Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. My fellow Missourian, Mark Twain, once said, ``The more you explain it to me, the more I don't understand it.'' I have no idea why we are considering this bill, because all the…
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. My fellow Missourian, Mark Twain, once said, ``The more you explain it to me, the more I don't understand it.''
I have no idea why we are considering this bill, because all the majority had to do was not raise a point of order on the appropriations bill. I do not want to say this is a cynical gesture, but it is. We are considering this bill because the majority is not serious about taking care of the troops and their families. 24,000 families will do without because the other bill will have a point of order raised on it. All they had to do on the other bill, the appropriations bill, was not to raise a point of order and 24,000 military families would have their housing in 2005.
I appreciate the fact that our friends in the majority are taking the issue seriously, but it appears to me that this is going around Robin Hood's barn to do what could be simply done by not raising a point of order.
While this stand-alone bill is fine on its merits, it is going to die in the Senate. It will go nowhere. What we wanted to do was raise the privatized housing cap in the Military Construction Appropriations Act. That is legislation that the Senate cannot ignore. And all we had to do was just not raise the point of order and those young families would have their housing.
I cannot argue against the words of this measure, but we should not be deceived. This is a ruse to avoid dealing with the privatized cap on an issue in a must-do piece of legislation. The details of the cap issue have been discussed at length by others, and I raised the issue during the rule on the other appropriations bill. Let me just say that because the Committee on the Budget refused to accommodate bipartisan requests on both sides of the aisle by the Committee on Armed Services, the Defense authorization bill bowed to CBO scoring. As a result, we could not fix the problem until 2006. Consequently, 24,000 military families do without.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
I thank the gentleman for agreeing with me.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
My recollection, during the earlier debate on the rule on the appropriation bill, was that my friend and my colleague and chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, during his very eloquent speech at that time, urged the gentleman from Iowa not to raise the point of order.
So I ask this question, Mr. Speaker: In order for us to have 24,000 more family units under the privatization program, the only thing that has to happen under the appropriation bill would be for the gentleman from Iowa, the chairman of the Committee on the Budget, not to raise a point of order.
So I ask the gentleman from Iowa, will he insist on raising the point of order on the appropriation bill?
I yield to the gentleman from Iowa.
Mr. Speaker, he will insist on raising the point of order.
Mr. Speaker, we just saw 24,000 military families getting their just housing delayed for a long time.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks).
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards).
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes).
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz).
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, we pride ourselves in this body, I know my chairman and I pride ourselves, in working for and supporting the troops. But supporting the troops is more than a bumper sticker. We are the one body in the United States of America that can speak, and speak with authority, and make good things happen for those families and those soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines.
I hate to turn the news on in the morning, because I hear so many Americans have either been wounded or killed or both in the far reaches of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Those St. Louis families, we are not going to take care of them. We are going to do it by insisting on a technical point of order on the appropriations bill. That is not right. So let us vote for this. I will support this suspension measure. I, of course, do so with reluctance because we could solve the problem so easily on the appropriations bill by just doing nothing.