Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, today, I missed the following rollcall votes: rollcall number 461--on agreeing to the Rangel amendment to H.R. 5025, rollcall number 462--on agreeing to the Olver amendment to H.R. 5025, rollcall number 463--on agreeing to the Stenholm amendment to H.R. 5025, rollcall number 464--on motion to recommit H.R. 5025, rollcall number 465--on passage of H.R. 5025. Had I been present I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall votes 461 and 464, and I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 462, 463 and 465.

Madam Speaker, we will soon double the size of this Capitol, adding a new Visitors Center. As the first thing visitors see, this space must reflect the values of our Nation and the way it inspires young Americans to public service.

Today I am leading a bipartisan group of Members to introduce the American Heroes Act, H.R. 5038. The act authorizes a statue honoring the people of United Flight 93 who fought the first battle in the war on terror over the skies of Pennsylvania. But for their sacrifice, the Capitol might have been destroyed.

We also authorize each State to add one new hero after essay contests in America's high schools. In this way, the new entrance to our temple of democracy will have new heroes adding to the pantheon in the Capitol.

As we approach the third anniversary of September 11, let us honor the heroes of Flight 93 who gave their lives to protect Washington, and let us also make sure that when this Capitol expands, it is filled with men and women who inspire us, especially young Americans, to public service.

Mr. Speaker, on September 11, 2001, fifty police officers lost their lives in the line of duty, serving our nation with honor, courage, and a selfless commitment. Today, as we approach the third anniversary of the September 11 attacks, we still see the same noble qualities from law enforcement officers on a daily basis. Officers Jeremy Gaughan, Michael Mann, and Kevin Schreiner of the Gurnee, Illinois Police Department are three examples of such courage.

On January 27, 2003, three neighborhoods in my district fell victim to a string of crimes all carried out by the same assailant. After murdering a night school student, fleeing from a hit and run scene, and attempting to carjack a young woman's vehicle, the assailant was cornered by Gurnee Police Officer Kevin Schreiner. Officer Schreiner responded to the shots fired call, located the suspect's vehicle and attempted to pull it over.

The suspect attempted to flee behind a private residence, where he began to fire upon Officer Schreiner. Officer Schreiner could not take cover before being shot in the left arm, with the bullet exiting his left shoulder. Despite being seriously wounded, Officer Schreiner radioed for assistance and remained on the scene until Officers Michael Mann and Jeremy Gaughan could arrive. As Officers Schreiner and Mann continued to draw repeated fire from the suspect, Officer Gaughan was able to move into position, fired once, and killed the suspect.

If not for the heroic and decisive actions of these three officers, there is little doubt that this assailant would have attacked more people in my Congressional district. Their selfless commitment and courage under fire are the same qualities found in the law enforcement officers who gave their lives on September 11. I am grateful for the actions of these three men, and am pleased to announce that they will be honored at the 11th annual TOP COPS Awards ceremony here in Washington, DC on September 11.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in recognizing the bravery of these men and every law enforcement officer for their noble service.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the thirtieth anniversary of Turkey's invasion of Cyprus. This anniversary serves as a reminder of three decades of illegal occupation by Turkish military forces of over one-third of Cyprus's territory.

On July 20, 1974, Turkey invaded Cyprus, forcing nearly 200,000 Greek Cypriots from their homes. To this day, in defiance of United Nations General Assembly and Security Council resolutions, Turkey maintains more than 30,000 troops in the occupied territory.

The division of Cyprus has gone on for too long. The past year has seen great efforts by the Cypriots, the United States, and the U.N. to develop a plan for reunification. Unfortunately, the U.N. sponsored April 2004 vote on reunification failed to pass.

Cyprus's recent accession to the European Union presents great opportunities to join its European counterparts in strongly supporting human rights and fundamental freedoms. These values should lay the foundation for a final settlement. On this anniversary, I join my colleagues in looking forward to a future where Greek and Turkish Cypriots can once again live in peace on one unified island.

