[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 150 (Tuesday, October 20, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H11583-H11591]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
WAIVING POINTS OF ORDER AGAINST CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 4328,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT,
1999
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 605 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 605
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider the conference report to accompany the
bill (H.R. 4328) making appropriations for the Department of
Transportation and related agencies for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 1999, and for other purposes. All points
of order against the conference report and against its
consideration are waived. The conference report shall be
considered as read.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) is
recognized for one hour.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield
one-half my time to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley), my
great friend, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.
During consideration of the resolution, all time yielded is for
purposes of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, passage of this rule will enable us to complete the
outstanding work for the 105th Congress and adjourn for the remainder
of the year. This rule is traditional for conference reports. It waives
all points of order against the conference report and against its
consideration. Further, it provides for the conference report to be
considered as read.
Mr. Speaker, the conference report to accompany H.R. 4328, the
Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriation Bill for Fiscal Year
1999, is serving as the vehicle for an omnibus appropriations package
for fiscal year 1999. That is the bill that we have before us.
Mr. Speaker, the conference report before the House contains the
following general appropriation bills for fiscal year 1999:
Transportation; Agriculture; Labor-HHS and Education; Commerce,
Justice, State, and the Judiciary; Foreign Operations; District of
Columbia; Treasury-Postal Service; and the Interior appropriations
bills.
Mr. Speaker, all of the spending bills in this general appropriation
bill are within the discretionary spending caps and are fully paid for.
This conference report also contains a number of provisions making
supplemental appropriations.
A significant portion of the package, and I think it is important for
Members to note, is an $8.4 billion Department of Defense component
including funds for missile defense and additional funds for military
readiness, so badly needed. This funding is critical to protect the
lives of our soldiers and our military personnel who serve overseas in
uniform.
I have warned my colleagues many times that we are returning to the
very hollow force of the 1970's in our national defense posture. There
was a time, that I often recall, when we had hostages being held in a
place called Iran. And when we attempted to rescue those hostages being
held, we had to cannibalize 14 helicopter gunships just to get 8 that
would work, and 3 of those failed, and so did the rescue operation.
That was the condition of our military back in the late seventies.
Mr. Speaker, our Nation's Armed Forces are facing the same kind of
critical shortages in a number of areas right now.
In terms of personnel, we have lost military personnel. We have
commissioned officers and noncommissioned officers who are choosing not
to stay in the military. Many of them are being furloughed because of
lack of funds. There are shortages of equipment and spare parts, and
even ammunition.
Mr. Speaker, all of these indicators of a declining readiness rate
are not academic statistics. All of these things contribute to the
ability of our Armed Forces to respond rapidly and effectively to a
threat from overseas in the manner in which we responded to Saddam
Hussein in 1990 and 1991, and today we cannot do that. We do not have
the military capability to mount that kind of an operation now. Also
these items which are in short supply lead to a greater propensity for
training accidents or aircraft crashes, and you see it almost every
week now in some part of the world.
Mr. Speaker, the lives of our young men and women who serve in the
military are constantly at risk from foreign threats. We should not
compound that risk by leaving them in the field with aging or broken or
outdated equipment.
Mr. Speaker, the world is a dangerous place, and there are nations
and forces who are hostile to the United States and American interests
all over this globe. The House should lend its support to our men and
women in uniform around the globe who put their lives on the line for
the national interests of this country by voting for this package
today. I intend to vote for it myself, even though I am a fiscal
conservative and do not share all of the purposes of everything in this
massive bill.
Mr. Speaker, the United States lives under the constant threat of
attack from ballistic missiles launched from China or North Korea or
other renegade regimes around this world. It is inconceivable to me
that we have not developed a system that would stop incoming ballistic
missiles from landing on American cities. Several regimes have a
startling missile capability and, when coupled with biological and
chemical warheads, these regimes and their devices pose an incredible
threat not only to American servicemen serving overseas, but also a
direct threat right here to the United States of America.
We all know that the People's Republic of China, which is a hostile
nation to this country by their own words, have no less than 13
intercontinental ballistic missiles aimed at American cities right
today, yet we are not equipped to do anything about that.
Mr. Speaker, if investing $1 billion for missile defense in this
package is not an emergency, I do not know what an emergency is. This
funding is absolutely critical.
Mr. Speaker, the conference agreement also contains funds to combat
terrorism, including at our American embassies overseas. For those who
have traveled there, you know that many of our embassy personnel are in
grave danger right today, and we saw that happen just in the last
several months. The Congress must support efforts to counter
international terror and the cowards who would employ such methods
around the world.
Mr. Speaker, this spending agreement also includes important funding
for intelligence activities which are critical so that we can know in
advance when terrorists are planning to attack America's
infrastructure, such as the World Trade Center, bridges, tunnels or
American embassies overseas.
Mr. Speaker, this package also contains funding to address the Year
2000 computer problem, or Y2K, a significant portion of which is
defense-related. We must ensure that our defense computers are
technically capable to meet the challenges of the new century.
{time} 1640
Mr. Speaker, this omnibus appropriation package contains something
even more important than all the things I have just mentioned, and that
is crucial funds for the anti-drug efforts as
[[Page H11584]]
well as legislative language to encourage drug interdiction efforts. A
vote for this package is a vote to rededicate ourselves to the fight to
stop all aspects of the illegal drug trade, supply, use and demand. And
I would also note on that subject, Mr. Speaker, that the conference
report before us maintains language which passed the House prohibiting
Federal or District of Columbia funds for free needles for drug
addicts, a program which has not worked in any part of the country,
and, Mr. Speaker, it is so terribly, terribly important to set an
example for our young people that there is nothing hip, that there is
nothing cool, about heroin use or any kind of drug use. Illegal drug
use can only lead to a life of failure and misery and even death.
Rather than promote desolation and despair, Mr. Speaker, we should
promote hope and opportunity for this young generation coming on board
now.
And, Mr. Speaker, this conference agreement also contains important
funding to assist our Nation's farmers who have faced numerous natural
disasters this year. The conference report includes language relating
to something terribly important to myself and the gentleman from
Louisiana, the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations sitting next
to me here, and that is called milk marketing orders, which will
prohibit the Department of Agriculture from changing the rules until we
have gone through both a legislative process and an appropriation
process cycle for next year. That would give the incoming Congress time
to hold hearings and to deal with this life threatening issue as far as
the dairy farmers of this Nation are concerned. The Federal Dairy
Program is so very important to the livelihood of my particular
district and certainly many of the others throughout this country.
