District of Columbia and United States Territories Circulating Quarter Dollar Program Act

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 574 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost), ranking minority member of the committee, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

(Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 574 is a structured rule providing for the consideration of the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for fiscal year 2005. The rule makes in order only those amendments printed in the Rules Committee report accompanying the resolution which may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by a proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject to amendment. The rule waives all points of order against the amendments printed in the report, except that the adoption of an amendment in the nature of a substitute shall constitute the conclusion of consideration of the concurrent resolution for amendment.

The rule further provides, upon the conclusion of consideration of the concurrent resolution for amendment, for a final period of general debate not to exceed 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chairman and the ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget. Finally, the rule permits the chairman of the Committee on the Budget to offer amendments in the House to achieve mathematical consistency and provides that the concurrent resolution shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question of its adoption.

Mr. Speaker, the Concurrent Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2005, H. Con. Res. 393, provides for $2.4 trillion in total Federal spending for the next fiscal year and sets us on course to cut the deficit in half in 4 years. The resolution provides for total discretionary spending of $818.736 billion in fiscal year 2005. Discretionary defense spending is at the President's requested level of $402 billion. The resolution also accommodates the President's requested increase in homeland security, minus a 0.5 percent efficiency savings. Non-defense, non-homeland security spending is held level for fiscal year 2005. The resolution also responsibly provides for up to $50 billion in fiscal year 2005 for additional costs related to operations in Afghanistan and in Iraq. Total veterans spending is increased by $1.2 billion for the next fiscal year, and the resolution does not include any of the fees proposed in the administration's budget.

It should be noted, also, Mr. Speaker, that no new mandatory spending is provided for in this resolution. Reconciliation instructions are included directing the Committee on Ways and Means to report a bill by October 1 that prevents a tax increase over the next 5 years. Without a change in the law, expiring provisions in the 2001 and 2003 tax relief bills would result in a tax increase on Americans beginning next year. The resolution also accommodates changes needed to write permanently into law the $1,000 child tax credit, the marriage penalty relief, and setting the lowest income tax bracket at 10 percent. Additional reconciliation instructions direct five House committees to report bills by July 15 of this year to eliminate $13.2 billion in waste, fraud, and abuse from government programs over the 5 years of this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, as a member of both the Rules and Budget Committees, I would like to congratulate Chairman Dreier on a fair rule allowing for open debate and Chairman Nussle for producing a budget that is focused on defense, economic growth, and our Nation's long history as a land of opportunity. Simply put, Mr. Speaker, this budget is about securing America, creating jobs, and responsible planning. American families do not have unlimited bank accounts.

They have budgets, and they prioritize how they spend and save their money. The Federal Government must set budgets and prioritize spending as well.

This budget continues our commitment to defense and homeland security as the Federal Government's number one responsibility, just as our Founding Fathers intended. It provides for increased funding to help secure America's borders, defend against biological attacks, protect our critical infrastructure, and train and equip our first responders. And it takes a comprehensive, responsible approach to protecting our Nation, winning the war on terror and preparing our military for future security threats and challenges.

Mr. Speaker, by avoiding tax increases and protecting the child tax credit and relief from the marriage tax penalty and relief for lower- income workers, our budget continues the policies that are helping our economy to recover.

Our economy is growing, not as fast as I would like, but it is headed in the right direction, and we need to keep it on track that way. Raising taxes would stop this growth dead in its tracks.

I believe in balanced budgets, Mr. Speaker, and I am proud to have served in the House when Republicans produced the first balanced budget in 40 years. But I do not believe in balancing the budget by simply shifting the burden to American workers, families, and business owners in the form of tax increases. Our budget is focused on allowing the Committee on Appropriations to make the responsible spending choices and fund the highest priorities within the overall framework established by this resolution.

We provide for full funding of the Medicare law to provide seniors help in paying for their prescription drugs for the first time ever. We continue the yearly increases in education spending and fund the No Child Left Behind Act so that our children are better prepared for the future, and we provide an additional $1.2 billion for veterans' health care.

Mr. Speaker, I recently returned from Iraq, and that trip served as a close-up reminder of the hard work and sacrifices made by those who serve in the Armed Forces. We made our promises to veterans, and those promises must be kept. Our budget provides for these priorities, strengthens our defense, and puts us on track to cut the deficit in half in the next 4 years, with declining deficits in the future, and is accomplished without raising taxes on the American people.

Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support both the rule and the underlying resolution.

Mr. Speaker I reserve the balance of my time

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

Mr. Speaker, I advise the gentleman from Texas that I have no further requests for time, and if he is prepared to yield back his time, I am certainly prepared to yield back my time. Perhaps the 6 hours of debate took all the steam out of what we have been talking about here.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, the Committee on the Budget had a very extensive markup

session; I think we had roll call votes on something like 25 particular items to add to the budget in particular areas. So we had a vigorous debate on that. Yesterday, in the Committee on Rules, there was again vigorous debate on the amendments that were offered.

It has always been the tradition when we deal with the budget document, which I might add is the broad blueprint for our appropriation process that is coming up later on, but it has always been the tradition when we do the budget document that the amendments that we make in order are full substitutes.

The gentleman spoke about his concern of the pay-go issue, and one of the substitutes that we made in order, the ranking member of the Committee on the Budget substitute, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), has precisely that issue within the substitute. So we will have a vigorous debate on that. The Committee on Rules made in order 40 minutes for each of those substitutes. I might add that three of the substitutes that we made in order come from the other side of the aisle, and one of those substitutes comes from our side of the aisle.

So we will, I think, have a vigorous debate on the issue that the previous speaker just brought up, and I think it will be a healthy debate; and then we will let the will of the House make that determination.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to just remind Members that the Committee on Rules made in order three substitutes, and I erred when I said the Spratt amendment was only for 40 minutes; it is actually for 60 minutes. The other ones are for 40 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Mr. FROST asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, Economics 101 tells us that if we spend more than we make, we quickly find ourselves in a hole. And as the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) often says when asked about the Federal deficit, the first thing we have to do when we find ourselves in a hole is stop digging. Well, Mr. Speaker this country has been digging for 3 straight years, and the result is a very, very deep hole.

Three years ago we projected a surplus of $432 billion for fiscal year 2005. But the Republican budgets of the past 3 years have changed a few things. We now face a deficit of $521 billion this year; a debt accumulation of $1.2 trillion over the last year, this year, and the next; and deficits will continue as far as our forecasts go. That is a dangerous trend, Mr. Speaker, and I will tell the Members why.

Budget deficits and the ensuing debt are bad for the economy. That is a view that almost all economists share. The current chairman of President Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, Harvard Professor Gregory Mankiw, even agrees. As a matter of fact, I have right here his well-known and respected 1998 economics textbook, ``Principles of Economics.'' In it, Professor Mankiw wrote about what he called `` . . . the most basic lesson about budget deficits,'' that when a government runs a budget deficit, investment falls and the economy's growth rate is reduced.

This is a very important point to understand, Mr. Speaker, that the budget deficit can really harm the economy, especially since the jobs outlook for the 8.2 million unemployed is getting worse, not better. The latest Labor Department numbers show the average length of unemployment is now up to 20.3 weeks, the longest duration of unemployment in 20 years. Coupled with the administration's refusal to extend unemployment benefits, the situation for the jobless looks bleak and unlikely to improve.

It did not have to be that way, Mr. Speaker. Our Nation's surpluses were meant to shore up Social Security for the retiring baby boom generation and pay down the national debt. This may sound familiar to anyone who may be listening to the debate today, and it should. Mr. Speaker, for the third year in a row, this House is considering a budget that makes deep funding cuts to our national priorities while at the same time it drives America deeper and deeper into debt.

There is only one way to dig ourselves out of this hole now, Mr. Speaker: by working together, as a national family, to restore fiscal responsibility. That is how families across the country operate. They take an honest look at their expenses, their debts, and their income, and then they sit down at the kitchen table and work it out.

That is what Democrats have tried to do repeatedly with the Federal budget. We have repeatedly urged Republicans to forget politics as usual and join us in a bipartisan budget plan that does not bankrupt our grandchildren.

Last year, Democrats offered a budget that would have saved our Nation and our grandchildren almost $1 trillion in debt over 10 years. I need to repeat that, Mr. Speaker. The budget Democrats proposed last year cost almost $1 trillion less over 10 years than the Republican budget. That is a phenomenal number, but not one Republican Member of this House voted for that bill, not one.