Mr. Speaker, today I missed a series of votes due to the visit of the President to my district. Had I been present, I would have voted in the following way:

``Yes'' on rollcall No. 407, H. Res. 738, the rule providing for the Morocco Free Trade Agreement.

``Yes'' on rollcall No. 408, H.R. 4175, Veteran's Compensation COLA Act of 2004.

``Yes'' on rollcall No. 409, H. Res. 728, sense of Congress on Presidential election postponement.

``No'' on rollcall No. 410, H.R. 3313, Marriage Protection Act of 2003.

``Yes'' on rollcall No. 411, H.R. 4056, Commercial Aviation MANPADS Defense Act.

``Yes'' on rollcall No. 412, H. Res. 652, urging the Government of the Republic of Belarus to ensure a democratic, transparent, and fair election process for its parliamentary elections in the fall of 2004.

``Yes'' on rollcall No. 413, H.R. 4842, United States-Morocco Free Trade Implementation Act.

``Yes'' on rollcall No. 414, H. Con. Res. 436, celebrating 10 years of majority rule in the Republic of South Africa.

``Yes'' on rollcall No. 415, H. Con. Res. 418, recognizing the importance in history of the 150th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the United States and Japan.

``No'' on rollcall No. 416, motion to recommit H.R. 4837, Military Construction Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2005.

``Yes'' on rollcall No. 417, H.R. 4837, Military Construction Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2005.

``Yes'' on rollcall No. 418, conference report on H.R. 4613, Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2005.

``Yes'' on rollcall No. 419, H. Con. Res. 469, condemning the attack on the AMIA Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

``Yes'' on rollcall No. 420, H. Con. Res. 467, declaring genocide in Darfur, Sudan.

``No'' on rollcall No. 421, motion to instruct conferees on H.R. 1308.

Mr. Speaker, over 33 years ago, Bruce Rodewald joined the Arlington Heights Fire Department located in my Congressional District. Thirteen years later he accepted the title of Fire Chief and for the last 20 years he has led the department with the highest distinction and honor.

Chief Rodewald comes from a long lineage of firefighters and community leaders. Both his father and grandfather served in the Arlington Heights Fire Department. His son also serves as a firefighter and paramedic in a neighboring town.

During his tenure as Fire Chief, the village of Arlington Heights' Class III Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating was upgraded to an ISO I rating. This is the highest ranking given for a municipality's fire protection services. Arlington Heights is one of only about 40 fire departments in the county to have received this outstanding distinction.

Mr. Rodewald's dedication to his department and the village of Arlington Heights is unequaled. He had originally planned on retiring from the department in 2001. However, after the September 11th attacks, Chief Rodewald decided to forgo his retirement and continue his service. For the last 3 years he has dedicated himself to the reorganization of the Arlington Heights Fire Department to reflect the heightened levels of awareness and preparedness necessary in the post 9/11 world.

In his years of service, Fire Chief Bruce Rodewald has led the Arlington Heights Fire Department with the professionalism and dedication required of a community leader. The Department he leaves behind is one of the most well-prepared and trained in the Nation. Chief Rodewald's tenure in the Arlington Heights Fire Department is worthy of the highest commendation. I wish him much happiness in retirement and offer him and his family my sincerest thanks and appreciation. Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me in recognizing this extraordinary individual.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in very strong support of this bill and the work of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) and the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), our chair and ranking minority member.

Mr. Chairman, many have said that the United States in this current campaign should build allies, that we should strengthen our ties with other governments, that we should back peace treaties and agreements that make war much less likely. This bill does that.

In 1917, the U.S. went to war in Europe and lost hundreds of thousands of young men. In the following years, our government took the easy way out. We demobilized. We saddled allies with debt. We focused resources at home. It was a very popular set of decisions but also laid the foundation for World War II.

One man who understood this well as a mistake was Harry Truman, a veteran of World War I. He saw the waste of a Second World War and knew that he had to do everything to prevent another conflict.

We had to keep an army overseas. We had to lead international organizations. We had to help allies. These were not popular decisions, and Truman made these tough decisions that started this appropriations bill when he stood at 32 percent in the polls.

