Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Appropriations have until midnight, March 11, 2005, to file a privileged report, making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding. I would be happy to try to respond. At this moment it is my anticipation that we will be in the Rules Committee on Monday next in the evening, sometime in the late day, I suppose; and hopefully we will be on the floor on Tuesday. If not on Tuesday, Wednesday.

Mr. Speaker, I very much appreciate the gentlewoman being so generous with the time available. It is a great privilege to work with the Committee on Rules on this very important issue that we have been trying to finalize here in the House for a couple of years.

I rise in very strong support of H.R. 39, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy For Users, known as TEA-LU. I want to commend the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) and his ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) for the effort they put into this package. It is a bill that reflects much of the balance of the needs of the Members of the House.

As the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) will recall, I have spent a lot of time working with Members of this

committee from the first day I walked into the Congress. Years ago, my first committee assignment was to the Committee on Public Works, which is the heart of this work itself. The chairman believes that a key to a successful 6-year transportation bill involves the revenue of the bill itself.

Indeed, I understand that the chairman has worked rather intently to find mechanisms whereby we can be assured that enough money is available to meet the many demands across the country, including such things as indexing the gas tax, a proposal that I myself was involved in many years ago in the State legislature.

It is a fact that the demands for transportation systems that work are a primary national concern. The major lacking regarding that is money availability. So I am very much appreciative of the chairman's difficulties. I appreciate the gentleman from Alaska's (Mr. Young) efforts to meet the enormous demands from the Members across the country. My colleague from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) mentioned an item, a highway transportation item, that is very critical to her constituency, the people of West Virginia. That can be replicated across the country. Almost every district faces these challenges.

I do, as I speak to the challenge, express also some concern about the guarantee within this bill that essentially would suggest where we fall short of money under current circumstances, additional funding will come by way, or likely come by way, of the general funds.

As all of the Members know, we are working intently this year to move our appropriations bills ahead of schedule and indeed under budget. As we go about that, there are a lot of pressures on our dollar availability as relates to the general fund.

So I really rise to express concern about things like the following: The funding floors mandated in TEA-LU would require discretionary appropriations of about $1.7 billion from the general fund for 2006. Because those funds remain short, obviously, such a conflict will create difficulty in moving forward with the regular appropriations process.

In addition to the mass transit difficulty that is obvious to anybody who will but look, the highway category of TEA-LU guarantees $37.4 billion in highway budget resources. This is $1.6 billion over the President's request of $35.9 billion. As you can see, we have great difficulty moving our way through this process and making sense out of the budget, too. It is my intention to work very closely with the chairman and the ranking member to make sure that these challenges are handled in a way that meets all of our needs.

In turn, I look forward to working with members of the committee and the House to try to be responsive to challenges they face relative to transportation as well.

I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 2 of rule XI I submit for printing in the Record the Rules and Practices of the Committee on Appropriations as follows:

Practices:

Committee on Appropriations

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman very much for the time.

I very much apologize being as late as I am. I meant to be here earlier, but I am glad I walked in as my colleague the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) was making his remarks, for the emotion that we could feel in his very presence and voice is a reflection of how all of us feel, and I join in this celebration of our friend Bob Matsui.

All of us who care about public affairs and the Congress absolutely know that fundamental to our success in solving people's problems involves our understanding of just how important people are to our entire process.

The gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) and I got to know each other first in Sacramento, and at that very time, overlapping our service, our friend Bob Matsui was serving on the city council. I learned to get to know Bob in a different venue, however, for he and I were elected in 1978 and came here as freshman, not so long ago.

Bob Matsui, as you have heard from many a person, is a fabulous, fabulous reflection of the best of public affairs.

I would like my colleagues to know that while we all believe public policy is what we should really be about, looking for the solutions to problems that the people care about, looking for alternative avenues for making a difference, when it comes to it in the final analysis we are all in this together.

The American public has grown tired of that rhetoric that we hear all too often that reflects the fringe of our dialogue; and far from that fringe but rather right in the heart of the best of us was a personality we have been discussing today, Robert Matsui of Sacramento, of the Committee on Ways and Means, a wonderful, wonderful human being, who was willing to look you in the eye, tell you what he thought when he disagreed with you. All too often, and much more, he was putting his arm around you and telling you what you did well and what he thought of you on the positive side.

