C. Young

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I do. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation on the appropriations bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if exchanging existing law.'' The amendment directly amends existing law.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of the time. Mr. Chairman, I rise reluctantly in opposition to the Sanford amendment. I must rise in opposition to it. The comment has been made now twice by two speakers that it does not touch defense. That is not accurate. Part of this amendment strikes the emergency designations in the bill. That means that we would have to find at least $2 billion in offsets to provide, just to replace the money for Kosovo. We would have to provide another $1.6 billion in offsets just to make up the additional fuel costs that this bill provides for for our national defense. So Mr. Chairman, this amendment does touch national defense. That is a major reason why we ought not to support this amendment. It also cuts a large amount from the counter-narcotics program. I was wondering, how much is a life worth? If we can eliminate just one acre of a terrible drug, how much is that worth to a kid that might or might not have the opportunity to get on that drug and to possibly get addicted, possibly die from an overdose? It does cut money from the emergency appropriations related to Hurricanes Floyd, Dennis, and other natural disasters. It cuts money from the United States Coast Guard, that is already so far behind in its operating expenses that I am amazed that they can do anything in search and rescue, let alone drug interdiction. This amendment would actually knock out money for aircraft spare parts that are so much in demand for the United States Coast Guard. The drug pushers, those who ship drugs from Colombia to the United States, they do not have any spare parts problem. They have plenty of money, plenty of spare parts. If the boat does not work, they throw it away and get a different one. If the airplanes do not work, they throw them away and get a different one. They do not have the limitations that we have. Yes, this amendment knocks out the money for the Coast Guard's operating expenses, aircraft, spare parts. Mr. Chairman, as much as I understand the importance of this amendment to its sponsors, I just do not believe this House can accept this amendment. We might just as well strike the enacting clause, or take a vote on the bill now and send it back to committee, because that is what the effect of this amendment is. It kills the bill.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Approximately 10 o'clock.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would yield, we will roll several votes this evening and we will vote at approximately 10 o'clock.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I can only speak for this bill. This bill will be up tomorrow.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, if I could have the attention of the House, I would like to announce that it is our intention to proceed this evening for about 1 additional hour; that we will consider several amendments and roll the votes until that hour is up, and then at approximately 10 o'clock we will take whatever votes there are, and we will then be finished with this bill for tonight and take it up again tomorrow morning.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. There is an objection, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. There is objection, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer a unanimous consent request that has been cleared by the minority and the Parliamentarian. I ask unanimous consent that the Committee be permitted to consider the Lewis amendment made in order under the rule to title II at this time, without prejudice to further amendments to title I or title II.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I do. I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states in pertinent part, ``an amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.'' The amendment is legislation. I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

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

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

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just wanted to say to the gentleman, we have no problem with the amendment, we are willing to accept the amendment. It is not incompatible with the report that accompanies the bill that we reported from the committee.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to control the time in opposition, although I am not opposed.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I reluctantly oppose the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ramstad), and I know the emotion with which he offers this amendment. But I have to tell him that it was very disturbing when I listened to him say that this money would provide treatment for 200,000 addicts. I think, Mr. Chairman, that our goal here should be to eliminate that terrible drug that is causing these addicts, that the addicts are getting addicted to. We need to destroy the fields where these poppies are growing. We need to destroy the mountain sites where the coca is growing. We need to eliminate the source of the drug. That way, if we dry up the source, we do a lot better than treating 200,000 addicts. What we will do is try to prevent 200,000 more people from becoming addicts. That is what we need to do. Now, if we wanted to get rid of posse comitatus and let the United States military use its full force against the drug growers and the drug lords, that might be a way to solve this problem. But no one is going to repeal posse comitatus. Or if we wanted to triple or quadruple the size of the United States Coast Guard and give them more helicopters and more ships and more manpower to interdict, we might be able to be a little more effective. But the effective way is to eliminate these drugs at the source. Let us eliminate the opportunity for those 200,000 addicts that the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ramstad) talked about. Let us eliminate the source of the drug that caused them to be addicts. Let us think about whose kids are going to be next. If the drug is on the street, whose kid is going to be next? Who is going to become the next addict? Who is going to become the next casualty because of an overdose of drugs? Who is going to be the next person shot, killed because of a drug bust gone bad or drug violence on the streets? Stop the drugs at the source. Defeat this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, we have only one speaker remaining, and we reserve the balance of our time to close.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the very distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer).

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, first, I would announce that as we conclude the business on this bill tomorrow, that the subcommittees of the Committee on Appropriations that were scheduled for hearings, because of the rule, those hearings will not be held tomorrow, inasmuch as we will be in session trying to conclude this bill. Secondly, Mr. Chairman, I will shortly move that the committee rise, and once we rise and go back into the House, I will have a unanimous consent request to propose; in fact, two unanimous consents, one having to do with legislative days to revise and extend, and then before I make this motion to rise, Mr. Chairman, I would ask my colleagues to give the chairman a round of applause for having conducted this day's activities in a very, very excellent and professional way. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill through page 80, line 11, be considered as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would like to advise the gentleman that we think this is a very good amendment. We are accepting the amendment.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during further consideration of H.R. 3908 in the Committee of the Whole, pursuant to House Resolution 450, no further amendment shall be in order except as follows: One, pro forma amendments offered by the chairman or ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations for the purpose of debate; Two, the amendment printed in Part B of House Report 106-549 and numbered 12; and Three, the following further amendments: Amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul) regarding certain reductions and limitations; Amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns) regarding an across-the-board cut; Amendment offered by the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) regarding U.S. military in Colombia; Amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) regarding buy America; Amendment offered by the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Baldacci) regarding building technology assistance conservation activities; Amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo) regarding the Food and Drug Administration; And an amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) regarding the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Each further amendment may be offered only by the Member designated in this request or a designee, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 20 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for a division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 3908, and that I may include tabular and extraneous material.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.