Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I spent the month of August and the first part of September traveling across my district in upstate New York, listening to my constituents in townhall meetings, tele-townhalls and one-on-one discussions in my office. I've listened to doctors, nurses, hospital administrators in order to build consensus on what my constituents want to see as part of a health care reform bill. I learned a lot during that time, and I heard stories that would make hearts break regarding denied coverage or loss of coverage because of preexisting conditions and catastrophic illness.

I have promised my constituents that I will keep listening until we have to go to vote on this bill. However, it is crucial to America's financial health that we pass comprehensive health care reform to rid the current system of rampant waste, fraud and abuse, like the inflated costs of prescription drugs. Our economy cannot sustain the high cost of our current system, and it is clear to me that the health care reform in this country is not just the moral imperative for those who don't have health care insurance, but it's also an economic imperative for those that do have health care insurance, to ensure that those individuals can continue the coverage that they have.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mohawk Valley Community College (MVCC) for its extraordinary record of athletic achievement.

Under the direction of head coach Gary Parker, the Women's Outdoor Track and Field team finished the 2008-09 season with a 25-0 record against two-year college competition and earned first place at the National Junior College Athletic Association (NJCAA) Division III National Championship, marking the program's fourth national title.

The Women's Cross Country team, also under head coach Gary Parker, finished its season with an undefeated 25-0 record against two-year college competition, and rounded out the year by winning the NJCAA Division III National Championship, the program's ninth national title. Coupled with the Men's team's second place finish, MVCC's cross country program earned the coveted Pepsi Cup, an award given to the college with the best combined finish at the National Championships.

Looking more broadly at college's 20 competitive intercollegiate athletics programs, MVCC won last year's second place trophy at the National Alliance of Two-Year College Athletic Administrators Cup competitions for its overall performance in the non-scholarship division's national championships. In the last six years this competition has been held, MVCC has never taken anything less than fourth place.

The aforementioned achievements represent the continuation of decades of success for MVCC's athletic programs. With one of the largest and most diverse two-year college intercollegiate athletic programs in the country, MVCC is home to 17 national championships, 107 individual national champions and 330 NJCAA All-Americans. Madam Speaker, I am honored to represent such talented and dedicated athletes in my district. I ask that my colleagues join me in congratulating the MVCC Hawks and wishing them the best of luck in their future athletic and scholarly endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 726 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz- Balart). All time yielded during the consideration of this rule is for debate only.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 726.

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

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 726 provides for consideration of H.R. 965, the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network Continuing Authorization Act. I want to recognize my colleague from Maryland, Mr. John Sarbanes, for his leadership on this issue. He has worked diligently in a bipartisan fashion to protect the Chesapeake Bay so that it remains a vibrant recreational and economic network.

H.R. 965 will continue the important restoration and conservation of the Chesapeake Bay watershed by permanently authorizing the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network. The Chesapeake Bay is our Nation's largest estuary. Many people often think of the bay as only part of Maryland and Virginia. But the bay's watershed covers 64,000 square miles in five States and the District of Columbia. In fact, the watershed's most northern point, or what we in upstate New York would call the starting point, extends into a significant portion of my congressional district in the village of Cooperstown.

As a result of its size and location, the Chesapeake Bay has played an important role in our country's history, from early settlement and commerce, to military battles and transportation development, as well as recreational uses. It truly is worthy of preservation, both for its natural beauty and its impact on our Nation's culture and economy.

The Chesapeake Bay Network is a comprehensive protection program for the bay. The programs authorized serve to identify, conserve, restore and interpret the natural, historical, cultural and recreational resources within the watershed. These programs also educate local communities on the significant sites in the region and how their community impacts the overall health of the bay. This law requires a full matching requirement for grants awarded by the National Park Service to State and local agencies and not-for-profit corporations and organizations for such projects.

The resulting network is a system of over 150 parks, museums, historic communities, scenic roadways, water trails and water access points located within the vast Chesapeake Bay watershed. Each of these sites tells a piece of the vast Chesapeake story, while providing Federal support for the preservation and improvement of these sites to enhance both the historical and recreational user experience. The network is overseen by the National Park Service, but the Park Service only manages 10 of the network's sites. Other gateways are managed by local State and nongovernmental organizations.

The Chesapeake Bay Network has always been a bipartisan program. The legislation that created it in 1998 passed the House on suspension by voice vote, was agreed to by unanimous consent in the Senate, and signed into

law by President Clinton. In 2002, a clean 5-year reauthorization received similar unanimous support in Congress and was signed into law by President Bush. Last year, an identical bill, H.R. 5540, passed the House by an overwhelming bipartisan vote.

H.R. 965 will permanently reauthorize this bipartisan program, which the White House Conference on Cooperative Conservation, headed by the Department of the Interior, has called a success story. It's worth noting that the National Park Service has also recommended permanent reauthorization of the network.

I encourage all my colleagues to vote for this rule and the underlying bill and to continue to support the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network.

