Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I speak out in opposition to H.R. 2432, the ``Paperwork and Regulatory Improvements Act of 2003.'' This bill would weaken, rather than improve, the process of developing federal regulations by elevating the interests of regulated industries over all other considerations. The bill would needlessly divert resources from implementing important regulations and does nothing to protect current public health and environmental regulations, which are under fire from the Bush administration. These are regulations that even the Office of Management and Budget has indicated have immense benefits: in September of 2003 an OMB study concluded that environmental regulations are well worth the costs they impose on industry and consumers, resulting in significant public health improvements and other benefits to society. For example, the study found that the health and social benefits of enforcing clean-air regulations during the past decade were five to seven times greater in economic terms than were the costs of complying with the rules. Yet the Bush administration continues to issue rules and guidelines that weaken the Clean Air Act.

I strongly support the Waxman-Tierney amendment to establish an independent commission on the politicization of science in the regulatory process. The amendment responds to a growing concern among scientists and the environmental community that the Bush administration is placing politics above science. From refusing to release a report contradicting their views in the Klamath basin of Oregon to removing information on global warming in an Environmental Protection Agency report, this administration has shown little more than flat out contempt for science. Just last month we saw the Bush administration issue a new policy that would allow hatchery-raised salmon in the Pacific Northwest to be included in wild salmon population counts, which could have a significant impact on whether or not the species are listed under the Endangered Species Act. Press accounts show that this was done over the objection of an independent panel of scientists commissioned by National Marine Fisheries Service to advise them on the issue.

In February of this year, 60 leading scientists--including 20 Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors, and university chairs and presidents--voiced their concern over the misuse of science by this administration. I am deeply disappointed that H.R. 2432 takes us in the wrong direction by advancing a misguided concept that elevates the interests of regulated industries over the health of our communities.

Mr. Speaker, I oppose H.R. 3722, the ``Undocumented Alien Emergency Medical Assistance Amendments of 2004,'' because it would establish an unfunded mandate on an already overburdened and under-funded medical care system. Hospital workers would be required to gather several pieces of information from their patients to prove their citizenship, including their fingerprints. This information would then be shared with the Department of Homeland Security, which would be required to monitor the information with a currently non-existent tracking system. This bill aims to create a costly burden on an already stressed medical system.

H.R. 3722 also poses a serious public health threat. The bill would create fear and confusion amongst both documented and undocumented immigrant families, discouraging them from seeking urgent medical care, possibly resulting in severe complications, the spread of infectious diseases and epidemics, and even death. I stand firmly opposed to this troubling legislation which poses a serious risk to public health and creates unnecessary monetary burdens upon hospitals and taxpayers.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, this Congress has repeatedly undermined protections for the American workforce, shifting emphasis from employees to employers. The four bills brought to the House floor today are the most recent examples that hinder the efficacy of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), taking away protections from the workers that need them most, and shielding businesses from government oversight.

Taken together these bills:

Allow businesses to indefinitely delay the reparation of health and safety violations.

Needlessly expand the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, allowing the administration to stack it with partisans who may work to undermine basic worker protections.

Strip OSHA of the power to issue authoritative interpretation of regulations, enabling more companies to violate safety and health hazards without facing repercussions.

Require OSHA to pay attorney fees and costs even in cases in which the federal government was found to be ``substantially justified'' in pursuing the action. This will create a deterrent for complaints against employers.

Rather than ``reform,'' these four pieces of legislation weaken OSHA and undermine Congress's original intent when OSHA was enacted in 1970. These bills were introduced under the guise of creating economic competitiveness. Undermining the health and safety standards does not make Americans more competitive. Americans pride themselves in having the greatest workforce in the world. How can we enhance working conditions of workers abroad in trade agreements and other international pacts when we erode basic health and safety protections for our own workforce? Americans deserve a safe and healthy workplace. Limiting OSHA, the agency created to ensure workers receive these basic rights, will do nothing to advance the cause.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that in 5 minutes, the House Committee on International Relations is going to have a hearing about the post-Iraq situation. Since there are only 48 days left until the transfer of power, it is about time. Sadly, it is about 2 years late. It is an example of the sorry declining of congressional oversight and leadership of what was supposed to be a co-equal branch of government. The abuse of Iraqis never convicted of anything is just the latest example of that failure.