The lessons he learned were well applied to the world after September 11. This bill backs our allies, especially in the Middle East. It also provides debt relief and reduces the growth of population in countries that can barely create jobs for the people they already have. We have learned that we must be engaged and aggressive with aid and provide leadership in conflict regions.

One institution Truman created was the World Bank, officially titled the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. The bank moved quickly into occupied Japan and Germany to rebuild those countries. We fulfilled our obligations and built not just security relationships but allies.

Years after the Bank moved in, we finally created new governments in Germany and Japan. The Bank has a proud tradition of moving quickly and keenly in new states emerging from civil war. I am the only Member of Congress that is an alumni of the Bank, and during my time we opened offices in zones of conflict in quasi states and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.

The Bank also provided aid to Croatia and Bosnia and Haiti. It had a proud staff that knew their work was dangerous but important. Given this, it is surprising the World Bank is now so slow to help the people of Iraq. Iraq is a founding member of the World Bank. After the coalition moved into Baghdad, the Bank launched a timely study of Iraq's needs, but then most action stopped.

After the U.N. Baghdad bombing, the Bank lost a staff member and withdrew all of its international staff from Iraq. No one has returned, and the Bank has no plans to put international staff in Iraq.

Worse, the Bank staff spent from May, 2003, until 2004 debating whether to recognize a new government. I think this is a call to action to Secretary Snow to rectify the situation and hope that we can act.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) for the time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment to honor our colleague, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).

When the Founding Fathers envisioned a new Nation based on self- government, they wrote many rules into our Constitution. Many things were formally laid out, but many assumptions were left unsaid. One of the assumptions were that among the representatives chosen would be people who were consensus and coalition builders, people whose highest allegiance was not to the political party but to country. It is on the backs of such leaders that self-government depends.

Doug Bereuter is an embodiment of the kind of leader our Founding Fathers assumed that would move our country forward.

I have worked with the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), as I called him as a staff member and as a Member, for 21 years. I call him a friend, but I admire him more.

Forty years ago, Republican Senator Arthur Vandenberg joined with Democratic President Harry Truman to start the Marshall Plan. Many Members of Congress objected to a spending program overseas, but Senator Vandenberg said, ``Partnership should end at the water's edge.''

In his service on the Committee on International Relations and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, no Member of Congress embraced that ideal more than Doug Bereuter.

I worked closely with him on food assistance programs for North Korean children. Despite a formal state of war between our two countries, Doug Bereuter was our leader, championing a humanitarian vision where, as Ronald Reagan said, ``A hungry child knows no politics.''

Doug pioneered leadership for the P.L. 480 program and for the Farmer-to-Farmer programs. These programs fed the hungry and represented the highest ideals of the American people.

We honor Doug Bereuter today. I want to also mention his work with the intelligence community to boost foreign language instruction by the U.S. government. No action will boost the long-term defenses of the U.S. more than the Bereuter foreign language initiative.

We wish the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) well as the new head of the Asia Foundation and urge the adoption of the amendment as a way to honor a real American and someone totally committed to the humanitarian vision of the United States overseas.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment.

This amendment sends a clear signal that we will be economic conservatives, that we will protect the public treasury, that we will also respect the private buyouts and the private settlements that have already happened with a substantial amount of funds already going to the tobacco industry States and tobacco growers. This amendment stands for the principle that if we buy out, then they should cease producing tobacco, which under the tobacco buyout does not happen. And for all of us as good protectors of the public FSC, it is incumbent upon us to stop new government programs and to make sure we restrict government spending especially at this time when our government budget is in the red.

We know there is an unfunded liability for Social Security. We know there is an unfunded liability for Medicare. It is very important for us then to restrict public spending so that we can honor the promises to the American people, especially for retirement security and health care, that we have already made.

I applaud the gentleman for putting this together. I apologize to my subcommittee chairman, who I know personally is a rancher and does not have a personal stake in this issue; and I applaud the gentleman for offering the amendment. I urge its adoption.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished chairman and the ranking minority member for their strong leadership.

