Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany, and providing for corrections in the enrollment of, the joint resolution (H.J. Res 2) making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2003, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot ask people to vote against their bill because it does some things which any piece of legislation would do which came to the floor at this point. It does provide needed funds for Medicare. It does provide funding for a number of programs which, if we did not pass the bill, would be limited to last year's level; and that would cripple a good number of programs, including education. But before Members decide how they want to vote, I think they need to understand that this legislation is a god-awful mess brought to the floor by a god-awful process.

About $360 billion, or 90 percent, of the $400 billion in spending contained in this bill, never came before the House of Representatives until it arrived in this one huge take-it-or-leave-it package today. That means 90 percent of the domestic budget involving hundreds of individual programs was never subjected to debate or amendment in the United States House of Representatives.

What you have here, as I said earlier, is the biggest back-room deal in terms of spending in the Nation's history. And when you have a back- room deal which is not ever aired in public, that means a lot of people are going to get hurt, and a lot of people are going to get things that they should not get. And I want to walk through some examples.

The most urgent need in this country is to ensure that we can track down and stop people who would commit acts of terror against our citizenry. This bill leaves huge gaps in our defenses. Once again, we are delaying the ability of funds that are required to protect American lives.

I would say to everyone who would listen that this is not the fault of our good friend, the chairman of the committee; he has done his duty, and he understands the need for action in this area. But there are many others in this Chamber and there are some on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue who are not being helpful and who are blocking the resources that are critically needed at the moment. This Nation is in serious peril and here are some examples:

The head of the Customs Service says we need to greatly beef up the inspections of cargo containers used in worldwide shipping. He and others have warned that these containers offer terrorists with significant opportunities to get bombs, chemicals, missiles and other dangerous weapons into this country. He has asked for $57 million right now to do that job, $57 million. This bill contains $12 million, less than 25 percent of what is needed. We have $392 million in spending for new courthouses in this bill, but the committee could not find the other $45 million to fully fund the container security initiative that was asked for by our own administration.

In addition to the containers themselves, we have huge security issues with respect to ports. We have ships arriving in this country every day containing millions of gallons of highly flammable and toxic chemicals. They are bombs waiting to be detonated. The Coast Guard says the costs of upgrading security at these ports is $1 billion. This bill contains only $150 million or 15 percent of the amount that ought to be in the bill.

Now, we have known since we saw the pictures of those brave police and fire fighters on September 11 that the next attack might put them in even more dangerous situations. Very few police departments have the equipment necessary to allow first responders to enter an area that has been hit by chemical, biological or radiological weapons. We have been trying to get that money out for more than a year, and we have hit roadblocks time after time after time.

The White House is playing a flim-flam game with respect to this issue. A year ago, the President blocked the inclusion of significant first responder funds in the supplemental. Last summer, he vetoed first responder funds in the second supplemental. He has also refused since last October to release the first responder funds made available by the continuing resolutions. But he spends a lot of time going around the country being photographed with firemen and policemen and talking about the $3.5 billion in funds for first responders in his 2003 budget.

He does not mention, however, where he got the bulk of the money to pay for that $3.5 billion increase. He got it by eliminating a series of ongoing programs that also provide grants to local policemen and firemen. That is like the boss offering to double your pay next month if you will agree to take no pay this month. It does not help a heck of a lot.

This bill restores those basic cuts, but it does so by slashing the President's first responder initiative. When all grants to fire and police are combined, this conference report is $466 million below the President's request for first responders. For the first time, Congress will have a worse record on first responders than the White House, and that is outrageous. So I guess the answer is, let them use duct tape.

There are deficiencies in other areas. The Department of Energy, the committee could not find $108 million identified last spring by the Army Corps of Engineers as being absolutely essential for physical security upgrades to waterway navigation and dams around the Nation. And none of the $254 million identified by the Secretary of Energy last spring as necessary to secure radioactive material, nuclear weapons and other highly toxic substances at U.S. nuclear weapons plants and laboratories is provided in this bill.

Education is a mixed bag. Now, for the last 6 years, on average, we have been able to provide about a 14 percent increase in education.

The good news in this bill is that we have been able in this bill to raise the funding for education above the real dollar freeze that the President presented, or 3 percent in nominal terms.

This bill is about $3 billion above the President's for education. It means that we will have about a 10 percent increase. That is still a cut in the rate of increase that we have had for education on average over the last 6 years, but it is some progress and I am pleased to see it; but it is still funded at such limited levels that we will be leaving an additional 628,000 children behind who would not have been left behind if we had funded this bill at the Senate levels.

We are also turning a blind eye to what is happening on college campuses. State and local budget crunches are hitting, and tuition is skyrocketing in some places by as much as 36 percent. This bill holds Pell grants to a 1\1/2\ percent increase over last year. That simply means college will not be affordable to tens of thousands of young people who want to better themselves by getting a college education.

We have an ugly product with respect to both homeland security and a mixed bag with respect to education. I save the worst for last.

