House Democracy Assistance Commission Resolution

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 135) providing for the establishment of a commission in the House of Representatives to assist parliaments in emerging democracies.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

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

First, I want to thank the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), chairman of the Committee on Rules, and the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price) for introducing this legislation. I would also like to recognize the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), chairman of the Committee on International Relations, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), our distinguished ranking Democrat member, as original co-sponsors.

Last week, the Committee on International Relations unanimously agreed to ask the chairman to seek immediate consideration of this resolution by the whole House under suspension of the rules. I would like to thank the leadership for moving so expeditiously to schedule this debate. I would also like to remember the role played by one of our long-time colleagues, the very distinguished gentleman from Nebraska, Doug Bereuter. Prior to his retirement last year after nearly 26 years in the House, Mr. Bereuter worked closely with the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price) on this initiative. Doug Bereuter was a strong believer in helping to spread democracy to former dictatorships, a mission that he has continued to champion in his new role as President of the Asia Foundation. His commitment to interparliamentary relations was underlined by his service as president of the 26-nation NATO Parliamentary Assembly.

This resolution, in part, is of his legacy of the House of Representatives and to the expansion of democracy around the world.

Mr. Speaker, in his second inaugural address, the President of the United States, Mr. Bush, declared: ``The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world . . . So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and the institutions in every nation and culture with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.''

The resolution before us would enable the House of Representatives to directly and personally answer the President's call to support the growth of democratic institutions in every nation. House Resolution 135 creates the House Democracy Assistance Commission. This commission will allow Members and staff of the House of Representatives to work directly with their counterparts in new democracies around the world to help those parliaments play an independent and substantive role in the legislative process and government oversight. This commission would build on the legacy of the Frost-Solomon task force of the 1990s when the House worked with democracies then emerging in Central and Eastern Europe, helping their parliaments become independent, effective legislatures.

Today, with democracies spreading throughout the world, the House Democracy Assistance Commission would allow Members to personally undertake what President Bush called ``the idealistic work of helping raise up free governments.'' Through the House Democracy Assistance Commission, Members and their staffs from the House of Representatives will personally advise their counterparts from the parliaments of new democracies around the world both in their home capitals and here in Washington. Many of these

parliaments need assistance in areas like committee operations, government oversight, constituent relations, parliamentary procedure, bill drafting, and establishment of research services and legislative information systems.

In addition, when the commission identifies needs in developing countries, it can recommend that the U.S. Agency for International Development provide office equipment for information technology to enable those parliaments to become more efficient and transparent. Creation of the House Democracy Assistance Commission will enable the House of Representatives to personally answer the President's call to support the growth of democratic institutions in every nation.

I urge my colleagues to adopt this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), sponsor of H. Res. 135, the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. McCotter), a member of the Committee on International Relations.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my friend from California for those very generous and indeed extravagant words. Coming from him, they mean more than I can say.

Thank you.

And we do thank the chairman and the ranking member, Ms. Ros- Lehtinen, for scheduling this resolution so promptly, so that the House could act on this and our commission could get on with its work.

I also want to acknowledge the previous speaker, Mr. Dreier, the previous chairman of the House Democracy Assistance Commission, who did a wonderful job in getting this commission launched in its first 2 years. As he said, we have operated every step of the way on an open and bipartisan basis; and so as we swap roles, with my assuming the chairmanship and his being the ranking member, I am very hopeful that this will be a seamless transition, and that this cooperative way of operating will continue. Indeed it should, as we work together in this body to take the message and the practice of democracy to our partner legislatures around the world.

House Resolution 24 would reauthorize the work of the commission. This is a body that was inspired by the work of the Frost-Solomon Task Force back in the early 1990s. We worked then with states in Central and Eastern Europe as they were emerging from communism.

Our commission has undertaken this same kind of work. We are building the institutional capacities of legislatures in emerging democracies. We are working with them to develop their research and budget analysis, oversight, legislative drafting, and other capabilities.