If we could take the extreme from our rhetoric and the dialogue around here and remember Bob Matsui suddenly because of that, this House, great as it is, would indeed be an even better place.

I am pleased to take just a moment to express to Doris, their family, all their friends in Sacramento, how much we will miss them and how much we pain for especially his personal family. Our own friends in Sacramento who remain have talked often about the greatness of this man. We only had a chance by getting to know that by having the privilege of serving with him here.

With that, let me bid Bob adieu and join with all of his dear friends here in expressing our love and prayers for not just his family, but the future, the future of those he served, and know that we will all miss his service.

Mr. Speaker, I have little doubt that the people of Florida know just how significant the work that the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) has been about all this night on behalf of all of them. To have the chairman of this committee be that responsive at such a critical moment is evidence of the lifelong work of this wonderful man on behalf of his State in this House.

The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg) and I have had a chance to work with him for all these years on the Committee on Appropriations. It has indeed been a pleasure. I have told anybody who would but listen that the one quality of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) that I would hope one day to acquire involves his almost incredible patience, his patience in dealing with us especially in times of crises.

At a moment like this, as this very important base measure goes forward, to have him effectively put together the sort of response that we need to have in times of crises for the people of our country is reflective of his leadership. I know that most who have watched his work know just how effective he can be. But at this moment all the people of Florida are aware of that, and he will be here for as long as he wants to be here to continue with that service.

It is our privilege to work with him, and it was my great pleasure to spend a little time with him early this morning trying to deal with a few little difficulties last night. I congratulate our chairman on a job well done.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate very much my colleague yielding me this time. I will be rising later in the day to express my very serious concern about the Menendez substitute, but that is for a later time.

But I wanted to take a moment to express the House's deep appreciation for the work being done every day by the men and women who make up our security agencies. We all know that during the 1990s, much of their work was disrupted by undermining, especially of our HUMINT assets in the country, throughout the world, particularly in the Middle East. But between now and then, those men and women who work every day and put their lives on the line on our behalf, those who make up the agencies that are our security agencies, need to know that there is broadly-based bipartisan support for their work here in the Congress.

Mr. Chairman, regretfully, I rise in very strong opposition to the Menendez amendment, for this substitute does not reflect the real word that we must deal with when we are trying to make certain that our intelligence activities positively affect our men and women who have their lives threatened overseas.

The Menendez amendment is similar to H.R. 10, but includes a number of provisions that are unacceptable or at least should be to this House. Probably one of the most troubling aspects of the amendment before us is the provision that would call for the disclosure of the aggregate level of funding provided to the intelligence community.

Mr. Chairman, I would ask my colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), to please tell us what the logic is behind disclosing to our enemies the top line of our intelligence budget? I am not worried about what the Senate may say or suggest, I am not sure they thought through what this might mean. But what is the logic behind our disclosing to our enemies the top line of our intelligence work? Who can it serve in terms of America's interests to disclose those top lines?

The September 28, 20004, statement of administrative policy states clearly that ``legislation should not compel disclosure, including the Nation's enemies in war, of the amounts requested by the President and provided by the Congress for the conduct of the Nation's intelligence activities.''

H.R. 10 retains a classified intelligence budget. It is absolutely in the American interest, our public interest, our military interest to make certain that those top lines are not disclosed. If the gentleman would not depend upon the Senate, I would like to hear the gentleman's logic behind disclosure of those top lines. Indeed, it is fundamental to the future security of our troops to make certain our intelligence programs are kept within the interest of those troops who are defending us overseas.

If the gentleman would like to respond specifically to that, perhaps I could understand better why he would take these steps.

I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Who did?

Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I asked the gentleman who disclosed the amount?

But who disclosed the amount?

Reclaiming my time once again, Mr. Chairman, I am not certain the gentleman has been in the intelligence rooms. If he has disclosed that, then he is in violation of the rules.

Mr. Speaker, it is with pleasure that I rise today to recognize Major General Tony L. Corwin, United States Marine Corps. Major General Corwin has served as the Legislative Assistant to the Commandant of the Marine Corps for the last five years.