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

Mr. Speaker, we are here today to reauthorize the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network. This is a program that did not have a single Member of Congress oppose its creation or its subsequent reauthorization. The program has been heralded as a success by the Bush administration and was unanimously reauthorized during that administration. This rule provides for consideration of the legislation that would now permanently extend the authorization for this bipartisan program, a move endorsed by the National Park Service.

We all agree that the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network is a good program that has had a positive impact on preservation and recreation within the Chesapeake Bay watershed, but it's clear that some of us disagree on whether to make the reauthorization permanent, which is why we've made in order a substitute amendment that would reauthorize the program for 5 years to allow a full debate.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Speaker, we certainly can appreciate the passion on both sides of the aisle with respect to health care. This House has not debated a bill of this importance in many years. But one thing that we can't forget is that we need to continue to focus on transportation. We have before us right now a surface transportation authorization bill that must be reauthorized by the House of Representatives. We have bridges that are collapsing throughout the country. We have roads that are deteriorating. I hear my colleague from the other side of the aisle say, Where are the jobs? The jobs are out there now from the stimulus bill where money was given to the States, and they're repairing the roads, and they're fixing the bridges. We need to continue that.

There is no better way to create jobs and no better way to keep our infrastructure the best in the world than to spend money through transportation. I strongly urge my colleagues to continue to work on reauthorization of the surface transportation bill.

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 669 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, this point of order is not about anything other than delaying the passage of this very important bill. And I would say to my friend from Arizona, that he, himself, has probably received more amendments from the Rules Committee than the rest of Congress put together. So he certainly has had an opportunity to offer many amendments with respect to different earmarks that he feels should be removed from the bill.

So I would submit that this point of order is really about delaying the passage of what is a critically important bill, and that is the transportation appropriation bill, a bill that talks about things like funding roads so that we have safe highways for our families to travel on, things like high-speed rail so we can bring people and goods from point A to point B as quickly as possible. That's what we're here to discuss today. That's why the passage, the consideration of this rule and the passage of this rule, is so important, so we may consider this critically important bill.

I hope my colleagues will vote ``yes'' so we can consider this legislation on its merits and not stop it by virtue of a procedural motion. Those who oppose the bill can vote against the final passage. We must consider this rule, and we must pass this legislation today.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield back the balance of my time, and urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule.

Madam Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz- Balart). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise today as a member of the Rules Committee and also as a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in strong support of H.R. 3288, the Fiscal Year 2010 Transportation HUD Appropriations Act. H. Res. 669 provides for consideration of H.R. 3288 under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate controlled by the Committee on Appropriations.

The rule makes in order a total of 23 amendments, each of which is debatable for 10 minutes. The rule also provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Madam Speaker, housing and transportation are two areas that must be priorities for Congress, especially when the economy slows, because we get a double return on our investment. As we have seen with the recovery bill, investment in infrastructure not only generates economic recovery by putting people back to work, but those construction jobs strengthen our transportation system and improve our housing stock. We not only put people to work, but we also get something in the long run. We get better roads. We get safer transportation. We get better housing. That is critically important.

Some of the members of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee would have liked to have seen a greater percentage of the funding in the Recovery Act go towards infrastructure spending and, indeed, we have seen that of all the funding included in that bill the transportation funding has resulted in saving and creating jobs faster than even we expected.

The Transportation-HUD Appropriations bill continues this investment and our commitment to utilize all of the tools available to continue this economic recovery that has already begun to take hold. Included in H.R. 3288 is $41.1 billion to improve and repair our Nation's aging highway infrastructure. The bill includes more than $10 billion for Federal Transit Administration, which will help transit agencies meet increased public demand for mass transit. This not only provides more transportation options to Americans during tough economic times, it also decreases traffic congestion, reduces our dependence on foreign oil, and reduces greenhouse gas emissions.

This bill adds another $4 billion to develop and construct a national system of high-speed rail, building on the commitment we began with the recovery bill. This is the first major investment in transportation since the 1960s. High-speed rail moves more people at a lower cost, at a faster speed and with less impact on the environment than does road transportation. We have developed the most advanced highway and aviation systems in the world over the last 60 years, but in comparison to the train system in other nations such as Germany, France and even China, they have clearly exceeded what we have done here in America.

Speaking from the experience of my own delegation, the Members that represent upstate New York, we are committed to work in a bipartisan effort to make high-speed rail a reality across upstate New York. We have done so because we realize the numerous benefits that this improvement in our transportation system will have as a result of high- speed rail, not only for upstate New York, but for the Nation as a whole.

Just as we saw over a century ago with the construction of the Erie Canal, streamlining the movement of people and goods along the corridor between the eastern seaboard and Chicago, the freight gateway to the west coast, will benefit the cities at both ends and also the cities across the country through which the line will run.

Madam Speaker, this is just a sampling of the important programs and initiatives that the Transportation-HUD Appropriations Act will fund in fiscal year 2010. I urge all my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado, one of the new distinguished members of the Rules Committee, Mr. Polis.

Madam Speaker, before I recognize my colleague from New York, I would just like to make a point, and that is, throughout history, we have seen vision on the part of people, and it's that vision that brought Columbus to the New World. It's that vision that built the Panama Canal. It's the vision that built the Erie Canal. It's the vision in the Eisenhower Highway System. It's the vision that brings us and moves us forward.