And, Mr. Speaker, it is important that we adjourn this Congress in
order that Members have a chance to discuss with their constituents the
fact that we have produced the first balanced budget in 30 years. We
are now cutting rather than increasing spending. We have produced a
historic budget surplus for the American people, and, Mr. Speaker,
Ronald Reagan's vision has been achieved by our actions. The growth of
the federal spending has been slowed to 3 percent a year. I never
thought 5 or 6 or 10 years ago that we would be able to accomplish
that, but we have, and we should commend both the Committee on
Appropriations and the Committee on the Budget and the other committees
of this Congress for having bit the bullet and dealing with this very
critical issue.
We have reformed welfare and made a dramatic difference in the lives
of so many Americans encouraging the personal responsibility and
dignity that are a part of decent jobs. In New York State alone more
than 500,000 people have been taken off the welfare rolls. Those people
are now taxpaying citizens, they are good citizens that are
contributing to society.
And, Mr. Speaker, we took on the dreaded IRS and brought about long
overdue reform to that agency.
Now the conference agreement is not perfect; we all know that. It is
a compromise among the House and the Senate and the President of the
United States. All Members did not get all the provisions we were
seeking, nor did we knock out all the provisions that we wanted to
knock out. Nor did the President get all of his legislative agenda in
this package. But the spirit of compromise, which is what Ronald Reagan
spent a great deal of his time trying to teach me, is that you cannot
always have it your own way. One of the most difficult lessons that I
have learned in Washington is the fact that we have to compromise. And
that is why I urge every Member to come over here regardless of their
philosophy, whether they are liberal, conservative or somewhere in-
between.
This is a bill we ought to vote for the American people. I urge my
colleagues to support it, support the rule and then vote for the
omnibus package when it comes before the House.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon), my
dear friend, my colleague, the chairman of the Committee on Rules, for
yielding me the customary half hour.
Mr. Speaker, at long last we are preparing to vote on this omnibus
appropriation bill. This is the bill that contains the eight unfinished
appropriations bills and hundreds of extra provisions all the way from
duck hunting to stomach viruses, all lumped together in a document that
weighs over 40 pounds, stands 16 inches high and has to be brought over
here in a box that resembles a Budweiser case. I mean this is a first.
I hope that all the people who are listening in will really pay
attention to this. This is the largest bill that I can recall lumping
all these appropriation bills together in an end of the season rush to
get out of here.
Mr. Speaker, we all know the reason the Congress is passing this one
enormous bill instead of the individual bills is because the
Republicans just could not get their act together, they could not
finish their work in time for the new fiscal year. But it turns out
that the good news for the Democrats is this bill contains a lot more
Democratic provisions than we could have gotten under the regular
legislative procedure if that legislative procedure had taken place in
its orderly fashion. By sticking together and insisting on our
priorities we won very many major victories for the American families
of America.
Democrats won 100,000 new teachers for our classrooms, which means,
Mr. Speaker, classrooms all over the country will average 18 students
fewer per classroom. Children will get more individual attention. It
will be easier to discipline and to teach these children. Mr. Speaker,
thanks to Democrats, my home State, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
will get $22 million more to reduce our class sizes.
Democrats fought off Republican attempts to raid the Social Security
surplus to pay for tax cuts. Democrats won a 14-percent increase in
health research in diabetes, cancer, genetic medicine and to develop an
AIDS vaccine.
Mr. Speaker, Democrats won the funding for 17,000 new community
police officers, and we also won the removal of Republican provisions
letting polluters get off the hook scot-free and the addition of
investments in cleaner environment.
Mr. Speaker, Democrats and Republicans combined saved the LIHEAP
program, which provides energy assistance for the 5.5 million elderly
and working people during very cold winters and very hot summers.
But, Mr. Speaker, there is still a lot to do. Our schools are still
falling apart. One out of every three American schools needs extensive
repair or replacement, and about the same number were built before
World War II.
Mr. Speaker, American children should be taught in classrooms and not
trailers, and they should not have to eat lunch at 10 o'clock in the
morning because the cafeteria just does not have enough tables to feed
them all at the same time. But my Republican colleagues refused even to
meet on the school construction bill.
Americans enrolled in managed care plans still do not have the
protection against the abuses. We need to pass a Patient Bill of
Rights. But my Republican colleagues refuse to take it up.
My Republican colleagues buried efforts to reform our campaign
system, reduce teen smoking and raise the minimum wage.
Still, Mr. Speaker, despite our small numbers the Democrats have done
pretty well. We stopped the Republican attempt to destroy Medicaid back
in 1995. We stopped the Republican attempt to use the Social Security
surplus for tax cuts, we stopped their efforts to let polluters off the
hook, and we kept them from dismantling public education.
So I congratulate my Democrat colleagues for really insisting
education be made a priority, and I urge my colleagues to support the
rule and support the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, as I begin to recognize our next speaker, I have to call
attention to the fact that I will be leaving this body at the end of
this year and after 20 years. More important is the gentleman sitting
next to me. He is not a Member of Congress, but he is probably more
important than any Member of Congress because he is the Chief Counsel
of the Committee on Rules. Bill Crosby has been with this body for
[[Page H11585]]
27 years. He came here directly out of the United States Navy, and he
has served under former members of the Committee on Rules,
Representative H. Allen Smith of Glendale, CA, Representative Dave
Martin of Nebraska, and of course our old good friend Jim Quillen, who
was a Member of this body for 30 some years from Tennessee. We are
certainly going to miss Bill. He was my valuable right arm for 10 years
on the Committee on Rules, and we wish him well.
Mr. Speaker, having said that, I yield such time as he may consume to
the gentleman from Claremont, California (Mr. Dreier), the vice
chairman and the man I will be turning the gavel over to as chairman of
the Committee on Rules.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my very good friend from Glens Falls
(Mr. Solomon) for yielding me this time, and while we have all engaged
in what is clearly a long good-bye, I would like to, as this is the
last issue that we are going to be considering in the 105th Congress,
join in saying once again how sorely we will miss the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Solomon) when he will not be a Member of the 106th
Congress and to also join in saying to our good friend, Bill Crosby,
``Thank you very much for nearly three decades of great service to this
institution.'' I am particularly honored that he was first hired here
by H. Allen Smith, as Mr. Solomon has just said, who was the ranking
Republican on the Committee on Rules at that time and a fellow
Californian, and we were saddened with his passing just within the past
several months. But Bill will be sorely missed, and we certainly wish
him well in his future endeavors.
Mr. Speaker, 2 years ago the American people gave a Republican
Congress and a Democratic President a mandate to do a number of things
to balance the federal budget, provide tax relief for working families,
create incentives for private sector jobs and job creation, preserve
the Medicare program and to promote quality educational opportunities
for all children. The 105th Congress accomplished each of these
important goals by sticking to fundamental principles while making
compromises that reflected the political realities of a divided Federal
Government.
