Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the members of the California State Employees Association on the 75th anniversary of the organization's founding.

CSEA currently represents over 140,000 California state employees and retirees. Members include a wide variety of hardworking state employees, from front line service providers to university professors. California residents depend on CSEA members for a wide variety of state services, members ensure everything from a safe drinking water supply to the speedy processing of our tax returns. Without their hard work the business of the state would not get done.

It is a testament to the organization's importance and leadership that it continues to thrive 75 years after its formation. Since its inception, CSEA has been instrumental in making certain state workers have the protections and benefits they deserve. CSEA helped create the first retirement system for state workers, advocated for a mandated forty hour work-week and helped obtain voter approval of the Merit System for state service, all of which has contributed to a well qualified and motivated state workforce.

CSEA has also contributed to the health care of public sector employees. Since 1938, they have provided state workers with medical insurance, as the state did not provide such benefits until 1962. Today, CSEA serves its members by offering California state employees access to affordable homeowner's, life and dental insurance.

As an organization, CSEA has also played a pivotal role in ensuring state and university employees are entitled to collective bargaining. CSEA successfully lobbied for passage of the Dills Act and the Berman Act in the 1970s, both of which extended collective bargaining rights to public employees.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to congratulate CSEA President J.J. Jelincic, as well as the association's thousands of members on CSEA's 75th anniversary. I ask all my colleagues to join me and honor CSEA, as well as the fine work that California state employees do everyday

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in tribute to the congregation of Mt. Olive Missionary Baptist Church on the 50th anniversary of their church. This congregation has served the Del Paso Heights neighborhood and Sacramento region since 1956. As members of the Mt. Olive Missionary Baptist congregation gather to celebrate 50 years of community service, I ask all of my colleagues to join me in saluting this outstanding congregation.

The Mt. Olive Missionary Baptist Church was founded in Del Paso Heights in February of 1956. The Church was established and organized by Reverend Je Petiway, Reverend Powell and Reverend Eddie Phillips. Reverend Mack Smith was the parish's first Pastor and the church became a member of the St. Johns District association. The church bought its current facility in October 1956 and became incorporated in 1959.

Reverend White Henderson became Pastor in 1960 and took steps to greatly expand the church. Under his leadership a new edifice was constructed and a chapel was purchased and relocated to its current site. The church continued to expand in 1968 when Reverend Eugene Washington became Pastor. His leadership and guidance resulted in the construction of additional classrooms and a social hall.

Throughout the history of Mt. Olive Missionary Baptist Church, the congregation has been dedicated to making a positive impact on the lives of Sacramento residents. The Church has always been a comforting place of refuge for people in need, providing assistance spiritually, mentally and physically. During the current tenure of Pastor Washington, the church has established numerous ministries in the Sacramento region. These outreach programs have included prison ministry, convalescent ministry, youth outreach and counseling programs.

Mr. Speaker, I am truly privileged to congratulate the congregation of Mt. Olive Missionary Baptist Church as they gather to celebrate their 50th church anniversary. The Sacramento region has greatly benefited from having their strong community leadership and compassionate hearts. I ask all of my colleagues to join with me today in wishing Mt. Olive Missionary Baptist Church continued success and happiness in all future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, our nation's history is interwoven with the accomplishments and contributions of African Americans--from Hank Aaron, Ella Fitzgerald and Louis Armstrong to George Washington Carver, W.E.B. Du Bois, and Maya Angelou--and because of their efforts our nation is stronger. The African American community recently lost two of its leaders and as we mourn the passing of Rosa Parks and Coretta Scott King, we should be reminded that we must continue the civil rights work they devoted their lives to. What better way to celebrate the legacy of these leaders and all of those who have worked to ensure racial justice than by reauthorizing the expiring portions of the Voting Rights Act. The struggle for civil rights continues today and we must make certain that all citizens not only have the right to vote, but that their ability to vote is protected.

