[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 149 (Thursday, October 28, 1999)]
[House]
[Page H11125]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       THE APPROPRIATIONS PROCESS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I was not going to speak to 
the topic, but I do want to tell the gentleman from Florida that as a 
member of the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims of the Committee 
on the Judiciary, I will look intently at his issue, and I appreciate 
his bringing this to the attention of the House.
  I would hope that the different extremes of thought, the fact that 
people should not be discriminated against but the fact that we should 
have a workplace that respects American workers and recognizes that we 
do discourage illegal immigration and encourage employers to hire both 
legal immigrants and those who are American citizens, that we can find 
a way to respond to the gentleman's concerns, and I thank him for 
bringing this to our attention.
  Mr. Speaker, many of the American public who have watched us over 
this past time frame of dealing with the appropriations process may 
have wondered what all of the bickering was about. In fact, they may 
have wondered why the bickering, with the most prosperous peacetime 
over a period of time that we have seen in a number of years. 
Consistent prosperity. It seems ludicrous to many who would study the 
issues of economics that we find ourselves at a point where we are 
denying services to the American public under the precept of an across-
the-board cut at a time when there is great prosperity.
  So the problem, I think, is that we are either misrepresenting to the 
American public, playing our own private games, or failing to recognize 
our responsibility to work in a bipartisan manner to address the needs 
of this country.
  It is important to note that just a couple of months ago the 
Republican majority was offering a $792 billion tax cut. What was that 
based upon, particularly when we now are debating the idea of an 
across-the-board cut? And as I continue in my discussion, I think my 
colleagues will see the people who are negatively impacted by such a 
cut.
  Well, the $792 billion tax cut was based upon presumptions and good 
news and the hope that something would happen, and that was that if the 
peacetime economy was to continue, there was some thought that the 
prosperity of this country would allow monies to be recouped on the 
$792 billion tax cut. This is the same tax cut that most Americans said 
they did not want; the same tax cut that probably would give little 
benefit to working and middle class Americans; the same tax cut that 
would not have benefitted the EITC, the earned income tax credit, 
recipients, those working poor who would benefit from their lump sum 
tax benefit, who in the last days were in the middle of a chopping 
block while we were talking about a $792 billion tax cut.
  So my call on my fellow colleagues is that as we have now voted on 
the last appropriations bill, of which it is quite obvious that the 
President will veto, when we have the opportunity to come back again, 
or if we go into major negotiations, might we put in front of all of 
the distinct and disparate political philosophies the fact that the 
American people have asked us to frugally, yet responsibly, and with 
compassion, deal with all of their needs.
  I would hope when we come back to the table again that we would not 
deny 950,000 children the right to participate in after-school 
programs. Today, I had the privilege of conducting a hearing entitled 
``An Ounce of Previous Recollection Is Worth a Pound of Cure''. It was 
a reaffirmation or a hearing regarding the testimony of advocates and 
participants in programs that children use after school. It was the 
children themselves, it was the participants in Boy Scouts and Campfire 
Girls, it was the YMCA, which indicated they are in 22,000 communities 
around this Nation.
  If my colleagues could have heard those young people, 14 years old 
and 16 years old, tell their own personal stories. A 14-year-old Girl 
Scout, who is already a mother, says she belonged to a gang and that if 
she had not been steered away, through this program which receives 
complementary Federal funds to expand its program into lower income 
neighborhoods, she would not have been sitting in that hearing room 
today. She got off drugs, or the enticement of drugs, she got away from 
gangs and began to understand how to behave as a girl, and she said she 
is now a better parent.
  These programs, Mr. Speaker, are just one example of why the 
appropriations process is wrong, why this bill was wrong, and why we 
should go back to the drawing board and do the right thing for the 
American people.

                          ____________________