Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 3889.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 686 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday the Committee on Rules met and granted a structured rule for H.R. 4548, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005. This bill would authorize appropriations for the fiscal year for intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the United States Government, the Community Management Account, and the Central Intelligence Agency retirement and disability system.

This is must-do legislation. It is also the most robust Intelligence Authorization Act the House has ever considered, and it is consistent with the Defense appropriations bill the House passed yesterday by an overwhelming vote of 403 to 17.

The classified annex to the committee report, which includes information on the budget and personnel levels, is available to all Members of the House of Representatives, subject to a requirement of clause 13 of rule XXIII.

This rule permits only those Members of the House who have signed the oath set out in clause 13 of House rule XXIII to have access to the classified information. Simply, this means they must agree not to release the information they see.

Intelligence has been, rightly so, recognized as a critical weapon in the global war on terrorism. Resources for, and demands on, the U.S. intelligence community have increased dramatically in the 2\3/4\ years since September 11, 2001, and the attacks we all remember.

This increase is even more dramatic when one takes into consideration the depth of the cutbacks, underinvestment, and the near fatal loss of political support for the intelligence community in the prior administration.

That is why I am pleased that this bill authorizes more money than last year, even including the supplemental. This is the type of investment that our intelligence community deserves.

This legislation continues the sustained effort and long-term strategy to bring human intelligence, signals intelligence, imagery intelligence, and other intelligence systems and disciplines to life successfully.

H.R. 4548 also continues a similar commitment to build and maintain the analytic expertise and depth of coverage necessary to make wise and timely use of the information collected.

I want to take this opportunity to thank the CIA and all the members of our intelligence community who do make a vital contribution to our Nation's security.

I agree with President Bush that this is a mission of service and sacrifice in a world of great uncertainty and risk. America's commitments and responsibilities span the world in every time zone. Every day our intelligence community helps us to meet those responsibilities.

This bill provides the President with the intelligence tools needed to win the war on terrorism; and to that end, I urge my colleagues to support the rule.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Burr), another member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), chairman of the Committee on Rules.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham).

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Gibbons).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson); and, I might add, she is the only female military officer in this body.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to remind my colleagues in closing that there is more money in this bill than ever before. There is more money for counterterrorism than ever before. And whatever is needed will be provided, as always been the manner of this House and the other body to do.

I want to close by thanking the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss) because he has always worked in a very bipartisan manner on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, which all of us appreciate greatly, and with his background in intelligence, of course, that has been extremely important to have him there. We are going to miss him greatly, both as a chairman and as a long-serving, well respected Member of Congress from Florida.

So we wish him only the best as he goes on whatever new challenges he may take on.

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

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 683 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Committee on Rules met and granted an open rule for H.R. 4613, the Fiscal Year 2005 Department of Defense Appropriations Act. The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate, equally divided between the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The rule also ensures that the United States Government shall take all steps necessary to guarantee the full faith and credit of the government.

Mr. Speaker, this is a fair and open rule for a very important bill. It cannot get any better than that. The rule allows any Member to offer any amendment to the bill as long as their amendment complies within the normal Rules of the House.

H.R. 4613 comes at a particularly crucial time for our Nation's Armed Forces. The Iraqi conflict and our continuing war on terrorism have brought a renewed and proper focus on national defense. In our global campaign against global terror, our military must have every resource, every tool, every weapon, and every advantage that they need for the missions to come.

This legislation addresses the needs of a Nation at war on multiple fronts.

It contains $391.1 billion for the Department of Defense. It also provides an additional $25 billion requested by the President for early fiscal year 2005 costs associated with operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The primary focus of the legislation is protecting our troops on the battlefield. Our men and women in uniform depend on having the necessary systems and equipment to be successful in accomplishing their mission.

Many of us have been concerned about the lack of armor available for our Humvees and other trucks. This bill addresses that concern by providing $674 million for an additional 2,996 up-armored Humvees, and $198 million for ballistic protection. These improved ballistic Humvees will protect our soldiers from anti-personnel armor-piercing munitions, and improvised explosive devices, or IEDs.