Although the Voting Rights Act has been essential in protecting the voting rights of minorities, additional safeguards are necessary to ensure that every citizen is included in the election process. I remain committed to furthering the causes of the Civil Rights Movement and will work hard in the coming months to guarantee the right to vote for every citizen. I hope that this month we will celebrate the lives of all of the strong and determined men and women who have worked to ensure equality for all Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in tribute to a distinguished woman who has faithfully served the State of California for over 38 years. Hope Matsui Yasui retires this month from the State of California Employment Development Department. As her friends, family and colleagues gather to celebrate her decades of public service, I ask all of my colleagues to join me in saluting this outstanding citizen of Sacramento.

Hope began her career of public service to the State of California in 1962 with the California Department of Transportation, and then in 1967 she continued her career with the State Employment Development Department. The majority of her years of public service were with the State Employment Development Department and the California Governor's Committee on Employment of Peoples with Disabilities.

Hope successfully represented the California Governor's Committee on Employment of Peoples with Disabilities on a major California task force to work with the Social Security Administration to remove employer disincentives against hiring disabled people. While with the Committee, she was also an original co-founder of the California Model Youth Leadership Forum for Students with Disabilities. This well respected youth program led to the establishment of similar programs in over 30 States throughout the country.

Throughout her many years of employment with the State of California, Hope has established herself as an excellent role model through her career of exemplary public and community service. She has developed an impeccable reputation within Sacramento and throughout the State, as she has promoted employment opportunity for people with disabilities and for all Californians.

As a devoted public servant and community leader, she has shown compassion and understanding for those who are underprivileged in life. Her profound sense of understanding for those less fortunate was developed, in part, as a result of the injustices she faced at birth in a Japanese internment camp in Minidoka, Idaho amidst the turmoil of World War II.

Hope has maintained her commitment to the people of California and has remained dedicated to her family. Therefore, I would like to congratulate Hope Matsui Yasui for her many successes and for her well deserved retirement.

Mr. Speaker, as Hope Matsui Yasui's family, friends and colleagues gather to celebrate her career of service to Sacramento and to the State of California, I am truly privileged to congratulate one of Sacramento's most respectable citizens. The State of California has greatly benefited from having Hope Matsui Yasui's strong leadership and compassionate heart. Her dedication to people with disabilities and to the people of California has lasted a lifetime and has forever improved the lives of Californians with disabilities. I ask all of my colleagues to join with me today in wishing Hope continued success and happiness in all of her future endeavors, wherever her retirement may take her.

Mr. Speaker, Coretta Scott King dedicated her life to racial and economic justice as a leader in the civil rights movement working in partnership with her late husband, the great civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. And after his assassination, she continued her tireless efforts fighting for equal justice for children, the poor and the forgotten among us.

She was a passionate advocate for equality here in the United States and around the world. Her efforts ensured a fledgling civil rights organization--the Southern Christian Leadership Conference--had the funds to continue its critical work and her actions made certain apartheid did not fade from the world's conscience.

Mrs. King once eloquently said, ``Women, if the soul of the nation is to be saved, I believe that you must become its soul.'' And her accomplishments--the civil rights legacy she created in her own right-- demonstrate how she became our nation's soul.

As a nation we mourn the loss of one of our civil rights pioneers, Coretta Scott King. Together we must continue her life's work of equality and justice. My thoughts and prayers go out to her family and friends at this time of loss.

Mr. Speaker, this is the third time the House has voted on this budget package and there is good reason this legislation is having such a difficult time receiving final approval from Congress. While we all agree that this Nation cannot continue to spend beyond its means at the expense of future generations, this budget package will do nothing to right our precarious fiscal situation. If you take even a cursory glance at this legislation, it is readily apparent that the Republican method of deficit reduction is to disproportionately pass the burden on to hard-working Americans and the poorest among us. It ignores the idea of shared sacrifice the American people expect and deserve.