There is a difference, though. In contrast to the Frost-Solomon effort, our scope is not just Central and Eastern Europe, although some of our partner countries are still in that region. We are undertaking around the world to work with partner legislatures. In the commission's first 2 years, we have worked with legislatures in 12 nations. Many of these countries are of key strategic import for our own Nation, and all are enthusiastic, worthy, and willing partners: Afghanistan, Colombia, East Timor, Georgia, Haiti, Indonesia, Kenya, Lebanon, Liberia, Macedonia, Mongolia, and Ukraine.

Madam Speaker, we view our work as a small but important niche in the United States's mission to spread democracy around the world. We do this not in the sense that we have all the answers about how to promote democratic rights and governance. The commission's work is rooted in the fundamental realization that the heart of democracy is not found just in elections but between elections. Between elections, that is when a nation's ability to govern itself in a way that is responsive to its citizens and representative of its citizens is established. What happens between elections, establishing representative institutions of governance, is just as important as the nation's free determination of who will govern.

Our commission works with partner legislatures to support development of the tools legislators need to establish responsive, effective government. We carry on our work in the sure realization that we do not have all the answers. We know that our own democracy is a work in progress. We do think we have an important story to tell. But we approach each of these legislatures in a true spirit of partnership, learning from them as they learn from us.

We also don't have a corner on the market of democracy promotion, and we coordinate closely with USAID, with the State Department, with other actors in the field to ensure that our efforts complement and enhance theirs.

We have high expectations for the program which we hope to implement in 2007 with the support of this body. During the last 2 years, our focus has been on assessing candidate legislatures and seeking to establish partnerships. Now we plan to move toward consolidating these relationships by expanding and focusing our programming. We plan to conduct advanced seminars on critical legislative capabilities, to enable sustained communications between members and staff of our legislatures, to identify and support pro-democracy reformers in partner legislatures, and to provide small-scale material assistance in cases of significant need.

So, Madam Speaker, let me close by again thanking my colleague Representative David Dreier, the founding chairman of the House Democracy Assistance Commission, thanking him for his leadership. He has led us with vision and with an inclusive spirit. I also want to thank Speaker Pelosi, past Speaker Hastert, Majority Leader Hoyer, Chairman Lantos, Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen, and many others who have supported the commission and helped bring forward quickly this resolution to get our work going.

I urge my colleagues to support the resolution, which offers Members of this body a promising opportunity to directly contribute to the important work of championing democracy around the world.

Mr. Speaker, when Congress passed SAFETEA-LU--the legislation that reauthorizes the Federal surface transportation programs--in 2005, it recognized the need to significantly increase Federal investment for highway, highway safety, and transit programs. In fact, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, SAFETEA-LU, increased the overall investment in surface transportation programs by more than 40 percent, with a significant part of that increase guaranteed to take effect in fiscal year 2007.

Earlier this year, the House passed H.R. 5576, the Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development, TTHUD, appropriations bill, which meets SAFETEA-LU's funding guarantees. It provides an increase of $3.4 billion for the Federal-aid highway programs and an additional $474 million for the transit programs over the fiscal year 2006 SAFETEA-LU funding levels.

It is now more than 2 months since the start of fiscal year 2007, and the Republican-led Congress has not enacted the TTHUD appropriations bill. Instead, H.J. Res. 102 provides funding for the highway, highway safety, and transit programs through February 15, 2007. The resolution funds these programs at the fiscal year 2006 level. Thus, all of the highway and transit investment increases guaranteed by SAFETEA-LU are put on hold. If this approach is continued and the continuing resolution is extended through fiscal year 2007, SAFETEA-LU's guaranteed highway funding will be cut by $3.4 billion and its transit investment slashed by $474 million.