Mr. Speaker, despite their rhetoric, Republicans do not want to deal with the problem of the deficit. They would rather hide behind budget gimmicks and accounting tricks to hide the true cost of their agenda.

The budget that is before us today does not reflect the fiscal reality of our Nation today, Mr. Speaker. That is because it omits a number of large expenditures that are sure to exist, including funding for the war in Iraq after fiscal year 2005 and the cost of making the President's tax cuts permanent, a goal that Republicans have repeatedly advocated, but which is conspicuously missing from their budget. Republicans also assume billions of dollars in unspecified cuts that will never be enacted.

At best, the Republican budget will dig our Nation deeper into debt, leaving us with a $377 billion deficit in 2005, spending the entire $1 trillion Social Security surplus from 2005 to 2009, and leaving America with deeper deficits far into the future. It is an irresponsible proposal brought to us by the leadership of the Republican Party.

Mr. Speaker, I am getting sick and tired of this. The American people deserve better, and they expect that Congress will act in their best interest, not spend the Social Security surplus and burden their grandchildren with debt. I believe that America deserves better than this partisan misleading and divisive resolution. That is why today, Mr. Speaker, I will vote in favor of the Democratic budget alternative.

The Democratic budget resolution will provide real fiscal discipline, with a balanced budget over 10 years, by extending pay-as-you-go rules to both spending and tax cuts and by offsetting the cost of tax cuts through reform measures such as closing costly loopholes and eliminating abusive tax shelters. There are no tricks, no gimmicks, and no hidden costs.

The Republican budgets of the past 3 years have clearly led America in the wrong direction. And what do we have to show for 3 years of fiscal mismanagement, 2.9 million fewer jobs, paltry funding for education, health care, and other national priorities, and a $1.2 trillion debt for our grandchildren to pay. The budget resolution before us today will only compound these problems.

If Members of Congress are really serious about reducing the debt, they would vote today for the Democratic budget alternative. Democrats have put together an honest proposal to reduce the deficit, invest in our Nation, and restore fiscal responsibility in the budget process. It is the right and responsible vote to make for this country, its economy and its people. And that is why I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for the Democratic budget alternative.

The American people deserve no less.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley).

Mr. Speaker, I advise the gentleman that we do have some speakers and one is here currently.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), a member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to oppose the previous question. If the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule that will allow the House to vote on the Thompson-Moore pay-as-you-go amendment. This amendment would require that any new mandatory spending or tax cuts must be paid for. Mr. Speaker, the amendment was offered in the Committee on Rules last night, but was defeated on a straight party-line vote.

For some reason, the Republican leadership is afraid to allow Members the opportunity to vote on this responsible and reasonable proposal. Three years ago the budget deficit was shrinking and the economy was robust and growing; but, as Members have stated today, the leadership of the Republican Party has turned a balanced budget into record deficit spending. And here they go again, pushing a dangerous budget that will spiral the deficit out of control.

Well, Mr. Speaker, I just do not see how we can continue this reckless, unchecked growth in our national debt. I believe deficit spending is a serious threat to our economy. The numbers are so high and out of control, they have almost lost their full impact. Republicans are throwing trillions of dollars around like it is pocket change. But it is not pocket change, Mr. Speaker; it is a staggering number, and it can crush any chance our Nation has of an economic recovery.

We must put something in place to halt the out-of-control deficit, and I think the Thompson-Moore pay-as-you-go amendment is a step in the right direction. A ``no'' vote on the previous question will let the American people know once and for all which Members stand in favor of reduced deficits, responsible spending, and fiscal restraint.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment and extraneous materials at this point in the Record, and I urge Members to vote ``no'' on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2993) to provide for a circulating quarter dollar coin program to honor the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation, and to insert extraneous material thereon.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of H.R. 2993, the District of Columbia and United States Territories Circulating Quarter Dollar Program Act, introduced on February 10 by the gentleman from New York (Mr. King).

Similar to the popular 50-State Quarter program I am proud to have authored, the legislation would create a 1-year program to use designs reminiscent of the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands on the reverse of our circulating quarters in the year following the end of the State quarter program in 2008. Passage of this legislation would foster respect for and enhance historical knowledge of the District of Columbia and the territories that are an indispensable part of the United States and also would be an economic windfall for the United States Treasury.