This bill contains that vision. It has money in it for high-speed rail. That, I would submit, is our vision for the future. That's the kind of vision that people sent us here to Congress to continue, and it's that kind of vision that this bill contains.

With that, Madam Speaker, I would yield 3 minutes to one of the leaders in transportation in this country, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to another gentleman from New York, one of the freshmen here, Mr. Massa.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez).

We have no additional speakers.

Madam Speaker, I will continue to reserve the balance of my time.

We are at the present time reviewing that option, and we are looking at it, but I would like, if I may, in the meantime, to make one more point about this bill.

I thank my friend for his comments.

Madam Speaker, this is somewhat of a technical change that we are contemplating, but I would say this: I think what one side or what one person views as rushing a piece of legislation the other side can very well argue is necessary and that we need to do it.

One of the things that I hear from constituents at home is, you know, Congress needs to put aside the partisan bickering and move forward with the people's business. I would submit that that is exactly what we are trying to do. There is nothing more important, obviously, for Congress to do than to ensure that the funding to run the government is available. Now, obviously, both sides of the aisle have dramatic differences on how that funding should occur.

I would submit to my friend from Florida--and I mean that, my good friend and colleague from the Rules Committee--that we have a distinct difference in terms of what a ``timetable'' is. We believe that we are here to ensure that we do the people's business and that it is done and that we do the funding in appropriations bills in a timely fashion. So we are working on that, and we are considering the amendment, and we will have an answer on that very shortly.

I will gladly yield to my friend from Texas.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

With respect to the question, I do take exception to your characterization of it.

We are not ready.

Madam Speaker, first off, may I inquire as to the amount of time left on both sides?

Thank you.

Madam Speaker, I would like to speak just for a couple of more minutes again about the underlying importance of passing this rule and the underlying bill.

I think there is nothing more important than transportation and infrastructure for government to ensure exists. When you look back at the history of this great institution, the first standing committee was, in fact, the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, although then not called by that very name, but it was critically important. The framers saw the importance of having an infrastructure, of having the ability to render our ports navigable and of having functional roads. At that time, of course, rail and airlines were not even imagined, but as we transformed our Nation, it became a critical part of our infrastructure. So it is my belief that this rule and the underlying bill are critically important.

Madam Speaker, at this time, I would like to lay out on the record the amendment that we may be offering.

The amendment to the rule is, actually, rather minor. The amendment will strike from the rule a provision that is no longer necessary. There was some concern that the final version of the GPO print might not have the same page and line numbers as the ordered reported version. That did not occur, so the language in the rule to preserve the Members' rights to fix their amendments is no longer needed.

As I indicated earlier, it is clear that this proposed amendment-- again, we have not offered it yet--is really of a technical nature to allow for a correction in the rule that was passed yesterday out of the Rules Committee.

With that, Madam Speaker, I would reserve the balance of my time.

May I reclaim my time?

Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I thank my friend for his cooperation in this.

As I indicated earlier, we are considering offering this amendment. With that, I would again just like to talk a little bit more about the underlying bill.

The bill that we are considering today, the THUD bill, is, again, important at this time. With our economy in the state that it is in, clearly, many people believe that the best thing that we can do for the economy is to spend on and to develop our infrastructure. It is that which we are supposed to do and that which we are asked to do.

One of the things in the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on which we debate on a very regular basis is the surface transportation reauthorization bill, which will come up this year. We clearly believe that it is critically important, that it is important not only for our infrastructure but as a way of creating jobs. It is what we were sent to Congress to do, which is to ensure that our roads are safe, to ensure that our airports run and function the way they are supposed to and to ensure that our rail transportation infrastructure is what it should be.

Madam Speaker, I would say, at this time, we have decided that we will not be offering the amendment. Therefore, I would reserve the balance of my time, and I am prepared to close.

I have no additional speakers.

Madam Speaker, I'd like to thank my good friend from Miami for his cooperation in management of this rule and for his courtesy in that regard. I appreciate it very much.

Madam Speaker, the Transportation-HUD Appropriations Act funds some of the most important initiatives that pay for everything from roads, bridges and railroads to housing for veterans and low-income families. In my opening remarks, I discussed the critical investments that this bill would make in our transportation system. This bill also invests in housing programs for vulnerable populations, including retirees, people with disabilities, veterans, and even children. The funding is even more essential during these tough economic times.

This bill includes funding to address the problem of homelessness among our veterans. All too often the men and women who sacrifice the most for our freedom are hit the hardest during times of economic crisis. We owe our veterans the utmost respect and gratitude for their service, and we must honor the commitment made to them. They should not have to return home to be confronted by the possibility of poverty or homelessness. To address this, H.R. 3288 includes $75 million for veterans affairs housing vouchers to provide 10,000 of these vouchers for our homeless veterans.

It provides $8.7 billion to provide affordable housing to 1.3 million low-income families and individuals, two-thirds of whom are elderly or disabled. It includes another $1 billion to rehabilitate and build new housing for low-income seniors. Currently there are 10 eligible seniors on the waiting list for each unit of available housing. In America, it is unacceptable that our Greatest Generation is faced with this shortage.