While some would claim that asking hard questions is an example of lack of support for our troops, the real lack of support for our troops is not giving them adequate water, and food, proper equipment, to say nothing of the relief of adequate support for troops on the ground and relief to rotate them home.

To the shame of this congressional leadership, we have failed to do our job as congressional watchdogs and policymakers. It has created problems for our troops in Iraq, it has created problems for the Iraqi people, and for the American public.

Mr. Speaker, last week, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan delivered a warning that ``the free lunch has still to be invented.'' He was referring to the soaring Federal budget deficits that are adding hundreds of billions of dollars to our $7 trillion debt. These budget deficits are threatening economic growth and increasing interest rates in the short-run, and risk the solvency of Social Security and Medicare in the long-run. This bill is not a free lunch. In fact, it will cost $218 billion over the next 10 years.

Instead of passing legislation with any degree of fiscal responsibility, the Republican leadership is passing the buck, trillions of them, onto our children and grandchildren. Middle-class tax cuts are important in addressing tax fairness, of which our current system is increasingly in dire need of help. The Democratic substitute, which I support, provides middle-class tax relief and protects against the egregious impact of the Alternative Minimum Tax, without adding to the Federal budget deficit and burdening future generations.

Mr. Speaker, one of the most frustrating aspects of the way we run Congress today is an interest in scoring political points as opposed to solving problems. Nowhere is that more in evidence than the symbolic political acts surrounding healthcare this week in the House of Representatives.

We are in the midst of a healthcare crisis for the uninsured, for small businesses, and for practitioners. There is a complicated, interconnected fabric that provides healthcare in this country that includes insurance companies, HMO's, public agencies, Federal Government programs and the institutions that represent and train medical professionals. Advocacy groups, legal experts and consumers all have legitimate interests and something to say.

Sadly, the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives continues to be more interested in scoring political points than solving problems. Simply recycling the same flawed legislation, is clearly far less than our best effort and stands little likelihood of passage to the Senate, where similar legislation continues to languish.

These bills would undermine our efforts by insuring only the healthiest and wealthiest, leaving 511,00 uninsured Oregonians and tens of millions of Americans behind. Furthermore, the Association Health Plans proposals would exempt state solvency requirements, leaving the consumers at a significant risk.

If we were able to openly debate these proposals on the floor I know that the healthcare community would be well served because the majority of Congress does not want to short change it or our citizens. Most in Congress do not want to artificially restrict payments and are sincerely interested in making sure that Federal policy does not create or enhance abusive or distorted behaviors.

The most dramatic example would be fixing flawed funding. There is a gusher of money going to items far less important, far less essential to the American public, such as the unaffordable, unnecessary additional tax benefits to those who need help the least. It is time for the vast array of interests represented by the healthcare community and the people vitally dependent upon it to insist that the Republican Leadership stop the games. Everyone should commit to full, fair, honest debate in a more open legislative process. This is the only way we will enact cost effective legislation, and stop the funding abuses. We must stop holding legislation hostage, to another political agenda. I will continue to work with my healthcare community at home along with national groups and organizations to produce the type of process, discussion and legislation Americans critically deserve.

Mr. Speaker, today the Committee on International Relations had a hearing on the Iraq transition. Actually, it was not so much a hearing as a briefing. While interesting, the real need for the Committee on International Relations and other committees of appropriate jurisdiction is policy development and oversight. I hoped ours would be the first in a series of oversight on the war in Iraq and the war on terrorism.

