Paul D. Wellstone Muscular Dystrophy Community Assistance, Research, and Education Amendments of 2008

Mr. Speaker, in accordance witt House earmark reforms, I would like to place in the Record a listing of the congressionally- directed projects I have requested in my home State of Idaho that are contained in the report of H.R. 2638, the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009 Appropriations Bill.

I'd like to take just a few minutes to describe why I support these projects and why they are valuable to the Nation and its taxpayers.

The report contains $4,000,000 in the NPPD Infrastructure Protection and Information Security account for the Power and Cyber Systems Protection, Analysis, and Testing Program at the Idaho National Laboratory. The program would conduct vulnerability analysis, testing, and protection of power and cyber connected systems for the Department of Homeland Security, utilizing the unique resources available at the Idaho National Laboratory, such as the electric grid, SCADA and control systems, cyber and communication test beds, and the explosives test range. The proposed work entails collaboration with leading universities and other National Laboratories to leverage ongoing research at these institutions and advance the state-of-the-art in building resilience into infrastructure systems. The funding would be used to obtain full-scale systems in sectors of interest to DHS for testing of vulnerabilities, identification of protection strategies, and evaluation of resilient designs; partner with universities and National Laboratories to develop resilient control systems; and establish a program that develops new protection schemes. The INL is uniquely placed to carry out this program, which would leverage its ongoing work in this area sponsored by DoD, DHS, and Intelligence Agencies and its established relationships with industry, universities, and National Laboratories. This request is consistent with the intended purpose of this account.

The entity to receive funding for this project is the Idaho National Laboratory, located at 2525 North Freemont St., Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415.

The report contains $1,600,000 in the Defense Production Act Purchases account for the Read Out Integrated Circuit (ROIC) Manufacturing Improvement. The United States Air Force and the Missile Defense Agency have been investigating ways to improve manufacturing capabilities and improve cryogenic and

radiation performance of these circuits. The thermal imagers of the future will operate in harsh environmental conditions for longer periods of time and will have increased resolution (through increased pixel count) over the detectors of today. Maintaining a domestic source of this technology as well as working to enhance the manufacturing capabilities of this critical technology are equally as important as increasing the yield. Funds for this project will be used to establish a long-term, known U.S. source; improve yields both by the manufacturer and by the vendors who use the contractor as a manufacturing source; decrease the cycle time required in manufacturing ROICs and a reduction of design cycle time by ROIC designers; and provide a roadmap to meet the future needs of the ROIC designers. When the program is completed, ROICs will be available with twice the number of pixels for less money than the ROIC currently costs. This request is consistent with the intended purpose of this account.

The entity to receive funding for this project is ON Semiconductor, located at 2300 Buckskin Rd., Pocatello, Idaho 83201.

The report contains $1,600,000 in the Medical Advanced Technology account for the Integrated Patient Quality Program. To directly enhance the patient-provider encounter, the Integrated Patient Quality Program will identify the degree to which physicians utilize consumer content integrated into the DoD Electronic Medical Record (AHLTA) and provide after-visit summaries to patients, and identify the impact this critical medical information has on patients' health and their ability to make informed decisions. This phase of the project will build upon the requirements' definition and technical feasibility study performed within FY08 funding that developed a functional and technical road map, and successfully tested the Integrated Patient Quality concept in a development environment. Additionally, the Integrated Patient Quality Program will explore content delivery options outside of the patient- provider face-to-face interaction to include: secure provider/patient e-mail, online laboratory results, pre-visit/test preparation, surgical decision support, and disease management to at-risk patients. This request is consistent with the intended purpose of this account.

The entity to receive funding for this project is Healthwise, Incorporated, located at 2601 N. Bogus Basin Road, Boise, Idaho 83702.

The report contains $2,000,000 in the Support Systems Development account for the Accelerator-Driven Non-Destructive Testing. The Idaho Accelerator Center (lAC) proposes to continue development of penetrating and nondestructive testing (NDT) techniques utilizing new techniques in positron annihilation spectroscopy with accelerator-based gamma-beams, and the use of monochromatic x-ray beams that are produced by colliding high-power laser beams with high-energy electron beams. Both of these core technologies have been under development at the lAC for several years and have matured to the point that serious in-field commercialization is possible. This request is consistent with the intended purpose of this account.

The entity to receive funding for this project is Idaho State University, located at 921 South 8th Avenue, Pocatello, Idaho 83209.