The Fiscal Year 1999 Omnibus Appropriations conference report which
we are addressing here today does look at many of those very important
national needs. In particular, I would like to applaud the negotiators
for the $7 billion included to overcome the rapid diminishment and the
readiness of our military forces. It also provides new funding to
protect American cities from a limited nuclear missile strike, to fight
terrorism, avoid the Year 2000 computer problems in government and to
help victims of national disasters.
While this final budget package is worthy of support, make no
mistake. We all have acknowledged that it does have real shortcomings.
The President, his supporters in Congress have proven extraordinarily
resilient in treating every federal spending program as a sacred cow,
and unfortunately opposing tax cuts at every turn, using the very
specious argument that this poses a threat to the solvency of the
Social Security system.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I believe that more should be done to provide tax
relief to working families and to ferret out wasteful federal spending
and out-of-date government programs. I look forward to the next
Congress including more Members who are committed to those policies
that represent these values of hard-working Americans.
With that I thank my friend for having yielded this time to me, and I
urge support of both the rule and the conference report.
{time} 1645
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 7 minutes to the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the ranking member of the
Committee on Appropriations, who has labored so diligently on this
massive, massive piece of legislation.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, this bill is here because of a massive
institutional failure on the part of the Congress.
Now, it is true that there are some major victories for the President
and for my party in this package. In my judgment, those major victories
are here because we had a large portion of the Republican Caucus, known
as the CATs, who early on this year indicated that they did not like
the way the Congress handled appropriations bills the year before when
we had a relatively bipartisan approach, and they decided they wanted a
much more partisan approach; they wanted the bills to be written only
on the Republican side of the aisle. They did not want the minority
party included; they did not want to hear what our views were; they
wanted to bring their agenda to the floor, so they did.
They cut $1 billion out of the President's education program. They
eliminated the Low-Income Heating Assistance Program. They eliminated
the Summer Jobs Program. They laced the appropriation bills through
with antienvironmental riders. They proposed all kinds of measures
which they thought they could impose on what they perceived to be a
weakened President, and then something happened. What happened is that
the moderate Republicans decided they could not support that package,
and the Senate Republicans also decided that some of these bills were
so extreme that they would not vote for them. And so we wound up in a
colossal end-of-the-year, after-the-deadline negotiation on more than
half of the budget.
Now, as a result of that process, a lot of the decisions that were
made were made by four people. They were made by the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Livingston), the chairman of the committee, my good
friend; by me; by Senator Stevens, who represents the majority party in
the Senate, and by Senator Byrd, who represents the minority party in
the Senate. We made hundreds of decisions on the specific appropriation
items. But then a laundry list of other items were kicked upstairs and
there judgments were made by only one person in this House so far as I
know, that being the Speaker, and they were made on the other end of
the avenue by representatives of the President.
We are in this mess because this Congress did not do its job. We are
in this mess because the Congress passed only a tiny number of the 13
appropriation bills that we were required to pass by the end of the
year. And now we have this god awful mess on the floor, which while it
contains a number of, I think, needed victories for us on education and
on other items, still represents an incredibly outrageous way to do the
country's business.
So we have as a result of this process some 70 extraneous provisions
laced through this bill. We do have a bill which is now $2.6 billion
above where the House was on education, and for that the President
deserves credit and so do the minority party negotiators. We did
restore fuel assistance, we did restore summer jobs, we did protect the
National Labor Relations Board, we did keep the full IMF funding, and
we did get a number of other victories. We did get $1.6 billion
additional funds to help our farmers. We did get language which extends
contraceptive coverage under Federal health benefits for women. We
stopped the punitive action that the majority party wanted to take
against the Federal Elections Commission. But in the process, an awful
lot of garbage stuck to this bill.
The most outrageous action taken of all was action that was insisted
upon by the Committee on Ways and Means. There was a provision in this
bill which would have allowed the brother of the Unabomber to get the
full reward that was promised for solving that crime without being
taxed. He wanted to give the full amount of that reward to the victims
of the Unabomber, but because of jurisdictional dumb Hill
considerations, the Committee on Ways and Means decided they would not
allow that money to be provided to the victims of that crime tax-free.
I have never seen a more disgraceful action on the part of anyone in
this Congress than that action in denying those funds to the victims of
the Unabomber, and yet that is one of the pieces of garbage that we had
to swallow in this bill in order to get the bill that would be
supported by the majority.
We have a number of other items on tax legislation that were added to
this. We have $4 billion added to the defense budget without a dime of
that $4 billion going into readiness. It goes into a lot of the
Speaker's pet projects, into a lot of third-tier, third-rate
intelligence
[[Page H11586]]
activities, (one good one), and yet none of the funds go directly to
military readiness. It is really a lousy way to prioritize national
needs.
So I am going to ask Members to do the only thing we can under these
circumstances, because the country does need a budget. I will ask them
to vote for the bill when we finally get to it, because thanks to the
incredible mismanagement that we have seen in this Congress all year
long, we have no other choice. But that does not mean I am proud of the
product.
I think this product, at least the process by which we got here, is a
national disgrace, and I think the House ought to be ashamed of itself
for all of the decisions that led to this ridiculous process. I want to
make clear in my criticism that I make no criticism of the majority
party on the Committee on Appropriations. They did everything possible
to work under these ridiculous circumstances to bring a decent bill to
the House. But I have to tell my colleagues, wait until you see the
stories that the press will write for weeks and weeks on some of the
provisions that are in this bill, and more importantly, some of them
that are not, and we will get a clear idea of just how low this
Congress has sunk.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The other night my wife was up in our home in the Adirondack
Mountains, she was watching C-SPAN, and my next speaker was on the
floor. He was telling it like it is, and as soon as he finished she
called me and she says, my goodness, he sounds just like you. I do not
know whether she was being critical or heaping praise.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Metairie,
Louisiana (Mr. Livingston). He is truly one of the commendable Members
in this body. In the last 4 years, he is one of the reasons that we
have a balanced budget here and we have gotten our fiscal House in
order.
(Mr. LIVINGSTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend from York (Mr.