Under a long-term continuing resolution, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, NHTSA, and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, FMCSA, safety programs will be funded at substantially lower levels than guaranteed in SAFETEA-LU. NHTSA stands to lose up to $21.7 million. At a time when more than 43,000 people are dying in roadway crashes each year, we simply cannot afford to shortchange an agency tasked with making our roadways safer. Likewise, FMCSA could lose almost $27 million that would be spent on motor carrier safety programs and grants. It is essential that we properly fund these critical programs.

The highway, highway safety, and transit programs differ from most other Federal programs in that they are supported by user fees. Motorists who drive on our highways pay the fees when they pump gas. They willingly pay the fees because they rely on a commitment by the Federal Government to use the money so collected to finance our highway and transit programs. In other words, users have already paid for the investments authorized in SAFETEA-LU and funded in the House-passed TTHUD appropriations bill. However, the Republican-led Congress's failure to enact this legislation in a timely manner will shortchange funding for critical transportation projects.

Transportation projects are usually high-cost undertakings that take several years to complete. Certainty in funding--especially Federal funding--is critical to their success. Relying on short-term, stopgap measures, such as continuing resolutions, does not provide the certainty that State departments of transportation need to plan for their construction projects in the upcoming season. And for northern- tier States, where construction seasons are short, delays in providing adequate Federal funding can severely disrupt their process for contract bidding, directly affecting next year's construction season.

Continuing resolutions also provide great uncertainty for transit programs. The Federal Transit Administration, FTA, has delayed the release of transit formula apportionments and other new grants until a final TTHUD appropriations act is enacted. The continuing resolution, coupled with FTA's policy, is resulting in many transit agencies being unable to advance badly needed transit projects.

According to the Federal Reserve, housing construction is currently very weak throughout the country. Congress should do everything within its power to ensure that transportation infrastructure investment is not disrupted through congressional inaction, placing an additional burden on this sector of the economy. Hundreds of our small businesses and thousands of our workers could be put at risk as a result. I urge Congress to fulfill its responsibilities in passing appropriations acts and to honor the funding guarantees established in SAFETEA-LU.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 24, to reestablish the House Democracy Assistance Commission in the 110th Congress. In the 109th Congress, the House of Representatives created this Commission to enable the

Members and staff of the House of Representatives to personally assist their counterparts in the parliaments of new democracies around the world to build strong, independent legislatures. I thank my colleagues, Mr. David Price, the gentleman from North Carolina, and Mr. Dreier, the gentleman from California, for leading the Commission and supporting the promotion of democracy.

Under their leadership, the Commission has accomplished a great deal. It undertook congressional delegations to six new or reemerging democracies and hosted six visiting parliamentary delegations here in Congress. It also offered material assistance to several legislatures through USAID. One highly successful project furnished, equipped, and trained staff of the parliamentary library of East Timor, with the invaluable assistance of our own Library of Congress.

In the aftermath of September 11, it has been too easy to view some nations more aggressively, as we undertook the obvious course of attempting to dismantle terrorist networks, end the support they received from states, and strengthen domestic and international defense capabilities. But in addition to responding to the immediate security threat, it is also necessary to help democracy take root in those countries of the Middle East, Africa, South and Central Asia, and other regions that now breed or support terrorists. It is in these Muslim countries or regions, more than anywhere else, that terrorism feeds off tyranny, finding recruits among the politically repressed and sanctuary from states that use terror against their own people. Building effective political institutions is the surest way to sever the link between terror and tyranny and to advance the values of democracy, individual rights, and cultural pluralism in the Middle East and elsewhere in the Muslim world.

Promoting democratic institutions and values in the Muslim world is thus one of our most urgent challenges. But it is not the only one. Meeting the challenge of democratization in the Muslim world should not warrant a retreat from a global approach; on the contrary, it constitutes a powerful new argument for maintaining and strengthening this approach. As September 11 made clear, any seam of dysfunction in the international system, however marginal to the main centers of political and economic interest, can become a source of exposure and threat. In a globalized world, the cancer of breakdown in any country can metastasize to other parts of the global body politic and thus constitutes a danger to international peace and security. In promoting the antidote of democratic institution-building, therefore, it is unwise to write off any country as insignificant or beyond hope.