The report contains $1,440,000 in the Electronics Technology account for the 3-D Technology for Advanced Sensor Systems Project. The military has a need for new three-dimensional (3-D) packaging of electronic systems, particularly sensor systems for portable applications. The team of Boise State University and RTI International has developed 3-D processing techniques on silicon and LTCC platforms, including technologies for die- and wafer-scale bonding and 3-D interconnects. These funds will allow them to apply these techniques to create 3-D integration and packaging solutions applicable to a general category of high performance sensor systems. These funds will be used to support summer salaries for faculty, and provide salaries for research staff, post-doctoral associates, graduate and undergraduate students. Research supplies, capital equipment, and travel will be funded as required to support the objectives of the project. This request is consistent with the intended purpose of this account.

The entity to receive funding for this project is Boise State University, located at 1910 University Drive, Boise, Idaho 83725-1135.

The report contains $1,200,000 in the Critical Infrastructure Protection account for the Electric Grid Reliability/Assurance project. The effort will operationalize advanced electric grid modeling simulation and analysis capability that links disparate critical infrastructure sector models that run simultaneously and dynamically to share information providing greater understanding of critical infrastructure status before, during or after a destructive event. Funds will be used for the enhanced development of electric grid modeling, simulation and testing capabilities at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). Incorporation of both real-time and distributed system modeling capabilities will provide expanded capabilities for analysis of systems critical to DoD. These efforts will provide DoD an enhanced capability to simulate, prove and make recommendations for techniques to sustain mission operations via continued power generation when power from the electric utilities is no longer present. This request is consistent with the intended purpose of this account.

The entity to receive funding for this project is Idaho National Laboratory, located at P.O. Box 1625, Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415.

The report contains $1,200,000 in the Advanced Electronics Technologies for the Hybrid Power Generation System. Research has resulted in a breakthrough technology using compressed magnetic fields which can generate power. The continued research, development, testing and validation of the technology should result in mission extension for dismounted soldiers and considerable savings by reducing the reliance on disposable batteries. Approximately $57,000 is being spent per soldier, per year on batteries alone in theatre. This technology will not only reduce Federal spending needed for such batteries, but will considerably reduce related military logistics costs, reduce the amount of hazardous waste disposal costs (for the toxic substances used in battery materials), and will reduce the man/machine interface by reducing the 20-30 lbs of extra batteries soldiers are currendy required to carry for extended missions. This request is consistent with the intended purpose of this account.

The entity to receive funding for this project is M2E Power, Inc., located at 875 W. McGregor Court, Suite 150 Boise, Idaho 83705.

The report contains $3,200,000 in the Chemical and Biological Defense Program Account for the Vacuum Sampling Pathogen Collection and Concentration project. Production and commercialization potential of the recently completed basic wet-vacuum pathogen collection system will be further enhanced through completion and integration of current prototype-stage ``sister'' technologies. The combined systems will provide safer, more accurate and faster sample collection and processing capabilities with GPS-RFID sample site documentation and sample identification, plus handling, transport and lab traceability. Current outsourced production activities will be centralized through expanded in-house production facilities for more stringent cost, QC and delivery schedule management and control. Integrated technology systems will improve safety, accuracy and standardization of bio-agent detection methods for our soldiers and civilian end users. This request is consistent with the intended purpose of this account.

The entity to receive funding for this project is Microbial-Vac Systems, Inc., located at 160 Bridon Way, Jerome, Idaho 83338.

The report contains $3,200,000 in the Advanced Spacecraft Technology account for the Ultra Low Power Electronics. Ultra-Low Power (ULP) Electronics is an Air Force Research Lab-sponsored initiative working in collaboration with industry to develop electronics that require less power and provide increased efficiency. A key challenge for DoD electronics applications is the reduction of power consumption in the Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor (CMOS)--the technology platform used for advanced integrated circuits. Funding in 2009 will develop a high OPS/Watt ULP platform solution for DoD designers of electronic systems and demonstrate a base technology that can be rapidly scaled to meet general ULP industry requirements for portable electronics. The project is an iterative, multi-lot, fabrication research and development effort that includes design tool and model development necessary to deploy the new technology. A viable scaling method for reducing electronic voltage requirements and the associated ULP products will define an alternative CMOS scaling roadmap specific to portable technology. This program will establish a new technical approach and industrial capability for U.S. electronics. This request is consistent with the intended purpose of this account.

The entity to receive funding for this project is American Semiconductor, Inc., located at 3100 S. Vista Ave., Ste 230 Boise, Idaho 83705.