Many Members of Congress and their staffs have come to know General Corwin as an exceptional spokesman for the United States Marine Corps. His straightforward approach and extensive knowledge of programs and policy have been of great benefit to the U.S. Congress, and our national security.

Through the effective communication efforts of General Corwin, the U.S. Congress has been kept fully informed of the crucial programs vital to the success of America's force-in-readiness: the United States Marine Corps. These important programs include, the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), the V-22 program, the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV), the KC-130J, the Maritime Prepositioned Force (Future), initial issue of gear for the individual Marine, LHD-17, LHA (R). General Corwin is thoroughly knowledgeable on all of these programs.

General Corwin has provided Congress with vital information regarding the purchase of the Blount Island Maritime Prepositioning port facility, and why it is vital to the United State's national security. As a result of his efforts, the House has agreed to provide $115 million to acquire this property. In his role as lead liaison with the Marine Corps, General Corwin has overseen the responses to more than 25,000 congressional inquiries made to House and Senate Members. His responses have always been timely, accurate, and professional.

The Marine Corps Air-Ground Combat Center at Twentynine Palms--the Corps' largest base--is in my district, and I receive numerous requests from Marines, and their family members on a myriad of issues. General Corwin and his superb staff have helped me provide top-notch service for these defenders of our Nation.

General Corwin is known for his in-depth knowledge of the legislative issues and operational requirements of the Marine Corps. But he is also greatly respected as a dedicated leader and officer who possesses a deep and abiding passion for what it means to be a Marine. He has an unquestionable devotion to duty, impeccable integrity, absolute sound character and is a consummate professional. Through his assignment as the Legislative Assistant to the Commandant, General Corwin has served the Congress and our Nation extraordinarily well.

As Chairman of the Defense Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, I have had invaluable insights and great appreciation for the caliber of General Corwin's work. He sets a high standard for others to emulate. I wish General Corwin and his wife, Thanya, and their wonderful family continued success in their future endeavors. Many thanks, General Corwin. Our Nation benefits from your outstanding leadership.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 735, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 4613) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes.

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

We will not take a great deal of time of our colleagues in the House. Following the tradition of the ranking member of the full committee and my colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), we certainly want to extend our great thanks to all of our colleagues and staff.

Mr. Speaker, it is my great privilege to present to the House the conference agreement on fiscal year 2005 Defense appropriations bill.

My colleagues, one month ago--exactly to this day--the House passed its version of this bill, with overwhelming support. The Senate followed suit shortly afterwards, and like the House, the other body showed nearly unanimous support for this bill.

And here we are tonight, with this conference report. We present a bipartisan Defense bill, targeted at supporting our men and women in the Defense Department and intelligence community, at a most critical time in the Nation's history.

It is during a time of war.

It is during a time of challenge for our Nation and freedom-loving people everywhere.

And it is during a time when our country, once again, must take on the mantle of leading the world community.

This is as the United States has done before--as it must do today; and as it must continue to do in the future.

The President, and this Congress, understand this challenge. The President asked us to consider this bill--the largest Defense bill, in terms of dollars, in our Nation's history. In recognition of this, as I mentioned on a bipartisan basis both the House and the Senate moved this bill late last month into conference. And now we will soon be asking the House, and the other body, to send this final product to the President.

Mr. Speaker, I must say this conference agreement is an even better bill than passed the House. I truly believe that. I can say that because of the tremendous work done by the Members of the conference committee on both sides of the Capitol.

Mr. Speaker, we would not be here tonight without the leadership and experience of my colleague from Pennsylvania, Mr. Murtha.

And we would not be here without the experience, skill, and tenacity of the leaders of the Senate Defense Subcommittee, my friends, the senior Senators from Alaska and Hawaii.

The support and counsel of our chairman, Bill Young, and our ranking Member David Obey have also been invaluable at every step of the process. As has been the support of all the Members of the Defense subcommittees--both sides of the aisle, on both sides of the Capitol. I personally want to thank, and acknowledge, all of them.

