C. Young

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, first I want to thank all of the Members for their very spirited and enthusiastic participation in this great exercise in democracy, where the majority rules. My only request of the Members is to remember that before they vote, this is a wartime emergency supplemental appropriations bill. My colleagues may not like some of the feathers, but the main body of the product is exactly what I said, a wartime emergency supplemental to support our troops in the field and to make sure that they have whatever they need and that we do not stand down any of our military preparedness. So what I would ask is that Members will vote for final passage for this bill. On this vote, let us vote ``no'' and then let us go to the final passage vote. Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I thank the gentleman for this offer. Once we begin to talk about a way to get out of this, I think then we can accomplish that. I would be more than willing to discuss this with the leadership on my side. As a matter of fact, we have discussed similar situations earlier. I do not have a conclusion that I can report to our colleagues in the House one way or the other, but I would be more than happy to discuss that with the leadership.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman's amendment is subject to a point of order, but at this point, as a courtesy to the gentleman to allow him his 5 minutes, I will reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would have to say that I have been enjoying this debate all day today and I enjoyed this debate all evening last night, late into the evening. I would like to make an appeal to the Members on both sides of the aisle. We have had a lot of debate on this bill. But I want to remind our colleagues, for those who did not have the great privilege of serving with a real statesmen, that Morris Udall was an outstanding Member of this House. He had a famous statement that I have quoted on occasion, and I want to quote it again now. It went something like this: That everything that needs to be said has already been said. The problem is that not everyone has said it yet. But I think we are about at the point that everyone has said it. So I wonder if I could just make an appeal to get to the amendment process? Why do we not start to deal with the amendments that are filed and let us proceed and get this done? If we want to have a major political debate on any kind of issue, I am sure we can find a parliamentary way to do that. But I think we have really beaten this one to death. Can we get on with the business of the Committee? Can we get on with the amendments and see if we cannot come to some closure on this bill?

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. If the gentleman from Mississippi would like to request that time, I would be willing to agree to that.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Further on my point of order, I would respectfully disagree with my friends on the minority side when they say that this would be a precedent-setting ruling. For on page 52 of the ``Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House,'' using ``Deschler's Precedents'' as the basis, it simply says it is not in order to offer an amendment merely striking out an amendment previously agreed to. The rule previously agreed to the amendment that was offered on the subject that the gentlemen are concerned about. So I think this is not a precedent-setting point of order. I believe that it is well established in precedence.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, as usual the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and I have agreed on a lot. And one agreement is we are going to stay here until we finish this bill, whatever it takes. And if it takes two or three changes of clothes, we will be here. We are going to finish this bill. You know why? Because this is an emergency defense supplemental at time of war. American soldiers are on the battlefield. American soldiers are dying, unfortunately. A family in West Virginia just two days ago lost a son, lost a husband, lost a father. America is at war. We are not only fighting on the battlefields, we are fighting terrorist cells, headquarters, groups and organizations, whenever we can find them. A lot of money that we are providing in this bill for the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the Marine Corpss and the Coast Guard has already been spent. The Army, for example, has reached into their fourth quarter operational money, and they are using it now to fight the war. So what do they do in the last quarter of the year if we do not move this bill? We are going to move this bill to completion. It may only pass by one vote, but it is going to pass. If you want to argue about the fact that some of the things that are in this bill do not really relate to the appropriations bill that the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) said he would support and that I support enthusiastically, I may agree with that. I may agree that there are some things on this bill that should not have been added. But the fact is the majority of this House worked its will, and that is what we are dealing with now. And so, I think it would be well for us to move this bill quickly so we can prove to the world, friends, and enemies, that we are serious about fighting this war and eliminating the threat of terrorism. We can do that by joining with the President and providing this appropriation to the President of the United States as he prosecutes this war. So let us get to it. If it is going to take all day today, if it is going to take late into the night, if it is going to take all day tomorrow, late tomorrow, if it is going to take Saturday or Sunday or Monday or Tuesday, be my guest. Take whatever time you wish. I am very patient, and I will be here right to the bitter end. But we really ought to let common sense prevail. Let us move this important wartime defense emergency supplemental bill.