A resolution congratulating Nicolas Sarkozy on his election to the presidency of France and welcoming President Sarkozy on the occasion of his appearance before a Joint Meeting of Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I raise a point of order against H. Res. 794 under

section 2 of H. Res. 491, because the resolution contains a waiver of all points of order against the conference report and its consideration.

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

H. Res. 491 says that it shall not be in order to consider a conference report unless the joint explanatory statement includes a list of congressional earmarks that were air-dropped into it or that were not committed to the conference committee by either Chamber.

Mr. Speaker, it's unfortunate that, on the first general appropriations bill since the adoption of H. Res. 491 and its improvements to the earmarks rules, that the majority has reported a rule that waives all points of order.

I object to using veterans spending to grease the skids for a pork- laden Labor-HHS spending bill. A cursory look through the more than 150 pages of earmarks in the conference report reveals such earmarks as $320,000 for the American Jazz Museum in Kansas City, Missouri; $130,000 for the First Ladies Museum in Canton, Ohio; $85,000 for the Los Angeles Craft and Folk Art Museum in Los Angeles, California.

But beyond taking exception to the bill, I raise this point of order as the only means available to highlight the alarming trend toward opaqueness rather than transparency. Rather than allow for a full debate on whether this conference report complies with the earmark rule, this rule actually prevents it.

Mr. Speaker, I have a little experience challenging earmarks on the floor. It's not been a pleasant experience at times. We don't know much of what are in these bills that get to the conference. And then when you have a conference report that comes with earmarks air-dropped into it after that, and you only get that bill just a few hours before you vote on it, then I think it behooves us to slow down a bit and say what are we doing here.

I should note that when I challenged earmarks in the House version of the bill, on one occasion we had an earmark withdrawn before the earmark amendment could be offered because there was a problem with the earmark.

In other cases we had the Committee on Appropriations go to the Rules Committee and actually withdraw some of the amendments before they could be challenged. So it is obvious that these earmarks have not been vetted through the process very well, and those are the earmarks that actually went through the House process.

We have here at least nine, nine that are identified, nine earmarks that were air-dropped that were not either part of the House or the Senate version. Mr. Speaker, this just is not a good practice.

One example of the air-dropped earmarks that we just found out about just hours ago, $1 million for the Thomas Daschle Center for Public Service and Representative Democracy. Now, if we are air-dropping amendments like that into this bill, what else is in the bill? We really haven't had time to go through it. Outside groups are trying to go through this bill and simply haven't had the time. And you are going to have problems; we are going to be learning for weeks or months what's in this bill unless we slow down a bit here.

With that, Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I think it begs the question, if there was total transparency here, why did we waive all points of order against this rule? I would have liked to have challenged the conference report itself, but I couldn't because the Rules Committee had decided to waive all points of order. Now, you have to ask why. If everything is transparent and everything is known, why did we waive all points of order? Why am I forced to bring a point of order against the rule itself rather than the conference report?

And I would submit that I would like to believe that it is a transparency, but when you have air-dropped earmarks dropped at the last minute, again, if we are working so hard for America's hardworking taxpayers, as was just said, then why are we air-dropping an earmark for $1 million for the Thomas Daschle Center for Public Service? Naming a center after a former Member, why is that so urgent that we have to break all the rules that we have laid out and sneak it into a bill at the last minute, with less than 24 hours, in fact, less than 12 hours to actually review it? That's not proper vetting.

I should mention that there have been statements made by the majority, and I have liked what I have heard about what we are going to do this year in terms of earmarks transparency.

The Speaker of the House said back in June that Members need to have time to read through these reports and that every earmark should have to be defended.

These nine air-dropped earmarks into this bill today don't have to be defended. They are untouchable. We can't even go at them. We can't offer an amendment to strike them out because they are air-dropped into a conference report where you have no ability to strike them.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).

Madam Speaker, I am not here to defend the Republican record on earmarks. It's abysmal, frankly. I think that's one of the main reasons we are here squarely in the minority today.

But I took great heart, as did many of us, at the promises that were made with the new Congress, that we would have real transparency, real accountability. And, unfortunately, what we are seeing today is a move away from that.

Let me read a statement that I mentioned. In June of this year, the Speaker of the House, in a press conference, said, ``Before Members vote on a bill, there should be an appropriate time for people to be able to read it, that it should be a matter of public record. And if there's an earmark that can stand the scrutiny, then that transparency will give the opportunity for it to be there.''