This bill is sad with respect to both funding and legislative language that will damage the environment and damage our forests and wilderness areas. This bill is a wholesale attack on environmental protection. The interior section of this bill is one of the worst appropriation measures to come to the floor of this House in many years. The park service is cut by $110 million below the President's request. The committee has trampled on a commitment made by the Republican and Democratic leadership of both bodies to provide a specific level of funding for key conservation programs, an agreement that was entered into in order to prevent the creation of yet a new entitlement in this area, and yet the committee has walked away from a solemn commitment that it made.

Then we have the environmental riders, or I should say the antienvironmental riders. This bill will exempt the Tongass from any review whatsoever once the regulations are out, and they have not even been completed yet; but this bill will prevent any review of whatever regulations are produced by either administrative challenge or challenge in courts. That is outrageous.

It also includes language which again allows funds in this bill to be used for preliminary activities, preliminary to drilling in ANWR. The worst provision involves an innocuous-sounding program called the Forest Stewardship Pilot Program. Currently, there are 80 projects around the country in which noncommercial organizations work at

thinning growth in forests that are considered vulnerable to fire.

These small projects are not required to get the normal environmental waivers. The House bill proposed to expand the number of projects by 12. The Senate bill would expand the project by 28. Reasonable people can disagree on what ought to happen here, but the conference agreement provides no limits whatsoever. You might as well turn our national forests over lock, stock and barrel to the timber companies. That is what this provision does.

There are no longer any legal limits to what can be cut under this provision. Whatever the administration wants, by all means, go ahead.

Then, as I said earlier, we have some special provisions. I have mentioned the provision in this bill which is here on behalf of a company that operates three chicken plants in Georgia. This provision says that the USDA shall certify chickens as being organic even if they are not fed organic meal. That provision may boost the profits of one company, but it undermines the integrity of the entire organic certification process.

Then there is another nifty little provision that arrived in the Committee on Appropriations last night. It involves the bank accounts of 10 Texas dairy farmers. As we all know, and I know a lot of you like dairy farmers. I do, too. I have a lot of them in my district. They are not getting this kind of treatment.

I was stunned to see what was being done in this bill. It seems that these 10 dairy farmers have herds close to the Mexican border. There have been concerns that the herds might be exposed to bovine tuberculosis, and USDA decided that they ought to be slaughtered. The problem is that if the cows had already been infected the farmers would be able to defer tax payments on the money received from the government; but because the cattle had not yet become infected, that deferral option is not allowed under Tax Code. So somebody decided the only fair thing to do was to have the government pay the taxes in full up front. So this bill contains 15 million bucks to be distributed to 10 farmers to cover their tax liability. Had they received the deferral, their benefit would have only been a fraction of that amount.

So I guess moral of the story is, there is no limit to how rich you can become if you have certain friends on the Committee on Appropriations.

So, Mr. Speaker, I am going to offer a motion to recommit to try to improve this bill in the most egregious area of the bill, and that motion to recommit would negate the language in this bill which allows funds to be used for activities preparatory to drilling in the ANWR. It would also provide funds that eliminate the special rider that abuses the pilot stewardship forest thinning contracting program. We would eliminate the rider that says that Tongass is exempt from all environmental review in court or in administrative activities, and we would raise the first responder funds in this bill to the amount requested by the President. That is what the recommittal motion will do.

There are many other provisions I would like to reach. In a recommittal motion we cannot do it under the rules under which we operate, but we are going to try to at least correct the most egregious antienvironmental provisions in this bill and try to put enough money in for first responders so that you can all go home and look at your firemen and policemen with a straight face.

I would urge support for the recommittal motion when it comes, and I would urge you to use your own judgment in terms of how to vote on final passage.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks).

Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the ranking Democrat on the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

(Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I must say, I am amused by the prior speech. I would simply observe with respect to title I, the Republican Party in this House had to be dragged kicking and screaming into supporting the very funds which the gentleman so proudly now pointed to on his chart.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take this time, and so does the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), in order to express the House's appreciation to Greg Dahlberg, who has served this institution so ably and for so long. For over 20 years he served on the Committee on Appropriations on the Subcommittee on Transportation, on the full committee central staff, and on the Subcommittee on Defense. Since 1994, he was a senior Democratic staffer for defense appropriations which covers virtually all of the military operations in the government.

He was appointed Under Secretary of the Army the last 6 months of the Clinton administration. He volunteered to help the new administration get started, and stayed a few extra months. He has been a personal adviser and great friend to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) and myself. He has served over 200 Democratic members to help them understand defense issues and to deal with those issues in their districts. He has a deep concern for the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines deployed throughout the world. He loves this institution, and he has given help many times to both Democratic and Republican Members of this institution.

In the defense world there are many opportunities for qualified staff to leave the Hill for more lucrative jobs. Greg has resisted that temptation for many years, and for that we are grateful. We certainly wish him well in his future endeavors. He has been the institutional memory of this House on the budget process and on defense intelligence. He is one of the finest, most dedicated public servants, and one of the most decent human beings I have ever had the privilege to work with.

