Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I was detained the afternoon of November 9, 2005. Had I been present, I would have voted in the following manner:

Rollcall 581 (On Passage--H.R. 2862)--``aye''; rollcall 582 (On Passage--S. 1894)--``aye''; rollcall 583 (On Agreeing to the Scott #9 Amendment)--``nay''; rollcall 584 (On Motion to Recommit with Instructions--H.R. 1751)--``nay''; and rollcall 585 (On Passage--H.R. 1751)--``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, the Good Book tells us if you owe debts, pay debts. If honor, then honor. If respect, then respect. As Washington, D.C., begins today to embark on a healthy debate over the future course of the Federal budget, I rise in the quiet of this morning to pay a debt of gratitude to those that will be remembered in ceremonies and parades wearing moth-balled uniforms and gray hair across the land as Veterans Day is remembered and celebrated.

Memorial Day in the spring is that day we remember those who did not come home; Veterans Day is the day that we remember those who did. I will never forget a close friend of my late father, who said years after he returned from having served in combat in Korea, ``I don't think your dad ever got over the guilt of coming home.''

My dad said good-bye forever to many close friends who served alongside of him in Korea, but he carried a special weight, having fired shots in anger for the United States in uniform. Let us remember our veterans and celebrate them across the land tomorrow.

Madam Speaker, earlier today, my good friend Rahm Emanuel, a Democrat from Illinois, said, ``Tomorrow the House will vote on America's future, with an $8 trillion national debt and with a Congress that spent $60 billion in 6 days without a thought as to how we were going to pay for it.'' I could not agree more.

The gentleman from Illinois went on to say, ``Where else could we cut food stamps and Medicaid?'' and he answered, ``With a Republican Congress'' and a lament.

And I would ask, where else but in Washington, DC could a deficit reduction act that actually increases entitlements by 6.3 percent, instead of the planned 6.4 percent, be called a cut? The budget cuts we will pass tomorrow, let me say again, will still increase spending in Medicaid student loans and aid to dependent families. As a conservative, as some of my Blue Dog colleagues have said, I do not think this deficit reduction act goes nearly far enough to do right by those children and grandchildren that we raise. But it is a good first step. It is a modest start in the direction of putting our fiscal house in order. I urge my Republican and Democrat colleagues of goodwill to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I was detained this afternoon. Had I been present, I would have voted in the following manner: Rollcall 581 (On passage--H.R. 2862)--``aye''; rollcall 582 (On passage--S. 1894)-- ``aye''; rollcall 583 (On Agreeing to the Scott #9 Amendment)--``nay''; rollcall 584 (On Motion to Recommit with Instructions--H.R. 1751)-- ``nay''; and rollcall 585 (On Passage--H.R. 1751)--``aye.''

Let me say I am deeply humbled by the gentleman's characterization of our efforts. There is not a

day goes by in this Congress that I am not grateful to the people of Texas for sending Congressman Jeb Hensarling to Washington, DC. His work, Mr. Speaker, on the Budget Committee, his work as the leading voice of fiscal restraint in the largest caucus in the House of Representatives has been seminal to the debate that we are engaged in, both in the House and, as we have motivated it, in the Senate; and I congratulate my colleague from the heart.

Mr. Speaker, I rise, along with my other colleagues today, in strong support of the Deficit Reduction Act. The numbers speak for themselves. And as I have listened to the opposition to this legislation speak, as I have listened to even the advocates of this legislation speak, we are spending a great deal of time in, specifically, distinguishing the trees from the forest. I would like to talk about the forest from the trees for a moment.

The forest is $8 trillion in national debt, a national debt that has swelled by 25 percent, $2 trillion in the last few years alone, a post- World War II high of per-family share of the national debt, I believe the number, the gentleman will correct me, in excess of $24,000 in obligations for every American family. It is a second mortgage on every American family, that $8 trillion in national debt.

We come into this well, this week, as our colleagues in the Senate did last week, and in the face of a hurricane of national debt, we are going to throw a pebble of $50 billion in savings. And in the context, Mr. Speaker, of a $2.5 trillion Federal budget, this is a modest effort, but a meaningful effort. And I rise to applaud it.

$8 trillion in national debt. And then as the gentleman from Texas observed, in 6 days, in the wake of the worst natural catastrophe in our country's history, the worst hurricane to strike the coast of this country in some three centuries, this Congress spent over $60 billion in 6 days. And the American people, and many Members of Congress simply stood astride that freight train of spending and yelled ``Stop.'' And it is in a very real sense, that, in part, which brings us to this impasse today, whether or not we, as a Republican majority, as a governing majority in America, are going to be able to make tough choices during tough times.