The global defense of democracy is the appropriate and most effective response to the threat posed by Islamic extremists. As has already been suggested, these extremists do not represent a religion or a civilization but espouse an ideology of hatred and violence as their means to power. Though it is a particularist and corrupted Islamic ideology, to its zealous adherents it is a universal system of truth and thus a fitting rival to democratic civilization, which they falsely describe as decadent and narrowly Western. Since democracy is a genuinely universal value based on the belief that people everywhere, regardless of their religion or culture, can achieve self-government under the rule of law, it is the natural organizing principle in the struggle to defeat terrorism and to create a stable and peaceful world.

Pending the passage of this resolution by the full House, in 2007 the House Democracy Assistance Commission plans to assist the legislatures of Afghanistan, Colombia, East Timor, Georgia, Haiti, Indonesia, Kenya, Lebanon, Liberia, Macedonia, Mongolia and Ukraine. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and to participate in this important project.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution. I strongly welcome this resolution to establish a commission in the House of Representatives to assist parliaments in emerging democracies. At the outset, I want to pay tribute to the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), who has been a consistent and steadfast advocate of the establishment of this commission. I also want to commend the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), my fellow Californian and friend, who is the author of this resolution, and the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) for his leadership in moving the resolution through committee. I also want to commend the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Barrett), our new colleague, for his work on this matter.

Mr. Speaker, our country has been the leading promoter of democracy from the very beginning of our Nation. It defines who we are as Americans, and it is rightfully a key and continuing element of our foreign policy.

In 1789, the year our Constitution went into effect and the year that George Washington was sworn in as our first President, the young United States supported the French Revolution. In 1848, the United States supported the uprising of the people of Hungary against the Hapsburg monarchy; and after Russia and Austria crushed that revolution, we welcomed to our shores Kossuth Lajos, the great leader of the forces of democracy in Hungary whose statue adorns our Capitol in perpetuity.

In 1918, our President Woodrow Wilson expressed the idea that it is in the national interest of the United States to encourage free and open and democratic governments. President Bush echoed that sentiment in his inaugural address earlier this year.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation provides for the establishment of a House commission to assist the new parliaments in emerging democracies. It is similar to the commission which was established by the House of Representatives in 1990 as the former communist states of Central and Eastern Europe were emerging from Soviet dominance. Under the able leadership of our former colleague, Congressman Martin Frost of Texas, and then our late colleague, Congressman Gerald Solomon of New York, this commission worked with the Congressional Research Service and the Library of Congress to provide technical assistance and information to these new democracies in Central and Eastern Europe.

Our Commission played an important role in assisting the parliaments of these newly democratic states. This legislation establishes a Commission with a similar mandate to assist parliaments in newly emerging democracies in areas throughout the Middle East where we have recently seen the winds of democracy beginning to stir.

There are also parliaments in other parts of the world where assistance from the Congress can help to establish free and open and democratic practices that will strengthen the rule of law.

Mr. Speaker, we all know the need to break the grip of dictatorship wherever it exists, but that is merely the first step on a long journey. Without assistance to help in the establishment of institutions of democracy, countries in transition to a more pluralistic political culture will be subject to the risk of falling short of the aspirations of their citizens who promoted democratic values.

We in this body have a role, along with our democratic friends and allies, to help those who want assistance in strengthening legislative assemblies in many forms.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), the Democratic author of this resolution

(Mr. PRICE of North Carolina asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Thank you, Mr. Lantos. I appreciate the opportunity to speak on the floor this afternoon.

Madam Speaker, I was honored to serve on the House Democracy Assistance Commission during the 109th Congress, and I was privileged to travel on the commission's first trip to Indonesia and East Timor in February of 2006. I too want to thank the commission's chairman, Congressman David Price, and the ranking member, former chairman, Congressman David Dreier, for their hard work and their leadership on this important initiative.

