José Serrano

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. I am sorry, I cannot vote for the gentleman's amendment this year or next year.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time, and I am still reserving my point of order.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, let me use the 1 minute that I have been granted to make an observation. I spoke on this floor last week about the fact that we should just be allowed to speak, and the majority wanted the unanimous consent to limit the time. Now I notice that on every amendment, we are adding time. I do not have a problem with it, but if we have an agreement, then we should stick on that agreement. Point of Order

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill and, therefore, violations clause 2 of Rule XXI, and I am asking for a ruling on the Chair.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This is one of those out and out attacks that one always wonders whether what was said on the floor is the actual reason or there was a reason behind it. Let us face it, the FCC is in a lot of trouble with some people these days because of the work they are doing on low-power FM stations, and for that they are paying a big price. It is interesting that people who are in this profession, like ourselves, like myself, would get up to oppose the idea of an office of media relations. I mean what we do every day, the fact that we have allowed cameras in this Chamber, is in fact our desire to keep the public informed. And what we have here is an office that handles very delicate issues, issues that we deal with on a daily basis in this country, from the FCC. The whole notion of suggesting that the FCC generates this kind of information is not totally correct. The FCC and the media relations office also do a lot of work responding to many inquiries from Members of Congress, from the public in general and, yes, from the press. For instance, on a yearly basis, 39,600 average press calls come in seeking information about telecommunications issues and pending FCC cases and proceedings. Secondly, because of the work that the FCC does, and because of the fact that the FCC has been involved in some very serious decisions in the last few years, there is a need from the public to know; and the public is constantly asking on a weekly and a monthly basis of the FCC to handle more information. They brief the press and the public before each Monday meeting on all the issues; they also make available the information on the Internet and via e-mail. These are the kinds of things we demand of ourselves and we demand of other people. They, as I said, maintain and continually update the FCC Web site, on which all documents released by the commission are posted. The site receives approximately one million hits each day. One million hits. Now, this is not an office that sits around doing nothing; and this is not an office that has to go out, as has been suggested here, and create information and create their jobs. The mere fact that they are in an agency which gives out information and which controls a lot of the information that goes out in this country, they are part of this agency and this is the work that they do. To stand here on the floor and just try to say, well, we have to get at them for some of the things they have done that we do not like, and we are going to start by keeping the information from coming out, that is just not fair and should be seen for what it is. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo).

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment, in support of the comments of the gentleman from California (Mr. Filner). I would hope that this is the kind of issue that we can continue to solve. Just as an aside, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Bilbray) for bringing a sign in two languages.

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

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I support the gentleman from California (Mr. Bilbray) in that. I support him in his amendment, and I hope he remembers that when we discuss another bill later on.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment. I am acting as the designee of the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, as I said, I am acting as the designee of the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey). Let me first tell the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) that it is our intention to withdraw this amendment, but we want to bring this issue up and discuss it properly. Mr. Chairman, included in the bill is language that would withhold $100 million in regular dues to the United Nations until the United Nations certifies a no-growth budget. This is of great concern to us on this side, because we believe that this would have a significant and devastating impact on ongoing negotiations. What happened is that last year we did something great in this bill, we were able to pay our arrears, but payment was based also on our claim that our assessment should be lower, that the dues that were assessed should be lower. Those negotiations are going on right now. In our opinion, to put this language in the bill would just send a very bad message, not only to those folks at the U.N. and our government to have to negotiate this issue, but also to other countries who we are trying to negotiate with. On one hand, we are telling them that it is our intent to pay our dues, at the same time we are telling them we think we are paying too much and we should not carry such a load. While that is going on, we then send a message that we will withhold amounts which, one, as I said, would just send a very bad message. It would make us look like we are negotiating in bad faith, and at the same time begin to put us again in arrears, something we are working hard and in a bipartisan fashion of last year, to try to do away with. While it is our intent to withdraw this amendment, I would just hope that in the comments of the gentleman from Kentucky (Chairman Rogers), if he wishes to make some, he would begin to send us the message that this is not the way we want to go, and that we have to continue to send a positive message to the U.N. Lastly, we in this Chamber take great credit for all the activities that this country undertakes throughout the world, and I think that more and more every day we have to understand that we do not take those activities alone. In the last few years and in the last decade, we have been taking them very closely and in conjunction with the U.N. as part of members of the U.N., and we should not continue to on one hand work closely with the U.N. to deal with issues throughout the world that are of great importance to our national security and to peace and prosperity throughout the world and at the same time continue to bash the U.N. I think that what we are seeing in this language is in fact U.N. bashing, and I will wait for some comments from the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), if he has any, and then I withdraw the amendment

Mr. SERRANO. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I am hoping that the gentleman will not be on the House floor next year, but it has nothing to do with the amendment.

Mr. SERRANO. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Now that the gentleman from Florida has gotten me in trouble with my press secretary, I must say that I still think that this is an unfair attack. It is interesting that the gentleman mentions my press secretary, because at this very moment each one of us that has spoken on the floor today has been getting countless phone calls from the media and from the public asking for information as to what we said, what we discussed, why we said it, and what was the issue. The FCC handles as important issues as we do and they get the same information requests, and they get the same desire from the public to know. So what I am saying to my good friend is I know that the gentleman has some problems with the FCC, but he should find another area to attack and not attack the media relations. Because if the gentleman succeeds, I assure my colleague that a year from now he will be back on the floor complaining that he does not get enough information from the FCC.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I share the desire of the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) to work with our colleagues on the Committee on Government Reform to address their concerns. The activities of the Census Bureau are too important to be shortchanged, and we must make sure that their work is not obstructed by a lack of sufficient resources. I look forward to working with the chairman to deal with this issue.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, that is all I need just to rise in strong support of this amendment. I think it speaks to an extremely important issue; one that we have to continue to work on. I support the gentlewoman wholeheartedly.

Mr. SERRANO. I do, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I would have to object to that at this point.