The report contains $800,000 in the New Design Ssn Account for the Highly Corrosive-Resistant Alloy Joining for Nuclear Applications. This funding will be used to develop and test novel prototype design-for- manufacturing methods, flexible automated welding and inspection technology for application in submarine nuclear reactor propulsion systems. The research will result in new joining techniques to shape highly corrosive-resistant alloys to meet the requirements of underwater power generation and radiation containment. This request is consistent with the intended purpose of this account.

The entity to receive funding for this project is Premier Technology, located at 1858 W. Bridge Street, Blackfoot, Idaho 83221.

The report contains $1,800,000 in the Air Force Military Construction Account for the Mountain Home AFB Logistics Readiness

Center. The Existing Logistic Supply is a condemned 53-year-old wooden structure beyond economical repair. The building had to be evacuated and now 60% of base supply functions operate from temporary spaces across base, creating significant delays in troop/equipment mobilization. This negatively impacts the Wing's ability to demolish and relocate from other substandard facilities on base. When funded, the Logistics Readiness Center will provide command and control for all materials in-bound and outbound, including freight processing, packing, crating, pallet buildup shop, and provide bulk and bin storage. The facility will also support secure storage and an armory and will include administrative areas. This request is consistent with the intended purpose of this account.

The entity to receive funding for this project is the 366th Wing, Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho, located at 366 Gunfighter Avenue, Ste. 107, Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho 83648.

I appreciate the opportunity to provide a list of Congressionally- directed projects in my district and an explanation of my support for them.

(1) $4 million for the Power and Cyber Systems Protection, Analysis, and Testing Program; Idaho National Laboratory.

(2) $1,600,000 for the Read Out Integrated Circuit (ROIC) Manufacturing Improvement; ON Semiconductor.

(3) $1,600,000 for the Integrated Patient Quality Program; Healthwise Incorporated.

(4) $2,000,000 for the Accelerator-Driven Non-Destructive Testing; Idaho State University.

(5) $1,440,000 for the 3-D Technology for Advanced Sensor Systems; Boise State University.

(6) $1,200,000 for the Electric Grid Reliability/Assurance; Idaho National Laboratory.

(7) $1,200,000 for the Hybrid Power Generation System; M2E Power Inc.

(8) $3,200,000 for the Vacuum Sampling Pathogen Collection and Concentration; Microbial-Vac Systems, Inc.

(9) $3,200,000 for the Ultra Low Power Electronics; American Semiconductor.

(10) $800,000 for the Highly Corrosive-Resistant Alloy Joining for Nuclear Applications; Premier Technology.

(11) $1,800,000 in the Air Force Military Construction Account for the Mountain Home AFB Logistics Readiness Center; Mountain Home Air Force Base.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1488, I call up the bill (H.R. 2638) making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I offer the motion at the desk.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the pending legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), the Chair of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina, chairman of the Homeland Security subcommittee.

I yield the gentleman 1\1/2\ additional minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas, the chairman of the Military Construction Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished majority leader.

Mr. Speaker, I have only one remaining speaker, so I will reserve time until the end.

If I yield the gentleman 10 seconds, will he yield to me briefly?

It's never true that the gentleman cannot say a lot in 1 minute.

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

Let me first second the comments made by the gentleman from California about our departing Members. They have, I believe, all been professionals. They have been an asset to this institution. They've certainly been an asset to the committee, and I appreciate the many courtesies that we have received from all of them throughout the years and wish them all the very best in retirement.

Mr. Speaker, today we have three moving pieces with which we have to deal between now and the closing of the session. The first is the President's unprecedented bailout request or rescue request, however you choose to term it, of $700 billion, which has, I believe, truly astounded the Nation.

Second is the need to try to pass a second stimulus package which tries to react to the loss of jobs in this economy by providing funding for programs that will help create additional jobs and also provide funding for programs that help mitigate the pain to families of the loss of employment opportunities.

And thirdly, and most immediate, we have to pass a continuing resolution to keep the government functioning. It is important that we pass this and let the other body pass it because we can add at least a small sense of stability to the markets that are in turmoil today and I think also in the process give us more time to address the truly radical proposals that have been sent down to us by the White House with respect to that bailout.

I want to congratulate Mr. Murtha and Mr. Young because they both know their bill. They both know their brief. And their staff has provided able support to both of them, and I appreciate the hard work that both of them have done, and I appreciate what they've contributed to this institution over their careers.

I want to say the same thing about the Military Construction Subcommittee, which has been ably led by Mr. Edwards and Mr. Wamp, and certainly the Homeland Security Subcommittee, led so ably by Mr. Price and the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers).

I'm especially proud of what's happened in the Military Construction bill. If you take the last year's budget plus this year's budget, we have had the largest increase in veterans health care in the history of the country, and much of that was adopted over the initial opposition of the President.