H.R. 3288 also contains important investments to revitalize our local communities, including $4.6 billion for community development block grants, $25 million for brownfields redevelopment, and $250 million to fund the Hope VI competitive grants program to transform neighborhoods of extreme poverty into sustainable mixed-income neighborhoods through the demolition of severely distressed public housing.

Madam Speaker, housing and transportation are two areas that must be priorities, especially when the economy slows. The funding that H.R. 3288 provides for these programs will ensure that jobs continue to be created and that our Nation's economy continues to recover. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the previous question and on the rule.

The text of the material previously referred to by Mr. Lincoln Diaz- Balart of Florida is as follows:

Amendment to H. Res. 669 Offered by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida

Strike the resolved clause and all that follows and insert

the following:

Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this

resolution the Speaker shall, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 3288) making appropriations for the

Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban

Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending

September 30, 2010, and for other purposes. The first reading

of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order

against consideration of the bill are waived except those

arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. General debate

shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour

equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking

minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. After

general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment

under the five-minute rule. Points of order against

provisions in the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 of

rule XXI are waived. During consideration of the bill for

amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may

accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the

Member offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in

the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that

purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII. Amendments so printed

shall be considered as read. When the committee rises and

reports the bill back to the House with a recommendation that

the bill do pass, the previous question shall be considered

as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final

passage without intervening motion except one motion to

recommit with or without instructions.

I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 665 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials into the Record.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a member of the Rules Committee and of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition and as a proud supporter of this rule and H.R. 2920, the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go bill.

When the 110th Congress convened in 2007, I strongly supported the reinstatement of the pay-as-you-go principles in the rules of the House. Today, we will take up the next step toward reinstating the statutory pay-as-you-go rule. These statutory requirements helped turn deficits into surpluses in the 1990s under the Clinton administration. When the previous statute expired, Mr. Speaker, the result was a return to unchecked deficit spending, which doubled the national debt in less than a decade. This is not a Democratic problem. This is not a Republican problem. Rather, this is a problem for all of us.

The American people deserve better. We in Congress must be forced to balance our spending the same way that every American family does. We should not spend what we cannot afford. In order to spend a dollar, we must find a dollar either in savings or in new revenue.

Mr. Speaker, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle may try to argue semantics and say that this is an imperfect bill. If this is the case, I would simply remind my colleagues that every journey is completed one step at a time. This bill is just a first step. It is part of a clearly delineated path toward fiscal responsibility.

To date, this Congress has passed critical pieces of legislation, like the expansion of the SCHIP, which provides health insurance to 11 million children, and we did so in a way that was completely paid for, showing our commitment to fiscal responsibility. Earlier this year, we adopted a budget resolution that placed the full cost of war spending on the books for the first time. These are steps in the right direction. This bill continues these important steps in the direction of fiscal responsibility.

This legislation will require that all new policies of reducing revenues or of expanding spending enacted during a session of Congress be offset over 5 and 10 years. It will require any future extension of upper-income tax cuts to be offset, and it will force a serious examination of wasteful subsidies in the budget and of tax loopholes that can be eliminated to offset more worthwhile programs.

Finally, the statute would not be complete without an enforcement mechanism. The Congressional Budget Office will continue to score legislation passed by Congress. The Office of Management and Budget will keep a running scorecard for all of the revenue generated in new spending enacted during a year. If we have not fully offset the legislation enacted during the session, it will trigger an automatic sequester of funds from mandatory spending programs.

Mr. Speaker, the American people have spoken, and they want a return to a fiscally responsible Congress that abides by pay-as-you-go principles. This is the legislation that will make that a reality. As a member of the Blue Dog Coalition, I have worked, since being elected to Congress, to reenact statutory PAYGO, and I strongly urge my fellow colleagues to vote for this rule on H.R. 2920.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts, a member of the Rules Committee (Mr. McGovern).

Methinks thou doth protest too much.

I listened to my friend from Louisiana, and all I hear are complaints about PAYGO. And then I see a sign that says, PAYGO equals tax increase, which actually means nothing at all, but it is a very nice sign. But, in fact, that's not at all what PAYGO is about. In fact, if PAYGO did nothing more than put a check on spending, I would say it's worth voting for. But my friend on the other side of the aisle says he doesn't support it.

You know, we see a lot of finger-pointing going on in Congress, everybody blames the other side, but the fact of the matter is, when they talk about spending, we are spending now because we are in the throes of a recession.

When the Republicans were in control of the House of Representatives, we see that they didn't reinstate PAYGO and they continued to spend. We have put the war on the books for the first time, which is a step in the right direction towards fiscal responsibility.

When I finish, I will be happy to yield.

When we hear my friend from Louisiana talk about PAYGO and talk about all of the problems with PAYGO, he doesn't acknowledge the fact that PAYGO does require that we spend only what we have. And if it did nothing else, he should support it. Yet he doesn't support it because it's more of the finger-pointing that we see in Congress.

I yield to the gentleman.