I must pay tribute to our staffs--especially Sid Ashworth and Charlie Houy, who lead the Senate staff, and our subcommittee staff, led by Kevin Roper and David Morrison. Many thanks also to the full committee staff, Jim Dyer, John Blazey, Dale Oak, Therese McAuliffe, and John Scofield.

This bill reflects our best, collective judgment on how to meet those many challenges and demands confronting the Nation.

What does this bill do? We provide over $416 billion to support our Defense and intelligence communities; most importantly it supports the ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the global war on terrorism; it supports our troops who are on the front lines--it fully funds the pay raise, as well as the military pay, benefits, and medical programs; this bill increases funding to support the overall readiness of DoD forces worldwide; and it increases funding for intelligence.

Looking ahead, this bill also supports major equipment and research needs. For example--we provide over $1.6 billion over the budget request--to help restock and accelerate production of those items being used by our Army and Marine Corps in Iraq--ammunition; trucks; helicopters; and armored vehicles.

This bill also fully supports the President's objective of, later this year, initially fielding a missile defense to protect the United States. We also fund missile defenses for our troops in the field.

It continues production of major platforms such as the Virginia class submarine, the C-17, and V-22 transport aircraft, and the F/A-18 and F/ A-22 fighters.

And this bill increases funding to support ``military transformation''.

Mr. Speaker, most importantly, this bill puts first and foremost our men and women in uniform, especially those on the front lines. In that regard, as you all know, the President asked that we include in this bill some $25 billion to help defray the ongoing costs of our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have done just that--and shaped these funds in a way to provide our deployed forces with the funds they need to meet their most immediate demands.

Mr. Speaker, in summary, this is a bill that I am very, very proud of. And it is one that each and every Member of the House can take pride in also. It deserves your overwhelming support.

Now, if the House would indulge me, I want to thank a few people. Under the rules of our conference, this is the last Defense appropriations bill that I will have the privilege of bringing before the House as chairman. It has been a remarkable and rewarding experience. I want to thank my subcommittee members--on my side, Dave Hobson, Henry Bonilla, George Nethercutt, Duke Cunningham, Rodney Frelinghuysen, Todd Tiahrt, and Roger Wicker.

On the other side of the aisle, Norm Dicks, Martin Sabo, Peter Visclosky, and Jim Moran.

I want to also accord special thanks to the ranking Member of the full committee, Dave Obey, and of course, to my predecessor, our full committee chairman Bill Young, who has set a standard that I try every day to emulate. And of course, I must acknowledge my partner, our former chairman, the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Jack Murtha. I also must recognize the terrific staff that I've gotten to know pretty well over the past few years.

Chairman Young, and Jim Dyer, the chief clerk of the full committee, you've really done a great job in putting together a great team for us on the subcommittee; Alica Jones, Doug Gregory, Betsy Phillips, Paul Juola, Steve Nixon, Leslie Albright, Greg Lankler, Sarah Young, Paul Terry, Kris Mallard, Sherry Young, Kevin Jones, Callie Michael, and Linda Muir in our computer shop who provides us with so much support.

The same goes for our minority staff, David Morrison and Bill Gnacek. I must thank Carl Kime, of my personal office, who watches this bill for me and does an outstanding job. And, of course, all of the staff in my congressional office for their support and contributions.

I'd be remiss if I didn't mention those committee staff who have moved on to other endeavors, but who made significant contributions while they were with us. They include John Shank, Greg Dahlberg, Dave Kilian, Trish Ryan, Tina Jonas, Dave Norquist, Greg Walters, and Celia Alvarado.

And I cannot let this moment pass without mentioning Letitia White, formerly of my personal staff, who worked so hard on this bill for many years.

Finally, I must mention the clerk of the subcommittee, Kevin Roper, who pulls all this together. And for whom this conference may be the ``last time around'' as well.

Thank you so much. My colleagues, I thank all of you for your help, and for the privilege of serving with you.

At this point, Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert for the record a summary of the conference agreement.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JY04.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JY04.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JY04.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JY04.004

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JY04.005

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JY04.006

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the conference report on H.R. 4613, and that I may include tabular material.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, it was not my intention to speak on this matter, but I am a little disconcerted about discussions that would suggest that anybody on either side of the aisle is interested in some way or another of placing a limit on the opportunity for our men and women who are serving us across the country by way of their housing or by way of their potential for income.