Let me also say that I--

Mr. Speaker, could I suspend and ask the gentleman a question. Did the gentleman yield back all of his time?

I see the minority leader on the floor, and I'm sure that he would probably like to say some words.

If I suspended my remarks, would you like to proceed with the minority leader's comments right now if you could take back your time?

Mr. Speaker, let me resume my comments.

What I was trying to say is that the item I'm the most proud of in this package is the fact that this Congress will have provided the largest increase in veterans health care in the history of the Republic, and in addition to that, we have also provided by action taken just a few months ago the largest increase in education benefits for veterans since the beginning of the GI Bill. I think that's truly an historic action, and I am very pleased that this House was willing to do that.

So this bill does contain the three bills that represent the security-related appropriation bills for the coming year.

Having said that, let me make one observation. As I said earlier, I initially did not plan to have the Defense

bill in this package. Much has been made today by some Members about earmarks in the bill. The fact is if the Defense bill hadn't been in this package, those earmarks would not have been in the bill. We put the Defense bill in, in the end, at the request of the minority and at the request of the Secretary of Defense who asked us to do so, and I suspect in the end it will probably, from the standpoint of the Defense Department, prove to be the right choice.

But having said that, I want to talk about why I believe we have not been able to finish the domestic appropriation bills. The President submitted a budget to us at the beginning of the year in which he insisted that we cut some $14 billion in crucial domestic items. Example: He wanted us last year to cut 50 percent out of vocational education funding, and this year he wanted us to eliminate vocational education. He wanted us in the last 2 years to eliminate all student aid programs except Pell Grant and Work-Study. He wanted us to eliminate the program that teaches medical personnel to deal with the specialized needs of children in children's hospitals.

I've never had anybody in my life come up to me and say, ``Obey, why don't you guys in Congress get your act together and cut cancer research.'' And yet, that's what the President and the previous Congress did; they cut almost 1,000 research grants out of the National Institutes of Health.

At a time when we've had a 70 percent increase in the cost of home heating, the President asked us to cut the Low Income Heating Assistance Program, to help the victims of those price increases, by 22 percent. So if we had rolled over and accepted the President's domestic budget, that's what we would have had to do.

And we felt therefore, that since the President had made quite clear that he would veto any domestic appropriation bills that exceeded his budget request, we felt that rather than capitulate and make those cuts, we would simply say, ``All right, Mr. President, for the 4 remaining months that you're in office, we'll be living at your budget level, but we will kick the can down the road so that if we have a President who will negotiate like an adult at the end of the road next year, then we will try to cut some compromises that will preserve some of these high-priority areas.''

Now, the President made a Federal case out of our desire to spend $14 billion on our own people, and then he has presented to the Congress in the last 2 weeks a request that we spend 50 times that much, 50 times that much, on the bailout of Wall Street. And so I say that to put in perspective the President's stubbornness.

The fact is, if he had not taken a ``my-way-or-the-highway'' approach to domestic appropriations, we could have sat down. . . . I told Mr. Nussle many times, I would have been happy to sit down and split the differences right down the middle, compromise like adults are supposed to. But no, the President said, ``My levels or no levels.'' So he gave us no choice unless, of course, we wanted to capitulate.

So, by not finishing these bills, we maintained the possibility of providing more support for medical research, more support for energy research, more support for education, and more help to the 50 million people in this country who have no health insurance, and I make no apology whatsoever for doing that. I think it is the right thing to do and the moral thing to do.

Now, let me explain just a bit about what's in this bill. We, therefore, straight-lined all of the domestic bills until March 6. In addition, we've included a number of other items. As I've indicated, we have essentially doubled the Low Income Heating Assistance Program. We're taking it up to the full authorization level.

We have provided the funds that the gentleman from Michigan just referred to, funds requested to try to enable the auto industry to modernize and retool. We did not give them the $50 billion that they wanted. We have cut it to 25, and we did not change the authorization in the way that the auto industry wanted because we did not want government to be on the hook for 80 percent of the cost of those projects.

We also provided the $5 million the White House wanted so that they can conduct their search of e-mails because of subpoenas that have been laid on them. And we have provided $2 billion in this package so that next February, the agency doesn't have to write every family in America and say, ``Sorry, but the Pell Grants for your son or daughter for the next year are going to have to be at a lower level than they were last year.''

We have also provided $23 billion in disaster funding for Iowa, Texas, and all the other States who have been hit by so many bad storms lately. And I will stipulate that I believe that the Community Development Block Grant portion of that disaster funding is inadequate and will have to be revisited next year.