Reclaiming my time, I never said PAYGO was great. I said PAYGO is a step in the right direction. PAYGO is a step that we need to take, and that is what I said.

I would be happy to yield.

My friend knows full well what the purpose of PAYGO is. And the purpose of PAYGO is to ensure that whatever money we spend in the

future, we have a way of providing for, either by creating cuts or by raising revenues in other ways. That's what PAYGO is all about, and it's about doing it over a 5-year and a 10-year period.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I would yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar).

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Half of the nondiscretionary spending is on the military. Do you think that we should be cutting the amount of spending that we do for the military?

Will the gentleman yield?

Do you think that any increases in military spending that we have made should have been cut as well?

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from California for his comments. And I would just point out that we are in unprecedented times. We are in a time when we are conducting two wars overseas, one ending in Iraq and one continuing in Afghanistan. And that requires increases in military spending. It continues to require increases in veteran spending, which we have done. We have seen unprecedented natural disasters, which we have had to spend upon. We have seen an economy in a downturn. As a result of those things, it is necessary for spending to take place. I think my friend knows that.

With that, I will yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from South Dakota, a member of the Blue Dog Coalition, Ms. Herseth Sandlin.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Mrs. Dahlkemper).

Mr. Speaker, before I yield, I would just like to say to my colleague from Tennessee that if Katrina was not an emergency and did not merit emergency spending, then I cannot, in my wildest imagination, imagine what would. That is the reason why we have an emergency spending exception to any PAYGO requirement, to allow government to do that which the voters sent us here to do, and that is to ensure that when a catastrophe and when an emergency strikes, that we are there to do everything that we possibly can to help the people who have been injured by it.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I would yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee, a proud member of the Blue Dog Coalition, Mr. Tanner.

I yield the gentleman an additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend from California for his management of this rule.

Mr. Speaker, since the beginning of 2007, the Democratic leadership of the House of Representatives has shown a strong commitment to the pay-as-you-go rules, first, by reinstating the PAYGO rule in the rules of the House on the opening of the 110th Congress, and now, in working to bring this important legislation before the House. I applaud the Blue Dog Coalition, my colleagues there, for their outspoken leadership on PAYGO.

When I explain to folks back home what PAYGO is, I ask them the question, if they have to balance their own books each month, if they have to ensure that they have enough income coming in to cover their expenses; and of course they respond that they do. And I then ask, shouldn't the Federal Government operate in the same way when it involves spending your tax dollars? My constituents get it. The American people get it.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, there are still some Members of Congress who are steadfastly against the idea of being fiscally responsible and balancing the Federal books, the same way that our constituents balance their checkbooks each and every week.

The legislation we will consider later today will require Congress to balance the books or face the harsh consequence of automatic cuts to offset the shortfall in our spending.

Now I certainly appreciate the born-again Republican commitment to fiscal responsibility. But the real question is why the Republicans allowed PAYGO to expire in the first place under the last administration. Not only did they not advance the cap discretionary spending, which they are criticizing us for not coupling with the PAYGO statute, but they wouldn't even renew the PAYGO provision, which we are now doing.

My colleagues on the other side of the aisle criticize the majority for the increase in the deficit since the beginning of 2007. One of the reasons for this is that we have put the full cost of the war on the books for the first time. That is a hard thing to do, but it is the responsible thing to do. The Republicans kept this off their budget balance sheet, but the Democratic majority has taken the fiscally responsible approach and placed the entire cost of the war on the books, which adds nearly $1 trillion to the deficit.

So to say that we have single-handedly raised the deficit over $1 trillion since 2007 is disingenuous at best.

Furthermore, the budget adopted by Congress this year cuts the deficit by nearly two-thirds in 4 years and contains even deeper cuts in the deficit than were proposed by the President. Under the concurrent budget resolution adopted by the House and the Senate, the deficit will be cut by $1.7 trillion, or 12.3 percent of GDP, in 2009 to 3 percent of GDP in 2014.

I strongly believe that we in Congress must balance our own books and maintain fiscal responsibility similar to what is asked of all taxpayers in dealing with their own personal finances. I urge all members to vote ``yes'' on the previous question, ``yes'' on the rule, and to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 2920.

I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, the gentlewoman from California, for the courtesy of yielding to me and for her strong leadership on the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the rule and H.R. 3183, the Fiscal Year 2010 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. The bill provides much-needed funding to continue our Federal commitment to meeting the infrastructure needs for our Nation. This bill will create jobs and invest in new technologies, scientific research, and conservation efforts.

I also would like to take a moment to lend my strong support to Mr. Pastor's amendment to H.R. 3183, the manager's amendment. The amendment provides a critical increase in funding for the Northern Border Regional Commission. The 2008 farm bill first authorized the Northern Border Regional Commission as an independent agency to address the shared economic needs and harness the unique assets of the counties along the Nation's northern border from Maine and New England through New York. In

this region, 13.1 percent of the population lives in poverty. The median household income is $6,500 below the national average. Unemployment is significantly higher than the national average; and the region actually lost population between 1990 and 2000, while the overall population of the United States rose by 13.2 percent.

