Recognizing the 20th anniversary of the remarkable events leading to the end of the Cold War and the creation of a Europe, whole, free, and at peace.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 903 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous materials into the Record.

I yield for a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey).

(Mrs. LOWEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield for a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).

(Mrs. MALONEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson).

(Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) for a unanimous consent request.

(Ms. LEE of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick) for a unanimous consent request.

(Ms. KILPATRICK of Michigan asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield for a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Zoe Lofgren).

(Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield for a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton).

(Ms. SUTTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield for a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis).

(Mrs. DAVIS of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

I object.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) for a unanimous consent request.

I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Hirono) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield for a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard).

(Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, regular order, please.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlelady from California (Mrs. Capps) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlelady from California (Mrs. Napolitano) for a unanimous consent request.

(Mrs. NAPOLITANO asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlelady from Ohio (Ms. Kilroy) for a unanimous consent request.

Regular order, please.

Regular order.

Mr. Speaker, I have already yielded to the gentlelady from Ohio (Ms. Kilroy).

Mr. Speaker, I would inquire of Ms. Kilroy, have you had time to raise your objection?

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlelady from the Virgin Islands for a unanimous consent request.

I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin) for a unanimous consent request.

I am calling for regular order. I would like to really get on with this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Eshoo) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlelady from Massachusetts (Ms. Tsongas) for a unanimous consent request.

I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier) for a unanimous consent request.

(Ms. SPEIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Loretta Sanchez) for a unanimous consent request.

(Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Richardson) for a unanimous-consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz) for a unanimous consent request.

(Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Edwards) for a unanimous consent request.

(Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter) for a unanimous-consent request.

(Ms. SHEA-PORTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson) for a unanimous-consent request.

(Ms. WATSON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to my fellow New Yorker (Ms. Velazquez) for a unanimous-consent request.

(Ms. VELAZQUEZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Halvorson) for a unanimous-consent request.

(Mrs. HALVORSON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the Delegate from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) for a unanimous-consent request.

(Ms. NORTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown) for a unanimous-consent request.

(Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin, Ms. Gwen Moore, for a unanimous consent request.

(Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, because of the kind indulgence of our friends on the other side, we have no further speakers, but we would like to sit quietly and listen to the other side.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I rise in support of House Resolution 892 commemorating the extraordinary events in 1989 which led to the end of the Soviet regime's domination over Eastern Europe and those people it held captive within its borders.

As this resolution points out, 1989 was an important and pivotal year for

freedom in Europe. In the course of only 365 days, walls fell, free elections were held, dictators were washed away, and people who had long yearned for freedom crossed barriers and walked into liberty. The trade union Solidarity won its historic election victory leading to the first noncommunist government in Poland since 1945.

Two million people living in the Baltic States linked hands to form a human chain almost 400 miles long in a dramatic, peaceful protest against Soviet rule.

In response to protests that had grown to include over a million people, East Germany opened the border with West Berlin for ``private trips abroad''; then thousands of East Germans flooded across the border and the Berlin Wall fell.

The ``Velvet Resolution'' protests in Czechoslovakia led to a free election of a new democratic government.

Romanian security forces brutally murdered brave Romanians who were protesting the arrest of a local priest, but subsequent mass protests overthrew the communist regime there.

Mr. Speaker, and while I do support this resolution, it might have been an even more important statement by this House if it had clarified more specifically the great importance that membership in the NATO alliance now holds for these countries formerly trapped behind the Iron Curtain.

While this measure indeed reaffirms our commitment to article 5 of the alliance, I would like to point out some disturbing recent incidents involving some of our allies in Eastern Europe which would seem to call for an even stronger statement of the strength and commitment of our alliance.

In April of 2007, the Russian Foreign Minister threatened serious consequences after the Estonian Government moved the site of a Soviet war memorial in Tallinn. Subsequently, Estonian Internet and technological information systems were subjected to large-scale, systematic cyberattacks suspected to have originated in Russia.