Deferring to the administration might have been understandable, if questionable, in the aftermath of September 11, but certainly not today. Congress cannot afford to be a rubber stamp, nor can we continue to rely on the media to embarrass us to action.

Had we held today's hearing 2 years ago, Iraq, our troops, the world and American taxpayers would be better off today. We would have clarified that the challenge was never to win the battle and remove Saddam Hussein. That was a given, once the might of the United States was unleashed. The real challenge was winning the peace. For that, sadly, the leadership of the United States was unprepared.

I will in the course of the official record submit questions for response from the Department of Defense and the Department of State, issues like the status of the new United Nations Security Council resolution, or getting the international donors to deliver the $2 billion in outstanding pledges, and whether the United States is going to shortchange Iraq's needs after the transition to sovereignty like we have in Afghanistan.

The most important question, however, for us as a committee and for individual Members of Congress is to see if we can play a role in improving this situation. Can we help the President, who is unable to think of any mistakes, understand, admit and even be candid about where he and his team have fallen short of the mark? Can we provide to the American public real budget numbers as we clearly see now a $300 billion price tag emerging?

The public demands an open and honest budget process. Can committees make it easier to get rid of the architects of this failed policy? Can we help place less emphasis on the shadowy military contractors and more emphasis on working through the nongovernmental organization community? I would note as an example the Mercy Corps operation, extraordinarily cost efficient and extremely effective in working with foreign nationals in trouble spots around the world. To the extent that we continue to use military contractors, can we in Congress rethink how it happens, clear up the ambiguities in law and policy and to have, finally, rigorous standards for performance and cost accountability? Can we help the administration avoid using artificial deadlines for key governance decisions based on our political calendar in the United States? Can

we help train attention on the real threat, after all, which is global terror? Can we focus our resources and attention away from things that are, if not positively loopy, at least very low priority, like national missile defense, to have priority placed on homeland security and finishing the job in Afghanistan?

It is time for this Congress to act like a coequal branch of government. Had we been doing that since September 11, we would have saved money, saved lives and enhanced our legitimacy and effectiveness around the world. Indeed, that world, Iraq and our troops all need us to do our job. Even the administration, while it may not recognize it, will be better off if Congress does its job.

Today Secretary Grossman said that he appreciated references about American staying power in Iraq. I would say that the real key to staying power is the trust and confidence of the American people. The administration's performance and inability to acknowledge its mistakes is undercutting the confidence of the people I represent and the people I meet from around the country. I hope our International Relations Committee and other relevant committees in Congress do their job to help rebuild the confidence, so badly shaken, of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, this last month has been a hard month: Hard for our soldiers in Iraq as we lost more lives than any previous month; it was hard on the people of that troubled country; and it was hard on the American public as citizens of conscience and people who are footing the bill. It has also been hard on Congress.

I personally believe the Speaker and the chair of the key committees to be people of conscience, and they must be terribly embarrassed as the world sees what happens when Congress shirks its responsibility to set policy, control spending and provide oversight.

It is as sad as it is outrageous that Congress and the President of the United States find out at the same time as millions of people around the

world about the unconscionable abuses in Iraqi prisons.

Now, the President will have to settle with Donald Rumsfeld as to why he has been kept out of the loop, but we in Congress have only ourselves to blame if we continue to avoid being a constructive partner, making sure that these abuses stop.

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. The issue has never been whether or not our troops could win a war. They are the finest fighting men and women in the world, and they can win a war.

The issue is the mismanagement of this administration, their inability to win the peace. The mismanagement of our war is not the fault of our troops. It starts with the Secretary of Defense who is out of the loop. It is a failure of candor with people in this Congress who have to rely on the The New Yorker magazine to find out things that the Administration should have provided to our committees. It is a failure of our committees to move forward to deal with the investigations of problems of supply, of inappropriate activities on the part of contractors, of why there has been a failure of command that has produced the horrific pictures that put not just our troops at risk but put at risk any American traveling in the Middle East.