The region shares many common economic challenges stemming from relative geographic isolation, aging infrastructure, and a loss of natural resource-based industry that has historically been an economic engine. However, at the same time, the region also has a common set of assets, not the least of which is expansive natural beauty and resources, as well as historic and geographic ties.

The commission utilizes the same model that has successfully enabled the Appalachian Regional Commission to facilitate a ``bottom-up'' approach where local development districts, not-for-profit organizations and others bring project ideas and priorities to the commission from the local level.

The regional commission model helps foster improved collaboration and coordination within the region and among Federal and State agencies, while also serving as a vehicle to leverage additional public and private sector investments. By taking a regional view, the commission can promote projects that confer a broader benefit without States having to compete among themselves for scarce funds for the region.

I thank the committee for their hard work to see that the Northern Border Regional Commission receives the funding necessary to make the commission a reality for this region. I thank my colleagues from the region, Representatives Michaud, Pingree, Hodes, Shea-Porter, Welch and my New York colleague, John McHugh, for their continued efforts to establish and secure funding for the Northern Border Regional Commission.

I urge my colleagues to support the manager's amendment and vote for the rule and for H.R. 3183.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to say how thankful I am to live in such a great country, a country where we have inalienable rights guaranteed to us by our Nation's founding documents, and the knowledge that our government is set up to protect those rights.

We know that we are guaranteed the right to peaceful, public protest, and we see many great Americans utilizing that right here in Washington, D.C., on a daily basis. It is not until haunting and disturbing images of blatant violence and oppression run across the front pages of our newspapers and TV screens that we realize how important these rights are.

The people of Iran are expressing themselves peacefully in the streets, and are being viciously attacked by armed guards and police. The violence needs to end now, and the people of Iran should be heard.

I want to commend President Obama for his leadership and his judgment in such a difficult and intense foreign policy crisis, and I agree with his resistance to instigate a foreign nation through demagoguery, a distinct difference from the carelessness that sometimes was used by administrations in the past.

Let me be clear, I know the world understands that the United States will always vehemently oppose oppression and violence against a nation's people and we will do everything we can to ensure this type of behavior is not tolerated. I thank President Obama for his thoughtful leadership on this matter and offer my support in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 8 o'clock and 51 minutes p.m.), the House adjourned until tomorrow, Friday, June 19, 2009, at 9 a.m.

Madam Speaker, I stand today in recognition of the State University of New York (SUNY) Cortland Men's Lacrosse Team, which won the NCAA Division III championship with a 9-6 victory over Gettysburg College on May 24, 2009. The SUNY Cortland Red Dragons finished 2009 at 19-2, setting a school record for wins in a season. The game also marks the 200th career victory for three-year head coach Steve Beville and Cortland's second national championship in four years.

The Gettysburg Bullets held the lead at 4-2 after the first quarter, only to be shut out by the Cortland defense in the second and third quarters--a scoreless run that spanned about 38 minutes. The Red Dragons tied the game at the half before pulling ahead in the third quarter and closing the game with the title.

Junior Brandon Misiaszek (New Hartford, NY) was named the Most Outstanding Player with a career-high five goals. Mike Tota (Webster, NY) had a goal and an assist, finishing the season just one goal away from becoming the seventh player in school history to score 50 in a season. Senior goalie Matt Hipenbecker (Mountain Lakes, NJ) recorded 10 saves--seven alone during the fourth quarter--finishing an impressive performance in the NCAA playoffs during which he registered 40 saves.

Madam Speaker, I am honored to represent such talented and dedicated athletes in my

district. I ask that my colleagues join me in congratulating the SUNY Cortland Men's Lacrosse Team and wishing them the best of luck in their future athletic and scholarly endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, the health care crisis in our Nation is real. We need to step forward and take action to provide quality and affordable care for those who need it. With 46 million Americans uninsured in this country, there is no time to waste in offering hardworking families the option of health insurance while infusing competition into the health care market, which desperately needs it.

Our broken health care system also happens to be the most expensive health care system in the world. If we don't act now, the cost of health care in this country in 10, 20 or 30 years will bog down our economy. Reforming our health care system now makes economic sense.

Proposed health care reform is all about options. If you are happy with your current plans and with your current providers, keep them. The choice to have health insurance and the choice to get the best medical care you can possibly get is up to you. Health care should be a right for every American, and our current health care system in this country is broken. It is time for Congress to take the lead and to make the tough choices that we were sent to Washington to make.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 545 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 545.

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

H. Res. 545 provides for consideration of the supplemental conference report, legislation that supports our military in the field in both Iraq and Afghanistan. This spending plan provides our troops with everything they will need during the remainder of this fiscal year, and the President has said this will be the last supplemental spending request he will send to Congress. I hope this will be the case.

I, along with a majority of my colleagues, share the President's goal of winding down the war in Iraq and leaving behind an Iraq run by Iraqis. This conference report takes a step towards that goal by providing for the training of security forces, economic development, and diplomatic operations.

We are also looking to secure Afghanistan, and this conference report provides for training of Afghan security forces and counterinsurgency measures in bordering Pakistan.