As a former staffer, the construction of a staff gym is one I am very proud to see move forward. Congress spends a lot of money each year on programs to promote physical fitness and to fight obesity. Finally, the Congress is doing that right here. This legislation includes a $3 million fund for the construction of a staff gym located in the Rayburn garage. Along with my colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood), who has advocated this for so long, we have finally begun the process of the construction of a staff health and fitness center because it is time to give our staffs the same opportunities that Members have right here.

We employ over 17,000 people in the legislative branch. Any employer of that size in Chicago would have long provided such facilities to their employees. The staff gym gives men and women who serve here in the House the opportunity to be fitter and be able to better handle the stress of their jobs, handling the long hours and under sometimes low- paying conditions working for our constituents.

I want to thank the subcommittee staff, especially Liz Dawson for her work in making this a reality.

During the subcommittee markup, another issue was addressed to halt funding for the Capitol Police mounted horse unit. I offered an amendment to deny funding because of fiscal constraints in the face of security threats. It is imperative that we invest funds in protecting the Capitol and spend them wisely. I applaud the Capitol Police for their cooperative work with law enforcement agencies to minimize the threat but do not believe that investing taxpayer dollars in 18th century technology represents fiscal responsibility.

We should not fund a program that has so many unresolved issues. A perfect example is the issue of quartering horses on the Capitol grounds. Last year, the committee was told the horses would be using Park Police stables on the far side of the mall. At very little expense, they were supposed to be housed close to the Capitol complex. However, that is not happening.

Currently, the Capitol Police horses are stabled at a Bureau of Land Management facility on Gunston Road in Lorton, Virginia, 1 hour's drive with trailers from the Capitol. The Architect of the Capitol does not have a current cost estimate for constructing a stable or handling manure on the new location, but the K-9 kennel construction cost over $1 million, and one could easily hazard a guess that horse stables would cost even more than the K-9 facility that we have built. If the program continues, Congress would have to pay for use of the BLM facilities or constructing an entirely new horse stables and waste disposal system at taxpayer expense. By blocking funding for a new mounted unit, the committee has taken the action to save taxpayers approximately $1.8 million over the next 10 years.

Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of this legislation. I thank the ranking minority member and the chairman for their work on this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, on July 9, 2004, I missed rollcall vote No. 354, the motion to recommit for H.R. 2828. I missed the vote due to a meeting I had with the President of the World Bank. Had I been present I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, over 22 years ago, Paul T. McCarthy became the Village Manager of Glenview, IL, located in my Congressional District. Since that time, Mr. McCarthy has played the leading role in the development of one of suburban Chicago's most prosperous communities.

Upon arriving in Glenview, Mr. McCarthy embarked upon an ambitious program to attract businesses and residents to the community. One of his first projects was to improve the bond rating of the Village as an incentive to investors and capital. Within 8 years, Glenview had achieved Moody's highest bond rating of AAA. It has maintained that rating ever since.

With this strong financial foundation, Mr. McCarthy began to implement his vision for the Village. In 1990, he negotiated the Willow Road Corridor Agreement between Glenview and Northbrook. In 1997, he negotiated the purchase of the privately-owned water company, North Suburban Public Utilities. He also oversaw the closing of the Lutter/ Krohn landfill and its redevelopment as a golf course. These 3 initiatives, along with numerous other projects, had tangible, beneficial affects upon Glenview residents and were the direct result of Mr. McCarthy's leadership and vision.

Mr. McCarthy's biggest challenge was ahead of him. In the second or third round of military base closings, the massive Glenview Naval Air Station was shut down, opening up thousands of prime real estate acres for development. Mr. McCarthy led the development of this area with extraordinary success. The Glen, as the area is now known, has become a nationally recognized and award winning mixed use development, representing $1 billion in public and private investment.