I think it is time for my colleagues to get a grip and get back to the business that we should, as Members of Congress, fulfill our responsibilities, not try to play politics.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding me time.

Mr. Speaker, it is sad that the resolution before U.S. today is as close as we can get to having a full and open debate on the tragedy that continues to unfold in Iraq.

Yes, this is about failure of leadership in the Department of Defense from Secretary Rumsfeld and the team that was unable, after winning the war, to win the peace, a Department that cannot communicate with its own Department of State, let alone the Congress. But it is about more than the failure of the administration and the Department of Defense.

What we should be debating today is the failure of Congress. We should be having hearings dealing with these issues on armed services, international relations, appropriations, government operations.

Mr. Speaker, my Republican colleagues do themselves no favor rushing this to the floor and refusing to deal with the responsibilities of congressional oversight. When our Republican colleagues do not permit us to do our job, it does not help them politically. What happens is that this is forcing us to rely on reporters from the New Yorker & from CNN. The avalanche of reports now coming out show the Department of Defense knew about this, even if the top brass had not bothered to read the reports. This should have been shared with members of Congress, and we should have been helping them do their job.

It is not just the brave men and women on the front lines in Iraq who are being shortchanged by failures of Congress & the Administration. We are shortchanging the American public, wasting their Treasury, putting Americans at risk, and undermining their confidence in their government doing its job and giving them straight answers.

I strongly urge the rejection of this rule and that this morning we start doing our job as Members of Congress to give the American public the information they deserve.

Mr. Speaker, this Resolution falls far short of the mark of adequately expressing the concerns I've heard from my Oregon constituents and that I have myself. Its failure to include a mechanism to hold Congress accountable and ensure that we do our job is unacceptable.

While concurring with the sentiment of outrage expressed against these acts and deploring those responsible, this Resolution is a very poor substitute for the oversight, fact-finding, and policy formulations that are the duties of this Congress. H. Res. 627 is window dressing, after the fact, and I refuse to support it.

Mr. Speaker, recent revelations about the abuses in Iraq illustrate problems not just with United States policy but with how Congress deals with its responsibilities.

Yes, there are problems with the Department of Defense, starting with Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld who is either out of the loop, who either does not know or places a low priority on these problems, things known for months and issues lingering for over a year.

Yes, there are problems with contracting out to private companies functions, fundamental core government activities, at great cost without accountability. But we should be concerned that Congress fails to aggressively take seriously our oversight responsibilities instead waiting for a pending article in The New Yorker to cut loose an avalanche of other news accounts.

There are at least a half dozen committees in this House that could be taking action. The American public, the Iraqi people, and our men and women in uniform deserve better.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on this.

Mr. Speaker, I find my friend from Pennsylvania's commentary somewhat ironic because all independent observers agree that after three rounds of massive tax cuts, we are getting very little benefit for the magnitude of the costs involved.

On our side of the aisle, we have had a variety of areas that would have put far more people to work producing far more economic benefit for this country at far less cost.

It is also ironic that somehow, the blame; after 10 years of Republicans in control, that somehow, this inequity is the problem of the Democrats. In fact, under the watch of my Republican colleagues, we have seen the ``millionaires' tax'' that was enacted in 1969 to stop sheltering all income, now punishes people who pay their taxes, claim a child care credit, and save for their future.

In the midst of the largest tax-cutting frenzy in our country's history, the Republican majority has used the $600 billion that is going to be extracted from people who do not deserve to pay this over the next 10 years, to disguise the impact of their misguided policies.

Now, I would suggest that it is inappropriate to continue limping along as my Republican colleagues would do today with the enactment of their proposal. It just puts off the day of reckoning, gets past another election and, they hope, can implement more of their true agenda: to provide more permanent tax relief for people who need it the least.