In the near term, the outcome of our war against terror depends on the courage of our personnel on the frontlines.

I am pleased that this bill makes significant improvements in the quality of life of the men and women who serve in the Armed Forces. These improvements include a 3.5 percent military personnel pay raise, and increased levels for basic allowances for housing by eliminating service members' average out-of-pocket expenses from 3.5 percent to zero in 2005. We can never pay our men and women in uniform on a scale that matches the magnitude of their sacrifice, but this bill reflects our respect for their selfless service.

Today, more than ever, we also owe those in uniform the resources they need to maintain a very high state of readiness. Our enemies rely upon surprise and deception. They used to rely upon the fact that they thought we were soft. Well, they have gotten the message that we are not. Our forces must be ready to deploy to any place around the globe on short notice, and this bill provides over $120.6 billion for operation and maintenance. This Nation must have and will have ready forces that can bring victory to our country and safety to our people.

The world's best soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines also deserve the world's best weaponry. To ensure this, our Nation must invest in procurement. This defense bill contains $77.3 billion for procurement.

The continued development and procurement of the M-Gator is also made a priority in this year's bill. The U.S. has deployed the M-Gator to the Balkans, Afghanistan, and Iraq, providing our troops with the support and the mobility they need to successfully wage war.

With the continued support and commitment from Congress, researchers will be able to enhance the M-Gator's capabilities with silent operation, precision control, and machine intelligence. These technological enhancements will continue to help make the United States military the most technologically advanced and best prepared force in the world.

This Nation must give our military the weapons it needs to meet future threats. If the war against terror means that we must find terror wherever it exists, pull it out by its roots and bring people to justice, our military must have the means to achieve that objective.

Now, more than any time in our Nation's history, we are relying on the men and women who so faithfully serve our country in the National Guard. H.R. 4613 contains language that will help us continue to provide strong support for our National Guard.

In my State of North Carolina, universities and community organizations are coming together to help develop a comprehensive program to effectively support our citizen soldiers. This bill recognizes the importance of this program and provides language to help integrate the National Program For Citizen Soldiers Support with the Defense Department's ongoing efforts to support our men and women in uniform.

Some of our greatest defense resources are found in the classrooms and the labs of our universities. This bill continues to recognize the important role our universities play in research and development for the Department of Defense. Funding in this year's bill will help researchers at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte study optoelectronics and superlattice nanotechnology, two technologies that are on the cutting edge of defense R&D. To that end, I urge my colleagues to support this rule and support the underlying bill. Now, more than ever, we must improve our national security.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt).

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, this really is a very simple procedure to add language to the bill and that will allow for the possible future consideration of an increase in the national debt limit. That is what this does is allow for that to happen in the future. It is the same language that was done in 2002 in the supplemental.

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

I would just remind the gentleman, when we passed the bill through the House recently for the budget, we did put a freeze on discretionary spending for the first time in a long time which is the beginning of paying that down.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith).

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

Mr. Speaker, on March 11, 2004, Charlotte, NC, lost a hero, Chris Hill. Chris was originally from California, but located to Charlotte in recent years. He had already served four years in the Army when he decided to re-enlist. His wife, Cheryl Hill, said Chris was determined to go to Iraq last year: ``He just couldn't stand the fact that this was going on and he wasn't doing anything about it,'' she said. ``He wanted to help.''

Chris re-enlisted in April and went to Iraq in the fall. He was assigned to the 1st Infantry Division based in Ft. Riley, Kansas. Chris' friends and family will remember a man who was outgoing and fun and loved to sing. He even had his own karaoke machine, and he never turned down a chance to imitate Elvis Presley.

After moving to North Carolina to be near his wife's family, Chris was saved in a Baptist church. His brother-in-law, Rick Cope, a Christian songwriter, has written a song for his niece called ``Praying for You: Cierra's Song.'' Rick said, ``(We) wanted his daughter to know that he's there when she rides her bike. He's there when she gets married. He's there in spirit.''

Christopher Kenneth Hill was buried with full military honors. He was awarded a Purple Heart and Bronze Star for bravery. He was survived by his wife, and his daughter Cierra who is 14 months old.