My constituents in Sacramento are outraged--I have received hundreds of phone calls and I have stacks of letters; they are astounded that this bill would cut funding for Medicaid, student loans and child support enforcement in order to finance up to $70 billion in tax cuts. Clearly, they have good reason to be outraged. In fact, I completely agree with them.

For instance, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the budget package will cut Medicaid funding by $28 billion over the next decade and impose new co-payments on participants. The result will be that 65,000 individuals will stop participating in Medicaid over the next decade, 60 percent of whom will be children. In total, 13 million Medicaid participants--over a quarter of whom are children--will face higher financial barriers to health care coverage.

Yet, at the same time Congressional Republicans went ahead with their plans to worsen the health care crisis in this country, they modified one provision in this bill to save the health insurance industry $22 billion over 10 years, according to the Washington Post. As their profits show, this industry is not suffering from falling profits, particularly when you factor in the lavish benefits they received from the President's disastrous prescription drug plan.

Congress needs to get back to common sense budgeting that fairly distributes the burden of deficit reduction. And we need to reinstitute the pay-go budget rules that brought us fiscal surpluses during the 1990s. Congress should be protecting the vital programs that our community depends on and the safety net that protects the weakest among us, while still ensuring long-term fiscal responsibility. I urge my colleagues to vote against this legislation so we can start reducing the deficit in a way that is in the best interest of the vast majority of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, today we begin to debate this budget package and attempt to wrap up legislative business for the year. As we do so, many members find themselves thinking about going home to be with their families.

For me, I look forward to spending time with my family and particularly my 2-year-old granddaughter Anna. As many of my colleagues already know, Anna is the driving force behind my work in Congress--I want to make sure that we create policy that is best for Anna and those in her generation who do not have a say in what we are doing here today.

Therefore, I favor reducing the deficit. Anna and her generation should not have to bear the burden of the debt this Congress has created. But Congress must reduce the deficit in a responsible manner that results in a shared sacrifice.

Unfortunately, H.R. 4241 fails to do this. It disproportionately places the burden of these cuts on a few. And it also imposes cuts on key programs including Medicaid, child support enforcement and student loans.

When I consider how these cuts will impact my constituents and their families back in Sacramento--not to mention Anna and her friends--it is clear this is not a conscientious way to cut spending.

For example, one of the critical programs cut in this bill are student loans. By doing so we are placing greater financial stress on students who are already spread thin.

Recently I met with a group of students from Sacramento State, who reiterated this point to me. Each one of them stressed the importance of student loans in financing their education.

We need to be investing in the future to compete in the global marketplace. But, by cutting these loan programs we are undercutting America's ability to compete.

This is only one example of the impact of these cold-hearted spending cuts. Spending cuts necessary to finance the tax breaks in this budget package.

We need to restore fiscal responsibility in a way that makes sense-- in a way that aligns with the priorities of the American people. But the draconian cuts in this bill will not accomplish that. If you showed the American people the tradeoffs in this budget, they would tell Congress to go back to the drawing board and get it right. They would urge us to fund vital programs before cutting taxes for the fifth time in five years.

Why rush through legislation that could have tremendous repercussions on so many in this Nation? Instead, I would urge my colleagues to vote down this bill--take this holiday season to reflect on our Nation's true priorities and needs. Let's start fresh next year and figure out a way to protect future generations without impeding this government's ability to help those that need it the most.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, today we consider H. Res. 632, a martial-law rule allowing the House to bring bills to the floor on the same day that the Rules Committee meets to report that bill.

But significantly, the martial-law rule does not specify which bills may be brought up. Instead, it is a blank check for the majority party to bring up virtually any bill in Congress up until the speaker gavels this legislative day to a close.

Mr. Speaker, this is a highly unusual procedure. I would like to take a moment to explain to the American people exactly how out of the ordinary it is.