Mr. Speaker, the State quarter program, which reached the halfway mark at the end of December of this past year, has dramatically increased general knowledge of the historical contributions of our 50 States. I believe the legislation under consideration today would do the same for the District and the territories. These areas have some of the highest enlistment rates in our Armed Forces. Their commitment continues through today's conflicts, through the tragic sacrifice of the lives of, among others, Lance Corporal Gregory E. MacDonald of the District of Columbia, and Army Private Jonathan I. Falaniko of Pago Pago, American Samoa.

As well, Mr. Speaker, the District and the territories have many historical, cultural, and athletic contributions to our Nation; and the bill we consider today would allow a great opportunity to recognize them in artwork on the reverse of the quarters.

The 1-year program provides more than intangible benefits to the United States. It provides an economic boon to our Nation's Treasury. The success of the State quarter program has been overwhelming. The quarters have become one of the most popular collector's items in the United States and abroad; and by the halfway point of the program, the government had already benefited by over $4 billion, representing coins that have been taken out of circulation by collectors. As a result, it is estimated that if the popularity of quarters produced under this legislation follows similar trends, as much as $1 billion worth of the quarters may be taken out of circulation.

Mr. Speaker, I applaud the gentleman from New York (Mr. King) for introducing the bill, and the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) for her tireless campaign towards its passage. I also commend many others who have urged passage in the past, including the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), who sponsored a previous version of the legislation, and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters). Of course, I would also like to thank the ranking member of the subcommittee, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) and the chairman and ranking member of the full committee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) for their assistance in making this legislation possible.

I urge swift passage of H.R. 2993 to recognize the invaluable contributions of the District and territories.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to start by thanking the gentlewoman from District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) for her tenaciousness on this. I always favored this concept as soon as I heard about it. But if it was not for her, frankly, pushing everybody, I do not think we would be where we are today. And I say that because we have been there a couple of times before, and she has had to do it again and again.

I doubt if there will be a Rose Garden ceremony for the signing of this if it passes, but I intend to come over there and shake your hand if it happens, because you deserve a lot of credit for it. We just have to get the Senate to cooperate.

Apropos of comments made earlier by the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) on another bill, this is a pretty good day here on the floor, at least this portion of it, as far as the Federal Government is concerned. The BEP hopefully will be able to enter into the business that they can do specifically that the private sector really cannot do as well and perhaps have a chance to add some revenues to the Federal Government as has indicated. This quarter program has already produced $4 billion in money to the Treasury as a result of the keeping of these coins and collecting.

The chances are that the young people here are all collecting them. When you go to a classroom, you find that they are all collecting these coins.

We still have 5 years to run, hopefully a 6th year to run on this. We hope it will produce, as I indicated earlier, another billion dollars. It is not many programs that actually produce real money, real revenue for the Federal Government.

Pursuant to that, without advocating anything, I would say as an extension of this that I have introduced legislation, as you may know, for a Presidential program on the dollar coins, which is also, according to the studies that have been done, has the ability to produce revenue for the Federal Government as a collector's item, with the spouses to be on a gold coin sold at the price of gold which would be about $380 right now as a collector's item.

All of these also have the ability to do what this coin has been done and, most importantly, inform not just young people but all of us about our States, as the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) has pointed out, and about our territories, and about our Presidents hopefully.

So I think this has all been a very win-win-win situation. We are very appreciative of what this has done. I would encourage all of us to support this legislation, and hopefully this is something that we will get done this year.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I will be very brief. I just want to thank the representatives from the various territories and from the District of Columbia for actual historical lessons here on the floor. I think it behooves all of us, I recall those comments of the gentleman from Nebraska next to me, that perhaps putting the territories and District of Columbia on the quarter is more important than the States in some ways as this is such a good educational tool for our young people. So, hopefully, we will get that done this year.

Based on all I have heard, I think the problem is in the Senate, not the House. So we all need to go to work over in the Senate and get this done.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3786) to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to produce currency, postage stamps, and other security documents at the request of foreign governments on a reimbursable basis.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation, and to insert extraneous material thereon.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to voice my strong support for H.R. 3786, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing Security Printing Act of 2004, introduced by the gentleman from New York (Mr. King). The bill authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to print, under certain conditions, currency and security documents for foreign governments if it is consistent with our foreign policy objectives.