I believe that we will. I believe, as our colleagues in the Senate bravely did last week, I believe this Congress this week, will rise to this challenge because I believe it is precisely what the American people meant this majority to do, to be able to practice both generosity and fiscal discipline at the same time.

In a very real sense, I must say that as we saw $60 billion flow out of this institution in less than a week, in the aftermath of Katrina, I bristled at the posturing of some in the House and the Senate who went before the American people who were still grieving in our hearts at the extraordinary cost to families and communities along the gulf coast. And some in Congress stood up and said that we have done the hard work.

Well, getting out my grandchildren's credit card and borrowing $60 billion for the families and communities along the gulf coast is not hard. What we are doing this week with the leadership of Speaker Dennis Hastert and the leadership of this Republican majority, what the Senate did last week, is the hard work that the American people expect us to do. That being said, we will take a modest but meaningful step in the direction of ensuring that a catastrophe of nature does not become a catastrophe of death. But let us not overstate it.

And with this, I close. As we look at some $50 billion in savings over the next 5 years, we are hearing the remonstrations of the opposition that we are cutting Medicaid, we are cutting student loans, we are even cutting Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Programs. And it is simply not true. As much as it might warm the heart of this conservative for Congress to get out the sharp scalpel and truly go after that $8 trillion in national death, as the gentleman graciously assists me with the chart, that the baseline of changes in mandatory spending between this bill and the last mandatory spending was projected to grow, without my glasses on, at 6.4.

I will be glad to yield.

I thank the gentleman, having not brought my reading glasses.

What we are doing here is adjusting the arc from 6.4 growth to 6.3 percent. And as the gentleman from Georgia just said moments ago, in Washington that is what passes for a cut. And that is just false advertising in America today, and the American people are on to it. They know under this bill Medicaid will grow by 7 percent. They know that student financial aid will continue to increase. And they also know that there is a billion, a 50 percent increase, in low-income home energy assistance, over $1 billion in additional resources available.

This is modest, but meaningful pruning of the Federal budget. It is not, even though it may warm this conservative's heart, it does not represent the hard choices and deep cuts that, candidly, future Congresses and future generations will have to make to meet the unfunded obligations that this government faces in the next 50 years.

So I rise today to say, this is a good start. It is time to put our fiscal house in order. It is time to take that first step toward fiscal restraint.

I urge my colleagues to see this in context. For conservatives for whom it is not enough, accept it as an important first step. And for those less conservative in the Congress than me, which is most, see this as a modest first step in the direction of fiscal restraint that is so much needed in the wake of catastrophes of nature.

Two a.m. Sunday morning in Newburgh, Indiana, the rains came down, the winds blew and beat against the homes of that community, and it fell with a great crash.

It was the worst loss of life for a tornado in the State of Indiana since April 1974.

Nancy Grimes said to me today in an e-mail of the experience, ``It had to be the scariest thing I have ever been through. The noise and the debris hitting our house was incredible. I think I screamed for 5 to 10 minutes during the duration, and then there was total calm. And the next morning I cried when I walked out onto our front porch and saw the destruction.'' She spoke of finding a needlepoint Christmas ornament with the word ``Hope'' stitched into it. She wrote, ``It will certainly find a place on our Christmas tree this year.''

I urge my fellow Hoosiers and all Americans who have watched the grim reports from southern Indiana and northern Kentucky to be generous in prayer, to take every opportunity to come to the material aid of the families and communities affected by this horrendous tornado.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule supporting the conference report for Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs. It is an example of Congress demonstrating the ability to fund our national and international priorities in a fiscally responsible way, and I come to this floor to extol its virtues and urge all of my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill.

This legislation will fund the Nation's priorities in a meaningful way, addressing the AIDS pandemic, bringing innovative reforms to our foreign assistance programs and, of ultimate significance, supporting the global war on terror.

But specifically with regard to the internal mechanics of this legislation, I am particularly moved by the leadership of Chairman Jerry Lewis of the Appropriations Committee and subcommittee chairman Jim Kolbe who, in an effort to ensure that this legislation was brought to this floor not only on time but on budget, are in the midst of an extraordinary effort to amend the Budget Act to embrace a new road map that will bring not only this bill but all of the appropriations to the $843 billion level embraced by this Congress this spring.

Many of us have expressed concerns in recent days that three of the four preceding conference reports that came to the floor did not conform precisely with the details of that spring-adopted budget.

In response to that, the chairman of the Appropriations Committee shared with us and with other Members the road map to help us to achieve what will be, in a historic manner, a real cut to nonsecurity discretionary spending before Congress adjourns this year.

But in an effort to go one step further, the Appropriations Committee began the process this week of amending that road map into the Budget Act itself.