Solomon), the very distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules,
the very distinguished, outgoing chairman of the Committee on Rules. He
is my friend. He is a gentleman with whom I have enjoyed working with
throughout the time that I have had the opportunity and the honor and
privilege to serve the American people in the United States Congress. I
do not think that there have been any better served than those served
by the gentleman from New York who is leaving. This is his last
presentation of a rule not only before the 105th Congress, but before
the Congress as a whole. I just want to take this opportunity to wish
him and his lovely wife, Freda, many, many years of happy retirement,
although I know he is not planning on retiring, he is simply leaving
Congress. We will be able to see him in other roles, and we wish him
lots of success and happiness. Likewise, I would like to wish lots of
success and happiness to his sidekick, Bill Crosby, who has done a
remarkable job for the Congress over the last 27 years as a public
servant, plus his time in the Navy. So we wish him well and thank him
for his dedicated service over the years.
Mr. Speaker, I am not going to stand here and defend the process,
because I think it has been ugly, but I will say that we are ahead of
the game when we look at the last 15 years. We are actually completing
our business ahead of the schedule of all but 5 of those last 15 years.
In 10 other instances we have gone later in the calendar year, longer
in the legislative season than we are today. So even though we have a
40-pound pack of paper sitting there before us comprised of some 8
bills and 4 emergency sections, the fact is we are completing our
business. If the good Members of this House have the wisdom and good
judgment to vote as a majority for this package, we will go home,
complete the campaign season, and have a victorious time on behalf of
the majority, I hope, in November.
{time} 1700
That being said, let me say that we have comprised a great deal in
this package. We not only include eight regular appropriations bills,
but we address the Y2K emergency problem that threatens Government
computers and virtually all computers of this country in every walk of
life as we change into the next millennium.
We address the needs for increasing the safety for our diplomats and
their staff in embassies and consulates all around the globe to provide
some protection against terrorism.
We include money for agricultural emergencies reaped by natural and
other disasters around this country, and we provide much needed funding
that replenishes the readiness accounts and the needs for our Defense
Department to provide defense against incoming missiles to this country
through a viable missile defense system and various other priorities
that are so extraordinarily important to the armed forces and the men
and women that serve in them.
I might say that we do all of that, eight appropriations bills,
including the agriculture appropriations bill, which was passed by the
Congress and vetoed by the President and redrawn in this package,
within the caps provided us by the Committee on the Budget.
There may be some criticism about how we get there, but the fact is
the Congressional Budget Office, notwithstanding current press reports,
the Congressional Budget Office has proclaimed that we are under the
caps allotted to us which agrees with the budget process as agreed to
in last year's budget agreement. So nobody can say that this package is
out of kilter in terms of overall spending.
Finally, I would say that it is a fair rule which allows us to debate
this issue. We have an hour not only on the rule, but an hour to debate
the entire package. While there will not be any amendments allowed, we
are satisfied that the rule is appropriate and should be adopted. We
are hopeful that the Members of the body will come and vote as a
majority for the entire package, because they should not concentrate on
the process. They should concentrate on the substance.
The fact is that the House of Representatives using the normal
appropriations process passed all but one of our bills before the end
of the fiscal year. The Labor-HHS-Education bill was not passed in the
House or the Senate, but it was conferenced informally between our
Members of both bodies. We worked our way through the process.
Mr. Speaker, all I would say is that whether Members like this
process or not, the fact is that we have had a chance to finish all of
the individual bill packages in their entirety, bundle them together in
that very large bundle, and submit them to the membership so they can
vote on it.
Once they vote on it, it will be virtually the last vote they cast
for this Congress, and we will go home knowing that we have achieved
the first balanced budget in 30 years.
Last year we passed the first tax cut in 16 years. We have virtually
frozen the cost of government across the board, stopped the growth of
government in all of the departments, agencies, and programs. We have
saved about $125 billion under what the President projected we would
have spent some 4 years ago at this time. So we can take confidence in
the fact that we have restored fiscal integrity to the United States
Treasury for the first time in a generation. I think that is no small
accomplishment. I urge the Members to vote for this, and go home with
great pride.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Mrs. Capps).
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I just flew over 3,000 miles from the
central coast of California to support this important bill. This budget
bill is a victory for the American people. It is a victory over
mindless partisanship, and it is a terrific victory for education.
Providing our local school districts with additional qualified
teachers is an important step in the right direction. Next year we must
come back and help our local communities to build new classrooms and to
modernize their schools.
This budget is a victory in the fight against disease. As a nurse, I
am thrilled that Congress is giving vigorous support to critical
research on Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, diabetes, and ALS. Next year we
must come back, take on the HMOs, and pass a strong patient's bill of
rights.
This is a good bill. I urge my colleagues to pass it.
[[Page H11587]]
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio.)
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, the do-nothing Congress is limping to a
pathetic end, one final $500 billion bill. Just to my left there is a
copy bound with twine 2 feet tall. It weighs 40 pounds. Who among the
rank and file Members of the House can say they have read and
understood the entire package? Half the Members here could not even
lift it, let alone read it.
The chairman of the Committee on Rules said it was about readiness.
For once we are in vague agreement. This bill is about readiness,
campaign readiness. It is stuffed to the gills with election-year
goodies. The gentleman meant military readiness, but from the quarter
of a million dollars that the Pentagon is going to be forced to spend
to study the effect of stay-awake gum on the troops, to the C-130J
airplanes that they are going to be forced to buy that will be built in
the Speaker's district, and they will have to retire other good planes
10 years early to accommodate them, it is much more of an assault on
the orderly readiness of our troops than it is a help.
Of the $7.5 billion stuffed into the Pentagon budget in this bill,
perhaps $1.1 billion, 14 percent, can be said to truly be going to the
readiness needs of our men and women in uniform. Is $1 billion more for
the Star Wars fantasy that has wasted $50 billion, so far with no
successful experiments, is that the readiness that our troops need? I
think not.
Is $2 billion more for intelligence agencies what they need? Just 3
years ago the National Security Agency lost $4 billion in its budget.
That is right, it misplaced $4 billion, because it was trying to hide
it from our enemies, and they had a bunch of different bank accounts
around. They forgot they had the money until a new auditor came in and
found it, and they need another $2 billion? I do not think so.
The gentleman spoke about fiscal responsibility. This bill is
financed with $20 billion out of the future social security trust fund,
the so-called surplus in emergency spending. That is not fiscal
responsibility.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, let me tell the gentleman that we received this bill up
in the Committee on Rules at 9:30 last night. I was there. It was ready
for any Democrat to come upstairs and see it. I will tell the
gentleman, if he would have come up at 9:30 last night, he would have
found that the State of Oregon is the real beneficiary, and so is the
gentleman's district. He ought to be here praising this bill.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I will probably not have this opportunity again to
congratulate my friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) for
the work he has done as the chairman of the Committee on Rules in
representing his party's way. He and I, although we have disagreed
probably on 90 percent of the matters that came before us, we never
disagreed about our friendship. I hold him to be a very dear friend of
mine.