Mr. Speaker, while the United States Mint is allowed in law to produce coins for other countries, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, or BEP, as we know it, is not. This prohibition has prevented the BEP from responding to a number of requests or opportunities to help smaller countries strengthen their economies by producing currency or security documents such as stamps or deeds or passports that are difficult

to counterfeit. Simply put, Mr. Speaker, if the opportunity is there to impede counterfeiting of this sort and the BEP is prevented by law from taking it, we are all the losers.

The bill is essentially in the same language as that which has passed the House by both voice and recorded vote in the past several Congresses after being introduced at the request of both this and the prior administration, Mr. Speaker.

Because of the current prohibition in law, we have turned away currency-printing requests from friends such as Kuwait after the first Gulf War and Mexico a couple of years ago when they were redesigning their currency, and we were unable to bid on reprinting the currency of Iraq to remove the image of Saddam after last year's war.

Mr. Speaker, many countries lack the resources to produce secure currency or secure passports. Nothing in this legislation prevents a country from choosing a U.S.-based private sector printer; but the history of this sort of printing is that while a private sector printer is bound to be less expensive, the business is not price-sensitive. Typically, when countries turn to a printer outside their own borders, it is to another government printer: the bank of Australia, the Bank of England, or the European Central Bank printers. In my view, the United States Treasury should be on that list as well.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation specifies that the BEP could not bid on any printing contract for another government unless it could do the work without interrupting the printing and delivery of U.S. currency and security documents, and unless the Secretary of State certified that the work would be consistent with U.S. foreign policy.

Additionally, the BEP must be reimbursed by the client country, so that the work does not cost the U.S. taxpayer and it is not just another form of foreign aid. All costs, including administrative costs, will be passed to the foreign governments and no rogue state or unfriendly nation will receive the benefit of our knowledge and expertise.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this long overdue legislation and permit BEP to print currency, postage, and other security documents for foreign governments.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of H.R. 2993, the ``District of Columbia and United States Territories Circulating Quarter Dollar Program Act,'' introduced February 10 by the gentleman from New York, Mr. King.

This legislation will enhance the popular 50-State Quarter program I am proud to have authored, with the addition of a one-year program that will include designs reminiscent of the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands on the reverse of our circulating quarters in the year following the end of the State quarter program in 2008. With passage of this legislation, the District of Columbia and the U.S. territories will rightly be included in the historical depictions on the quarter. I support these inclusions for both the historical importance and financial benefit for the United States Treasury.

Mr. Speaker, the State quarter program--which reached the halfway mark at the end of December--has dramatically increased general knowledge of the historical contributions of our fifty States. I believe the legislation under consideration today would do the same for the District and the territories. These areas have some of the highest enlistment rates in our armed forces--their commitment continues through today's conflicts and includes the tragic sacrifice of the lives of among others Lance Cpl. Gregory E. MacDonald of the District of Columbia, and Army Pvt. Jonathan I. Falaniko, of Pago Pago, American Samoa.

As well, Mr. Speaker, the District and the territories have made many historical, cultural and athletic contributions to our Nation, and this bill we consider today is a great opportunity to recognize them, in artwork on the reverse of the quarters.

The one-year program provides more than intangible benefits to the United States. It provides an economic boon to our Nation's Treasury. The success of the State quarter program has been overwhelming. The quarters have become one of the most popular collector's items in the United States and abroad. As of December, the halfway point of the program, Federal revenues had grown by over four billion dollars, representing coins that have been taken out of circulation by collectors. As a result, it is estimated that if the popularity of quarters produced under this legislation follow similar trends, as much as one billion dollars worth of the quarters may be taken out of circulation.

Mr. Speaker, I applaud the gentleman from New York, Mr. King, for introducing this bill, and the gentlewomen from the District of Columbia, Ms. Norton, for her tireless campaign towards its passage. I also commend many others who have urged passage over the past, including the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Bachus, who sponsored a previous version of the legislation, and the gentlewomen from California, Ms. Waters. Of course, I would also like to thank the ranking member of the Subcommittee, the gentlewomen from New York, Mrs. Maloney and the Chairman and Ranking Member of the full committee, Mr. Oxley and Mr. Frank, for their assistance in making this legislation possible.