This is the first time that a totally open-ended blanket martial-law rule has been brought to the House floor. Every other rare use of this procedure has specified at least a category of legislation. This rule is unprecedented for the power it grants the majority.

Mr. Speaker, some Members may argue that the blanket nature of this rule allows them to conduct business efficiently by allowing them to bring up the first thing that is ready to pass.

I, however, take a different view. This will tarnish the honor of this institution by restricting the democratic process. It will allow bills to come up with absolutely no prior notice to Members. Members may not have time to examine what is in the bill. They may not have even heard of the bill before.

There is a risk that last-minute language could be written incorrectly, or that it could have unintended consequences. There is the risk that controversial provisions could be inserted without proper review.

And by not giving Members this review time, we will be forced to simply hope that this did not occur. Mr. Speaker, I believe that Members need more of a guarantee than that before we cast our votes.

Mr. Speaker, such a harsh rule impedes the democratic process. It did not have to be that way. The House leadership chose not to conduct floor business on Friday of last week, or on Monday of this week. This type of schedule has been commonplace all year long.

So I must conclude that we are here not out of necessity, but because the Republican leadership is unable to govern. Once again, it seems as though the majority cannot be trusted with conducting the business of the American people in an open manner.

I urge my colleagues to reject this blanket martial-law rule. Members should have adequate time to review bills before they vote for them.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say that I urge my colleagues to reject this blanket martial-law rule. Members should have adequate time to review the bills before they vote for them.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure today to honor Mr. Robert Thomas, the City of Sacramento's City Manager, who is retiring this week from a distinguished career of public service. As his friends, family and coworkers all gather to celebrate his career, I ask all my colleagues to join me in honoring one of Sacramento's finest citizens.

Mr. Thomas began his career in Sacramento with the North Highlands Recreation and Park District and later worked with the County of Sacramento, Southgate Recreation and Park District and City of Santa Cruz. At each step of his career Bob eagerly took on increased responsibilities for the recreational facilities that make Sacramento and California such a wonderful place to live.

In 1981, he returned to Sacramento as the Director of Parks and Community Services. For ten years Bob headed the department, managing over 600 employees and hundreds of volunteers. Under his direction the department increased revenue, grant funding and accomplished many important projects, including an expansion of the Crocker Art Museum.

Recognizing his management abilities, Bob was appointed Deputy City Manager in 1991, and he served in that position until being named Sacramento County's Executive in 1996. While with the County, he implemented the Board of Supervisors' policies and was ultimately responsible for managing over ten thousand employees and an annual budget of 1.4 billion dollars. Among the long list of achievements with the County, he was able to effectively reorganize the Economic Development Program and helped implement reuse plans at McClellan and Mather Air Force Bases, both of which were shut down.

From 1999 until the present day, the people of Sacramento have been incredibly fortunate to have Mr. Thomas serve as Sacramento's City Manager. He has been an effective leader, working with the City Council on many issues of great importance. These include flood control projects, major transportation upgrades across the city and managing the development of many new neighborhoods. In recognition of his superb work, Mr. Thomas was named Public Administrator of the Year in 2005 by the American Society for Public Administration.

Bob was also an active member of the California National Guard 175th Medical Brigade until his retirement from the Guard this year. Given his extensive background in municipal government, work with the California National Guard and decades spent living in Sacramento, I was always confident that Sacramento was being taken care of with Bob Thomas at the helm, as was my late husband Congressman Robert Matsui.

Whether it has been with the California National Guard, County of Sacramento, or with the City of Sacramento, Bob Thomas has left a legacy of successful public management and service that will be hard to match. On behalf of the people of Sacramento and the Fifth Congressional District of California, I ask all my colleagues to join me in thanking Bob Thomas for his public service and to wish him a healthy and happy retirement.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, today the House will debate legislation attempting to address immigration in our country, the challenges of which are extremely complex. Unfortunately, this legislation focuses entirely on border security and cracking down on illegal immigration. It fails to truly address the underlying issue of why people risk long boat rides in cargo containers, open rafts, extreme temperatures crossing deserts and risking death to come to the United States. This legislation overlooks the multifaceted nature of immigration and sadly ignores the fact the immigration system is broken.