I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. Speaker, whether it is within the rules of the House or not, I think this institution owes Mr. Dahlberg a round of applause for his service.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I just want to remind the Members of the House what the content of the recommittal motion will be. We will simply strike the antienvironmental riders exempting the Tongass National Forest plan from administrative and judicial review, expanding the Forest Service stewardship contracting demonstration program throughout the United States, turning over the forests of the country to the timber companies lock, stock and barrel if they choose.

It would also reconsider language in the conference agreement which removes the restriction in the House-passed Interior bill which prohibited the use of fiscal 2003 BLM funding for activity related to oil drilling in ANWR, the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve.

It would add funding for critical conservation resource programs at not less than 2002 levels. That is consistent with an agreement that was made and should be abided by until the year 2006.

And it also would add up to $500 million above the current conference levels to fund training, equipment and assistance for first responders; in other words, bringing it up to the presidential request.

Mr. Speaker, I full well recognize that there are many good things in this bill. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. There are many things that we have to provide. And so I am certainly not going to ask Members to vote against the bill, but I am going to ask them to vote for the recommittal motion if you care about our environmental stewardship and if you really care about providing the equipment and the support necessary to our first responders, our policemen and firemen.

If indeed you want to send them the resources they need rather than duct tape, vote for the motion to recommit.

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

Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.

At this stage, I certainly am, Mr. Speaker.

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, pursuant to the rule just adopted, I call up the conference report on the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 2) making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2003, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to start my brief comments on this bill to say, ``wow.'' We are finally here. And some of the complaints that we heard about how we got here are very legitimate, and the process was not the best, but we are finally here, and it is important that we get this bill off the deck, because fiscal year '04 is already descending upon us.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, I want to pay a strong compliment and tribute to the members of the Committee on Appropriations on both sides of the aisle who really worked hard to get us where we are today, and so we can conclude our work for fiscal year '03. All of the members of the subcommittees were involved at their levels, we had a very open process, we exchanged information and ideas and facts and details with each other as we went through the process. I would compliment the staff who worked many, many long hours; and as it was suggested, some of this bill was not written until 5 o'clock this morning, and I know that, because I was here at 6 o'clock this morning to file the bill, and joined my colleagues on the Committee on Rules at 7 o'clock to get a rule on this bill.

So what led us up to here, we should all be happy that it is behind us. Now we are in a position to close out fiscal year 2003, and I hope that is what we will do.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to bring this conference report on the consolidated appropriations bill for fiscal year 2003 to the House. This is an important appropriations bill. It not only includes 11 appropriations bills, and that is why the stack is so high and it weighs so much, but it also adds additional funding for national defense, national security, homeland security, intelligence activities, and support of our troops in Afghanistan.

It is an important defense bill, a homeland defense bill, and an antiterrorism bill. It is a must-pass bill. It includes funds for our troops in Afghanistan, our intelligence agencies, homeland security, law enforcement, first responders, education programs and many other important operations of our government. It includes money for election reform, something that has been very important to the Members of the House.

I am sure this bill will not please everyone in all respects, and I do not know of any bill that we bring to the floor that does. But it does address many important needs of our country. Most importantly for the Congress, it preserves one of our most basic and important responsibilities under the Constitution: to appropriate funds from the Treasury. The passage of this bill will allow us to focus on the year ahead as we begin to provide funds for the government for the next fiscal year.

We have already received the President's budget request for fiscal year 2004, and we expect that very shortly, within the next 10 days to 2 weeks, we will receive a supplemental appropriations request dealing with national security, national defense. I think we have done a good job in holding down spending to appropriate levels.

When the chairman of the Senate committee and myself met with the

President and we discussed what the top number should be, we agreed on a top number. We have stuck to that top number with the only exception being when the President either agreed with, or requested additional funding for important matters. This bill includes $397.4 billion in discretionary funding. This is discretionary money that pales in comparison to how much money is spent through mandatory programs; and that is something you will hear me say often, that the biggest spending for the government comes from mandatory spending programs, not the discretionary accounts that we are dealing with today. This is a fiscally responsible bill and it does comply with the fiscal parameters described by the President.

Let me highlight just a few items that I think should be of interest to the Members. On homeland security, the bill provides record levels of resources to defend our homeland, something that we have all sworn that we would do with whatever resources were necessary. This bill includes $3.5 billion in assistance to State and local first responders. It includes $6.1 billion for the Coast Guard and $4.3 billion for the FBI, including new investments in information technology, something that many of us have discussed here on the floor numerous times as a serious requirement.

In the global war on terrorism there is $10 billion in this bill included to support our military and intelligence activities. For the veterans, Veterans Administration and veterans medical care, we have included a $2.5 billion increase for medical care over last year and $1.1 billion over the President's budget request.

On education funding, we provided educational assistance to needy and disadvantaged students through the Title I program. It has been increased by $1.4 billion. Special education State grants are increased $1.4 billion over last year and $400 million over the President's request.

