Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Thank you. Go Gators.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I will close just by saying this. It would be one thing, and the American people, I know, are understanding this and have an ever-growing understanding with every day that passes and they observe this administration and the Republican leadership here. It would be one thing if they had the confidence that, you know, they could just sub out the Republican individuals here and sub in another, a different Republican and get a more competent person. Unfortunately, it is not just that the individuals here are incompetent or that this administration is led by incompetence. It is that the ideology and the incompetence are so intertwined that it doesn't matter which Republican you swap in. We have seen the board lit up here where you have moderate Republicans, arms wrenched behind their back when they are trying to express what is supposedly their conscience, and instead they are forced to vote according to the ideological stranglehold that is around the neck of the Republican leadership and the Republican Party. And so it doesn't matter who you swap in and out. If the ideology doesn't change, which it is clearly not going to, then you will just get more the same. Just like you will have more of the same in swapping the individual, one individual for another in the White House, as the President did today, and what you would see if we didn't make the change that is so necessary with the leadership in this country. I appreciate the opportunity to join my colleagues here again in the 30-something Working Group.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Thank you. And what just keeps striking me about all of what we are saying is that it feels enveloped by the stranglehold that is around this administration's neck by the far right and that ideology, that the stranglehold of the far right on this administration and this Republican leadership drives their incompetence, drives their decisions on Iraq, drives their decisions on Katrina, or lack thereof, drives their decisions on the deficit, on the debt. We talk about incompetence. We talk about corruption and cronyism and incompetence, but you cannot detangle, disentangle their incompetence and their ideology because the two are intertwined

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Kicked in the teeth.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I just want to piggyback on your observations. I am the least senior of the four of us. I am a freshman, and about 15 months into my first term. We have talked many times on this floor in our 30-something Working Group about the lack of outrage, the astonishing lack of outrage, the deafening silence on the other side of the aisle about all these things we are talking about. Why no hearings? Where is the accountability? Why aren't they demanding some answers from this administration about the results in Iraq, about how we got into Iraq, about the leadup, about the fact there were no weapons of mass destruction? And how come we haven't had any hearings on the intelligence and whether that was manufactured, or was it shaped around the decision that was already made clearly by this administration? Not one hearing. Not one hearing on almost anything since I have been in the United States Congress. And what I have noticed, the observation I want to make is that we have had a very slow but now more rapid deterioration of our system of checks and balances. This Congress, the Republican leadership in this Congress could care less about oversight. They would just cede the whole ball of wax to this administration. This administration has run amuck. That is how I really believe the American people feel. This administration has been allowed to go unchecked, unresponsive. No one asks any questions. You know what was really ironic, what was really interesting, was that it appears as though the outrage has built on the Republican side of the aisle, our good friends on the Republican side of the aisle. I noticed there was a whole lot of outrage that was cropping up all over during the Dubai Worlds Port deal. That sense of outrage on that side appeared to be in direct proportion to the reduction in the President's polling numbers. The lower his numbers got, the more outrage there appeared to be. I think that it probably would be a little bit more comforting for most Americans if the outrage was more consistent about Katrina and its aftermath, about the war in Iraq, about the deficit, about the debt, about the corruption, about the cronyism, and about the incompetence. This administration has veered so far off to the right. There is a stranglehold that the right has on the Republican leadership in this country. They are so out of the mainstream now.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Make sure we are clear about which part of the Congress is afraid and where the leadership has been exercised on our side of the aisle in terms of that oversight and where it has been shunned on the Republican side of the aisle, Mr. Delahunt.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Delahunt, Mr. Ryan, you talk about A.D.D. and lack of focus in terms of making sure we can keep this Nation safe. Lest people think that the DPW port deal was an isolated incident where we think that that was an anomaly and we are not continuing down that path of engaging foreign governments and the corporations they own to help us with our national security or to be involved in our national security, right after the withdrawal of DPW we learn, and through a third party validator again, the Associated Press, that the administration acknowledged that they issued a no-bid contract to Hutchinson Whampoa Limited which represents the first time a foreign company will be involved in running a sophisticated radiation detector at an overseas port without American customs agents present. I mean, what is going on? We are from Florida. The Bahamas is 30 minutes by plane. It is really unbelievable that there is an astonishing lack of concern about the gaping holes in our national security that this administration appears to have no qualms about leaving unprotected.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. You know what strikes me when you say that is that we talk about the culture of corruption and cronyism and incompetence that has existed for quite some time now and it is only getting worse with every passing day, it is interesting that the administration appears to think that just by changing out a staffer, by swapping one person, a chief of staff, for another, that that is somehow going to magically transform this administration into a competent one. It is amazing to me that they could get materials into this country if they have been supposedly stepping up their commitment and our ability to keep our Nation secure in the last 5 years. How is that possible if they are running a tight ship like they say they are?