Furthermore, Russian officials recently threatened undefined aggressive actions against Poland and the Czech Republic if those states agreed to the deployment by their NATO ally, the United States, of strategic missile defense components on their territory.

In August of 2008, a Russian general stated, ``By hosting (missile defense components on its territory), Poland is making itself a target. This is 100 percent certain. It becomes a target for attack. Such targets are destroyed as a first priority.''

Recent efforts undertaken by Russia and its state-controlled energy companies to monopolize control over energy supplies to European states have raised concerns over future Russian intentions regarding influence over political processes in those states. Again, this measure would have been a good opportunity to include specific references to those incidents.

The kinds of statements and actions emanating from the Russian Government are extremely serious and they must be viewed with the utmost concern for the sake of security of the countries of Eastern Europe that did work so hard to gain the freedom they finally achieved in 1989, the subject of this resolution.

Overlooking such statements and actions, the measure before us today forgoes the opportunity to send a truly clear and powerful message that we will not ignore statements and actions of that nature aimed at our allies, that their hard-won freedom and security do matter to us, and that we will stand with them against such intimidation.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would like to note today's news report concerning comments just made by the Russian Foreign Minister. These statements can only be interpreted as a subtle warning to our Polish ally against allowing any U.S. troops--its NATO ally--being deployed on sovereign Polish territory.

When told that the Polish Foreign Minister had stated that the United States should deploy troops in Central Europe, the Russian Foreign Minister replied, ``I'm astounded, because he and I discussed in tiny detail the objectives that Russia pursues with its initiative on a new treaty on European security.''

With such comments in mind, let us take note of the serious challenges that our allies in Eastern Europe continue to face today and send a strong message of support against any attempts to threaten or intimidate them.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 6 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), who is the ranking member on the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the my good friend, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry), a member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

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

Mr. Speaker, just to close on our side, I thank my good friend, the esteemed chairman of our Foreign Affairs Committee, Mr. Berman, for introducing this resolution.

As important as it is to pass feel-good resolutions, I think that this resolution would have been strengthened if we would have talked about the difficult realities that we are confronting now with Russia and other states that are threatening the stability and the democracy and the integrity of those countries who fought long and hard for their independence, for their freedom, and for their democracy.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution.

I want to talk about the cold war that has been created in the House of Representatives over this health care bill. This is my 11th year here, and I have never seen this House so divided and vitriolic. It is intense around here, and it doesn't have to be this way. We have heard speech after speech from my friends on the other side of the aisle saying that we, because we oppose government involvement in our health care and a $1.2 trillion price tag, that somehow we want people to die, we don't want there to be or somehow we support the preexisting exclusion in contracts or caps or insurance dumping.

Frankly, when you get past that level of vitriolic leadership- supported rhetoric, what you find out is that we actually agree on a lot between the two sides. We just haven't been able to actually discuss a real bill between us because the Republicans have been shut out. We are angry about that. I think that is the root or part of the problem with this health care bill, is that we have not been involved in its shaping at all.

For example, the bill that I supported or drafted and is up in Rules Committee and may be heard at 1, 2 or 3 in the morning, I guess, specifically forbids the use of a preexisting clause in a contract, that eliminates the caps that have been put on, either yearly or lifetime, that prevents the dumping. These are the type of things that we tend to all agree on, but we can't work together to get those done that have been identified as part of the problem.

Another part of the problem that I think we all agree on is the high price of the policies in health care in general prevents many people from being able to access or purchase health insurance. Therefore, not being able to access as well as many others the health care system. But there are ways to deal with that as well.

The GOP alternative, and the one I put in, allows people to be packaged together in large groups. We attack the underlying costs of health care, and we make it more affordable and policies available to a lot more people by doing that. Mine is a replication, an exact identical twin of what we have as Federal employees and Members of Congress. And that is 9 million people.

I agree with the insurance exchange idea where you can put maybe 15 million people that are uninsured, don't have access to one large group and let the private sector compete for them. This has been found by most economists to really dramatically reduce the costs by buying in bulk in the competition, and those two principles are embraced in the alternatives.