Also, Mr. Crosby has been a great, great person, never butting into
things, but always there as a font of information any time we needed
some information, even though he represented the majority and we were
in the minority. So I wish him well on his new endeavors.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr.
Sanders).
(Mr. SANDERS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the
time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the Republican
leadership's process which has brought us to the vote we cast today, a
vote which merges eight separate appropriations bills into one huge
4,000-page omnibus bill which will spend some $500 billion with one
vote.
Within this huge bill there are some excellent and important
provisions which are good for my State of Vermont and which are good
for this country, but there are some awful provisions and wasteful
provisions which are going to cost taxpayers billions and billions of
dollars. It is a travesty and an insult to the democratic process that
Members have not been able to vote separately on these provisions to
maintain what is good, to get out what is bad, and to end up with the
best legislation that would serve the interests of the American people.
I would hope that regardless of our political point of view or the
party we may be in, that we will work together to make sure that a
process like this does not take place again.
Within the positive aspects of this bill, there is some real help for
dairy farmers in the State of Vermont and throughout this country in
terms of the extension of the Northeast Dairy Compact. There are some
very important provisions for our Gulf War veterans, who have never
gotten the kind of treatment that they need, and this bill will provide
them with some real help now and in the future.
There is some good help for those home health care agencies in
Vermont and throughout this country who have suffered severe cuts as a
result of the balanced budget agreement last year. There is good
legislation extending the Cancer Registry Act, helping those people who
are victims or hurting from cancer. There are some good provisions, but
the process has not been good.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 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.)
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding time to me.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the chairman of the Committee on Rules for
bringing this rule to the floor today. I believe it is long overdue for
us to do our jobs to make sure that the government remains open and the
American people are taken care of. Let me thank the appropriators for
long and hard work.
Needless to say, I would have preferred a deliberate study of each
individual appropriations bill, but frankly, I want to say to the
American people, we want their business done. I am grateful that those
who are on waiting lists across this Nation, waiting on Section 8
housing, these are the working poor, will now have over a 2-year period
and 100,000 extra vouchers for people to live throughout the country
and continue working.
I am very pleased that AmeriCorps, that has helped educate any number
of our young people, has now been funded. They go into communities and
help senior citizens and help preschool children and help rebuild
communities, and yet then have funding to go to college.
Frankly, I am delighted that we recognize that the Census is one of
the most important tasks that we have, and therefore, we will extend
the time for sampling, as well as the other form that is now being
utilized by the Census agency so we can get the most accurate count.
I am very pleased, as rains pour in Texas, that we have 12 million
for the Simms Bayou in my district and other districts to make sure
that we provide for those taxpayers who send money to this government.
But most of all, I am proud for the incremental increase in helping
children suffering from mental disabilities, moving up $5 million, so
we can go into communities and draw in their families and the children,
and begin to rebuild lives of children who are suffering from mental
illnesses.
I am not pleased, however, in helping seniors who are homebound and
those home health care agencies. Yes, the IPS will be delayed now from
1999 to 2000, but I wanted to give retroactive help. Though we are
boosting the payments, Mr. Speaker, I think we can do more. My
commitment is we will do more to help those seniors and those home
health care agencies.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Minnesota (Mr. Sabo).
Mr. SABO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member of the Committee on
Rules for yielding time to me.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill. I intend to vote for it,
but I think that never, in all my life, in a long legislative career,
have I ever done anything so much on faith as signing this conference
report.
For the people who are wondering, this is a conference report on the
transportation bill. I think that is
[[Page H11588]]
probably less than 10 percent of the bill, but the conferees who have
signed it are those of us on that particular bill. So I put my
signature on that conference report, and 90 percent of it is something
that I am taking on faith. I know there are some good things in it, but
I am really not taking responsibility for everything that is in it. It
is sort of what one would call an institutional obligation, to move the
process on.
Mr. Speaker, within the transportation bill I commend my friend, the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf). I think we have produced a good
bill within the restraints of the budget deal and with the fundamental
transportation problems in this country.
{time} 1715
I also have to say, Mr. Speaker, I guess this is it, this big pile of
paper representing all of these bills that have been combined in a
process such as I have never seen, really with very minimal involvement
of many of the Members who were involved in writing the specific bills.
We have this huge bill now before us. Clearly, it is hard to ask
somebody to vote for it. That I cannot do.
But, Mr. Speaker, I think we have no other choice at this time but
simply to vote ``yes'' and move this bill forward.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on both sides?
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). The gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) has 8 minutes remaining, and the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Solomon) has 8\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to one of outstanding
Members from Morris, Illinois (Mr. Weller).
Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York for
yielding time to me.
First, I want to salute the distinguished chairman of the Committee
on Rules and thank him for his leadership. I realize tonight is his
last official vote in the House of Representatives, and I want to thank
him for his friendship and wish him well.
I rise in support of this rule, and I rise in support of the bill. As
I look back over the last 2 years, I look back at a Congress that has
accomplished a lot of things. I remember when we were sworn in 2 years
ago, there were a lot of the naysayers that said this Congress could
not accomplish what we wanted to do. They said we could not balance the
budget. They said we could not provide tax relief for middle-class
families. They said we could not reform the welfare system. They said
we could not restructure and retain the IRS. Well, we did.
As I look back over the last 2 years, we did all those things we were
told we could not do. We balanced the budget for the first time in 28
years. We cut taxes for the middle class for the first time in 16
years. We reformed welfare for the first time in a generation. We tamed
the tax collector for the first time ever.
Tonight we are in the final hours of this session of Congress. Now
there is this omnibus bill before us. It is a bipartisan compromise.
There are things in it some of us do not like. There are things in it
some of us do like. But it is a good bill, in general, and it helps
fight against drugs, puts more money into the classroom, helps family
farmers with disaster relief, helps small businesses by quicker phase-
in of the 100 percent deduction for self-employed for health insurance,
provides flood relief to the Chicago south suburbs.
Mr. Speaker, there is something very important that is missing. I
have often stood in the well of this House and I have often asked a
very simple question: Is it right, is it fair that under our tax code a
married working couple with two incomes pays more in taxes than an
identical couple, identical income living together outside of marriage?
It is wrong that our tax code punishes marriage with higher taxes.
Earlier this fall, the House of Representatives passed a tax cut
providing marriage tax relief for 28 million married working couples;
$243 a year they would have received. Unfortunately, they have been
left at the altar.
Mr. Speaker, let us make elimination of the marriage tax penalty a
number one priority of next year's tax provisions.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Bentsen).
(Mr. BENTSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in objection to the rule.