Now, I would suggest that the Democratic substitute, which is providing more help and not making deficits worse, is a step in the right direction. I join with my friend, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) to come forward to either repeal or fix the alternative minimum tax. But we could do that in a minute if the Committee on Ways and Means would return to its historic way of doing business, being bipartisan, maybe even considering legislation like this in committee before bringing it to the floor, allowing debate back and forth, allowing amendments. I think we would have a bipartisan majority that would put 400 votes on the floor to get rid of the single greatest inequity in the Tax Code.

Instead, the drum-beat from my friends on the other side of the aisle is to make permanent the most egregious part of their program for the people who need it least, and holding hostage some 35 million to 43 million American families with this sword of Damocles holding over their heads. It is just what they have done with the estate tax. Instead of coming forward with a bipartisan reform that we are ready to do and would get 300 or 400 votes, they have this bizarre thing where one has to be careful about what year they die, to know how many wills they have to have in order to play the game with this year after year.

I think it is inappropriate and it is shameful. It is time for us to take a step in the right direction, with the approval of the Democratic substitute.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take my Special Order at this time.

Mr. Speaker, as an American, I am ashamed and disgusted by the horrendous unspeakable acts at Abu Ghraib prison caught in pictures and displayed around the world. The impact of these images is devastating precisely in the part of the world where we are already struggling to counter the widespread impression that we do not respect the Arab world and Islamic traditions.

There is no excuse for these pictures and the acts shown. There is no excuse for a Secretary of Defense to be out of the loop and then deliver an apology that sounds like a lecture. I have listened repeatedly to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld dismissively brush aside penetrating questions from Members of Congress about both his policies and their execution.

We have seen Rumsfeld and his civilian managers at the Pentagon fail to appreciate and understand concerns from their uniformed command structure. They have dismissed the truth tellers like General Eric Shinseki who gave an honest and accurate assessment of troop requirements. They have removed people within the administration like White House National Economic Council Director Larry Lindsey who was candid about the cost of this war.

At one time I thought Rumsfeld's refusal to put a price on the projected cost on the mission he was leading was because he was trying to hide it.

While it is true there has been no excess of candor from this crew, it is becoming more and more clear that another reason that Rumsfeld and his team have not been forthcoming is that they probably really do not know. They have not a clue and repeatedly do not appear to care that they do not know.

The most recent example from the guy who is always trying to look like he is in charge but not knowing what is going on is the report of the abuse of Iraqi prisoners which has forced the President into a series of embarrassing efforts to apologize. A war that has begun with the exaggerated threats of weapons of mass destruction has morphed into a war that is based upon, well, I frankly do not begin to understand the latest justification. It took reporters like Seymour Hersh of the New Yorker to force other reporters to know what they knew and only when the truth behind the administration's contradictions and misinformation is exposed does the administration acknowledge that there may be a problem. And now months after a report that highlighted these problems, there is a grudging acknowledgment and apparently some steps are being taken to correct it after widespread damage to our credibility, damage to our already low-standing in the Arab world, and giving a green light to people who take our troops and other American citizens hostage as we have lost moral authority to effectively protest abuse of our people.

The administration does not know what is going on and clearly they are unsure about what to do. They are spending huge sums of money on private contractors that is not just eating up far more than it would take to equip U.S. troops properly but blurs lines of responsibility. They do not know whom to hold accountable, and if they did, it is unclear what they can do to these independent contractors other than canceling a contract.

I think it is clear four things need to happen. First, we should open our Iraqi prisons to independent third-party monitoring by the United Nations and International Red Cross. There is a reason why we should honor constitutional protections and commit to international standards of law and prisoner treatment. We should stop delegating to unaccountable private contractors functions that should be under the direct control and supervision of United States military uniformed command. We need to get a new Secretary of Defense, somebody who really is on top of the situation and who does read reports, who is not dismissive of our allies, of Congress, and of his own uniformed command.

Most important, for those of us who are in Congress, we should be finding out ourselves about these issues, not relying on the New Yorker and CNN.

There was a time when congressional panels, oversight committees were exercising oversight. We can grumble about the administration, but failure to do our job is only our fault.