Chris will be missed, but we will never forget his sacrifice for our freedoms.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Ohio for yielding me time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of not only this rule but the underlying bill, because as the economy continues to improve, it is important that we as Congress continue to help to provide incentives for those Americans who are still looking for work.

I spend the majority of my time in my district working on economic development and job creation. This is the Ninth District of North Carolina, and providing worker re-employment accounts is a phenomenal tool that the folks in our district and, of course, all across the country can use to help them get back to work.

As we have already heard this morning, these accounts are flexible, and that is the key. Flexibility is so important, because the workers can use the money for career counseling, for transportation, child care, job training, or housing assistance. Wherever the need may be, they can use that money. If they find employment within 13 weeks, they get to keep the balance of the account as a bonus.

It is important to the American people to know that we have not lost sight of the fact that there are still a lot of them out there looking for work and that times have been tough. We have been hit particularly hard in my district because of all of the textile jobs lost over the last few years. So it is very important, again, for my district, for the State of North Carolina, and other areas that are experiencing the same problems that we pass this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this rule and ``yes'' on the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 648 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purposes of debate only.

Yesterday, the Committee on Rules met and granted a structured rule for H.R. 4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005. The rule provides for 2 hours of general debate equally divided between the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Armed Services. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill. Finally, the rule allows that the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may recognize for consideration any amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules out of the order printed, but not sooner than 1 hour after the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services or a designee announces from the floor a request to that effect.

H.R. 4200 comes at a particularly crucial time for our Nation's Armed Forces. The Iraqi conflict and our continuing war on terrorism have brought a renewed and proper focus to national defense. This legislation addresses the needs of a Nation at war on multiple fronts. It contains $422.2 billion for the Department of Defense, DOD, and the national security programs of the Department of Energy, DOE. It also provides an additional $25 billion in emergency budget authority to partially cover the projected costs of continuing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The primary focus of this legislation is protecting our troops on the battlefield. Our men and women in uniform depend on having the necessary systems and equipment to be successful in accomplishing their mission. Many of us have been concerned about the lack of armor available for our Humvees and other trucks. This bill addresses that concern by providing $829.6 million for production of up-armored Humvees. This improved ballistic Humvee will protect our soldiers from antipersonnel, armor-piercing munitions and improvised explosive devices. These are most commonly referred to as IEDs when we hear news reports.

It also provides $358.2 million for vehicle add-on armor kits for the Army's truck fleet. Most importantly, it gives the military new authorities to speed critical weapons and equipment to the troops in the battlefield.

In the near future, the outcome of our war against terror depends on the courage of our personnel who are on the front lines. We owe so much to our men and women in uniform, and their success in Iraq and Afghanistan is a testimony to their bravery, training, and equipment and their commitment to defend our freedoms. It is the means by which we meet our commitment to provide them a decent quality of life with an across-the-board 3.5 percent pay increase for military personnel.

We need pay to sustain the commitment and professionalism of America's all-volunteer armed services and the families that support them. It increases the limit on hardship duty pay from $300 to $750 per month. It makes permanent the increased rate for imminent danger pay from $150 to $225 a month and more than doubles the rate for the family separation allowance from $100 to $250 per month.

Our soldiers also need to know that while they are deployed, we are praying for them and their safe return. I was told by a soldier in my district that the most important thing to a soldier who is serving overseas was knowing that their family is being taken care of and supported and they are safe at home. If these men and women are willing to lay down their lives for us, then the least we can do for them is to pray for them and to take care of their families while they are gone.

For this purpose, I have created a Web site. It is Honoring Heroes.com. It is a one-stop-shopping resource where folks can go to learn about supporting our troops and their families at home. On the site visitors will find links and resources to help support the families of our men and women who are overseas. And as we approach Memorial Day, one can also find on the Web site a list of those who have given the ultimate sacrifice during the war in Iraq. We must always remember them.

I commend the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the ranking member, for crafting this legislation that will really, truly strengthen America's military. It proposes the largest increase in military end strength in decades by increasing the active duty Army by 30,000 personnel and the Marine Corps by 9,000.