Individuals waiting years to receive a visa is not an uncommon occurrence, nor is it rare for someone who came to the United States legally for work or to study to wait years at a time to bring their spouses, children, and loved ones to this country to join them.

What we cannot forget is that these are real people. My grandparents were immigrants. So many people from California, Florida, North Carolina, Texas, New York, I could go on and on, are immigrants. We should take a breath and hold for a moment before we rush this. What we do to address our broken immigration system must be thoughtful.

Like many of our districts, my hometown of Sacramento has an immigrant population, and in Sacramento that population includes many from Russia and the former Soviet Union. I am currently helping some of my constituents to bring their 13-year-old son back to the United States. Seven years ago, this constituent legally came to our country. This past June, the family traveled to Russia for vacation and on return was shocked to learn that their son's eligibility had been canceled. Their son was barred from reentering this country with his parents. We are working as fast as we can to correct what seems to be a mistake and reunite this family. Until then, this young boy must remain in Russia.

As a mother and grandmother, I cannot fathom what this family must be going through, nor can I understand how we have not reformed a system that would allow this separation. We must not put families in a situation where they feel they must make a decision to enter legally or illegally or separate their families. We must reform our immigration system to end backlogs and to help reunite families.

As I said before, this is a multifaceted issue of which family unification is only one component. There are an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. They came here illegally in search of a better opportunity, to work on farms and restaurants, hotels, and hundreds of other service jobs. Whether we like it or not, they are part of our economy and fill a needed gap in our labor force.

That is why the chamber of commerce, the business community, the immigrant community, and the President all support a guest worker program. That is the only way to end the incentive to enter the United States illegally to find work, and bring out of shadows the illegal immigrants already here.

This legislation, however, ignores these issues. That is not to say it is without some needed provisions. I support increasing the number of border patrol agents and port inspectors as well as adding radiation detection equipment at all of our maritime ports. However, on the whole, it is filled with ill-considered provisions. What makes this worse is that there is no reason why we need to rush this through in the last days of the session.

It is clear there are many questions surrounding this legislation. The action we take on immigration will reverberate across the country and affect people's lives. We need to know its full implications before we proceed. It is not clear that we need to do this now. The American people deserve clarity now.

I urge my colleagues to vote against this rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and thank the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) for yielding me this time.

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

Mr. Speaker, today we consider House Resolution 596, the rule allowing consideration of the conference report accompanying the fiscal year 2006 Labor-HHS and Education appropriations bill. If the debate looks familiar to our constituents watching from home, it should. Just before Thanksgiving, the House considered a conference agreement almost exactly like the one before the House this morning. The House voted to reject that shortsighted agreement. It was a striking rebuke of a majority out of touch with concerns of average Americans, and yet here we are again with an agreement that is almost word for word the exact agreement from 3 weeks ago. This new version simply moves around a small amount of money, robbing Peter to pay Paul.

What seems to have been skipped was a discussion of the fundamentally flawed priorities, and there was no discussion of what the American people need, merely what it would take for a few more votes. This means that No Child Left Behind funding is still cut by $779 million, a maximum Pell grant award is still frozen for the fourth straight year, and there is still no new funding for student financial aid and support programs. The bill still provides $4 billion less than Republicans promised for special education through IDEA.

Further, this agreement provides only thin and shortsighted support for innovative research going on today on universities and colleges across the Nation. Hardworking families rely on these advances to ease the suffering or even cure a loved one's illness, but this agreement threatens this hope.

Earlier this month, the UC Davis Cancer Center, the only federally designated cancer center in the central valley of California, discovered a way to improve early detection of breast cancer. And just before Thanksgiving, UC Davis research shed light on how some cancer patients contract chemotherapy-induced leukemia.