On funding for space programs, something that has been called to our attention in our minds and in our hearts since the disaster with the shuttle Columbia, NASA funding is increased by $513 million over last year bringing the fiscal year 2003 funding to $15.4 billion; that is $414 million above the President's budget request. $50 million is provided to NASA to investigate the recent Columbia tragedy, so that we can do everything possible to prevent any further or future tragedies of a like nature. Additional flexibility is provided to the administrator of NASA to utilize resources where they are most needed.

Election reform is funded at$1.5 billion, something that has been very important to the Members of this House. There is $1.5 billion to help the States meet new standards under the Help America Vote Act, including over $1.4 billion in direct assistance to our States for the improvements of administration, the buy-out of antiquated equipment and new safeguards for voting rights. Also there is funding for programs to ensure that disabled voters have access and programs to encourage young Americans to participate in the electoral process.

I think we have reached a point of no return on this bill, Mr. Speaker. This is a must-pass bill. I hope we can get this important bill on the President's desk as soon as possible so that our soldiers, diplomats, law enforcement, intelligence officers can have the resources they need to protect our country.

While some may complain that potential operations in Iraq have diverted our attention from the threat of terrorism, funding in this bill for the intelligence activities proves that we will not and have not directed our attention away from that important subject.

The bill includes about $4 billion in funding for intelligence- related activities in support of the war on terrorism. This $4 billion, among other things, funds ongoing counterterrorism operations of the Central Intelligence Agency, funds the intelligence community's Counter-Terrorism Center, directly supports the intelligence requirements of counterterrorism activities of the Central Command and the Special Operations Command, funds the increased cost of maintaining 24-hour operations of intelligence collection and processing system, funds overtime costs for analysts and dissemination of imagery and signals intelligence.

Mr. Speaker, I think if anyone wants to look at this bill and find a reason why they should vote against it, they can do that. They can do that with any bill that is put on this floor, I believe. But this is a national defense bill. It provides for needs of our country and it provides some fiscal restraints that I think that most all of us have talked about and promised our constituents we would deal with over the years. So this is a good bill. It could have been really worse, but it is a good bill.

Many people worked long and hard to get us where we are so I just hope we can pass it so that our Committee on Appropriations can begin its 2004 responsibilities.

Mr. Speaker, at this point I would like to insert into the Record a series of tables that provide more detail on this bill.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.004

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.005

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.006

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.007

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.008

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.009

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.010

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.011

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.012

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.013

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.014

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.015

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.016

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.017

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.018

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.019

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.020

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.021

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.022

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.023

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.024

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.025

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.026

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.027

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.028

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.029

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.030

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.031

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.032

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.033

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.034

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.035

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.036

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.037

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.038

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.039

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.040

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.041

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.042

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.043

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.044

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.045

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.046

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.047

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.048

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.049

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.050

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.051

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.052

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.053

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.054

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.055

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.056

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.057

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.058

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.059

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.060

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.061

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.062

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.063

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.064

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.065

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.066

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.067

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.068

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.069

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.070

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.071

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.072

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.073

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.074

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.075

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.076

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.077

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.078

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.079

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.080

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.081

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.082

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.083

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.084

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.085

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.086

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.087

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.088

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.089

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.090

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.091

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.092

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.093

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.094

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.095

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.097

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.098

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.099

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13FE03.100

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute, and I do so to restate my earlier comment that if one looks really hard, one can find a few things in this bill not to like, and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), in his usual, skillful approach to his legislative responsibilities, has done just that.

He has identified a few things he does not like, but I wanted to comment on his comments about the ANWR, and there is no money in this bill for the Bureau of Land Management to develop or predevelop the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, ANWR. The President did not request funding for oil and gas development in ANWR, and the interior bill does not include funding for ANWR. So that really is not an issue, and we will address the other issues in the motion to recommit when we get to that point.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

The gentleman who just spoke said it was hard to find something good in this bill, but let me tell my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, there is money in this bill to take care of our soldiers in Afghanistan who are fighting the war against terrorism. There is money in this bill to upgrade our ability to perform intelligence activities, to know what the enemy might be planning to do against us. There is money in this bill to protect our homeland. There is money in this bill to provide funding and training and equipment for first responders, police and firemen, medical technicians, other people on the scene.

There is plenty in this bill that is good, and that is the reason it is going to be passed.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), chairman of one of our very important subcommittees on homeland security.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire as to the time remaining on both sides.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), chairman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State and Judiciary.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), who is chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce and author of No Child Left Behind.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), chairman of the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services and Education.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Harris) for the purpose of a colloquy.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentlewoman that throughout the 2004 process, we will continue to work with the gentlewoman and the Florida delegation for this purpose.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Defense.

(Mr. LEWIS of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks, and include extraneous material.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 15 seconds to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), chairman of the Committee on Agriculture.

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

I do so, Mr. Speaker, to say also a sad good-bye to Greg Dahlberg, who was not only a trusted staff but a trusted friend.

Greg, you know that we are going to miss you.