When you have nine, at least, that we have been able to find, and when the gentleman says that they are all marked with an asterisk, how do we know? We have 150 pages of earmarks that we were given just this morning. We only got the hard copy of this this morning. We simply don't know. So it behooves us to move a little slower here.

If we really believe in transparency, if we really believe that these earmarks need to be there, then let's have a rule that actually allows for a point of order to be lodged against the conference report, not just against the rule.

Again, I have to say if there was complete transparency here and we didn't have anything to worry about, I think we would have had a rule that did not waive points of order against the bill. And that's why we are here today.

We need to do far better. This is a wonderful institution. There are wonderful people here. It has a great history. We need to do better by it. And I would submit that this legislation before us today with 150 pages of earmarks and nine air-dropped earmarks at the last minute does not do this institution the good that it deserves.

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

Madam 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, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 794 and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

I would have the gentleman know that the earmarks that he refers to are clearly delineated in this conference report.

This point of order is about whether or not to consider this rule and ultimately the funding of vital education, health, and veterans programs. In fact, I would say that it is simply an effort to try to kill this conference report and, in my view, on a faulty premise at that.

Every single earmark in this conference report has been properly disclosed in conformance with House rules. This parliamentary ruse won't work because these programs are too important to the health and vitality of the Nation.

With this conference we keep our commitment to our veterans with the largest single increase in the 77-year history of the Department of Veterans Affairs. It also invests in critical domestic priorities in the Labor, Health, and Education bill with major investments in K-12 education, college affordability, increasing access to quality health care, medical research, worker protection, and job training programs. Voting ``no'' on this question of consideration will prevent consideration of this package, which has strong House and Senate bipartisan support.

Furthermore, the parliamentary maneuver that my good friend chooses to use today to stop this legislation is completely transparent. Just so that we keep the record straight, Madam Speaker, the changes proposed in the Boehner discharge petition that our Republican counterparts seem so eager to have adopted would not cover any measure not now covered by our earmark rule, clause 9 of rule XXI. As a matter of fact, Mr. Boehner's resolution does not even include the projects that are covered by House Resolution 491, which was introduced by our majority leader, Representative Hoyer, and is now in effect.

So despite whatever roadblock the other side tries to use to stop this bill, we will stand up for America's hardworking families and America's veterans. We must consider this rule and we must pass this conference report today.

Madam Speaker, I have the right to close, but in the end I am just going to urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' to consider the rule.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, the spirit and the letter of the law has been complied with in this matter. I will just reference one aspect of compliance with clause 9 of rule XXI and with the rules in the Senate. This is what it says:

``The following list is also submitted in compliance with House Resolution 491, which requires a listing of congressional earmarks in the conference report or joint statement of managers that were not committed to the committee of conference by either house, not in a report on a bill committed to conference, and not in a Senate committee report on a companion measure. Such earmarks are marked with an `X' in the list below.''

If that ain't transparency, I don't know what is. All of them have the ``X'' mark, the asterisk, and are clearly following the spirit of the law.

When the Republicans were in charge, they had 14,000 earmarks, and nobody knew where they were, where they came from, when they came. And now we have them in this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 379) congratulating Nicolas Sarkozy on his election to the presidency of France, as amended.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution and yield myself such time as I may consume.

I would first like to commend our distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe), for introducing this important resolution that congratulates Mr. Sarkozy on being elected the next President of France.

Over two centuries ago, the people of France assisted the people of the United States in their pursuit of independence during the American Revolution. Since then, the U.S. and France have shared an extensive and mutually beneficial relationship. Today, the United States and France are major economic partners, with nearly $1 billion in trade taking place between the two countries each and every day.

France is the United States' ninth largest partner for trade in goods and sixth largest partner for trade and services. The United States and France are scientific and technical partners as well. Research institutions and private companies in both countries participate in extensive scientific collaboration on a wide range of issues, including computer development, biotechnology, and space exploration.

This spirit of cooperation also typifies the cultural exchange that takes place between American and French academic institutions, museums, and theatres. In light of our continued friendship between the people of the United States and France, we are honored that President Sarkozy will be appearing before a joint session of Congress this week on November 7, 2007.

I urge my colleagues to support this resolution, which congratulates Mr. Nicholas Sarkozy on his election to the presidency of France and welcomes President Sarkozy to Washington.

I might also add that it is especially nice that the leader of France has demonstrated time and time again that he has warm feelings towards the United States of America and is, indeed, a pro-American leader of France. The relations between the United States and France in the past several years has been a little frosty, and it's nice to see that those frosty relations have thawed. It's nice to see a leader of France who understands and wants to work with the United States and understands that we have a very close, long-standing relationship between our people.