Even before Operation Iraqi Freedom, the global war on terrorism, and the commitment to homeland security, the Armed Forces had insufficient manpower for existing wartime and peacetime requirements.

Now more than anytime in our Nation's history, we are relying on these men and women who so faithfully serve our country in the National Guard. H.R. 4200 contains language that will help us to continue to provide strong support for our National Guard.

In my State of North Carolina, universities and community organizations will be coming together to help develop a comprehensive program to effectively support these soldiers. The bill recognizes the importance of this program and provides language to help integrate the National Program for Citizen Soldier support with the Defense Department's ongoing effort to support our men and women in uniform.

The bill also recognizes the importance of our Nation's continued development of advanced weaponry and technology. Included in this bill is the support of further exploration of the use of lithium batteries on the battlefield.

Finding a safe, cost-effective, and portable energy source for our men and women in the Armed Forces should be a top priority of the Department of Defense. I am pleased to see this year's bill addresses the need for our military to develop new and powerful alternative energy sources.

However, there is one amendment the Committee on Rules made in order that I strongly oppose, the Davis of California amendment. It would allow abortions on our military bases overseas. Military treatment centers, which are dedicated to healing and nurturing life, should not be forced to facilitate the taking of the most innocent human life, the child in the womb. For the past 7 years, the House has voted to keep abortion on demand out of military medical facilities, and I urge my colleagues to stay on this course and vote against this amendment.

That said, this is a fair rule. So let us pass the rule and pass the underlying defense authorization bill. At the end of the day, we will be making our homeland safer and we will be supporting our sons and daughters who are serving us in the military. We will be preparing for war, thereby ensuring victory. And at this crucial time in our history, this bill is most important.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder), a member of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton).

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to note for clarification, there have been press people coming and going ever since we have been doing this rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the distinguished chairman of this committee, who has done a phenomenal job in putting this bill together.

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

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

I would just like to respond to the gentleman that I am not sure when he testified, but other than having a lunch appointment and voting on the floor, I was in that hearing the whole time; and I would also like to say, there is a total of 9\1/2\ hours of debate on this bill. It is not just 2 hours.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton).

Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the chairman of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), the chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the chairman of the committee.

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

Yes, I do object.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the members of the Republican Study Committee (RSC) to express our sincere gratitude and best wishes to Neil Bradley. Neil, who has served as Executive Director of the RSC since January 2000, was recently asked by the House Majority Whip to serve as his Policy Director. As the members and staff of the RSC prepare to wish Neil well in his new position, we wanted to take a moment to reflect upon his outstanding service to our organization and to thank him for it.

For those who may be unaware, the Republican Study Committee is a group of Republicans organized for the purpose of advancing a conservative economic and social agenda in the House of Representatives. The group is dedicated to a limited government, a strong national defense, the protection of individual and property rights, and the preservation of traditional family values. Although these values are shared in the abstract by a majority of my colleagues, it is necessary that we measure what is produced through the deal- making and political give-and-take that permeates this institution against the ideals we were elected to uphold. The RSC plays an invaluable role in seeking to ensure that all legislation that moves through this body reflects and respects these fundamental values.

Over the past four and a half years, the RSC's efforts have been tremendously improved because of the service of Neil Bradley as the group's Executive Director. Neil is a committed and principled conservative. He is a tireless and effective advocate for the RSC's objectives. And, as anyone who has worked with or against him will readily acknowledge, Neil is a master of House procedure, especially the federal budget process. Mr. Speaker, Neil has served the RSC with integrity and distinction. We will miss him greatly, but are glad that he will be working for our shared values in a position of influence within the House Leadership.

As his friends and colleagues know, Neil's emails always conclude with some quotation from a famous conservative political thinker or office holder that is relevant to the policy fight of the day. Many of the quotes come from Neil's political hero, former President Ronald Reagan. I thought it would be fitting to close with some words from the great leader.