As many speakers have said before me, this is a horrible process. It
was just a year ago that this House, in a bipartisan vote, passed the
Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Now, as we head into a time of surplus,
which we do not know how much it is going to be, we have already
started to spend that surplus without planning for the future. Earlier
this year we passed a highway bill that was at least $20 billion over
the Balanced Budget Act. This bill, while there is some emergency
spending in it, which I think would qualify as emergency spending and I
agree with the concept, I am afraid may well set a precedent going
forward where everything we cannot get under the spending caps we are
just going to call an emergency and do.
I know parts of Texas have agricultural emergencies and we need to
fund that. I know there is a readiness problem. But I have some
concerns about funding more for this Star Wars project.
The bill has some good things in it, the increase in NIH, which I
support, and there are offsets for that. It has some things that are
very important to my State. But overall the bill sets a very bad
precedent. It shows the failure of this Congress.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
I just do not understand the protest here. The gentleman has not been
around here very long. Back in 1983, we had 7 appropriation bills
rolled into the continuing resolution. That was under Democrat
leadership. In 1985, we had 8 rolled into one bill. In 1986, we had 7.
And guess what happened in 1987 and 1988? All 13 were rolled into one
continuing resolution. Let us stop kidding ourselves and come over here
and vote for the rule.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
the Virgin Islands, (Ms. Christian-Green).
(Ms. CHRISTIAN-GREEN asked and was given permission to revise and
extend her remarks.)
Ms. CHRISTIAN-GREEN. Mr. Speaker, it is with mixed feelings and some
disappointment that today I nevertheless support H.R. 4328, although I
do have some reservations about the rule.
While many hail it as an example of what can be accomplished when
both political parties put their personal agendas aside to reach
compromise, and rightly so, the final outcome of this bill is a
bittersweet victory for the people of the Virgin Islands. While no bill
is perfect and there are winners and losers in every compromise, the
failure to even extend the rum rebate at its current level will deal a
hard blow to the treasury of the Virgin Islands.
This being said, I still join my colleagues in applauding President
Clinton and the Democratic leadership in this Congress for fighting and
winning vital new investments for the children of America. I want to
thank also President Clinton, his staff and the Democratic leadership
and my colleagues, many of them, who helped in securing an increase in
children's health care funding for the children of the territories, and
Senator Carol Moseley-Braun for introducing a companion bill to mine
which will breathe new life into a fledgling watch industry.
Before I close, let me just say I also ask for support to continue to
work on those taxes for the territories.
Mr. Speaker, it is with mixed feelings and a great deal of
disappointment that I rise today to nevertheless support H.R. 4328.
While many hail it as an example of what can be accomplished when both
political parties put their personal agendas aside to reach compromise,
and rightly so, the final outcome of this bill is a bittersweet victory
for the people of the Virgin Islands.
While no bill is perfect, and there are winners and losers in every
compromise, the failure to even extend the rum revenue rebate at its
current level has dealt a hard blow to the treasury of the Virgin
Islands.
While we did achieve some of our goals, this very important measure
met with such unexpected, inexplicable and adamant opposition, that
important capital projects, and programs needed to spur our lagging
economy will now go undone.
The hard working people of my district who have served this country
in large numbers as
[[Page H11589]]
far back as the revolutionary war, and who have made their
contributions to this country in other ways are deeply disappointed,
but it is an issue that we will continue to pursue because it is a very
necessary part of our economy's revitalization.
That being said, I must still join my colleagues in applauding
President Clinton and the Democratic Leadership in Congress, for
fighting for and winning vital new investments for the children of
America.
The President's proposal to hire 100,000 new teachers will help to
reduce class sizes in the early grades thereby enhancing individual
attention and increase student learning. And by so doing, we will also
be preventing more kids from getting in trouble.
The President and Congressional Democrats also secured very important
investments in child literacy, college mentoring, after-school programs
and summer jobs in this bill.
And finally green cards will be made available to Haitian refugees.
Like the majority, while Democrats made strides, we did not get
everything.
In addition to being saddened by what we see as a major but only
temporary setback on V.I. produced rum, we feel similarly about the
loss this year of the school construction initiative, of the ``Patients
Bill of Rights'' bill as well as an increase in the minimum wage for
working families, and last but not least, the killing of the
comprehensive anti-Tobacco legislation which would have saved millions
of young Americans from early and avoidable deaths.
In closing I want to thank President Clinton and his staff, the
Democratic Leadership, and my colleagues, Appropriations Committee
Ranking Democrat Dave Obey, my friend from Maryland, Steny Hoyer,
Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro, Congressman Louis Stokes, my Chairwoman
Maxine Waters, Senator Graham of Florida and all those too numerous to
mention who helped in securing an increase in Children's Health
Insurance funding for the children of the territories.
This additional funding will mean that the Children of our
territories will have the same opportunities for better Health Care as
their family and friends on the mainland.
I also want to especially thank Senator Carol Mosely-Braun for
introducing a companion bill to mine which would breathe new life in a
fledging industry in my district by instantly creating approximately
400 new jobs on St. Croix. For this effort as well, I must thank Ways
and Means Committee Chairman Bill Archer and Ranking Democrat Charlie
Rangel. Also Trade Subcommittee Chair, Phil Crane and Ranking Democrat
Bob Matsui for their help in getting this bill passed today.
And I also ask for your support as we continue to work for the return
of funds to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands as the law provides.
And last but not least, Finance Committee Chair Bill Roth and Ranking
Democrat Patrick Moynihan for their support of the proposal also.
My colleagues, while not have all we might have wanted, this bill
deserves our support. I urge all to put aside narrow partisan interest
and vote in favor of this good bill for America.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I wonder how many of my
colleagues would sign a $100,000 mortgage without reading it. I wonder
how many of them would take out a $10,000 business loan without reading
the terms. I wonder how many of my colleagues would profess to tell
their constituents that they know what is in these 4000 pages.
I can tell them there is a $100 million visitors center for here, the
Capitol. There is another $104 million for our protection. But I cannot
also tell them there is a buyout program for the Pollack industry that
I do not know why we need to buy those vessels. That costs us about $50
million.
This spends 500 billion of the taxpayers' money, not our money. And
no one in this room can tell us everything that is in it. We have been
here all year. I think we can wait a few more days to see to it that
Members have the opportunity to study this. If we are not given the
opportunity to study this, then I think the only businesslike and
responsible thing for the Members to do is to vote against it.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I was in my office at 9:30 last night,
right up there, when this bill was delivered. No Democrat came up to
pick it up until after 9:30 this morning. I would say to the previous
speaker, where was he for 12 hours when the bill was up there ready to
be read?