It is my understanding that the Budget Committee as well as many fiscal hawks in the Republican majority

have been moved by that leadership and see it as an example of the energetic, principled, executive renewed leadership in the Appropriations Committee under Chairman Jerry Lewis.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule. I urge all of my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill. I rise to give credit where credit is due, to Chairman Jerry Lewis and Subcommittee Chairman Jim Kolbe, for a job well done, proving once again it is possible to fund the Nation's priorities on time, on budget, in a generous, but fiscally responsible, way.

Madam Speaker, it has been an extraordinary series of days: closed door sessions in the United States Senate, accusations and recriminations by a former President of the United States.

President Jimmy Carter said in the last 24 hours that intelligence was ``manipulated'' in the runup to the war in Iraq. And yet, as the Wall Street Journal reports today, Madam Speaker, four separate independent investigations found otherwise.

Let me say from my heart, I was here the night we voted to give the President the authority to go to war, and it was a combination: Saddam Hussein's rejection of over a dozen United Nations resolutions, an appalling record on human rights, and the complete agreement of every intelligence service in the western world that he possessed weapons of mass destruction, a confidence that was derived from the fact that he not only had possessed them before, but Saddam Hussein had used weapons of mass destruction against his own people, killing thousands in the early 1990s.

There was no manipulation. The war in Iraq was just, is just, and the freedom of the teeming millions who established a constitutional republic 1 week ago supports that conclusion.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

Mr. Chairman, this is a rare moment of bipartisanship in Congress, and it bears some reflection as I rise in strong support of the Private Property Rights Protection Act. I think that agreement springs from our oath of office, which we take at the beginning of every Congress. It provides: ``I do solemnly swear/affirm that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic and that I will bear true faith and allegiance to same.''

And I believe that is what Republicans and Democrats are doing today is bearing true faith to the Constitution, which in its fifth amendment provides that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

The Private Property Rights Protection Act by virtue of its outstanding authorship, Chairman Sensenbrenner, Chairman Goodlatte, Chairman Bonilla, fulfills this oath of office in a profound way. In the wake of the June 2005 Kelo decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, which held that economic development could be a ``public use'' under the fifth amendment's takings clause, Congress and every Member of Congress, in my judgment, has a duty under that oath to support and uphold and defend the Constitution. Indeed, John Adams remarked: ``The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the law of God and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.''

As a Member of the House Agriculture Committee, I can say that the fear of development and the unbridled appetite of urban areas against rural areas makes this an especially important initiative of the Agriculture Committee and its distinguished chairman.

In the discharge of our duty to support and defend the fifth amendment to the Constitution, I urge my colleagues very humbly, say no to Kelo, say yes to the Private Property Rights Protection Act.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding me this time.

Today, the House is set to consider the fiscal year 2006 agriculture appropriations conference report, a bill of some $17 billion in scope. But according to the Congressional Budget Office, Mr. Speaker, the bill violates the budget resolution by $199 million over the budget.

The rule we are debating at this very moment is asking us to waive a budget point of order to enforce the budget.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot do that. These are difficult times in which we live. The American people are looking to this Congress to make the hard choices, to put our fiscal house in order. Today, as we consider this conference report, for my part I will neither be able to vote yes for this rule, but neither am I willing to vote no. The only reason why I will vote ``present'' and urge other conservative colleagues, Republicans and Democrats, to do likewise is simply out of a sense of confidence in the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee.

I have met in recent days and recent hours with Chairman Jerry Lewis of the House Appropriations Committee. The only reason I am not prepared to vote no on this rule is because I believe that almost solely by virtue of the integrity and commitment of Chairman Jerry Lewis, I believe that before we adjourn this year, we will eventually be back to the $843 billion number that this Congress labored to adopt as our budget for discretionary spending, back when the budget of the House was adopted last March. So I believe that at the end of the day, Chairman Jerry Lewis will bring these numbers in line.

But as was the case with the legislative branch conference report that was $85 million over the House budget, the Interior conference report which was $52 million over the budget, this Agriculture appropriations conference report is over the budget by $199 million. And I believe it is imperative that while we recognize this chairman's effort at the end of the day, at the end of this year to square this budget up, that largely due to our colleagues in the Senate, this bill exceeds the House budget.

It also, as I said in a letter to Chairman Dreier last night, it violates the House rules in one other regard. Under rule XXI, paragraph 6, legislation is not to be considered in order where there is a designation or redesignation of a public work in honor of an individual, and this legislation does that, naming a public structure after a sitting Member of the Senate in direct violation of the House rules.

This bill violates the House budget that we adopted in March, this bill violates the House rules, and for that reason I will vote ``present'' on this rule and urge my colleagues to do likewise.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding and am deeply humbled to rise during the chairman's time and prior to the ranking member's time.