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Exactly. Mr. RYAN of OHIO. You guys are from Florida. We are from the Midwest, so we don't have hurricanes.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Meek, the thing that keeps coming to mind when I think about the comparison between the stress that has been put on airport security versus port security, if you ask, if you go out into the country and ask most Americans the difference that they have seen since 9/11 and in security in general, basically about the only thing that Americans could say that they could identify is they have to remove their shoes before they walk through a magnetometer at the airport. I think most people really feel today that we should not be resting the sum total of our national security on taking your shoes off as you go through a metal detector. American people expect quite a bit more than that when it comes to homeland security, especially if you live near a port, like my district includes two, Port Everglades and the Port of Miami. We have so many, so many potential openings around this country, and vulnerabilities. To focus all of our attention on only the ones that are most visible that provide the leadership here, the ability to say, see, we did that, we have taken care of that, and just provide surface reassurance about homeland security, that is the difference between words and action. It is the difference between nice commentary in speeches and actually backing up those words with action.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. And that the port deal that was recently proposed, and, seemingly, not had an interest in even a 45-day security review with a country that had been implicated in some way, in the 9/11 attacks, that is the kind of thing I heard about when I went home. I heard about how they are really deeply concerned about the lack of port security. I mean, we have invested now, we have third-party validators that we talk about here on this floor. Mr. Meek, when I went down to the port of Miami after the revelation came about the DPW port deal, the port personnel there, in our home port, talked to me about the $18 billion that has been spent since 9/11 improving airport security, which is a good thing, and they are happy about that, and the less than $700 million that has been spent to improve our port security, the less than 6 percent of U.S. cargo that comes through our ports that is physically inspected, 95 percent not inspected. The general lack of confidence in our homeland security, in our government's ability to do the right thing on all fronts, is really, I think, at least from when I went home, something that is really disturbing them.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Just to shift gears a little bit, recently we have been talking about homeland security quite a bit, and I am not sure if you had a chance to talk about that with the seventh graders when you were in the classroom with them, but since we just came off a week, and, Mr. Meek, I know that you spent some time talking to your constituents as well, I was really struck when I was home last week during our recess by how many more of my constituents appealed to me to come back to Washington and make sure that I continue to fight to improve our national security, that their confidence in this government's ability to keep them safe has really been shaken on so many levels, not just in terms of protecting them from terrorists and from outside actors, but just generally had their confidence shaken in their government's ability to function. I mean, the culture of corruption that has been hanging over this institution, sadly, and this administration, really has shaken the confidence, I think, of our constituents to their core. We really need to return to a time when we can restore that confidence, let them know that not all of the people in this government are in it for the wrong reasons, and that, in particular, we do put a very high priority on our national security.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. How about the amazing experience we had 2 weeks ago with the President of Liberia, the first woman president of an African nation who addressed the joint session?