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, the reason that nobody came and picked it
up is because they could not find a hand truck big enough to handle the
bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Gephardt), our Democratic leader.
Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, Ronald Reagan stood in this Chamber nearly
a decade ago and attacked the Congress for sending him a massive last-
minute appropriation bill. Well, here we go again.
This bill is 4,000 pages long and weighs over 40 pounds. And at that
time Ronald Reagan said, Congress should not send another one of these
and, if you do, he said, I will not sign it.
Well, here they go again. This bill is a symbol of the wasted time
and misguided priorities of a Republican Congress whose leadership
consumed our agenda with investigations instead of legislation. Thanks
to the Republican leadership, we have worked the fewest days and passed
the fewest bills in decades. We did not even pass a budget resolution
in this House of Representatives, the first time since the Budget Act
passed 24 years ago.
For the last year Republicans in Congress have tried to focus the
debate on anything except what is really significant to our future.
They have had far more enthusiasm for subpoenas than for schools, and
they would rather talk about the FBI than the IMF.
We were able to convince a reluctant and unwilling Republican
majority to include funding for 100,000 new teachers in this bill,
teachers that will help reduce class size and improve the quality of
our children's education. While Democrats may not be satisfied with
what was not included in this bill today, we will come back and fight
again and again for a Patients' Bill of Rights, anti-teen smoking
initiatives and an increase in the minimum wage. And a Democratic
majority will hopefully enact the reforms to guarantee the future of
Social Security and save the surplus for Social Security, which the
Republican majority tried to spend before it could be saved, to save
that program.
Ronald Reagan was right. It was a bad way to do business in 1988, and
it is a bad way to do business in 1998.
Mr. Speaker, it is time for a change. It is time for a Congress that
works full time to help meet the challenges of our future instead of
skipping town with unfilled promises and unmet priorities, and one that
fulfills its constitutional role to produce a budget in a manner
befitting of us all.
If we want to change the agenda, it should be very clear. We have to
change the leadership of this Congress. I believe the American people
will do that, and I hope for the sake of the people they do.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I do not want the minority leader to take this wrong, but he has been
standing up here emulating my great hero, Ronald Reagan. Let me just
say to the gentleman, I know Ronald Reagan. He is a friend of mine. And
the minority leader is a great guy and a great friend of mine but he
isn't quite the same as Ronald Reagan.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt) was just
complaining about being opposed to the bill. I am looking at the
conferees here. Every Democrat conferee signed this bill: Sabo, Torres,
Olver, Pastor, Cramer. And the President of the United States is for
the bill. I do not understand the protest here.
{time} 1730
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Sanibel, Florida (Mr. Porter Goss), a very valuable member of the
Committee on Rules. He is also the chairman of the Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence.
(Mr. GOSS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I urge support for this rule, the last rule of
the year. The last rule of this Congress. This is a fair rule, it is an
appropriate rule and, under the circumstances, it is about the only
rule we could come up with, and I think we all know it.
This is a debate about the rule, but we are getting into process.
Many people have talked about budget process tonight. I want everyone,
all the Members, to understand that we have developed a bill, a
bipartisan bill, with some very innovative new ideas for budget
[[Page H11590]]
process reform. I say this not because we are all proud of the process
that we have just seen and we are experiencing tonight, but that we
think we can do better. More important than that, there is an
opportunity for Members to take that bill and read it, and I would
suggest that Members do that because there are some good ideas and we
should discuss them in the next Congress.
I would also like to point out the obvious. There is much in this
bill. There is much I like, there is much that others like, and there
is much that some of us are not so sure about at this point. That is
the way it is because we have, right now, a situation of shared power
in this country. That is what the voters have dealt us. We also have a
separation of powers. That is what the Constitution has given us. And
we have certainly something here that is a product where we should not
be worried about winners or losers on a partisan basis, we should be
worried about whether America wins.
I suggest America is going to win in a number of ways with this piece
of legislation. Certainly in education, as we have heard. Certainly in
intelligence, as we have not heard. We are reinvesting in the future,
so some of the tragedies that were witnessed around the globe this year
hopefully will not catch us by surprise or happen again. Certainly in
defense. Certainly in the war on drugs. Certainly in a number of other
areas that will be of interest to all Americans in their quality of
life and in their pocketbook.
So I think this is a good piece of work, even though I would admit
the process has been a little unusual.
The final thing I want to do is to pay my public respects to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon), chairman of the Committee on
Rules. I have followed the gentleman, who has been a great mentor and a
great leader. He lead while we were in the minority, as a ranking
member, when we were badly outnumbered. He has led in the majority, as
the majority leader and chairman of the Committee on Rules, when we are
also badly outnumbered on many occasions. I want to thank him, share my
respects, and to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) as
well.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). The gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) has 2 minutes remaining. The minority
leader yielded back 2 minutes to the gentleman. The gentleman from New
York (Mr. Solomon) has 3 minutes remaining.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time just
to briefly say that there is nothing unusual about considering a group
of appropriation bills in an omnibus bill. The Democrats controlled
this body for 40 years. All during the 1980s they lumped in 7 bills, 3
bills, 8 bills, 7 bills; and then, in 1987 and 1988, they lumped in all
13 of the appropriation bills. So there is nothing unusual about doing
this. We have to compromise, we have to govern.
Upstairs earlier I posed the question, why would a fiscal
conservative like myself support this kind of measure when it does have
a lot of excess spending that I do not agree with? And I pointed out
there are three reasons:
Number one is that the growth of Federal spending has been slowed to
3 percent. That is something that we fiscal conservatives have been
fighting for for years, and we finally have succeeded in this bill that
is before us today.
The second reason is that the bill raises the overall spending for
our military preparedness, something that is so terribly, terribly
needed today. That is the reason I am going to vote for the bill.
And, finally, it increases both the level of spending and gives
legislative clout to programs to deal with the most important issue
facing this Nation today, and that is the illegal drug war that is
taking away a whole new generation of Americans. We have to do
something about it. This bill does it.
That is why we should all come over here and vote for the rule, and
then we should vote for the omnibus bill.
I salute the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Bob Livingston), for an outstanding job
on bringing this to the floor today, and I urge support for the bill.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to address some
concerns on the Rule in H.R. 4328, the Omnibus Appropriations for the
FY 99 Conference Report.
Although many of us are satisfied with the bill, we are very unhappy
with the process that got us here. This bill contains over half of the
appropriations necessary to keep this country going next year,
including the funding for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human
Services, Commerce, Justice, State, Agriculture, and Interior. It
represents the most vital programs for our elderly, our disabled, our
impoverished, and most importantly, our children. We simply cannot
afford to play partisan politics with these people's lives, and hope
that next year we will have a Democratic Congress so that we do not
have to play these games.