These are two examples of living-saving advances among dozens in the University of California system. And they are a reality because of Federal investment. Two out of every three research dollars to the UC system are from the Federal Government. Sadly, misguided priorities, like the ones contained in this conference report, threaten to limit these types of advances.

Mr. Speaker, my local newspaper, the Sacramento Bee, noted earlier this month that today's challenges demand shared sacrifice and better priorities. The paper argued, rightly so, that ``the majority in Congress is more intent on locking in President Bush's tax cuts than paying for war, natural disaster, and essential public services for the Nation's most vulnerable people.'' I could not agree more.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues once again to reject this conference report.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) to respond.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Mr. Speaker, I would just urge my colleagues once again to reject this conference report, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, strange things happen around this place when we are getting ready for recess. Legislation just seems to come out of the woodwork sometimes, like the resolution on the Suspension Calendar today.

The bill before us today would spend $400,000 of taxpayer money to establish a House Task Force on Ocean Policy. Quite simply, it is duplicative and wasteful. There is already a standing House committee to deal with ocean policy that professional staff already have in place.

The Rules Committee has not met to consider this resolution. In fact, no action, at least none that I am aware of, has been taken beyond the simple introduction of this measure. This resolution just appeared on the schedule at the last minute with no explanation, no details, and no reason for its urgency.

So I am a bit puzzled about why this task force is needed at all. Generally, task forces are created when there is an issue that crosses the jurisdictional lines of several different committees, all of whom claim primary jurisdiction. In that circumstance, there may well be a need to coordinate efforts in an efficient manner. However, in this case, the primary issues fall within the jurisdiction of the Resources Committee. In fact, there is a Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans chaired by the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest). That is where this issue belongs.

Let me be clear: our Nation's ocean policy is a worthy project, but I believe that this issue should be taken up by the Resources Committee. That is where the expertise is.

I hope that the resolution's sponsors and other Members speaking here today will shed some light on the need to move so quickly on this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of my time be controlled by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for putting together this special time and for yielding me some time.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased this evening to honor a dear friend, John Dingell, who because of life's twists and turns has also become my colleague. It was actually about 30 years ago that I first met John Dingell. At that time my husband, Bob, was serving on the Sacramento City Council as well as chair of the reelection campaign of Congressman John Moss.

John Moss and John Dingell had arrived in Congress at about the same time, building a relationship and friendship as the years passed. When John Moss marked his 20th year in office, he asked his friend, John Dingell, to come to Sacramento to speak. It was at this milestone that Bob and I first met John Dingell. Little did Bob and I know that this was only the beginning of what would become a very deep and abiding friendship, as 4 years later John Moss would announce his retirement and Bob would run and succeed him in Congress.

Following his election, John Moss offered Bob some sage advice which, among other things, included John Moss's hope that Bob would build his own relationship and friendship with John Dingell. Bob took this advice to heart and built a friendship with his new colleague. It was clear that John Dingell respects and deeply cares and loves this institution. He brings knowledge that spans generations to any debate. And Bob, as a junior Member served alongside him on the Energy and Commerce Committee before his assignment to joining Ways and Means, saw why John Moss had given him the advice he had.

Simultaneously, Bob and I also began a friendship with John and his wife, the lovely Deborah. I would be hard pressed to talk about John without also mentioning Debbie as she is a strength in her own right. Their marriage is a true partnership, and because of that when we honor John, we are also honoring Debbie. Together they have made each other stronger. The friendship I have with both John and Debbie is one I truly value.

John, I know that you have many more years to serve in Congress, and I look forward to working with you through all those many years. Congratulations on the first 50 years.

Mr. Speaker, as we begin debate on additional tax cuts-- H.R. 4297--we must consider them in the larger context of the challenges this nation is facing and the impact these tax cuts will have, on our ability to face these challenges as well as future challenges. Our decisions must always prioritize protecting the future of this nation for our children and their children.