Mr. Speaker, I urge swift passage of H.R. 2993 to recognize the invaluable contributions of the District and the territories.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I am very pleased that this bill at least addresses in some very small part some of the concerns which the gentleman from Massachusetts holds, and I understand all that. But I think he is correct about this bill. I do not think there is any argument that what we are doing is essentially positive for the environment and for a government agency which can provide these services.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I am grateful to the gentleman from Massachusetts for his strong support and advocacy of this bill. May I offer my thanks as well to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), who has been with this bill since 1998 and was, from the moment that the territories and the District were not included, helpful throughout and insistent that we be included. Of course, the exclusion of the territories and the District was entirely inadvertent; and he comes once again full circle, because he was chairman at that time.

Indeed, twice before, the House has passed a bill to afford the five insular areas and the District of Columbia a quarter coin bearing a design of their choice on the reverse side. Inadvertently, these Americans were excluded from the 50-State bill affording this same right to the States in 1998. We owe very special thanks to three successive committee chairs and ranking members of the Committee on Financial Services. It is one thing to ask a committee to come to the floor once with a bill; it is a burden to come three times, even on suspension. I would like to thank the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), who has chaired the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology during the 105th Congress, and worked with me and introduced legislation to allow the District and the insular areas to participate in this program.

In the 106th Congress, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), as chair of the same subcommittee, introduced this bill and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), as ranking member of the subcommittee, cosponsored the legislation.

Today, I would especially thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. King), who is chair of the subcommittee during the 107th and 108th Congress who introduced the bill and the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), the ranking member, who sponsored the bill the last two sessions.

May I also give special thanks to the chair of the full committee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) for their support. I want to particularly thank the majority leader, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), with whom I recently spoke concerning the bill and who kindly agreed to move it to suspension.

To date, there have been over 21 billion State quarter coins minted; 26 States have had their State design on the reverse side of the quarter with four more States to be added before the end of this year. Five are added each year. All the coins are minted according to the year each State ratified the Constitution of the United States or were admitted into the Union.

Although the States have appropriate latitude, there are limitations as to what can be used as a design. According to Public Law 105-124, the Secretary of the Treasury has the final approval of each design. The law gives clear guidance as to what is an acceptable design concept. Such suitable design concepts include State landmarks, landscapes, historically significant buildings, symbols of State resources or industries, official State flora and fauna, State icons and outlines of the States themselves. State flags and seals are not considered suitable.

Among the examples of suitable coins already in circulation are New York's Statue of Liberty, Missouri's depiction of Lewis and Clark as they paddle down the Missouri River with the Gateway Arch in the background, and North Carolina's design depicting the first successful airplane flight.

We look forward to the day when the residents of the District of Columbia

and the insular areas can see similar symbols of their jurisdictions and of their American citizenship appear, as well.

This bill points up the importance of including all Americans in the symbols of American citizenship. The residents of the District and the insular areas are full and equal American citizens. To leave them out of mere expressions of citizenship is to deny the citizenship they revere and share with other Americans. The Americans who live in these areas have fought and died in our country's wars and have extraordinary records of service in the Armed Forces in considerably larger numbers than other States. The District of Columbia alone has lost more service members in Afghanistan and Iraq than many States and lost more in Vietnam than 10 separate States.

We in the Congress are proud to represent all Americans.

There are, of course, significant differences between the States and the jurisdictions covered by this bill. However, qualification to be a part of a program of quarter coins to commemorate congressional districts is not one of them. Under the Constitution, all Americans are equal notwithstanding important differences in form, structure and other significant distinctions. Today, by including all Americans, Congress avoids any appearance of differential or discriminatory treatment and any implication that these areas are colonies as, of course, was never the intention when the five jurisdictions were not included in the original bill as the House has made clear by repeatedly bringing this bill to the floor.

Today, when our country is at war and faces unparalleled dangers, this bill is yet another example of our unity as Americans and our indivisibility in honoring all of our country's citizens. By passing this measure, the House will make it abundantly clear that we are one country and that our hope is that the Senate will join us.