In 1989, in his farewell address to the Nation, Reagan said the following to the officials and staff that served in his Administration:

[A]s I walk off into the city streets, a final word to the

men and women of the Reagan revolution, the men and women

across America who for 8 years did the work that brought

America back. My friends: We did it. We weren't just marking

time. We made a difference.

Mr. Speaker, Neil Bradley has spent 4 and a half years working passionately for the Republican Study Committee, for the House of Representatives, and for America. He was not just marking time. He made a difference.

On behalf of the RSC, I thank him for his service and wish him well in his new endeavor.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) for yielding me this time. I rise today in strong support of both the rule and the underlying resolution.

I believe most Americans, as I was, were extremely upset by the images they saw on television of prisoner abuse in Iraq, and the horrific actions just defy everything that America stands for and Americans stand for: goodness, decency, fairness, compassion.

The perpetrators of these dastardly deeds must be swiftly brought to justice and severely punished for their actions.

America and our allies liberated Iraq from a despot. Mr. Speaker, our soldiers are very sincerely over there helping to restore basic services to Iraq and make life for the Iraqi people much better, and they are doing it at serious risk to their own lives. A few sick people in the military have set back our efforts for peace in the Mideast and around the world for who knows how long. They have destroyed all of the good relationships our soldiers and others have established in Iraq. And the majority of our service men and women are very good, decent, patriotic Americans, very honorable.

So we must not allow these actions by a few to overshadow the goodness of the majority of Americans or of our soldiers, or the effort to win the war on terror. We cannot close the book on terror until we close this chapter on Iraq.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 898, the Lumbee Recognition Act.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call

up House Resolution 607 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

On Tuesday, the Committee on Rules met and granted a modified closed rule for the Marriage Penalty Relief Act.

H.R. 4181 amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the increased standard deduction and the 15 percent individual income tax rate bracket expansion for married taxpayers filing joint returns. It will also make permanent the increase in the phase-out of the earned income credit for joint filers.

Before 2001, the Tax Code penalized many married couples by forcing them to pay higher taxes just because they were married. The 2001 tax relief bill, enacted by President Bush, brought fairness to the Tax Code by phasing out these penalties. This law increased the standard deduction in the 15 percent tax bracket for married couples to twice as much for individuals. The relief was accelerated in the tax relief that was signed into law last year.

Thirty-five million couples currently benefit from the elimination of the marriage penalty. However, this relief will be reduced next year and will expire in 2010, and we cannot let that happen. Unless the relief is extended, 27 million married couples will face an average tax increase of $300 in 2005, and over 35 million will see a tax increase of more than $700 starting in 2011.

H.R. 4181 ensures that the marriage penalty relief is not reduced next year and that it stays in the law permanently.

We all know our economy is starting to rebound. Businesses are beginning to hire workers again, and Americans are starting to spend their money with more confidence. If we do not eliminate the marriage tax penalty and prevent other tax increases, our economy might slow down and prevent job creation.

Married working couples will be able to use this tax relief to benefit their families, which always helps the economy. They will be able to spend this money to improve their home or buy something they want, like a new washing machine or a new TV; and the more money they spend, the more jobs they will help create for their neighbors and friends.

This is what the bill is all about. The most important thing we can do today is revitalize our economy here at home, and we do this by eliminating the marriage penalty tax.

To that end, I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill.

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

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

I would just say to the gentleman that we do have a bit of a philosophical difference here because, throughout history, every time we have done tax relief, the economy improves, and we put more money into the system, and it pays for itself over and over and over and over and over again. So this is just a philosophical difference we have.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume and would just say that I am glad the gentleman agrees that we need tax relief and we need fiscal constraint, because the budget we are looking at bringing forward, of course, has a freeze on spending, which is a very important part of this to reduce the deficit.

And again I would just say that we have a difference in how we look at this and how we pay for the tax cuts, because we believe that there will be increased monies coming in to the Treasury through the economic generation that is done with the tax relief. It has happened throughout history. And because of that, we will see the tax cuts paid for and the deficit reduced.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder), another distinguished member of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I say to my friend from Massachusetts that tax cuts do not cost money, they make money.