I want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) for spirit of cooperation that we have enjoyed with each other working through this process. And I also want to say, please vote against his motion to recommit. I want to thank the Speaker of the House for the strong leadership that he gave us in trying to come to a conclusion on some very thorny issues, as well as the distinguished majority leader of the Senate. As for Senator Stevens, I tell you he worked miracles, because he had to come down $9 billion more than we had to come down in order to meet this number.

I want to pay a special tribute to Vice President Cheney. The Vice President weighed in as we were trying to solve some very difficult issues. He was

extremely effective. I just really appreciate the fact that he helped us get to where we are today, where we can finally pass this bill out of here, conclude the work of fiscal year 2003 and begin the work of fiscal year 2004.

And, yes, by the way, again, please vote against the gentleman from Wisconsin's motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

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, normally, when I speak on legislation, I use a podium. This time we have a piece of legislation that is higher than my podium; so I am using the legislation. The podium is over here to the side.

Mr. Speaker, when a bill comes before the House, the normal process is for members of the committee of jurisdiction to come to the floor and explain the details of what is in their legislation. Unfortunately, that is simply not possible today.

Certainly the newspapers have reported on a few of the most egregious proposals in this conference report. For instance, Republicans inserted several sweeping anti-environmental provisions and severely shortchanged conservation resources. Democrats will try to fix these problems in the motion to recommit, which I urge Members to support. But an attack on the environment is just the tip of the iceberg with this bill, Mr. Speaker. Republican leaders did not file this conference report until six o'clock this morning, and they provided at that time only one copy for the more than 200 Democrats in the House. Even the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, who has worked very hard under the very difficult constraints imposed upon him by his own leadership, candidly and honestly admitted this morning before the Committee on Rules that he could not answer questions about all of the contents of this bill. So if the Committee on Appropriations chairman cannot tell us what is in some of this bill, it is obvious that the public and the members of the House have no way of knowing what is in this 3,000-page legislative monstrosity.

All we really know is this: while Republicans are hurting the economy by driving America deeper in debt, they still shortchanged homeland security. The Republican failure to address homeland security right now is particularly disturbing, Mr. Speaker. As we speak, the Bush administration is urging Americans to buy duct tape and stock up on bottled water to prepare for another potential terrorist attack. They are urging the public to be on alert for suspicious activity; but while the public is on alert, the Republican Congress is asleep at the wheel. Even in this bill today, they still refuse to adequately support the firefighters and police who would actually respond to a terrorist attack.

Republicans will say that they are doing all that they can afford. That is simply ridiculous, Mr. Speaker. Republicans may not be funding homeland security needs, but they are still driving America deeper and deeper into debt by their tax cuts.

Why has Republican control of the government brought America such massive and dangerous deficits? I would submit that the dots are not too hard to connect here. Less than 2 years ago, Republicans forced through the Bush tax plan, a tax plan which gutted the budget to give tax breaks to the wealthiest. At that time Democrats and many economists and nonpartisan experts asked, Now that you have given away the store to pay for tax breaks for the few, how are you going to address national priorities like national defense and education? Unfortunately, the Republicans' response was

as reckless as it was simple. They ignored the problem. The fiscal year started October 1. That was 1, 2, 3, 4, 4\1/2\ months ago. Republican leaders simply refused to bring up difficult appropriations bills last year prior to the beginning of the fiscal year.

Let us look at the record. Five of the normal 13 appropriation bills passed the House. Two actually became law. Six other appropriation bills were reported out of the House Committee on Appropriations but were never brought to the House floor because Republican leaders did not want their Members to have to cast tough votes on painful spending cuts before the election, and of course two bills were never even reported out of the committee. The Republican leaders' timidity last fall directly contributed to the $300 billion fiscal year 2003 deficit we face today. That is why we are here today, with just 60 minutes to consider this rule and just 60 minutes to debate this massive 3,000- page conference report that the vast majority of Members have never read.

Mr. Speaker, there is no way that considering 11 of the 13 appropriation bills in 1 hour, a half hour on each side, can provide the public with an honest assessment of the budget, 4\1/2\ months later of course. Normally each appropriation bill would get at least a day of discussion and Members would have the opportunity to offer amendments. But today the vast, vast majority of Members will have no opportunity to even read the budget for this year.

Mr. Speaker, that is a definition of fiscal irresponsibility, and it is how Republicans have burdened our children with the crushing deficits we face today. Even the Bush administration is projecting deficits as far as the eye can see, over $300 billion this year, over $300 billion next year, and more than $1 trillion over the next 5 years. That is why even Alan Greenspan, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, was forced to sound the deficit alarm earlier this week. He pointed out that huge long-term deficits, the type Republicans have created in just the past 2 years, will hurt Americans by driving up interest rates and increasing families' home mortgage and credit card payments. Why is the American economy facing this harmful burden especially now when families are struggling with the weakest economy in a generation? Because the Republican House leadership refused to do its job last year. The chickens are coming home to roost today, and it is not a pretty sight.