Although there are no deadlines or timelines in this conference report, I think we share in the desire to have troops wrap up their missions abroad and return home to their families. It's my hope that we will see the beginning of that troop drawdown this year.

This report also provides for a few key domestic economic priorities like the Cash For Clunkers program, which will allow Americans to trade in old vehicles for new ones with higher fuel efficiency.

This conference report also includes $1.5 billion for response to the swine flu pandemic to help State and local governments but also to fund global efforts to track, contain, and slow down the spread of this flu.

Although it is not perfect legislation, it provides some essential funding, and I will support it and urge my colleagues to do the same.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to point out that this bill does provide for the troops; and it provides very well for our troops because that is the most important thing that we, as Members of Congress, can do. It provides $1.9 billion more than requested for MRAPs and $2.5 billion above the President's request for U.S. troops. Those are the kinds of things that we need to do as a Congress to make sure that our troops are provided for.

Mr. Speaker, with that, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin).

(Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Yes, I have an additional speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

I have one more speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton).

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague from the Rules Committee for his management of this rule and also for talking about what I think is ultimately the most important thing with respect to this bill, and that is, of course, our troops.

There are many of us who opposed the war in Iraq. I was one of them. I continue to oppose it. There are many of us who believe that the funding that this bill contains should be greater. I think on both sides of the aisle there is agreement that we should do as much as we possibly can. And there are things about this bill that clearly are not perfect. But we can't allow the perfect to get in the way of the good.

This bill is a good bill. Let's not deprive our brave sons and our daughters, their husbands and their wives, of what they need to return to their families safely. This is not about what is right or what is wrong. This is about what we as a country, what we as a Congress, need to do, and that is to make sure that our troops, our sons and our daughters, the people who put their lives on the line each and every day, have all and each and every thing they need.

Some people may argue it is not enough, but we need to give them everything that we possibly can. Voting ``no'' simply because you think it is not enough is not a solution. That absolutely is not a solution. We need to do everything we can to ensure that our soldiers have what they need.

With that, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 544 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz- Balart). All time yielded during consideration of this rule is for debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 544.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 544 provides for the consideration of H.R. 2847, the Departments of Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2010. I want to thank the distinguished chairman of the committee and ranking member for reporting out this bill that does not pay mere lip service to making communities safer, but makes critical investments in our Nation's communities.

The bill provides $802 million for Community Oriented Policing Services, which we know as the COPS program, 45 percent above the current funding level. As a former prosecutor, I know how vitally important these programs are in assisting local law enforcement to hire and train new officers, to participate in community policing, purchase and deploy new crimefighting techniques and technologies, and develop and test new and innovative policing strategies.

So often State and local governments are critical of the Federal Government's programs because they pass down mandates without funding them. But this bill appropriates money to put more police on the street, funds successful drug court programs, and increases Byrne funding to help develop new and innovative law enforcement techniques which put violent criminals in jail and keep our streets safe for our children.

This funding includes $298 million for the COPS hiring grants program, which help our local law enforcement agencies put more police on the street. When combined with the $1 billion provided in the Recovery Act for the COPS hiring grants, the funding in H.R. 2847 will enable the hiring of more than 7,000 police officers. Those are officers in each and every State in this country.

Increasing the number of police on the street will help local law enforcement agencies to reduce violence and get illegal guns off the street. As a former prosecutor, I know that the vast majority of the violent crimes committed with guns in this country are committed with illegal guns, not legal guns. By putting more police officers on the street, it will give officers the ability to better enforce the laws on the books, not by creating new laws, but by reducing the number of illegal guns, which is the cause of the majority of gun violence in this country.

This bill provides $15 million for the Weed and Seed program. Weed and Seed helps localities develop programs to weed out and deter crime and then take the all-important step often left out, that is, seeding the formerly high crime areas with programs to promote neighborhood revitalization. The funds will be used to carry out this mission in sites and communities such as my home in Utica and Rome, New York, cities which I represent.

H.R. 2847 also includes $384 million for Juvenile Justice programs, $11 million above the 2009 level. This underscores the strong Federal commitment to supporting States and communities in their efforts to develop and implement prevention and intervention programs and to improve the juvenile justice system so that it protects public safety and holds offenders accountable while also providing rehabilitative services that are tailored to meet the needs of juveniles and their families.

Additionally, the underlying bill includes $45 million for grants, technical assistance, and training to State and local governments to develop dedicated drug courts that subject nonviolent offenders to an integrated mix of treatment, drug testing, incentives and sanctions.

As a district attorney, I quickly learned that no matter what initiatives law enforcement took to reduce the supply of drugs, it never really affected the demand for drugs, which never seemed to go down and therefore created a market for drug dealers. One thing I saw is that reducing the supply can work, but reducing the demand for drugs always works.

When my office established a drug court program, I realized the powerful effect that the program had on helping enrolled participants get control of their addiction, thereby freeing them and their families from their awful addiction and reducing the demand for drugs. The appropriation of $45 million for drug courts provided by H.R. 2847 is 12.5 percent more than the current level, and I congratulate the committee on that increase.

The bill also includes funding for upgrades to emergency communications systems around the country.