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 580 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

On Thursday, March 25, 2004, the Committee on Rules announced that it may meet the week of March 29 to grant a rule which could limit the amendment process for floor consideration of H.R. 3966. The announcement further stated that any Member wishing to offer an amendment submit the amendment to the Committee on Rules by 1 p.m. on Monday, March 29, 2004. No amendments were submitted to the Committee on Rules for their consideration.

H.R. 3966 is based on a simple principle. Colleges and universities that accept Federal funding should also be willing to provide military recruiters the same access as other prospective employers to students in ROTC scholarship programs.

This legislation would improve the ability of the Department of Defense to establish and maintain ROTC detachments and ensure that military recruiters have access to college campuses and students.

Successful recruitment for our military relies heavily on the ability of these recruiters to have access to the students and the students to be able to have access to the recruiter easily.

This bill also requires an annual verification of colleges and universities who already support ROTC that they will continue to do so in the upcoming academic year.

The Department of Defense seeks nothing more than the opportunity to compete for students on an equal footing with other prospective employers. At no time since World War II has our Nation's freedom and security relied more upon our military than now as we engage in the global war on terrorism.

Our Nation's all-volunteer armed services have been called upon to serve, and they are performing their mission with the highest standards. The military's ability to perform at this standard can only be maintained with effective and uninhibited recruitment programs.

As many of my colleagues know, the Armed Forces face a constant challenge in recruiting top-quality personnel, and I believe that ROTC programs are ideally suited to meet those needs. To that end, I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).

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

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

I would just like to note, Mr. Speaker, that Albania is a country that is a NATO aspirant and Albania's Prime Minister Fatos Nano is visiting Washington today.

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

Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago, in a tragedy personified by the killing of a young woman from middle America, we were reminded of the unsung goodness and bravery of so many Americans serving their country overseas.

On March 9, 2004, Fern Holland, of Miami, Oklahoma, was the first American civilian killed in the Iraq war. Her death has sparked over 200 national news reports, and an outpouring of grief from around the globe. Fern's story has touched people like me who never knew her, but who can now never forget her.

It's rare these days to know someone who is willing to sacrifice the comforts America offers to serve others who are less fortunate. It is even more rare to know a person who is willing to sacrifice their own life in order to improve the lives of others around the world. Fern Holland was an American hero who sacrificed both the comforts of home, and indeed even her life, to make the world a better place. People who exemplify such compassion and courage should be honored, and by telling her story I hope that she will be remembered.

Fern was a successful attorney, first in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and later in Washington, DC. She walked away from a lucrative career to carry out human rights work in violence plagued Guinea, Liberia, and later Iraq.

In her first effort to help others overseas, Fern lived in a remote village in Namibia as a Peace Corps volunteer. She helped the villagers there learn English, and built a computer laboratory to access the internet. Later, Fern worked for the American Refugee Committee where she investigated sexual assaults in a violence-plagued refugee camp in Guinea. There, she established the first sex violence legal clinic that to date has processed more than 100 cases.

Last year, after major combat operations in Iraq concluded, Fern traveled to Iraq and worked for the Coalition Provisional Authority as a women's rights specialist. She helped establish women's rights, she established service centers throughout Iraq, and she helped found an Iraqi women's political party. The day before her death, Iraqi leaders signed an interim constitution that includes a controversial provision Fern helped draft. It establishes a goal for 25 percent female membership in the national assembly. Knowing of the dangers in Iraq, especially in working to extend women's rights, Fern wrote to friends only weeks before her death, ``I love the work and if I die, know that I'm doing precisely what I want to be doing--working to organize and educate human rights activists and women's groups''.

These are but a few of Fern Holland's contributions to the world, a world which is a better place because of her. In this day and time, when the world seems dark and dreary, we look to people like Fern Holland who's bright light gives us hope. Fern displayed a compassion and commitment to people that Jesus spoke about when he said, ``Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.'' Her sacrifice is an example and inspiration to all who strive for a better world, and she will be missed.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today to lend my strong support to the Republican Study Committee budget. As chairman of the RSC, I am very proud of this budget and I want the thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) for all of his hard work on making this possible.