Mr. Speaker, this omnibus appropriations bill, 4\1/2\ months late, is an admission that the Republican Congress has failed in its most fundamental responsibility, addressing national priorities from homeland security and the economy to education and health care. That is why I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule. Let us take some time to find out what is really in this 3,000-page bill and then let us sit down and honestly address the economic and homeland security needs that it ignores.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), a member of the Committee on Rules.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Florida, the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, is an honorable man. Unfortunately, he has been strangled by his own leadership. His committee did their work and reported a number of appropriation bills out of committee prior to the beginning of the fiscal year, and his leadership prohibited him from bringing those appropriation bills to the floor where we could have an open rule and could offer amendments.

Now, if the other side had really wanted us to have an open procedure, they should have permitted their own chairman to bring the bills to the floor after they had been reported out of his committee. But they prevented him from doing that. That is why we have this particular bill today in an unamendable form.

I find it difficult to understand why it makes sense to run the House in the way that their leadership, the Republican leadership, has run it. They have always said they want open procedures, but in the most important matter facing this Congress in a way, the appropriations process, they have denied this House an open procedure, denied this House the opportunity to vote. Even though their own chairman and their own committee did their work, their leadership refused to permit their chairman and their committee to bring bills to the floor where they could be amended. And now we have this, 4\1/2\ months after the beginning of the fiscal year.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ruppersberger).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I thought it might be interesting to the House and to people watching this proceeding to know what we are talking about, what bills we are mentioning. I said earlier that six appropriations bills were reported from the Committee on Appropriations but not brought to the floor, that the leadership on the other side refused to bring those to the floor. What were those six appropriations bills? Well, let us review that.

The agriculture appropriations bill, vitally important to the farmers of this Nation, reported out of the House Committee on Appropriations on July 11, 2002, never brought to the floor of the House; the District of Columbia appropriations bill, reported out of the Committee on Appropriations on September 26, 2002, never brought to the floor of the House; the energy and water appropriations bill, reported out of the House Committee on Appropriations September 5, 2002, never brought to this Chamber for a vote; the foreign operations appropriations bill, reported out of the House Committee on Appropriations September 19, 2002, never brought to this House for a vote; the transportation appropriations bill, vitally important to people all over this Nation, reported out of the House Committee on Appropriations October 7, never brought to the floor for a vote; and the VA-HUD, Veterans Department, reported out of the committee October 9, not brought to this House for a vote.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I would suggest this is a terrible way to run a railroad or to run a House of Representatives. Because those six bills were reported from the committee, but never brought to this Chamber, they now are contained in this pile before me.

Also in this pile before me are two other bills that were never even reported out of the Committee on Appropriations, and three other bills, of course, reported and passed the House but, of course, that never became law. So we are at this point today.

Now, we never did this when we were in the majority. We never brought an omnibus appropriations bill 4\1/2\ months after the beginning of the appropriations fiscal year and refused to bring individual appropriations bills to the floor for a vote. That was not something that was done by the Democrats when we were in the majority.

The other side does not care about the rights of the American people. Four hundred thirty-five of us were elected from districts. This a representative democracy. I represent 651,000 people, as does every other Member from the State of Texas, Republican or Democrat. The 651,000 people in my district and in the other, at that time, 29 districts, now 32 districts from the State of Texas, were denied the right to have their representative offer and consider amendments on the appropriation bills that fund this government.

Mr. Speaker, that is wrong. It should never have been done. It is the reason that we are here today, and it is one of the major reasons why we have the size deficit we do. If we had been able to offer those bills and vote on amendments, perhaps the House, in working its will, would have made some cuts, and perhaps the deficit would have been smaller. But the other side did not care.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

Mr. Speaker, my wife often watches these proceedings; and she always tells me to make it simple, make it so that a person out there in my district can understand what is going on. I will try to do that.

What we have here is a situation where 2 years ago, the Republicans ate dessert with their tax bill, with their big tax cut; but they have refused to eat their vegetables. They would not consider the appropriation bills. They would not give the people's representatives the opportunity to vote on the appropriations process. So I am glad they enjoyed their dessert. I wish they would have given us the opportunity to take part in the rest of the meal.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining time.

People listening to this proceeding, watching this proceeding may be kind of scratching their heads and saying, well, why are the Republicans not saying anything about this bill? Why are they just sitting over there? Could it be that they are ashamed of this process? Could it be that they have no way of defending what has happened here?

Normally, on a major piece of legislation, each side takes its 30 minutes. Apparently the Republicans simply want this to slip as quietly through as possible, knowing that this is an indefensible process and that they have done things that no one has done in the past, and I hope that even they will not do in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to vote against the rule. I will join Members on our side who will be voting ``yes'' on final passage, because we do need to make sure the government can operate, and there are important things in this bill. It is just regrettable that the House was denied the opportunity to work its will on so many pieces of the appropriations legislation during this fiscal year.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support for the conference report.

This omnibus act includes the fiscal year 2003 appropriations act for foreign operations, exporting financing, and related programs. As chairman of the Subcommittee, I'm pleased we'll finally enact into law important funding provisions and policy language that the Appropriations Committee considered last fall. It is vital that the Congress maintain a partnership with the Administration, both in funding for foreign assistance and in the development of the policy that accompanies and guides that assistance. Failure to enact foreign aid appropriations bills in a timely manner erodes and compromises the constitutional role of Congress in both these important areas.