I also want to acknowledge the commission's staff, John Lis, in particular,

the director, and the rest of the staff who worked hard in advance of our trips and continued to work hard in preparing for the designation of certain emerging democracies and our trips abroad as well to bring some of those members here.

The last few years have borne witness to a number of encouraging events in emerging democracies around the world, as well as a number of discouraging setbacks. One thing that has become clear is that to help advance democracy, transparency and the rule of law abroad, the United States can and must do more than just support elections. We must support the establishment of strong, independent democratic institutions, which provide the backbone of viable democracy. So in addition to elected executives, we must, and indeed it means, help legislative and judicial branches of government have the authority, the autonomy and the continuity that they need.

As Members of Congress, Members of the oldest directly representative democratic institution in the world, we are in a unique position to reach out to our counterparts in fragile democracies to held build relationships and to learn from each other.

The House Democracy Assistance Commission has conducted legislative strengthening programs with our counterparts in Indonesia, East Timor, Georgia, Macedonia, Kenya and Afghanistan; and these legislators face enormous challenges. For instance, in East Timor, where I traveled, only two of their legislators had legislative experience prior to serving in their parliament. They have almost no support staff and few resources.

Their constitution provides for a substantive parliamentary role; however, lack of experience and lack of infrastructure have severely limited their role, leaving the executive to control most of their legislation. Nonetheless, the members that we met with are deeply committed to their role as representatives and to their role in maintaining and building democratic institutions.

They are keenly aware of the challenges that they face as one of the poorest nations in the world, where basic services from electricity to schools are just being initiated. It is in our Nation's interest to work with nations like East Timor, nations struggling on the road to democracy and stability to establish effective legislative bodies.

The commission enables Members of this body, Democrats and Republicans alike, to do just that, to share our knowledge, expertise and passion for the legislative branch with our counterparts in these emerging democracies.

We have worked with parliamentarians from these countries in their home countries, in State capitals across this country and here in Washington, focusing on the establishment of legislative information and research services, on providing advice on legislative procedures and committee operations, and on constituent services.

The commission has also provided these parliaments with some needed material support, such as office equipment and computers and library resources. So as we confront the global security challenges of the 21st century, initiatives that strengthen democratic institutions abroad and help provide a positive image of the United States are of utmost importance. That is why this commission is so worthy of our continued support. That is why I urge a ``yes'' vote on House Resolution 24.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1105, I

call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 102) making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2007, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I bring before the House a continuing resolution for fiscal year 2007. This CR, which is clean, runs through February 15, 2007. Only necessary technical anomalies are included.

This CR will fund the agencies in the nine remaining bills awaiting conference at the lower rate the House passed, Senate passed, or current fiscal year 2006 level.

We have been working closely with both leadership and Chairman Cochran on this CR to ensure that all essential functions of the government continue without interruption.

With regard to veterans medical care funding, the VA presently has approximately $600 million left over from fiscal year 2006. However, should the VA need additional resources between now and February 15, we are providing the VA and the Secretary with the authority to transfer funds from within other Veterans Affairs accounts.

When we passed this CR the last time, my hope was it would provide a strong motivation for Congress to complete its work in regular order. I was hopeful that our colleagues in the Senate would complete their work on the floor so we could move the remaining individual conference reports before the end of this legislative session.

I want the body to know that the Appropriations Committee has been strongly committed to bringing to this floor individual conference reports. That has not occurred. Each and every individual bill should have come to the floor and gone to conference with the Senate and been sent to the President. From the beginning of our process, Chairman Cochran and I pledged to pass funding bills in regular order. We also stated publicly we would not, I repeat, not, support an omnibus bill in any form.

The House Appropriations Committee passed each of the 11 subcommittee bills out of the full committee by June 30, and with the exception of the Labor-HHS bill, all of the bills off the House floor by the July 4 break.