These are some of the initiatives we've taken. As the gentleman has indicated, we have also in the process, at the insistence of the White House, acquiesced in the White House's desire to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling. That will mean that what happens in the future will be determined by who is elected President. To me, that is what ought to happen in a democracy. When politicians can't agree on something, instead of continuing to try to gut each other and have needless wrestling matches for 6 months at a time, the right thing to do on many occasions is to simply say, ``Okay, we're going to take it to the referees. We're going to take it to the final judges, the American people.''

So that's what we're doing with this package. And it is the American people who will decide whether they're comfortable with the President's deep reductions in health, in education, in science, in low-income heating assistance, or whether they believe that our investments represent a better path for America if we want to see this country grow through the coming years. Basically, that is what we are trying to do with this package.

I appreciate the work of the literally hundreds of Members who have had input into this product. I know I have certainly been grabbed every time I turn around by Members who have this idea or that. I'm sure a third of the House is unhappy because of items that are not in the bill and another third is unhappy because of items that are. But that's the way it goes when you have got 535 people, plus a President in the White House who has from time to time been known to have fairly strong views.

With that, I would simply say that I would urge support for the product. I want to especially thank the staff of the committee on both sides of the aisle. On this side especially led by Rob Nabors, our staff chief. I do not think the average American understands how hard they work. I don't know about last week, but I know this week, many of them have not been to bed in 2 or 3 days. That, I think, is a testimony to their dedication and their willingness to step up and help us do what the country needs.

I hope that we will pass this today. But I hope we will keep in mind that we have been asked to do so much with so little in some of these discretionary appropriation bills; and I hope people will keep that in mind in comparison to the huge size of the bailout that the President is asking us to provide for Wall Street.

I make no apology for making one last stand to try to preserve our ability to invest $14 billion in our people here at home at the same time that we're being asked to provide 50 times that much to bail out Wall Street for its past mistakes.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today with serious reservations about the process, or rather the lack of process, governing the development of this year's end spending bill.

This package is made up of several components. We have just heard from the Defense Chairman. It also includes the Homeland Security bill and the Military Construction-VA spending bills, all of these together total some $603 billion; a continuing resolution for nine spending bills funded at fiscal year 2008 levels; emergency spending totaling something in the neighborhood of $23 billion; and other provisions costing even billions more.

If you are like me, you have a great many questions about what is actually included in this package. The simple truth is this: Very few people have any idea what is in it. During this time of economic uncertainty, our constituents are demanding oversight, transparency and accountability from Congress.

Last Friday, I began writing a letter to the three leaders writing this legislation. My message was simple: Given the size and scope of this spending bill, it is paramount that House Members and Senators of both parties be active participants in crafting this bill. I felt then, and I feel now, that it is essential that chairmen and ranking members of our Appropriations subcommittees be at the table during substantive negotiations.

I didn't send the letter, Mr. Speaker, because on Saturday morning I was told that the key elements of the spending bill were already in place and that there would be no Member or Senator participation. In other words, no full Appropriations Committee consideration, no meetings involving the key chairmen and ranking members, and no formal House-Senate conference deliberations.

I am convinced that the completion of this legislation without the full participation of Members and Senators will result in lasting long- term damage to not just the Appropriations Committee, but also to the institution, the House of Representatives that I love. It also leads the House and Senate into an unprecedented dangerous territory by handing the sole decision-making authority on national spending practices to a handful of elected leaders and a whole lot of unelected staff members.

It is not as if these leaders were negotiating 12 individual spending bills that had passed the House and the Senate. This year, the House has passed one funding bill. The Senate has not passed any. Over the last 2 years, out of the 24 regular order bills, the Appropriations Committee in the House has produced exactly one regular order conference report.

The challenge of developing and passing a Federal budget requires full active participation of Members and Senators in the full Appropriations Committee, on the floor of the House and Senate, and through an open House-Senate conference committee.

By the way, I might mention it was suggested on the floor earlier today that the chairman of our committee indicated the reason we haven't had a full, open committee hearing regarding this process was because Members tend to stand up and pontificate in open hearings.

Well, let me suggest that may very well be the case, and I wouldn't suggest that our chairman was ever known for pontificating, but, in the meantime, this lack of Member involvement is absolutely unacceptable. All year long, the majority leadership has chosen to ignore regular order. The assumption has been that Barack Obama would be elected President in November, and that he would support higher levels of spending all across the board.

But join me in this question: What happens if John McCain gets elected President? And what if that President draws an even tougher line than President Bush? What does that mean? Does that mean, Mr. Chairman, that we won't have Appropriations Committee meetings or hearings or bills for another 4 years? It is an interesting question.