Over the Thanksgiving recess, I participated in a program in my district that sought to increase early literacy by incorporating reading into doctors' visits. During my visit, I read to these children--who are about my granddaughter Anna's age--about ``Clifford the Big Red Dog.''

It is truly a wonderful program, and as I recall the joy and animation on each child's face with every turn of the page, I am reminded just how important the decisions we make today are . . . because we are merely stewards of this nation for them--and we must act as such. Are we being wise stewards in choosing to pass another tax cut--on top of the nearly $2 trillion in cuts we have already passed?

Congress has already transformed a $5.6 trillion surplus into a more than $3 trillion debt.

Yet, we are still financing the war in Iraq and the reconstruction from the war in Afghanistan. Regardless of your view on our nation's military policy over the past five years--we must pay for the wars and their subsequent cleanup, yet to date they have been financed by deficit spending. And we have only just begun the rebuilding efforts in New Orleans, Gulfport and other Gulf Coast cities struck by Hurricane Katrina.

Which brings us back to the legislation we are considering today. There are many positive provisions in this bill. They would create an even better future for our children and grandchildren, like my granddaughter Anna--particularly the provision to strengthen and extend the research and development tax credit. I am a strong supporter of this investment.

Unfortunately, the centerpiece of this bill--the dividends and capital gains tax cut extensions--is unnecessary at this time. Not only do these cuts not expire until 2008, they primarily help the same individuals who have already benefited lavishly from the previous rounds of tax cuts.

So we are at war, we are in debt and yet again we are cutting taxes without fully paying for it. The path we are beginning to turn down, as begun by this budget package, may ultimately include tax cuts that will far outstrip the some $50 billion worth of unwise spending cuts. Just the tax cuts in this bill will add at least $6 billion to the deficit and it seems more may be added outside this reconciliation process.

Sadly, it seems the only Americans asked to sacrifice are the brave men and women in uniform fighting in the Middle East and our children and grandchildren, like my Anna, who will bear the burden of our massive debt. This defies historical precedent and common sense.

We do, however, have an opportunity to make a decision that will return us to the path of fiscal responsibility. Ranking member Rangel has offered a pragmatic and effective substitute bill and I am glad today's rule will allow a vote on it.

This alternative will extend the tax cuts that expire at the end ofthe year and provide a muchneeded AMT patch. And the Democratic alternative will be paid for by taking back a small portion of the tax cuts that benefit families earning more than $500,000. Simply, we extend only what is necessary and we pay for it--Anna and other future generations deserve no less.

I urge my colleagues to embrace the principle of shared sacrifice and reject this tax reconciliation package in favor of the responsible Democratic substitute.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and the underlying bill, the U.S.-Bahrain free trade agreement implementation act.

Through cooperation--Democrats working alongside Republicans on the Ways and Means Committee, who then coordinated with the administration--we have before us a strong trade package that will open markets, advance free trade and cement America's ties to a strategically important ally in the Middle East.

And with the changes that are coming to Bahrain's labor laws, this agreement will ensure that the fundamental rights of workers are protected. It is my hope that in the future, these worker protections will be incorporated into the core of trade agreements, rather than through side agreements. This is a standard to which the United States should hold all its trading partners.

Though the magnitude of this particular trade pact is relatively small, the global trading system is at a critical juncture. The United States' leadership on trade is being tested--here in Congress and in Geneva.

For that reason, I am pleased that today we have both parties working together to advance free and fair trade.

I hope that this agreement receives broad support and that July's contentious and mean-spirited CAFTA debate is the low point, only to be seen in the rearview mirror. Because in the long term, the only way for America to continue to lead the world forward on trade is for us to work across the aisle here in the House.

I urge my colleagues to allow today's debate to serve as a first step toward reviving the bipartisan consensus on trade policy that has served this Congress so well in the past.