But I want to break down a little bit where we start separating, because really the real problems between the philosophical basis for our bill boils down to the public option. Theirs has a public option where it involves the government in health care. It sets up, and if you read the bill and understand how it works, you see where we will have a single-payer, totally-run-by-the-government health care system within 10 years. I oppose that. I ran on individual liberties, not growing government. That is where we are going to hopefully have the debate tomorrow, instead of the rhetoric that we have heard to date.

This is not only on the principles of big government versus limited government, individuals and patient rights versus big government and centralized leadership over health care, but it is also going to be a debate about $1.2 trillion or more. And even some of this, there is additional costs that are even hidden. Let me just give you one before I yield back my time.

In order to help insure the lower-income people right above the poverty mark, this bill tomorrow moves Medicaid from 100 percent of poverty as the eligibility cutoff to 150 percent. Why is that? Why do I say that is a trick? Well, it is good that they get uninsured, but ours would allow them access and probably a little bit of support to be able to help them. What this does then is shifts those costs to the State. Because Medicaid, most of the dollars for Medicaid people are borne by the State. So the price tag for this bill is actually higher.

One of the things that we are going to hear is, yes, they soak the rich, which involves a lot of small businesses, but the middle-income people are the ones that are going to get hit when they put these burdens on the States. When the States, like Nebraska, have to come up with tens of millions of more dollars at a time when we are in a special session trying to figure out how to balance that budget, the reality is they are going to have to raise taxes, and that is sales taxes and property taxes. So this bill trickles down to the local levels by forcing the States to have to expand their Medicaid coverage, hiding the costs, the true costs of this bill, but also is going to increase the local taxes. I think that is unfair and I think the American public needs to know about some of these little nuances or even tricks, as I would call them.

So I stand up in opposition to the health care bill; and when hopefully this bill is defeated or can't get the votes, then we can come together in a bipartisan way and fix the problems that we all agree on and we can actually help the American public, as opposed to creating this large new bureaucracy.

Parliamentary inquiry.

The question is, could the Speaker please advise us of the time that is being consumed. Does it come off the time that would be allowed in the rule for debate by the gentlewoman from New York?

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to object.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that what is occurring is that the facts of the case are that this has gone beyond the rules of the House in the presentation, and I object and would ask for regular order.

Mr. Speaker, I believe what is occurring now is not only opposed to the House rules but is containing further comment, which was not allowed in the rule nor in the general provisions of the House.

Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

Could the Speaker please advise me about the time that is presently being consumed?

Mr. Speaker, I object.

Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. Speaker, I would ask to be heard.

Mr. Speaker, the Republicans are asking for an extension of 1 hour on both sides under the rule that will equally allow both sides 30 additional minutes to be heard, because it's obvious that Members of Congress need to be heard and this rule does not provide the amount of time necessary, and the people who are here is an example of why this is wrong.

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I would like to yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Schmidt) for a unanimous consent request.

(Mrs. SCHMIDT asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield to the gentlewoman from Oklahoma (Ms. Fallin) for a unanimous consent request.

(Ms. FALLIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn) for a unanimous consent request.

(Mrs. BLACKBURN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Bono Mack) for a unanimous consent request.

(Mrs. BONO MACK asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) for a unanimous consent request.

(Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller) for a unanimous consent request.

(Mrs. MILLER of Michigan asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from the State of Washington (Mrs. McMorris Rodgers) for a unanimous consent request.

(Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) for a unanimous consent request.

(Mrs. CAPITO asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) for a unanimous consent request.

(Mrs. BIGGERT asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Bachmann) for a unanimous consent request.

(Mrs. BACHMANN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Kansas (Ms. Jenkins) for a unanimous consent request.

(Ms. JENKINS asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Mrs. Lummis) for a unanimous consent request.

(Mrs. LUMMIS asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite) for a unanimous consent request.

(Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx) for a unanimous consent request.

(Ms. FOXX asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Davis) for a unanimous consent request.

(Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Alexander) for a unanimous consent request.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson) for a unanimous consent request.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) for a unanimous consent request.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson) for a unanimous consent request.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I had planned on doing a 1-minute on the Berlin Wall. I think the 20th anniversary of the falling of the Berlin Wall is a historic occasion. It is a story about freedom and oppression and people having the opportunity to have that freedom.

I had the opportunity to visit Berlin before the wall came down and after the wall came down.

The contrast in East Berlin and West Berlin, when the wall was up, was about as stark as the debate is from this side of the aisle and the other side of the aisle. There was the idea of light and frivolity and freedom and action and caring--and just life on one side, and the other side of the wall was dark, negative, gray and repressive.

When I traveled over there, it was just startling for me to experience it. Kurfurstendamm, which is the main street in West Berlin, was a street of people and musicians and buskers on the street and wonderful food and all kinds of life and freedom, and the other side was dark. As soon as the people went home in these communist-style, Stalinesque architecture buildings, they went home, they were not out, there was no nightlife.

The waitress that waited on us in an East German, East Berlin restaurant was almost afraid to talk to us. She yearned to visit the West and to visit around the world, didn't know if she would ever have that opportunity. We

tipped her handsomely, and I hope she used that money at some time to make her trip across to the free world.

When we went through Checkpoint Charlie, I gave the guard there--and it was one of the most ominous moments that I've experienced seeing a combination of a police person, a border patrol person, a German--and I say that in all the best respect to Germans, just a characterization thereof, the same for police and border guards--and a communist checking you through Checkpoint Charlie. It was rather stern and official-like and intimidating. I slipped him an Elvis Presley swizzle stick, which he kind of looked askance and took his hand and got it into his hand and stuck it in his pocket and never moved his eyes from looking forward. I was happy to pass Elvis along.

While I agree with the gentleman who spoke earlier about President Reagan and some of the things he did in spending to help defeat the Soviet Union and bring down that wall, a lot of what brought down that wall was the people and their yearning for freedom, which was expressed through Radio Free Europe and other manners in which the German youth heard American music and saw American life. They saw blue jeans and they heard rock and roll, they heard Elvis, they heard the Beatles, they heard all kinds of people. Eventually that wall came down and they heard Pink Floyd; Pink Floyd played and the world listened and the wall came down.

When I returned years later to Berlin, I drove through the Brandenburg Gate, which I don't think I was supposed to, but I did. And that was fun, I could do it, it was freedom.

I thought back upon the last time I had been in East Berlin and you couldn't do anything; it was such an ominous state. East Berlin now is a fun, thriving, great place with great restaurants and art scenes and freedom and people. It has really become more happening than the KuDam or Kreuzberg or the other areas in the West which are happening as well. But it was a great day when that wall came down.

The Newseum has three or four portions of the wall here in Washington. I went there last week. I would encourage everybody, Mr. Speaker, to go to the Newseum, which is a great museum. It's a museum about history in America and the world, not just the news media, but about freedom. The reason they've got the Berlin Wall there is because of that freedom in the First Amendment, the freedom of press, the freedom of expression, and the freedom of association. You can learn about that and value it.

You look at that wall and you see pictures of the people who died trying to get across, and coming up with ways to tunnel their way under the wall or to leap or to create some type of flying machines, and all the different ways, being inside cars or under cars and taken to freedom. Many died, some made it. It's a great tribute to people's yearnings for freedom and their desires to overcome the barriers put before them by repressive regimes.

So I wanted to speak today because that was a momentous occasion in my life to see the Berlin Wall, to go into East Berlin and see the difference between our type of government and the Soviet repression, and then to go back later and see the joy that is now in East Berlin and the freedom that has been allowed to flourish.

So I thank the gentleman for bringing the resolution, I thank the lady for bringing the resolution, and I encourage everybody to go to the Newseum and to cherish their freedom.