When I first came to Congress, legislation was drafted by Members with jurisdiction over the issues of the day. Members of both parties had every opportunity to participate in the debate by offering amendments.

Today, whether you are Republican or a Democrat, you no longer have any opportunity to participate, no opportunity to offer amendments, no opportunity to settle meaningful differences in the committee and on the House floor or in the conference between the House and the Senate.

My colleagues, this is no way to govern. We ought to work together, produce spending bills through a legitimate committee process and return to a full and open debate in committee and on the House floor.

Let me say that I did have a conversation just yesterday, indeed a cursory conversation, with my chairman, Mr. Obey, about what's in this bill. I appreciated that opportunity to chat for a few minutes about this horrendous process as well as this bill.

Let me say that the issue that seemed to have paralyzed the process this year, and caused the committee to essentially close down, involves the majority's unwillingness to address the high price of oil and gas. That issue is finally, at least in part, addressed with this bill. Had we dealt with the OCS moratorium in June, the committee probably would have completed all of its bills, but we chose not to let that process go forward.

It is now late September, and, finally, the voices of millions of Americans, financially drained from paying $4 a gallon for gasoline, they are finally being heard. Section 152 of the CR represents a gigantic step in the right direction relative to energy independence. We actually suspend the moratorium on drilling in the United States.

Now, frankly, depending on who is elected as President, we may have to worry about that next year. I mean, a President could literally be involved in reestablishing that moratorium and thereby hampering America one more time.

In closing, I don't believe we should shut down our government. We must support funding for our troops, our veterans, and protect our homeland. Each of the 535 House Members and Senators should have played a role in shaping this bill.

It is time that we insist upon a return to regular order. It's certainly time that we get back to that which the Speaker promised, an open and transparent process with everybody's involvement, Members, but also the public as well.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Florida, who is the former chairman of the full committee as well as the Defense subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 5 minutes to my colleague, Hal Rogers, the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the ranking member of the committee dealing with military construction and veterans benefits, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Wamp).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon), Dr. Weldon, who's probably going to be speaking for the last time on an appropriations bill since he's chosen to retire at the end of this season. Dr. Weldon.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the ranking member of the Transportation Committee, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg).

Mr. Speaker, if there's been a Member of the House who has told all of us the urgent need for being able to tap into our resources of oil and gas, it's been the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Peterson). I yield him 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton).

Mr. Speaker, I do have one additional speaker. He doesn't happen to be here, but if the Members would bear with me, I would like to take just a moment on my time.

For just a moment I would like to suggest that because this is likely the last time we will be addressing Appropriations Committee business this year, I want to commend eight of our colleagues who serve on our committee who are leaving Congress at the end of this year to pursue new challenges and new opportunities. They are Bud Cramer, Tom Udall, Ralph Regula, Jim Walsh, Dave Hobson, John Peterson, Ray LaHood and Dave Weldon.

All told, with these retirements, the House is losing over 100 years of cumulative Appropriations Committee experience. The skill and knowledge that they bring to the committee each day will be sorely missed and not easily replaced.

Let me take a moment in a long-standing tradition of our committee in the House to thank each of our retiring colleagues for their friendship, their service, and their fine bipartisan work. Let's stand together, Republicans and Democrats, to show our appreciation and say thank you to our friends and colleagues.

If you have no additional speakers yourself, then with that I will yield back the balance of my time.

Yes, I did.

The gentleman is very kind.

The chairman is most sensitive and generous. Thank you for that.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to reclaim 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the Republican leader of the House, John Boehner of Ohio.

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.

I thank the distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee for yielding.

I rise obviously in very strong support of this continuing resolution and the three full bills that are attached to it and the other nine of course that will be funded at last year's level with certain exceptions that are necessary to act responsibly. Obviously, passing a CR is never an ideal step.

I want to say that as someone who served on the Appropriations Committee for 23 years, actually 25 years, I guess, I hold that committee in very high regard. And I am pleased that I am following the Representative from Kentucky, the ranking member of this committee, as he spoke not only about the substance of the bill that he has been most intimately involved in, but as well of the respect that he and the chairman have for one another and the ability they have to work together. I think it has been one of the hallmarks of the Appropriations Committee that has been possible.

Regrettably, however, very frankly from my perspective, forces outside of the context of the Appropriations Committee, for whatever reasons, whether they are from the administration or from each of our caucuses, has undermined that ability of the committee to work the way it has worked and wants to work.