I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for the courtesy in recognizing a markup schedule on the Hill. I am deeply humbled to stand between Tom Lantos and Henry Hyde, who are the two leading voices for human rights and for the relationship between the people of the United States of America and the people of Israel.

I rise in support of House Resolution 523 that recognizes an extraordinary and, as Chairman Hyde just said, shocking and venomous moment in world debate. On October 26, 2005, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, declared that Israel must be ``wiped off the map.'' He described Israel as, quote, a disgraceful blot on the face of the Islamic world. Such rhetoric is, as this resolution states, outrageous and despicable. It is, in my judgment, in the heart of the American people to rise in this Congress, in these extraordinary times and speak this truth to that power, and that is that the people of the United States cherish the dream that became the reality of Israel in 1948, and we categorically condemn rhetoric of this nature.

This resolution calls bravely on the United Nations Security Council and all civilized nations to condemn and reject these statements. Let the world know, the American people pray for the peace of Jerusalem, for all the people of all the faiths in Jerusalem. We long for justice in the region. And only if the world will come together and condemn this venomous and despicable and shocking statement by the president of the Islamic Republic of Iran will that peace and justice ever be achieved.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back to the chairman with gratitude and appreciation for his and the gentleman from California's leadership in bringing this important resolution before the Congress.

When it comes to making tough choices in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Madam Speaker, Presidential leadership will make the difference. Yesterday in remarks before the Economic Club of Washington, DC, the President of the United States called on Congress to ``redouble our efforts to be wise about how we spend your money.'' The President went on to say, ``We can help the people of the gulf coast region recover and rebuild and we can be good stewards of the taxpayers' dollars at the same time.'' He called on Congress to reduce unnecessary spending, to identify offsets, and pledged again to offer spending rescissions to provide the emergency relief, in his words, in a fiscally responsible way.

President George W. Bush yesterday encouraged Congress to push the envelope when it comes to cutting spending, and his strong leadership will make the difference. Congress should heed the call of President Bush to rebuild with generosity and fiscal responsibility in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

Mr. Speaker, it has been asked in some shrill tones this morning on the floor of this Congress, 2,000 American casualties in Iraq, and what do we have to show for it?

Well, I would offer very humbly, what we have to show for it is a dictator behind bars, a terrorist haven vanquished, 100,000 Iraqis in uniform with another 100,000 yet being trained in the next year, millions freed from tyranny, national elections in January, and, as the headlines today attest, a constitution ratified in a new, free, and democratic Iraq. That is what we have to show for it.

Because of the ongoing sacrifices of the American soldier, those at their post and those in glory, and their families, freedom is winning, terrorism is losing in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, the State of Indiana lost a giant of the engineering community last month. On Sunday, September 25, Dr. Julius Perr passed away in his home country of Hungary where he revolted against a Soviet-led communist regime before coming to the United States as a refugee of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution.

Julius Perr and his wife Elizabeth, made Columbus, Indiana their home and found peace from the unrest in Eastern Europe. It was also in Columbus where Julius began a 41-year career as a mechanical engineer for Cummins Engine Company. In this time, he distinguished himself by submitting more than 300 patents on engine technology improvements, 80 of which are still in use today.

Cummins recognized Julius's extraordinary accomplishments by establishing an award in his honor. Each year, Cummins presents the Dr. Julius P. Perr Innovation Award to acknowledge innovative contributions of Cummins personnel.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the State of Indiana, I extend heartfelt sympathies to the family of Dr. Julius Perr, specifically his wife Elizabeth; his sons Andrew and Victor Perr; his daughters Maria Garrison, Elisabeth Perr-McColm and Karolina Perr; and his eight beloved grandchildren.

Julius Perr was commended by the U.S. Patent Office for setting an example for future generations of inventors. But it is his love of culture and allegiance to his community that will be most missed by those who know him the best. The State of Indiana was fortunate to call him one of its own.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this time and I thank him and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns) for their visionary leadership on this bipartisan legislation.

The right to keep and bear arms is enshrined in the second amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act today will reaffirm our Nation's ability to keep, bear, and

manufacture lawful firearms in the United States of America. By passing this bill, Congress will prevent one or a few State courts from bankrupting the national firearms industry with baseless lawsuits.

Mr. Speaker, a gun, by its very nature, is dangerous. But throughout the history of tort law in this Nation, we have built on the principle of individual responsibility in which a product may not be defined as defective unless there is something wrong with the product, not with the way that it is used. The progeny of cases that have emerged in recent years against gun manufacturers flies in the face of both our Constitution as well as the history of common law and its tradition.

It is time for Congress to fulfill its congressional duty, exercise its authority under the commerce clause, and prevent a few State courts from bankrupting our national firearms industry that has as its foundation our constitutional right to keep and bear arms.