I also want to commend the gentleman from Iowa (Chairman Nussle) for his hard work and dedication to reining in spending. The gentleman from Iowa and the leadership of the House spent a lot of time honestly listening to Members' concerns. The underlying budget is an important first step for our conference, and I am very proud to support it.

However, I had hoped that we could do more. Hardworking Americans have to watch their spending, and so should Congress. Congress has got to get in the mind-set of spending less.

I will continue to remind my colleagues that Americans expect us to be responsible with their tax dollars. It takes them a long time to earn those dollars to send up here for us to spend.

This RSC budget reduces nondefense, nonhomeland security discretionary spending by 1 percent compared to last year's level. It assumes the President's numbers for tax relief over the next 5 years. The Committee on the Budget calls for $152.6 billion in tax relief. We call for $182.6 billion.

Most importantly, it establishes a fire wall, preventing the consideration of appropriations bills until at least $402 billion is provided for defense and military construction. The RSC budget brings true accountability to the Federal budget.

It is time Congress gets serious about reining in wasteful spending and getting our budget under control. This is what we were sent here to do. That is what the American people expect us to do. They want us to stop business as usual and stop the excuses.

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

September 11, 2001, is a day that should be etched in the mind of every American, because that is the day that terrorists chose to attack America and that threat is still here. The primary function of our Federal Government is to protect our citizens and we are doing our best to see that happens.

It is now 1 year since the coalition forces entered Iraq to free those people from Saddam Hussein's rule of terror. Freedom is flourishing and the Iraqi people know they are better off. However, terrorists are still doing everything they can to interrupt that and see that does not happen. The Iraqi people are in control of their destiny for the first time, and we are here today to encourage them in that effort, and we are here today to say thank you to our troops, all those men and women who have served in the past in this effort and who are serving now over there, giving of themselves and giving their lives so they can protect these freedoms that we all enjoy. We know the world is safer today without Saddam Hussein.

We must never forget 9/11 and that we are fighting over there so we do not have to fight the terrorists here at home. And no matter what the terrorists try to do, they need to be reminded that these colors do not run.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 554 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost); pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

On Tuesday, the Committee on Rules met and granted a structured rule for H.R. 3717, the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2004. H.R. 3717 is a direct response to the increasing levels of indecency on broadcast television and radio. The bill has strong bipartisan support, with over 145 cosponsors, and is a comprehensive measure that is reasonable, fair and firm.

The problem of obscenity on TV has been going on for far too long. However, the Super Bowl brought it to national attention. On February 1, millions of families were at home watching the Super Bowl together. I myself was watching the game, cheering on my Carolina Panthers. This was a moment of pride for my district, and in one moment the attention was shifted.

I was appalled by the shameless stunt that took place during the Super Bowl. And the excuses I have heard ring very hollow. Obviously, if it was deliberate, then Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake thought they could get away with it.

Mr. Speaker, my constituents are very tired of having to cover over their children's eyes and ears every time they turn on the television set, especially during the time that is supposed to be considered family time.

H.R. 3717 the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2004 raises the maximum penalty cap for broadcast stations, networks, and performers to $500,000 for each indecency violation. By significantly increasing the FCC fines for indecency, networks and individuals will do more than just apologize for airing such brazen material, they will be paying big bucks for their offenses.

I am very pleased that this legislation streamlines the Federal Communication Commission enforcement process for networks and individuals who willfully and intentionally put indecent material over the broadcast airwaves. So complaints do not languish at the FCC, the bill requires them to complete action on indecency complaints within 270 days of receipt. In the past, there have been examples where it has taken several years, and the broadcasters know they will not be taken to task until long after the offense is over.

I want to commend the chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), for moving this legislation so swiftly through his committee. I also want to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) for his resolve to protect our Nation's airwaves. He has been working on this issue for a long, long time.

Broadcast airwaves belong to the American people, not to the networks. So I believe it is time for Congress to defend and protect America's parents and children and pass a tough bill to ensure decency on the airwaves. To that end, I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder), a fellow member of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), the subcommittee chairman whose bill this is.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul).

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

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

move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.