No one in this body is more attuned to the needs of this body, loves this institution more, is more a student of this institution, and very frankly is a better legislator than the chairman of this committee, my friend, David Obey. I want to congratulate him for the extraordinary patience, and he is not known as a patient man, which makes his patience even more extraordinary, that he has been working on a bill that has been so frustrating for him, as well as the committee and the Congress.

The CR does contain a number of important funding provisions: an increase

in the Home Energy Assistance Program which the chairman has been involved in all of his congressional career, which spans some 3\1/2\, almost 4 decades. It helps families heat their houses during a winter of high fuel costs.

It includes funding for Pell Grants to ensure that college aid is not cut in the middle of the school year so that our students will have access to college; and nutrition funding for women and children struggling with the economic downturn and food prices that confront them.

Nevertheless, we are debating, frankly, a CR today because we did not complete the appropriations process. I think that is regrettable. I hope we do not repeat that next year. I see Mr. Wamp shaking his head as a ranking member. I think everybody on the Appropriations Committee wants to make sure that we can complete our process next year. And I think we can.

Very frankly, we were confronted, the chairman was confronted with an administration who wanted to limit funding, frankly, far below what was possible in order to meet the responsibilities that we have to this Nation and to our people.

Today's outcome was a direct result, in my opinion, of the White House's unwillingness to come to the table to discuss funding levels for priorities, to determine what those priorities are, whether they be the National Institutes of Health, whether they be vocational education programs, whether they be protecting our environment; or, very frankly, whether they be overseeing in a regulatory way the financial community, the failure of which has led us to a very critical time in our country's history.

There were 20 programs eliminated. Congress did not agree with all of those. The administration would have slashed funds for crumbling infrastructure, law enforcement, for energy research. Those are items which could have been debated and should have been debated and brought to this floor, but because there was no flexibility, that did not occur.

Simply saying, We'll adopt your priorities, Mr. President, is inconsistent with article I of the Constitution which gives to the 435 of us that have been elected by the people of this country to come and to set priorities for our country. We do so in a representative way. The President, very frankly, is elected to make a determination on our product, not to tell us what our product is, but to make a judgment once our product is passed whether or not he will agree. If he does not agree, he vetoes that bill and then we have a determination to make by two-thirds vote that we disagree with his judgment. That is the way that the process should work, not be told that your product is going to be unacceptable unless it is as I tell you.

With his veto threat hovering over the entire appropriations process, stifling debate and compromises, that process simply could not continue.

I want to again congratulate Mr. Obey. If we do not pass this CR, of course, the government runs out of funding authority on the 30th of this month. October 1 is the beginning of our fiscal year. We really don't have an alternative. The only responsible vote, in my opinion, is to pass this bill.

I want to congratulate Mr. Murtha and Mr. Lewis and Mr. Young. I want to thank Mr. Young for the extraordinary leadership he brings to this House. Mr. Young is not of my party, but he is, I think, one of those who has the highest character and care for the people of America. His willingness to work together has been, I think, in large part responsible for us getting a defense product with Mr. Murtha that this House will overwhelmingly support, in my opinion.

I want to thank Mr. Lewis as well for helping to bring this bill to the floor. I want to congratulate those with the Homeland Security and the Military Construction and VA parts of this bill.

They are bills which have been considered, and I think are going to be overwhelmingly supported.

I would urge all of my colleagues, meet our responsibilities, fund our government, come back here in an atmosphere in which open debate as to the priorities of our country is welcomed by all sides, and have a full appropriation process next year.

In closing, let me again congratulate and thank the gentleman from Wisconsin for his leadership, without which we would not have been able to get this bill as far as it has gotten to its passage and to fund our government in the coming months.

Mr. Speaker, Chairman Ike Skelton and the Armed Services Committee have worked tirelessly to put this bill together, and I want to begin by recognizing that hard work. Chairman Skelton is among this House's most dedicated advocates for our men and women in uniform. And he and his committee have put together a good authorization bill that deserves our support.

The bill authorizes a total of $601.4 billion, including $531.4B in budget authority for the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy's national security programs. It also includes significant commitments to new shipbuilding, advanced aircraft, and efforts to protect our troops in the field from improvised explosive devices.

This bill goes a long way to rebuild our military, which is still battered from years of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. It provides for an increase of 7,000 active-duty Army personnel, 5,000 more Marine Corps personnel, and 1,023 more Navy sailors. It dedicates significant amounts for the reset of worn-down armed forces equipment: $8.6 billion for Army and $1.8 billion for Marine Corps. $800 million is also authorized for the Reserve and National Guard, which have borne a heavy share of the fighting.