The foreign operations division of this conference report totals $16.3 billion in discretionary budget authority. It is $250 million below the level approved last year by the House Appropriations Committee, $130 million below the Senate level, and $171 million below the President's request. However, despite these reductions we have managed to fund important initiatives in funding for HIV/AIDS, assistance for Afghanistan, and in the War on Terrorism.

Assistance to combat HIV/AIDS in the foreign operations division of this conference report totals $800 million. That compares to $475 million in the fiscal year 2002 appropriations act. As part of this funding, $250 million is a contribution to the Global Fund to fight

AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, bringing the total United States contribution to date to $725 million.

In the two years since I became chairman of the subcommittee, we've raised funding to combat HIV/AIDS from $300 million to $800 million, an increase of over 250 percent. I know everyone would like more, and the President recommends major increases in future budgets. However, I think we can take some satisfaction in the way this Congress has responded to the needs in this area.

The conference report also includes the recommendation from the House bill that provides a minimum funding level for Afghanistan of $295.5 million. The President's budget stated that final funding levels for Afghanistan were yet to be determined, but I believe it is necessary to maintain an emphasis on reconstruction of the physical infrastructure as well as building institutions of democracy in Afghanistan. For that reason funding in this bill for disaster assistance and refugee assistance is increased above the levels recommended by the President.

Total refugee assistance in this conference report is $813 million, compared to the President's request of $720 million. Many members of the House wrote to us last year to support as high a level as possible for refugee assistance, and we have responded.

We also have a new focus in this conference report on economic growth, including trade capacity building, basic education, and clean water. We include bill language providing that not less $452,000,000 should be provided for trade capacity building in the developing world. This is an issue close to my heart, because I believe that without the ability to participate in the international trading system, developing countries will be left behind in the global economy.

We also maintain and enhance assistance for our allies in the War on Terrorism. Israel will receive almost $2.8 billion in assistance, including an increase of $60 million in military assistance. Jordan will receive $250 million in economic assistance, an increase of $100 million. In addition, Jordan will receive $198 million in military assistance, an increase of $123 million. Anti-terrorism training for the security forces of our allies will increase from $38 million to $64 million.

I am disappointed we were not able to fund $200 million for additional anti-terrorism assistance for Israel as I recommended twice last year--once in the supplemental and once in the regular fiscal year 2003 bill. In this conference agreement, we were forced to reduce the overall level of the House bill by $250 million, and the Senate bill did not contain this funding. Therefore it was impossible to accommodate this increase without damaging cuts to other programs. However, it is my expectation we will be addressing this matter as part of the supplemental appropriations request we should be receiving from the Administration in the next month.

It should come as no surprise to learn that we do not continue funding for the heavy fuel oil costs of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization, or KEDO, since North Korea has abrogated the Agreed Framework. This results in a reduction of $70 million from the President's request.

This conference report continues assistance to Eastern Europe and to Eurasia through out regional accounts. Funding for the Former Soviet Union and Eurasia is provided at a level of $760 million while assistance for Eastern Europe is funded at $525 million. However, we include language similar to that contained in the House bill prohibiting funding for the Government of Urkraine unless the President certifies that it has not provided arms to Iraq. We do not want to reward governments that are aiding Saddam Hussein.

We also retain important language initiatives from the House bill, including language that tightens oversight on both the West Bank and Gaza assistance program of AID and on our funding to the United National Relief and Works Agency. In neither case do we prevent funding for the important humanitarian work done by these agencies; we only ask for oversight by the USAID Inspector General in the case of the West Bank and Gaza Program, and a report by the GAO on whether current law is being followed by the State Department in providing assistance to the UN Relief and Works Agency.

After long negotiations with the Senate, the Committee came to a compromise on the Andean Counterdrug Initiative. The conference report funds this account at a level of $700 million, which is $75 million more than last year and $31 million less than the request. The conference report includes a permissive transfer of $31 million from the regular International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement account from this or previous Acts, therefore if the authority is exercised, the Andean Counterdrug Initiative will be fully funded.

While I am a strong advocate of properly managed United States foreign assistance programs, the Committee learned last year that some foreign governments have assessed taxes against our aid programs. This is unacceptable, and we owe it to the American people to ensure that tax dollars intended for programs to help people are not transferred to the treasuries of foreign governments. Therefore, we include language from the House bill mandating that the Department of State take definite action to halt this practice. We further require that any tax that is collected and not properly reimbursed to the United States government will be deducted at a level of 200 percent from the aid that would be provided to that country in fiscal year 2004. Half of these funds will be returned in a rebate to the Treasury, thereby providing the first ``tax relief'' Congress will consider this year.