In his 22 years of service, Mr. McCarthy has led the Village of Glenview with tremendous foresight and success. When he entered city hall as Village Manager, Glenview had a budget of $15.4 million and 180 employees. As Mr. McCarthy retires, the Glenview budget is $80.7 million and the Village employs 320 individuals. Mr. McCarthy's leadership as Village Manager of Glenview, IL, is worthy of the highest commendation. I wish him and his wife much happiness in retirement. Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me in recognizing this extraordinary individual.

Mr. Speaker, today, I missed rollcall vote number 303: H. Res. 692, to provide consideration of H.R. 4663. Had I been present I would have voted ``yea'' on this vote.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, we have all heard of forecasting to estimate future spending by our government. Our experience with forecasting the cost of entitlement spending shows wild inaccuracies.

A classic example comes from forecasts we used on the spending under a new entitlement program to care for patients suffering from kidney failure. Under estimates before our Congress, Representatives were told 90,000 patients would enroll for taxpayer-funded dialysis by 1995. 90,000 patients enrolled in this new Federal entitlement program by 1985, 10 years earlier than expected. By 1995, there were 239,000 patients in the program, not the 90,000 estimated. Today, in fact, there are 400,000 patients in this program, so spending is wildly above that which was estimated when the program was voted on before this House.

My point with the amendment before us is simple: we need better forecasts before we change or improve entitlement spending programs. We would do that if we started a process which every budget analyst fears, and that is called backcasting. Backcasting by the Congressional Budget Office would require analysts to look at the actual spending over the previous year, with an eye to reviewing the actual errors they made in the estimates used the previous year.

Backcasting would give our budget analysts a grade. It would show the Congress clearly where actual spending of a program differed from the assumptions used in the previous forecast.

Backcasting is now a standard procedure used in nearly every investment house on Wall Street, and every American family with an IRA reviews the estimates of promised performance by their mutual funds and then compares it to what actually happened with their retirement nest egg.

I think it is about time we use this time-tested procedure to improve estimates used to prepare our budget using a rigorous analysis, comparing our previous estimates and the errors made compared to our actual budget experience.

This amendment comes just in time for the budget history of the United States. Right now, over 60 percent of our budget is spent through entitlement spending. Soon 70 percent of the budget will be spent in entitlement spending. This means that the estimates we use to set benefits and beneficiaries are not just important; they are crucial to the long-term financial strength of the United States.

We make vital promises to America's seniors. We must use advanced forecasting and backcasting to make sure that the promises we make to America's seniors are promises that taxpayers can afford to keep.

I appreciate the support of the gentleman from Iowa (Chairman Nussle) on this amendment and the lack of opposition from our senior, very distinguished ranking Democratic member on this.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle), my distinguished chairman.

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

Mr. Chairman, I would urge adoption of the amendment. You can imagine CBO analysts do not exactly want to be forced to go back and compare exactly how actual performance deviated from the estimate that they provided.

Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, absolutely. You can imagine

CBO analysts are somewhat reticent for us to formally go back and see how their estimates varied.

I urge adoption of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute.

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

Mr. Chairman, I urge support for the Republican Consensus Budget Substitute. In sum, the consensus substitute saves $445 billion to help protect Social Security and Medicare.

This substitute includes 10 consensus principles that help restrain spending and make it difficult to create new government programs. It represents the work of the Conservative Republican Study Committee and the Moderate Republican Tuesday Group to put spending restraint as a core value of this Congress.

We know that Medicare's unfunded liability is in the red $21 trillion. We know that Social Security's unfunded liability is in the red $10 trillion. In just 5 years, the first baby boomers will start collecting Social Security checks. The number of people collecting Social Security checks will then climb from 40 million Americans to 80 million Americans. To honor our commitment to Social Security and Medicare, we must restrain spending on other programs. Our substitute would cut the growth of other entitlement programs by $445 billion, saving that to meet our Social Security and Medicare commitments.

Now, the Federal Government has made two important promises to the American people: one, to provide for the common defense; and, two, to ensure some retirement security. To honor those expensive financial commitments, we must hold back spending on other programs to keep those promises. In this substitute, we do some things, and we do not do other things. We do not cut Social Security and Medicare. We do honor our commitment to America's retirement security.