But just as importantly, this bill looks out for the needs of our troops at a time when our country has asked so much from them. They deserve all the support we have to give. That's why this bill gives them a much-needed raise of 3.9%, more than the President's request, blocks increases in their healthcare payments, and authorizes $3.2 billion to expand quality family housing.

In sum, this is a bill that strikes a sound balance between the needs of our national defense and the needs of our troops and their families. The road back to full military readiness will be long and hard--but this bill is a big step in the right direction. I urge my colleagues to support this vital piece of legislation--vital for our troops and vital for our Nation's security.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the package we are considering today includes the fiscal year 2009 funding for the Department of Homeland Security.

The Homeland Security provisions are the product of months of information-gathering and analysis by both the House and Senate subcommittees, and they reflect a careful matching of dollars to priorities. Our subcommittee held 15 hearings featuring testimony from department officials, watch-dog agencies and outside experts, and what we are voting on today is well informed by what we learned from those hearings. As always, we are indebted to our dedicated professional staff and the staff from our personal offices who have worked with them.

I want to thank our distinguished ranking member, Mr. Rogers, for his advice and partnership in helping make this a better bill. He and his staff worked cooperatively with us during the bill-writing process and during our negotiations with the Senate, and they provided many constructive suggestions and additions. I also want to recognize Mr. Rogers' substantial and lasting contribution as the first chairman of this subcommittee, especially since this is likely to be his last year as our ranking member.

The discretionary total in the bill is $39.98 billion, $2.31 billion or 6 percent above the comparable fiscal year 2008 amount--that includes funding with an emergency designation--and $2.37 billion above the administration's requested funding level.

Our primary objective in this bill was to correct known funding deficiencies,

which were substantial. Prime among these was the President's proposal to cut first responder, transit, and port grant programs by $2 billion, or 49 percent. This bill restores funding for these grants.

A second deficiency in the President's budget was the proposed repeal of law enforcement officer benefits for CBP officers. The bill provides the full $200 million necessary to pay for these benefits in fiscal year 2009.

The last major deficiency in the President's budget was a proposed $140 million cut for explosive detection equipment at airports. This cut was based on assumed revenue from a new passenger surcharge that has not been enacted. The bill restores the $140 million to provide level funding at $544 million for this program.

The bill also reduces funding that was not fully justified, or for which the budget justification overestimated the need, and it uses the savings to provide increases above the President's request for critical priorities. This includes $200 million for the Emergency Food and Shelter Program, $100 million more than the President requested and $47 million more than was provided in fiscal year 2008. Such an increase is warranted by the rising number of Americans who are relying on food banks and other community support organizations to meet their basic needs.

The bill includes $4.99 billion for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, $241 million above the request, and it targets $1 billion for identifying and deporting dangerous criminal aliens. The President proposed no additional dedicated funds for this activity, which should be ICE's top priority.

The bill fully funds the request for border infrastructure and technology, while continuing a requirement that the Department consult with local communities on the character and placement of such infrastructure. This does not give border communities a veto over departmental decisions about fencing or other infrastructure, but it does give them a right to be heard.

As in past years, the bill requires the Department to provide a plan for how it will allocate its appropriation for border infrastructure and technology, and it withholds a portion of the appropriation until that plan is reviewed by GAO and approved by the committee.

The bill, including funding provided through the disaster relief package, includes $9.3 billion for the Disaster Relief Fund, ensuring that FEMA can continue its work helping communities recover from recent disasters.

The bill imposes requirements on the Homeland Security Department to manage its programs efficiently and robustly, and to ensure that programs comply with all laws before they begin operations. The bill withholds a total of $1.4 billion to ensure that this planning takes place before taxpayer dollars are spent. Programs for which funding is conditioned include the Secure Border Initiative, Deepwater, and Cyber Security.

Also, I want to correct some comments made on this floor earlier about a sensitive DHS program. The bill does not provide funding for DHS's National Applications Office to use surveillance satellites for Homeland Security or law enforcement purposes. The bill does allow for the Department to use satellites for scientific and emergency purposes--for example, assessing damage from earthquakes or hurricanes. That's being done today. But provisions in this bill bar the Department from using these assets to pay for any other purpose until the Department explains how it will use them, protecting our citizens' rights and liberties, until the GAO reviews that explanation, and until our committee approves the expenditure of funds.

Mr. Speaker, this Homeland Security portion of the bill represents the right balance of investments and cost savings to ensure that we continue to make our homeland more secure, and it makes clear that the Federal Government will continue to be a faithful partner with State and local governments in that endeavor.

I urge colleagues to support this bill.