Similarly, the Senate passed each of its bill out of the full committee to ensure timely consideration on the Senate floor.

The Appropriations Committee has remained committed to moving these bills individually and within the framework of the budget resolution.

My colleagues, the Appropriations Committee has kept its word. The breakdown of regular order this cycle, indeed the failure to get our bills done, should be fairly placed at the feet of the departing Senate majority leader who failed to schedule floor time for the consideration of appropriations bills.

Senator Cochran and I were convinced that moving bills individually was the only way for us to get back to regular order. Lacking regular order, there is a tendency for the remaining bills to become Christmas trees and for spending to grow out of control, having individual Members do with a Christmas tree what they might. In our view, that is simply not acceptable.

Let me make one personal comment aside: my appropriations colleague, Senator Thad Cochran of Mississippi, could not have been a better partner as we attempted to bringing regular order to the appropriations process. The Senator of Mississippi was poorly served by his own leadership.

I would prefer to return to Congress in January as chairman of the Appropriations Committee but look forward to working with the new chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

Until then, I urge my colleagues to support this CR and I would like to close my remarks by wishing all of my friends a Merry Christmas and a happy new year.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin, who has done such an extraordinary job in trying to bring fairness and coherence in this process. Unfortunately, he will soon be in the business to do so, although carrying the burden that he has to get out from under.

I first want to join him in saying that I am glad to see we finally recognize the incongruity of pay raises for ourselves and no minimum wage increase. Many of us tried to argue that on logical grounds and on moral grounds. It is interesting to see that the loss of 30 seats apparently succeeded, where morality and logic was less persuasive. But I will take it any way I can get it.

Then I also want to congratulate my colleagues on the other side for their consistency because they end this Congress governing in the same way in which they carried on for 2 years: frankly, incompetently, without respect for democratic procedures, and with a willingness to inflict harm on the most vulnerable members of our society.

Earlier today we voted on packages of things that in a Democratic legislature, for example, Iraq, we would not have had all lumped together. Members who opposed some and supported others would have had a chance to say so. Today we got have one continuing resolution, as the gentleman from Wisconsin said, we have no choice but to vote ``yes'' so that the government does not stop acting.

But let us take a look at what they have done. I have a particular responsibility in my committee for housing. The one housing program that the Republican Party has not undone is the section 8 program. But we have today a resolution that substantially and deliberately provides fewer dollars for the section 8 program than the housing authorities of this country need to meet their existing commitments. This is a budget that goes into, what, January of this current fiscal year. Months will have gone by in this current fiscal year, and you are funding section 8 at significantly less than your president asked for for this fiscal year, significantly less than is needed to meet commitments. And in January housing authorities will be faced with dilemmas. They may be told by HUD that they cannot continue to service what they are now doing.

There is section 8 project-based assistance you put forward in a bill here which is $636 million below what your President asked for just to meet existing commitments. And housing authorities that have jurisdiction over projects which house elderly people and disabled people may be in turmoil and there will be uncertainty. We will probably be able come to their rescue; but why should we have to? Why should we create, Mr. Speaker, you and your colleagues, a situation in which this difficulty exists and we have to come to the rescue? Why such little regard for the poorest people in this country, the most vulnerable? Why are they going to be treated this way, as pawns, so you can avoid having to make difficult decisions, Mr. Speaker?

So I just want to echo what the gentleman from Wisconsin said about the inappropriateness of this. I do want to point out in particular what happens here. And let me say to those Members on the other side who supported this rule and supported this approach, I will predict now, Mr. Speaker, that many of them will be hearing from the housing authorities and from section 8 residents in January complaining of the uncertainty, complaining of the difficulty. You will have no justification in claiming that it wasn't your fault, those of you who voted to send this procedure. So please be ready to explain to people in January why you so callously, Mr. Speaker, disregarded once again the interests of the poorest people in the country.