HUD and the other agencies as a cardinal in this House on the Committee on Appropriations to drive even more money in great flexibility of $2.5 billion in community-involvement block grants; things that my colleagues in this House who represent the borough of Manhattan can immediately put into application in order to make sure that small businesses and utilities are back up and running as part of the partnership under the Mayor's direction as the city and chief- elected officer of the City of New York. As we look at the reality of money, most of us realize that $20 billion will not be enough for New York. Some have cited the New York City partnership and the $83 billion implication that this has on the attack of 9-11. We certainly know that all of us as New Yorkers need to plow through and make sure that money comes through in a steady flow to make sure that New York City and New York State is on a well, strong move back to a recovery. How we get it done becomes what has been the debate today, not that it will get done; and so from my colleagues who want the $20 billion under the mattress, I accept their view. For those of us who will look at it as a credit card, a credit card where we can draw down the $20 billion, I do not want to take the whole $20 billion out and put it under my mattress. I want to know that the President of the United States, when he gave this House and he gave New York his word and the Speaker of the House said he would support that, that it will get done because right now New York recovery is getting done. That money is flowing faster than we can use it, and it is up to us as oversight and up to us as a delegation from New York to make sure that money just keeps moving in as fast as we can spend it. The Mayor of the City of New York says that is the case. I support him on his view. I support this rule because we need to get moving on a defense budget that fights the war on terrorism, increases our homeland security, and brings back cash for New York recovery.

Mr. REYNOLDS

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 83) providing for a National Day of Reconciliation, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. REYNOLDS

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. REYNOLDS

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

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 274 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, bipartisanship comes from bringing two points of view together. That is going to happen if this rule is passed when the debate will go on the merit of the legislation of the underlying bill. It will happen when a vote occurs on the manager's amendment, whether it occurs or not with passage; and it will happen with the complete Democratic substitute written by Democrats in a partisan fashion to be brought before the House in a bipartisan vote, up or down. So we are going to have a lot of bipartisanship or nonpartisanship today, once this rule is passed. It is going to be the opportunity for those who support the President's plan to have that vote. For those who want to look at liability provisions and other aspects contained in the manager's amendment, that will be an opportunity for a vote as well. Finally, a Democratic substitute written by the Democratic minority of this House will have an up or down vote as well. So we are going to have a lot of bipartisanship, led by the leadership in this House, let alone rank and file Members, as we pass this rule and move toward consideration of those prospects within the bill that will be before the House. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa. (Mr. GANSKE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I remind the gentleman that the all-powerful Committee on Rules had the tremendous opportunity to have an hour and a half on the witness stand of the inquiries that were made by both Democrat and Republican Members as to the legislation, the manager's amendment opinions expressed by the members of the Committee on Rules on various aspects of that legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).

Mr. REYNOLDS

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Reading Clerk for his outstanding job of reading the amendment that I brought before the House. This simply substitutes the manager's amendment made in order last night by the Committee on Rules with a new manager's amendment that eliminates a provision dealing with preferred compensation for airline employees, and adds airport parking lots to a provision that requires airports receiving financial aid to work with airport restaurants, shops and other concessionaires on rent adjustments to account for their loss of revenue. The new manager's amendment also adds language that establishes a preference for the hiring of laid-off airline workers as screeners, and a provision that states where possible, airline security companies should be American companies. I urge its adoption. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on both the amendment and the resolution. The material previously referred to by Mr. Hastings of Florida is as follows: Previous Question for Rule on H.R. 3150, Secure Transportation for America Act of 2001 At the end of the resolution add the following new sections: Sec. . Notwithstanding any other provision in this resolution, immediately after disposition of H.R. 3150, the Speaker shall declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2955) to provide assistance for employees who are separated from employment as a result of reductions in service by air carriers, and closures of airports, caused by terrorist actions or security measures. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against considerations of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. The bill shall be considered as read. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Sec. . If the Committee of the Whole rises and reports that it has come to no resolution on H.R. 3150 or H.R. 2955, then on the next legislative day the House shall, immediately after the third daily order of business under clause 1 of rule XIV, resolve into the Committee of the Whole for further consideration of that bill.

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

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

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I have just a couple of speakers; and once the gentleman yields back his time, I will close out with a summary.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South Dakota (Mr. Thune).

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, do I understand the Democrat minority time has expired?

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble).

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time. Parliamentary Inquiry