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. It was incredibly moving for all of us. And she didn't mention it during her speech, but it was very fitting that she spoke during Women's History Month. And I am not certain of this, but she is certainly one, if not the only, woman leader to ever address a joint session of Congress, unless Margaret Thatcher had previously addressed a joint session. I have not found anyone who actually could recall a woman addressing a joint session. So it was just really historic in so many different ways. I really also thought about how we could take several pages from her lesson book because a lot of things that she talked about, making sure that you did not only look out for the privileged and making sure that you thought about the needs of young children and young girls in particular who needed to get an education and have hope and opportunity. In this country so often it appears as though the leadership in this body and in this country now has had a lot of disregard, quite a bit of disregard, for those things. And I am certainly hopeful that our colleagues were listening very carefully to her remarks and took them to heart.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. It shows you that we have really come a long way, but it really demonstrates why we need to continue to have Women's History Month and how it is so important to show young girls who are coming up behind us that they have the opportunity. They have to reach out and grab it. And it is our responsibility to pull other young women up on the platform with us now that we have been able to have an opportunity like this, not to be discriminatory against our male colleagues whom we are sharing the Chamber with this evening. And actually the gentleman from Florida is the dad of a young girl who is a wonderful young woman and works hard in school, and I know that especially since you are the son of one of the House of Representatives' most revered women, former Congresswoman Carrie Meek, that surely you have something to add at the end of Women's History Month.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. 211 women out of almost 12,000 people.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Absolutely. And I think it is only 70 women that serve with us in the House of Representatives out of 435 Members. You boil that down even further, there is only a handful of us who are moms with young children. There are only four of us that are younger than 40 years old. The thing that sticks in my mind from the time that we were elected 1\1/2\ years ago now is that story that they shared with us when we were at our orientation initially. If you recall, there is a statistic that they described there. There have been a little less than 12,000 people in American history who have served in the United States House of Representatives in all the 230-year history. And of that number, only 211 of them have been women and 70 are serving now. So as we close out Women's History Month, Madam Speaker, and you are one of those women members in the Women's Caucus, and I remember talking with you, Madam Speaker, actually about when we heard that information. It was really astonishing.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. It was incredible. And I mentioned to her that I was 13 when she was first nominated by then-President Reagan and that my parents raised me to believe that young women, young girls could grow up and truly be anything they wanted to be and that was my first memory that that was the most clear example of that being true. And it was just a thrill to be able to share that with her tonight.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. You are absolutely right. One of the most amazing things about having the privilege that we have to represent our communities in Washington is the people that we get to meet and interact with. And you and I, along with the other members of the bipartisan Women's Caucus, had an opportunity tonight to have dinner with former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman ever to serve on the United States Supreme Court.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. That is something that, with my 6-year-olds and 2-year-old coming up behind them, my husband and I are already talking about how to safeguard the information that they have access to and make sure we are aware and keep them and their computer in close proximity to us because there is so much out there. The Internet is an amazing thing, but there is so much out there. And whether it is data security or the security of our kids, we really have to make sure that we strike a balance, which is what you have been fighting for, and I have as well and other Democratic members on our committee. We have to strike a balance between making sure that business has the ability to operate and function and that we not unnecessarily restrict commerce on the Internet.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Actually this is a little bit of a leap, but you and I sit on the Financial Services Committee together, and I know that you have been very involved in the data security issue because, in addition to the concern that Americans have over our debt and our deficit, they are also very concerned, and I know my constituents talk to me about this all the time, about the financial information that is out there about them personally is being compromised on a regular basis. And I know that you have really been a leader in that effort, and it would good for you to talk about it.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. It is just, we have got to get a handle on this. We have to restore some fiscal sanity. We have to put on some brakes and we need a little tough mother love. Maybe it is just that we need to bring a few more moms into this Chamber and we will have a little more tough love, because apparently the folks here are either out of practice, or I don't know, maybe the discipline around their homes isn't, you know, is not so strong.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Right. The debt is the amount of money we borrow from other countries in order to remain fiscally solvent. I mean, that is truly amazing that we have so much debt that is owned by foreign nations. And I don't know if the gentleman from Florida is ready to jump in yet, but he has an amazing chart, as well, that shows the United States of America and the percentage of the debt that is owned by other nations.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Absolutely. We have another chart that we talk about. The amount of debt that has been racked up in just the last few years, just in the last 4 or 5 years is actually greater than all of the 42 administrations before this one. I mean, that is a truly astonishing statistic. I was really incredibly surprised about that. We also try to boil down the difference between the debt and the deficit. The deficit is related to the fact that we spend more than we take in.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. You are absolutely right. And I would like to welcome my colleague, the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Ryan