And we have other reforms. Ten reforms. They are: a rainy day fund for emergencies, so that we stop our process of emergency appropriations outside the budget.

We have baselines without automatic spending increase inflation adjustments, to begin to slow down the process of spending.

We have annual caps to make sure that we can keep track of the actual budget targets we set.

We have spending controls, automatic reductions, in non-Social Security, non-Medicare accounts to make sure that a budget we pass is one that we actually keep.

We keep promises to seniors by ensuring that Social Security and Medicare are not cut and have additional resources at the government's command to make sure that those programs are strengthened.

We have enhanced rescission protections to make sure that the President would be able to eliminate pork barrel spending projects, like greenhouses in Iowa.

We would be able to also focus on government inefficiencies with a new bipartisan commission.

We would be able to have proper accounting of long-term liability through accrual accounting.

We also have a clear showing of the Federal debt through more transparent reforms.

And, lastly, we maintain our fiscal discipline by making sure pay-as- you-go rules apply to entitlement spending.

Now, many criticize this effort, because while we do not touch Social Security or Medicare, we do hold other spending to the rate of inflation. Some say we must allow government spending to grow much faster than inflation. But if spending grows faster than taxes, we will run out of money; and every senior knows that.

Even Senator Kerry does not agree with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. They say that we cannot slow health care costs. But Senator Kerry disagrees. And in his latest TV ad he says the following, and I quote: ``We spend about $1.5 trillion every year on health care in America. $350 billion of that has nothing to do with care. It is all paperwork. We will literally save billions of dollars in health care costs in America by becoming more streamlined and more efficient.'' And he could not be more right.

Ask your seniors a question: Should we cut other entitlement programs so that $445 billion can go to protect Social Security and Medicare? Our seniors are savvy citizens. They know that spending in other programs threatens the long-term future of Social Security and Medicare, and they know that the retirement of the baby boom means that we will need to cut other programs to protect Social Security and Medicare.

Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the substitute.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), the chairman of the moderate Republican Tuesday Group.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We have an argument here. One side urges spending restraint and the other side urges higher taxes. I lean toward spending restraint and believe that Americans are taxed enough. This Congress was run by the other party in the 1980s and we raised taxes back then. But spending went up even faster than we raised taxes. We remember in the 1980s that for every $1 in taxes raised, the Congress lifted spending by $1.24. Therefore, taxes went up and so did the deficit.

Ask your seniors this question. Should we cut other programs to make sure that we have $445 billion to help protect Social Security? The gentleman asks, what commitment is there by the United States Government to make sure that these savings go to Social Security and Medicare? As I referred to in my opening, we have an unfunded liability in Medicare of $21 trillion, and we have an unfunded liability in Social Security of $10 trillion. There is a sacred bond and a piece of paper from the Treasury Department to the Social Security Administration that says that the American taxpayer will honor these debts.

But with what money? Ask seniors this question: Should we cut entitlement spending to make sure that the money is there for Social Security and Medicare? Should we make sure that their basic retirement security and their basic health care program has the money it needs to cover those sacred promises?

As I said before, we made two sacred promises to the people of the United States: one, that we would provide for the common defense. We made that promise in 1776. And, two, that we would protect at a minimum level their retirement security. But as I said, we are $21 trillion in the hole on Medicare and $10 trillion in the hole on Social Security. To honor those commitments, we have got to restrain spending. We have got to make sure that we have the money available to protect America's seniors, and with that I urge adoption of the substitute.

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

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I do want to commend the gentleman for a very trying and difficult debate. But this was one of the few times in the Congress where we did not have a scripted debate. This was one of the few times where we did not know how the votes would turn out. And the American people have seen that we are now wrestling with a very difficult problem of how to bring spending under control so that we meet the commitments to Social Security, to Medicare, to the Nation's defense that we have already made.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, earlier today, I missed rollcall vote No. 290, H. Con. Res. 460, regarding the security of Israel and the principles of peace in the Middle East. As a strong supporter of the state of Israel had I been present I would have voted ``yea''.