I welcome President Sarkozy. I look forward to hearing him when he speaks before a joint session of the House and Congress later on this week. I think that this resolution is a fitting tribute to him, and I believe that the United States and France, under his leadership, will enjoy warm ties.

If I can think a bit about my French from grammar school, I could say, Vive la France.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would continue to reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to congratulate President Nicolas Sarkozy on his election to the presidency of France, and also welcome him to Washington, DC, as he addresses a joint meeting of this Congress on Wednesday of this week. I look forward to hearing his remarks in this Chamber.

This past May, Mr. Speaker, Nicolas Sarkozy became the 23rd President of France. His election has ushered in a new and welcomed era in positive relations between France and the United States.

The history of friendship between these two countries, the United States and France, runs deep and it runs wide. Since the American Revolution, we have shared a deep commitment to freedom and independence; both of our countries have. Perhaps one of the best early demonstrations of France's commitment to our shared heritage of freedom is the example of General Marquis de Lafayette--General Lafayette, a young Frenchman who believed so passionately in the cause of freedom and liberty for all individuals that he left his homeland of France and came to join the American colonies in their fight for independence against Great Britain.

It was General Lafayette who persuaded the French to help Americans in their fight for freedom and independence from Great Britain. He served courageously under the command of General George Washington. George Washington's and Lafayette's portraits both hang in this hall tonight.

General Lafayette is the only non-American portrait in the entire Capitol building, and is the only other portrait besides General Washington in this House Chamber. There is a reason for that; both of them, General Washington and his friend Lafayette, were committed to liberty for all.

The American people will always be grateful to the commitment of General Lafayette and the people of France throughout our pursuit for freedom and democracy through the American Revolution. And the American Revolution was successful because of their help.

In the same way, Mr. Speaker, we are hopeful that the election of President Sarkozy will renew the ties of friendship that bind our two countries and our long heritage together.

On the eve of the election, President Sarkozy said that ``American friends can rely on France's friendship. France will always be next to them when they need us.'' We are hopeful, Mr. Speaker, that in the midst of many international crises, most notably, the threat of nuclear Iran and the global war on terrorism, that France will remain an ally committed to world peace and democracy for all and continue to pursue freedom for all peoples throughout the world.

I am pleased to be the sponsor of legislation H. Res. 379, which honors President Sarkozy and his appearance before Congress. I look forward to his continued friendship and an alliance between not only him and the United States, but the people of France and the United States.

And that's just the way it is.

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

The great nation of France and the United States of America have a shared heritage of commitment to freedom and independence. From time to time, of course, we have made different choices or followed different paths in our commitment to the rule of law, human rights and democracy, but we in the United States are always grateful to have France's collaboration in advancing important foreign policy and security objectives. The newly elected President of France, Mr. Nicholas Sarkozy, is this week paying an official visit to Washington and will address a joint meeting of this Congress during his visit.

His visit prompts us to recall some of the expressions of support Mr. Sarkozy has offered to our country and some of the concrete steps he has, indeed, taken to join with the United States in addressing key issues of our day.

On the eve of the fifth anniversary of the September 11 attacks, then-French Interior Minister Nicholas Sarkozy traveled to New York City to demonstrate solidarity with the American people on that occasion. During his visit, Mr. Sarkozy paid tribute to New York City's Police and Fire Departments as part of the commemoration of the anniversary and noted as part of his remarks the following: ``One thing is sure in the history of our two peoples, each time we faced a challenge, France was able to count on the United States of America.''

He then presented to the New York Fire Department the French Medal of Honor, the very first time that the medal, the highest award for French firefighters, has been awarded to foreigners. By taking such actions, as both Minister of the Interior and now as the President of France, Mr. Sarkozy has won the appreciation of the American people.

I note that his attitude regarding the necessity of preventing Iran from achieving its nuclear ambitions, his expressed support for the nation of Israel and his praise for the United States as a land of opportunity are very much appreciated as well.

Mr. Speaker, we are glad to have France as an ally, and we hope to deepen the friendship and partnership that the United States and France have enjoyed so many times in the history of our two countries. As the cochair of the Congressional French Caucus, I believe that the resolution before us today helps send a message of continued friendship with the people of France while congratulating President Sarkozy on his election and welcoming him to the United States.

I ask all of my colleagues to join in supporting this very timely resolution.

I have one additional speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) as much time as he may consume.

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

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