Mr. Speaker, I have addressed only a handful of the important programs for which H.R. 2847 would appropriate funds. My remarks are focused on the criminal justice aspects of this bill, but there are many other important areas addressed in this legislation.

It provides funding for critical scientific research, including programs to keep America on the cutting edge of technology, innovation and those that study climate change as well as funding the Department of Commerce and Economic Development Administration. The Appropriations Committee has approved a bill which would provide funding for these critical programs, and I once again thank them for their work and welcome the chance to vote in favor of this legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin, the distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Mr. Obey.

I yield the gentleman from Wisconsin an additional 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Ohio, a former colleague from the Rules Committee (Ms. Sutton).

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from California for sharing with us his thoughts. Clearly, his institutional knowledge of this grand institution is second to none. But there is one point that I think is important to clear up, and that is the fact that this bill has a preprinting requirement that in no way, shape, fashion, or form means that anyone is precluded or prevented from filing an amendment. What it does, however, mean is that any amendment that an individual Representative files has to be filed by a certain period of time, and that was yesterday. That does one thing. And I would submit that that enables our constituents to have the very, very best legislation that they can because it does one thing, it gives the Representatives an opportunity to read that amendment to see what that amendment means and to have an opportunity to interpret it and determine whether or not it is the best thing for the bill or, in fact, whether it should be pulled.

If I could finish my thought.

So I would submit that, in fact, it is a good thing to have a preprinting requirement in this particular bill, and I would yield to my friend.

If I may reclaim my time----

The point of it is that this allows individuals to file. In fact, the fact that we have 127 amendments filed, much more than we've had in the past, certainly indicates that in fact Representatives have had an opportunity to file.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California, a member of the Commerce, Justice and Science Subcommittee, Mr. Schiff.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from West Virginia, the distinguished chairman of the Commerce, Justice and Science Subcommittee, Mr. Mollohan.

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart) for his courtesies in this debate and for his very able management of this rule.

Mr. Speaker, on my opening remarks, I chose to focus on the criminal justice programs that are funded under H.R. 2847, but there are many other important areas addressed in this legislation, and we have heard about many of those during the debate. In closing, I would like to take the opportunity to discuss another of these that is of utmost importance to America.

The bill includes $293 million for the Economic Development Administration, which is $20 million above the amount enacted in 2009. The EDA administers several economic programs, including public works grants for upgrading infrastructure, planning, and trade adjustment assistance for communities that bear the burden of jobs outsourced to other countries.

H.R. 2847 includes more than $158 million for the Economic Development Administration's Public Works Program, $25 million more than last year. H.R. 2847 also makes critical investments in scientific research and NASA's space program. The bill includes $6.9 billion for the National Science Foundation. This level of funding will support the doubling of NSF's budget over the next 10 years and represents a true commitment to investment in basic research and development which will provide for innovation and future technologies to help the United States be competitive.

H.R. 2847 includes over $18.2 billion for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NASA's unique mission is to pioneer the future in space exploration, scientific discovery in aeronautics research, and this appropriation enables them to accomplish this mission. This recommendation also provides for the continued efforts of NASA's Mars exploration and provides funds for the completion of the Mars science laboratory to launch in 2011. Exploration has always been critical to mankind. We live in America today because of exploration. We must continue to explore the new frontier for future generations.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would remind my colleagues that so far we have discussed only a handful of the important programs that are funded by the fiscal year 2010 Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations bill. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the rule and the underlying bill, H.R. 2847. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the bill.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida is as follows:

Amendment to H. Res. 544 Offered by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida

On page 2, line 21, after ``if printed.'' insert the

following new sentence, ``The proponent of each such

amendment may make germane modifications to such amendment.''

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, it is undeniable that we have seen many positive signs in our economy since January. The unemployment rate, while still far too high, is improving and money is starting to flow through the economy and into our cities and municipalities to improve our infrastructure and ensure the safety of every American.

The recovery bill has been at the core of this progress and has saved and created jobs and made much-needed investments in my local district. For example, in my hometown of Utica, New York, the recovery bill provided the City of Utica with over $2 million for lead abatement in homes across the city. This lead abatement program will put people to work and improve the health and quality of life for countless families. Without this recovery bill funding, the City of Utica would have had to have continued to delay this vital program because it is likely that they did not have the funding necessary to proceed with these plans on its own.

I will continue to fight for the recovery bill funding for critical projects in my district, and I know that we will see even more progress in all of our communities as we all continue to work together to lead America out of this economic crisis.

Mr. Speaker, President Obama and this Congress inherited a fiscal and economic downturn the likes of which we have not seen in this country in generations, including a record deficit and soaring unemployment. Democrats have been committed to fiscal responsibility since taking control of the House in 2007. The first thing the Democratic-led Congress did in 2007 was re-impose PAYGO budget rules in the House. As a member of the Blue Dog Coalition, I applauded that and supported that strongly and continue to. We are working hard to reform our Nation's health care system, which will reduce the deficit, save money for consumers and improve efficiency in the health care system. I applaud President Obama and the Democratic Congress for taking these critical steps, and we will continue working with him to reduce our Nation's deficit and debt.