Throughout this 105th Congress women's concerns have been repeatedly
ignored. The Republican leadership has with one exception voted to
reduce women's choices for adequate health care and has attempted to
disempower us. It should be no surprise that once again women Federal
prisoners are once again denied the right to choose an abortion. Women
who discover they are pregnant after incarceration, have no option but
to have a child which they will not have custody to, during their
prison term.
The option to choose abortion, is one that is not available to them,
and this is wrong and unfair.
In addition, here in the District of Columbia, the use of local and
Federal funding for needle exchange programs in the District have been
banned. Needle exchange programs which reduce the spread of HIV and
hepatitis, can help to save lives, to cut this funding will exacerbate
an already desperate situation for many D.C. residents. Not
surprisingly, here in D.C. the use of Federal and D.C. funds used to
provide women with access to abortion services are also denied, except
in cases where the life of the mother is threatened, or in cases of
rape or incest.
It should also be no surprise that gays and lesbians were denied
important freedoms under the D.C. appropriations bill. In light of the
hateful and violent crime against Matthew Shepard during this pat
month, it should be clear to all of us, that our gay and lesbian
constituents deserve the same equal rights as all of us.
I am also dismayed that a crucial provision of the foreign
appropriations bill reduces funds for international family planning
assistance. The elimination of funding by the United States for the
U.N. Population Fund will deprive several hundred thousand women of
effective contraception and put many of these women at risk for life
threatening illnesses and injuries during an unwanted to unplanned
pregnancy. More than 1,000 women will die as a result of these cuts.
This simply is not acceptable.
Under the Labor HHS bill, this Congress has voted not to cover
Federal funding for needle exchange programs, prohibit the use of
Federal funds for embryo research, and expand the Hyde language to
cover Medicare funding, meaning that women dependent on Medicare will
not be able to access abortions. All of these decisions are harmful to
women and to our less powerful members of society. Those who cannot
fend for themselves should find protection through our Government. Yet,
to refuse poor women on Medicare the choice to an abortion, and to vote
not to provide our sick citizens with access to clean needles is
shameful.
The Treasury Postal appropriations bill provision continues a
prohibition on the use of funds for abortion in connection with any
health plan under the Federal employees health benefit program, except
where the life of the mother is threatened or where the woman is a
victim of rape or incest. Under Supreme Court decisions, women have
been allowed the choice for abortion and reproductive freedom, yet the
leadership in this Congress has done everything within its power to
erode these import rights.
Furthermore, this bill has come to the floor without adequate time
for review. The bill itself, along with the conference report total
well over 1,000 pages,
The way that this bill comes to the floor; however, should not
surprise any of us. This is the same majority that passed a ``martial
law'' resolution last week, which allows them to bring a bill to the
floor without notice, without preparation, and without adequate time
for deliberation. This is the same majority that brought the Labor-HHS
appropriations bill to the floor for debate on just one issue, family
planning, to appease their supporters on the far-right. This is the
same majority that did not include Democratic representatives in their
Conference Committee meetings. Having seen how the majority has handled
this appropriations process, should we be surprised by the manner this
bill has come to the floor? No. Are we outraged? Yes!
[[Page H11591]]
I urge all of you to vote against this rule, to reaffirm our
commitment to the Democratic process.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
move the previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the Chair will reduce to
5 minutes the time for any electronic vote on H. Res. 604 after this
vote.
There was no objection.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 333,
nays 88, not voting 13, as follows:
[Roll No. 536]
YEAS--333
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baesler
Baker
Baldacci
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Bereuter
Berman
Berry
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Bliley
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Bryant
Bunning
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Capps
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Chenoweth
Clay
Clement
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Cook
Cooksey
Cox
Cramer
Crane
Crapo
Cubin
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (VA)
Deal
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Evans
Everett
Ewing
Farr
Fattah
Fawell
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Fowler
Fox
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gejdenson
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Goss
Graham
Granger
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hamilton
Harman
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
Hefner
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inglis
Istook
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (WI)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kaptur
Kasich
Kelly
Kennedy (MA)
Kennelly
Kilpatrick
Kim
King (NY)
Kingston
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaHood
Lampson
Lantos
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Livingston
LoBiondo
Lowey
Lucas
Maloney (NY)
Manton
Manzullo
Markey
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDade
McGovern
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Metcalf
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Mink
Moakley
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neumann
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Obey
Ortiz
Oxley
Packard
Pallone
Pappas
Parker
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Paxon
Pease
Pelosi
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pickett
Pitts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Rangel
Redmond
Regula
Reyes
Riggs
Riley
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ryun
Sabo
Sandlin
Sanford
Sawyer
Saxton
Schaefer, Dan
Schaffer, Bob
Schumer
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shimkus
Shuster
Sisisky
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (OR)
Smith (TX)
Smith, Adam
Smith, Linda
Snowbarger
Snyder
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Spratt
Stabenow
Stearns
Stenholm
Stokes
Strickland
Stump
Sununu
Talent
Tanner
Tauzin
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thornberry
Thune
Tierney
Torres
Traficant
Turner
Upton
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson
Wise
Wolf
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--88
Allen
Andrews
Barrett (WI)
Bentsen
Bonior
Borski
Brown (CA)
Cardin
Carson
Christensen
Clayton
Clyburn
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Coyne
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Deutsch
Doggett
Edwards
Ensign
Etheridge
Filner
Ford
Frank (MA)
Furse
Gordon
Green
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Hilliard
Holden
Hoyer
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kildee
Kind (WI)
Kleczka
Klink
LaFalce
Lee
Lipinski
Lofgren
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Martinez
McCarthy (MO)
McDermott
McHale
McKinney
Menendez
Miller (CA)
Minge
Nadler
Neal
Olver
Owens
Payne
Peterson (MN)
Rahall
Rivers
Rush
Salmon
Sanchez
Sanders
Scarborough
Shays
Sherman
Skaggs
Stupak
Taylor (MS)
Thompson
Thurman
Tiahrt
Towns
Vento
Waters
Watt (NC)
Waxman
Weldon (PA)
Wexler
Woolsey
Yates
NOT VOTING--13
Becerra
Fazio
Hansen
Kennedy (RI)
Meehan
Mollohan
Oberstar
Poshard
Pryce (OH)
Smith (NJ)
Stark
Tauscher
Weygand
{time} 1753
Messrs. WEXLER, VENTO and OLVER changed their vote from ``yea'' to
``nay.''
Messrs. STUMP, HINOJOSA and PORTMAN changed their vote from ``nay''
to ``yea.''
So the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________