I did not speak extensively on the earlier bill, but within that bill we had funding, full funding for a pay adjustment for our troops. I believe that everybody here who knows this subject knows that the authorizing committee just the other day moved a separate bill that would lift the lid in terms of the housing challenges we are talking about.

It is not the intention of the Members of this House in any way, shape or form to do anything but support our troops. Indeed, the last bill that passed the House had a $25 billion amendment as a part of its package that reflects our effort to make sure that money upon the time that bill is signed is readily available to fight the war overseas, as well as to make sure that we are doing what is necessary to care for the families, the men and women who make up the strength of this Nation.

I must say that my colleague from the Committee on Appropriations knows full well that on both sides of the aisle we are committed to serving our troops. This is not a partisan question by any matter or means. It is very dangerous to our national security when people try to carry this to partisan levels, and so that is the only reason I am speaking today is because the House has worked beautifully in this connection. It was a bit disconcerting for me at least to hear what I considered to be rhetoric rather than substance.

I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Reclaiming my time, the gentleman suggested that we are about to take the August recess; and thereby, I suppose, people are on vacation. I do not know about the gentleman, but I intend to go home and work and communicate to my constituents all of that which we are doing for the men and women who are serving us in this country. I mean, it is very, very important that we not suddenly decide this may be an issue whereby I can impact or give the impression that maybe one side is more holy than the other in terms of what we are trying to do for our troops. It is just the reverse. We have done our work well because we do so in an almost nonpartisan manner.

Mr. Chairman, I would hope as the gentleman is preparing to leave our body as my classmate and my dear friend, I hope that we will have a lot of time in the future to discuss the positive of this kind of discussion. In turn, all of us know that we serve our troops best when we take partisanship out of it.

Indeed, today, I am very proud of my colleague, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg), for the work he has done here; and I hope we can move forward from this point and discuss his bill in terms of the real values that have been contributed here. So congratulations to my colleague, and I appreciate him giving me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the managers on the part of the House have until midnight, July 20, 2004, to file a conference report on the bill (H.R. 4613) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes.

Madam Speaker, I thank very much my colleague for yielding me time.

I come to the floor to express my deep appreciation for the House's recognition of our colleague, former Member of the House and Republican Leader, Robert Michel, as the House goes about naming a veterans medical clinic after Robert H. Michel, a fabulous Member of the House who reflects much of that which is the best of this place.

He was a Member of the House who for many years served as the minority leader during much of the time that I was a member of that caucus. As he carried forward that responsibility, he also carried forward some of the most important qualities of leadership in this House. He absolutely recognized that beyond the policy work that we do, that friendship on both sides of the aisle was fundamental to our success. And Bob Michel understood that as we walked away from the Chamber, we could be friends. And time and time again, he demonstrated the value of that because he was able to accomplish things as minority leader that all too often these days we find not getting accomplished.

But, indeed, more important than all of that, Bob Michel represented his people in Illinois in a way like few ever have. He is a fabulous person and to have a medical clinic named after him is very, very appropriate, but particularly appropriate in this sense. It is a part of the past history, but at one time I had the privilege as serving as chairman of the subcommittee that handles veterans affairs and medical care problems. We all know that we are all very proud of the amount of money that we are, from time to time, able to get appropriated for veterans services. All too seldom, however, are the people who work here in an organized sense on behalf of veterans, all too seldom are they willing to go down to the communities where those services are actually delivered.

We have known for a long, long time that the big hospitals too often are too far away from where the services are needed, and too often the VSOs do not worry too much about whether the veterans are getting the service they need at home.

These medical clinics are designed to recognize that the huge hospital of the past is not necessarily the best way to deliver service in a local community either today or in the future. So this medical clinic as a part of the VA system appropriately reflects the changing demands and needs for medical services for our veterans; but most importantly in this instance, we recognize the fabulous service and the understanding of veterans' needs exhibited by our colleague, Bob Michel.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the motion to go to conference on H.R. 4613, and that I may include tabular material on the same.