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I will respond to the gentleman as I did to an earlier inquiry similar to the gentleman's, and that is yes, the first responders include firefighters, police officers, emergency medical people, and all other types of folks who respond. Anyone that knows anything about September 11, 2001 understands the importance of first responders. We had originally thought that the $175 million the gentleman talks about should have gone to the Office of Homeland Security. The Administration determined that they did not want that money to go there, and so the gentleman knows why we moved the money to the Department of Justice. But I agree with the gentleman. We have to make sure that all of the people that provide first response to a tragedy, a disaster, whether it be a terrorist attack or a flood or a hurricane or an earthquake, whatever it is, have to be supported. They are also our first line of defense for homeland security. So I say to the gentleman, yes, we will work with him to do the very best we can to make whatever is needed to provide the first responders what they need.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak on the amendment. Mr. Chairman, we have no opposition to this amendment. It does not add any money to the bill. It does not take any money away from the bill. As the gentleman from Wisconsin said, it strikes the emergency designation for this section dealing with the FBI. When this bill was produced by the committee, we were at our top number. We could not spend any more money. In order to balance this bill, some of the requests were determined to be an emergency and others were offset. So we came out with a really good, clean bill. But now there have been some interesting budgetary changes, I am not exactly sure how they worked, but I understand there were some decisions made that changed the number of dollars available. Because of that, the gentleman from Wisconsin's amendment is perfectly in order and there is enough money in this bill to provide this money without declaring it an emergency. And so, Mr. Chairman, we have no objection to this amendment. Hopefully we can dispose of it and move on to the next item of business.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I believe the gentleman's comments are not related to the point of order.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the gentleman's amendment. Under the rule, section 1403 was adopted in the Committee of the Whole and the House. Page 52 of the House Practices states that an amendment that seeks to strike an amendment previously agreed to is not in order, and I insist on my point of order.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I think I need to clarify something here. I have heard a number of speakers say that we should not be considered unpatriotic because we have a difference of opinion here. I do not think anybody on my side of the aisle suggested that anybody in this House is unpatriotic. To the contrary, I appreciate all of the Members who came together with us after September 11 to provide the supplemental appropriations bill that the President used to get the war started. We appreciate that. We appreciate the way that we work together, and I know that we are going to continue to work together for what is in the best interest of America, what is in the best interest of our troops that are defending America, and what is in the best interest of those who are seeking out terrorism wherever it is in the interest of America. But what is happening here is there are those who are trying to change the direction of what this bill really is all about. Now, this bill is about providing a defense emergency supplemental appropriations bill. That is the basic bill that we are talking about. And we need to get that money available quickly. Because of the war, the military services have used up money that they would use normally in their fourth quarter. We need to replace that money quickly. We need to replace the missiles and bombs that have been used. We need to replace the airplanes and helicopters that are worn out. We need to do all of these things because we are at war. I want to say something else, Mr. Chairman. For those who are not old enough to remember Pearl Harbor, that was World War II for us, that was the war that we were fighting because we were attacked. But now count all the other wars after World War II, whether it was Korea, which was next; whether we are talking about Viet Nam, which was a terrible tragic experience for many of our people, especially the military; whether it was Granada; whether it was Panama; whether it was Haiti, Somalia, Rwanda, wherever it might be up to and including Desert Storm, we were fighting somebody else's war. Listen to that. We were fighting somebody else's war. Today for the first time since World War II we are fighting our war. We were attacked. America was attacked. Our Pentagon, the headquarters of our national defense was attacked. The World Trade Center, the center of our economy was attacked. Thousands of our American people lost their lives in a sneaky terrorist attack. That is what this bill is about. And the attempts to change it into something else just do not fly. This is a national defense emergency bill and we need to get to it. We need to focus on what this bill really is about and how we need to respond quickly to get this bill passed and get it to the President so that, in fact, those funds that have already been spent can be replaced to fight the war and to seek out the terrorists. Modification to Amendment Offered by Mr. Obey

