Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 151 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. Frost), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 151 is a structured rule providing 3 hours of general debate with 2 hours equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on the Budget, and 1 hour on economic goals and policies equally divided and controlled by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark).

The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the concurrent resolution. It further provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute specified in Part A of the Committee on Rules report accompanying the resolution shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole.

The rule makes in order only those amendments printed in Part B of the Committee on Rules report which may be offered only in the order printed in the report. Said amendments may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable for 1 hour equally divided and controlled by an opponent and a proponent, and shall not be subject to amendment.

The rule waives all points of order against the amendments printed in the report, except that the adoption of a further amendment in the nature of a substitute shall constitute the conclusion of consideration of the concurrent resolution for amendment.

Resolution 151 also provides, upon the conclusion of consideration of the concurrent resolution for amendment, for a final period of general debate not to exceed 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget.

Finally, the rule permits the chairman of the Committee on the Budget to offer amendments in the House to achieve mathematical consistency and provides that the concurrent resolution shall not be subject to a demand for a division of the question of its adoption.

Mr. Speaker, as the House takes up the proposed Federal budget for fiscal year 2004, it does so with two overriding objectives in mind: to successfully complete the war we have just begun in Iraq, and to revitalize our Nation's economy today while building a firm foundation for long-term economic growth.

The budget resolution passed by the Committee on the Budget reflects these realities and does so in a time of extraordinary fiscal strain. The members of the Committee on the Budget are to be commended for completing their work in a timely manner.

This budget resolution, of course, is only the first step in the long process by which Congress sets the Nation's spending and revenue policies. Much hard work remains to be done by the various committees of jurisdiction, and the Committee on the Budget has, in large measure, left those committees the flexibility to make decisions on specific programs and priorities.

Mr. Speaker, make no mistake about it, the challenges before us in this area are great, and we are not alone. State and local governments all across the country are struggling to tighten their belts, and we must do the same thing here in Washington, D.C. Hard choices are inevitable, and no Member is likely to get everything he or she would like to see in this budget resolution, but we must act, and we must act now. All of us learned a painful lesson this last year about the consequences of allowing the budget process to break down.

Mr. Speaker, House Concurrent Resolution 95 provides for a Federal budget of $2.22 trillion, an increase of 2.9 percent or $62 billion over the current fiscal year. It puts the Nation back on a path to a balanced budget, which would be achieved by the year 2012, 9 years from now, with the projected budget surplus of $21 billion that year.

Although there will be ample time during general debate to highlight key provisions of the resolution, I am particularly pleased to advise my colleagues that the proposed manager's amendment to the resolution reinstates the reserve fund for Medicare, which puts, in essence, a fence around the $400 billion to fund Medicare modernization and prescription drug coverage for older Americans.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, let me remind Members that the budget resolution is only a blueprint in the broadest sense. The details will take shape in coming months, but the sooner we can complete this blueprint and move on to the hard work of enacting its various components, the better off we will be. Neither the war in Iraq nor the urgent work of economic recovery can afford to be hindered simply because the

budget resolution is not perfect in the eyes of every Member of Congress.

Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support both the rule and the underlying concurrent resolution on the budget.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder), a member of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker), a member of the Committee on the Budget.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds to just briefly respond to the gentleman that just spoke.

In the manager's amendment that we will adopt, when we adopt the rule in discretionary spending for veterans, we provide a 6.1 percent increase, which has doubled, as my friend from Mississippi said, the overall budget. The mandatory spending in the manager's amendment that we will adopt, that calls for a spending increase of 7.5 percent for our veterans. So we respond to the needs of those that have made our country as free as it is.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart), a member of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining on both sides?

Mr. Speaker, I would observe it looks like my friend from Texas has more requests for time than I have. So I will reserve my time.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for the kind words that he gave me.

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

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 10 o'clock and 38 minutes p.m.), the House adjourned until Thursday, March 20, 2003, at 10 a.m.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 7 o'clock and 43 minutes a.m.), the House adjourned until today, Thursday, February 13, 2003, at 10 a.m.