Finally, we have recommended language for the U.N. Population Fund that almost no one likes, but which almost everyone is prepared to live with. This bill respects the concerns of the majority in the House who insist that U.S. funds going to the UNFPA are contingent on that organization's commitment, action, and adherence to a policy of opposing coercive abortions in China in compliance with the so-called ``Kemp-Kasten'' amendment. I have also tried to recognize our common belief that it is imperative that U.S. maintain and continue to project positive leadership in international affairs in a way that helps us secure our very broad foreign policy interests. That is why both the fiscal year 2002 funds of $34 million, and $34 million in fiscal year 2003 will be available to UNFPA if they are in compliance with Kemp- Kasten.

Mr. Speaker, I have highlighted only the most important provisions of the foreign operations appropriations act. I think we have done a good job responding to the President's needs in this area while protecting programs important to the Congress. I strongly support this conference report and urge its adoption.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 71 and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 71 waives all points of order against the conference report and against its consideration. The resolution also provides that the conference report shall be considered as read and provides that upon adoption of the conference report the House shall be considered to have adopted H. Con. Res. 35.

Mr. Speaker, this day has been a long time coming. The omnibus appropriations measure that we will take up in a few minutes has followed a long and torturous path to enactment. But rather than point fingers and try to assign blame for months of delay, I hope my colleagues will instead focus on moving this important legislation forward as expeditiously as possible.

In this difficult budget climate, cuts have been made in a number of popular programs. However, at the same time the Committee on Appropriations has recommended increases in quite a few other important areas. In other words, Mr. Speaker, they have prioritized the spending in these difficult times. It is simply not possible in a bill this large to list all of the major provisions, but I would like to highlight several that may be of general interest to the Members.

The bill includes an increase of $79 million for the Drug Enforcement Administration and more than $6 billion for immigration enforcement activities to strengthen our borders against terrorists and facilitate border crossings for legitimate travelers and workers. NASA funding has been increased by $513 million over last year and an additional $50 million is provided to investigate the recent Space Shuttle Columbia tragedy.

The National Science Foundation will receive $536 million over last year's level, and the largest programmatic increase in the entire budget will go to the National Institutes of Health, which will receive a $3.8 billion increase.

I am pleased to report that the Department of Energy has received increases in several important areas. This bill boosts DOE science programs by $72 million and the Department's environmental cleanup programs, including the one in the Hanford reservation in my district, will increase by $310 million above the current level. At the Interior Department I am pleased that the National Park Service budget will be increased by $78 million, much of it for badly needed maintenance of existing facilities. Funding for wildlife refuges and related programs will be increased by $53 million, and the National Forest System will receive a $31 million increase. Furthermore, I am pleased that funding for Veterans Administration medical care has been increased by $2.5 billion.

Finally, in these difficult economic times, it is important to provide for the truly needy. In that regard this bill increases homeless assistance by $102 million and provides for an increase of $348 million in the special supplemental nutrition program for Women, Infants and Children or the WIC program.

Mr. Speaker, no Member ever gets everything that they want in a massive appropriations bill, which inevitably includes certain items opposed by various Members. It is the nature of the appropriation process. And that is as true in this omnibus bill as in any other. It is not a perfect bill, as I am sure we will hear as we debate this bill, but I commend the chairman and the ranking minority member and their fellow conferees for making the best of an extraordinarily difficult situation. Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support both the rule and the underlying bill.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I just remind my colleagues that conference reports are never amendable. They always come to the floor in this fashion.

But I also would like to remind my colleagues that in the time that our distinguished chairman of the Committee on Appropriations has been chairman, he has always brought and asked for open rules on the appropriation bills. So I just wanted to clarify that for my colleagues.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time.

Mr. Speaker, I find that the arguments that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle were using were interesting arguments. They were based on the whole process of what we are supposed to do here in the House, or in the Congress. They, of course, only mentioned what they wanted to mention that would enhance, presumably, their position; but they forgot one very, very important part, step in this whole process, and that is the adoption of a budget which, of course, is a blueprint that all of our appropriators have to go through on all of the 13 spending bills.

Now, by law, by law, that budget has to be passed by both Houses in the spring, which meant that the budget should have been passed last spring. We did pass it in the House. The other body, with the same majority here as our minority, did not pass the budget. So we had no blueprint. And we know that we have to give and take as we go through this whole thing. So that was never mentioned whatsoever on the other side about the process. That made it very difficult; it would have made it very difficult had we passed appropriation bills over to the other body to try to reconcile when we have no blueprint as to where we are supposed to be spending.

So that was left out conveniently by my colleagues when they were talking.

So, Mr. Speaker, as I said in my opening remarks, this has been a long, difficult process. I said in my opening remarks that there are some good things in it, a lot of good things in it; and there are a lot of bad things, and we will hear about that. But in the end, we have to get on with the business of the people; we have to put '03 behind us so that we can start with '04. And I am certainly going to be one Member who is going to work as hard as I can with both sides of the aisle to make sure that we have a budget this year. I hope the other body has a budget. And I hope that we can pass the appropriation bills in a timely manner, because we do not know what is going to be ahead of us in this year with all of the challenges that face us.

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

The previous question was ordered.