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, I only do so to allow time for the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) to give an explanation of exactly what this request is about.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, this is a very serious matter. I am really concerned, I know that my friend, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), has used that picture, chart, diagram, whatever he referred to it as, to make an interesting observation about this issue. But can you imagine what we would look like if that particular chart showed up on the front page of our friendly newspapers in Europe with our allies or potential allies? I am afraid that it would make us look really bad if a distinguished Member of this Congress was suggesting that another Member was advocating an invasion of an ally. That is what that chart makes it look like. So this is a serious matter, and it deserves serious discussion. Just a few weeks ago, I had an opportunity to visit with some of our troops in Bosnia. Yes, we are still in Bosnia, and we are still doing things there. And just 2 days before I was with those troops, they had arrested one of the indicted war criminals in Bosnia. They had to use some unusual sources of information. They had to use some very unusual and extreme methods for apprehending this indicted war criminal. They did so. Now, it was a rather delicate operation. Had they been out there having to worry about doing something that would violate the International Criminal Court or being arrested for something they did, I just wonder how effective their mission might have been. As it was, their mission was very effective. I will tell another story. We all know about Operation Anaconda in Afghanistan. As part of Operation Anaconda, there were several helicopters with troops. One of the soldiers on board was a Navy SEAL. He was knocked out of the helicopter as it rose from the ground, and he fell to the ground. The troops in the other helicopter went to the ground and began a fire fight that lasted for nearly 8 hours trying to rescue this Navy SEAL who had been knocked out of the helicopter. They did not know if he was alive or dead at the time, but they were either going to bring him back healthy or they were going to bring back his body. One way or another they were going to bring him back. They were engaged in a tremendous fire fight with the al Qaeda military unit. One of those Rangers on that helicopter that went in was a Ranger named Mark Anderson. I am glad Mark Anderson did not have to worry about something that might get him arrested by the International Criminal Court. I am really glad this is not one of the things he had to think about at the time when he was trying to rescue his comrades and save his life. But unfortunately, just several weeks ago my wife and I attended the funeral of Ranger Mark Anderson who lost his life in that incident. I am very happy that Mark did not have to worry about being arrested and being taken to the International Criminal Court while he was performing a mission trying to save a fellow trooper. So I think that this is a serious issue, and I think that we need to be concerned about it. But I do not think we should be giving friend or foe around the world an opportunity to reprint a poster like we just saw here that would indicate that Members of this Congress think that we are going to invade an ally.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, our heart is in the same place, I would tell the gentleman. But the gentleman's facts are not exactly correct, because the first application under this program was America West and it was filed on November 28 of last year. So the regulations were in order much earlier than the gentleman suggested.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I listened attentively to all of these speeches. What I have to say is this is an emergency, wartime supplemental. Political speeches about whatever my colleagues want to make political speeches about, that is all well and good. Why do my colleagues not do that on some other bills? This is a wartime, emergency supplemental. The military is running out of money, especially those who are directly involved in the war in Afghanistan. We have got to protect those soldiers that are deployed. We have got to make sure that they have whatever it is that they need to fight this war. We have got to provide for the FBI and the intelligence agencies. Let us focus on what this bill is all about, and it is about protecting America. It is about seeking out those who would terrorize America. It is about securing our places and our people, our seaports, our airports, our airplanes, public gathering places. That is what this bill is about. This should not be a vehicle for political speeches.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I just want to remind everybody. And as of tonight, as we stand in this Chamber, certain airlines have not even made their application, knowing full well that under the law that we passed last September the application process terminates on June 28. That is rapidly approaching. So the airlines are not totally free of guilt in not getting the job done. All that aside, we are prepared to try to help keep our airline industry viable. And the only airline that I can fly direct to my district is USAir. I do not want USAir to go out of business or to go bankrupt. I want to help them. But I have to tell my colleague that they could have applied for this loan guarantee a lot earlier and they did not.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, reluctantly, I must concede the point of order.