[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 56 (Tuesday, April 8, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H2870-H2872]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 APPOINTMENT OF CONFEREES ON H.R. 1559, EMERGENCY WARTIME SUPPLEMENTAL 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2003

  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take 
from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 1559) making emergency wartime 
supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
2003, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, disagree 
to the Senate amendment, and agree to the conference asked by the 
Senate.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.


                 Motion to Instruct Offered by Mr. Obey

  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct.

[[Page H2871]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Obey moves that the managers on the part of the House 
     at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses 
     on the Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 1559, recede to the 
     Senate on section 409 of the Senate amendment, providing 26 
     weeks of additional temporary extended unemployment 
     compensation for displaced airline related workers.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) will 
be recognized for 30 minutes, and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Young) will be recognized for 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).
  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 8 minutes.
  Madam Speaker, American citizens often hear Members of Congress talk 
in terms that they do not understand. They hear us talking about Blue 
Dogs, Blue Dog Democrats, they hear us talking about Yellow Dog 
Democrats. Sometimes they see us acting like lap dogs, and today I am 
afraid that the House may wind up genuflecting to Top Dogs, because 
that has been the general pattern on the issue that I am raising this 
afternoon.
  After 9/11, the Congress passed a $15 billion airline assistance 
package, $5 billion in direct cash payments and $10 billion in direct 
loans and loan guarantees. The Congress was asked at the same time, and 
a number of us have tried to get it done, but Congress had asked at the 
same time that we were bailing out the airline industry to also 
recognize workers within that same industry who were also losing their 
jobs and should have some help from the government. The Congress 
responded by saying, no, thank you.
  Now, the bill that the House passed last week contained $3.2 billion 
in cash payments for the airline industry on this go-round and the 
Senate bill contained a figure of slightly over $2 billion. We are here 
today again to ask that if we are going to be bailing out the airline 
industry that we also provide some $275 million in assistance to the 
workers in that same industry by providing an additional 26 weeks of 
temporary extended unemployment benefits for displaced airline-related 
workers.
  Now, the administration has let it be known what their position is, 
and essentially they are opposed to this proposal. And what they are 
telling Congress is that, instead, we should work with the 
administration to make sure that any aid package is appropriately 
scaled and ``appropriately based on free market principles.'' Well, I 
guess I am kind of new around here and naive around here, and I am not 
quite sure what those ``free market'' principles are when it comes to 
the airline industry.
  To me, I think that the airline industry is a let's pretend industry, 
run by let's pretend capitalists who are on the public dole, and I do 
not mean Bob. They are out here once again asking the taxpayers to help 
finance their survival. Now, we have had some of those airlines go 
bankrupt not once, not twice, but three times. I asked on the House 
floor last week how many times Continental Airlines had to go bankrupt 
before they were bankrupt. I still have not received an answer.
  Now, I will fully grant that given the serious nature of the war, 
given the impact of 9/11, and given the fact that the airlines are a 
crucial part of our economy and our transportation system, I would 
fully grant that some kind of cooperative relationship between us and 
the airlines will be necessary in order to keep this economy healthy. 
But it seems to me that we ought to have some systematic way to assure 
that when we are bailing out the airline industry and its executives, 
that at least some of those taxpayers' dollars wind up trickling down 
to the workers who keep those airlines moving in the first place.
  So that is the purpose of this amendment.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will remind all persons in the 
gallery that they are here as guests of the House, and that any 
manifestation of approval or disapproval of proceedings or other 
audible conversation is in violation of the rules of the House.
  Mr. OBEY. I assume that does not come out of my time, Madam Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. It does not.
  Mr. OBEY. So, as I was saying, lest anyone think that it is not 
needed, the airline industry itself estimates that we have had a 15 
percent increase in unemployment in that industry since 9/11, and since 
January 1, we have seen another 15,000 layoffs.
  So I would ask the Members of this House today to, for a change, let 
us not institutionally genuflect to the top dogs in this society. Let 
us keep in mind the needs of the underdogs and provide at least some 
modicum of assistance to the workers I am talking about.
  Let me also explain that there will be a rollcall on this vote. I 
know that it may be possible that this motion could be adopted on a 
voice vote. But frankly, if we were to simply have a voice vote, it 
would not mean anything to anybody. It would be very easy to jettison 
this language in conference.
  So I think to assure that this vote is a meaningful vote, let the 
chips fall where they may in terms of passage. To assure that it is a 
meaningful vote and not just a sleight of hand so Members can say, 
``Well, do not worry, airline worker, I voted with you. Of course, it 
was not a rollcall vote, and of course the leadership made us turn 
around in conference so that there would not be any.'' But I would urge 
Members to vote for the motion.
  Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
  (Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to 
instruct.
  Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this Democratic 
motion to instruct House conferees on the supplemental appropriations 
bill.
  It's just. It's fair. And it enjoys bipartisan support in both the 
House and the Senate, even if the Bush administration has labeled it 
``objectionable.''
  In short, this motion would instruct House conferees to recede to the 
Senate provision providing an additional 26 weeks of unemployment 
compensation to workers in the air transportation industry.
  This industry and its workers have borne the brunt of the continuing 
war on terrorism and have been wracked by our sluggish economy.
  In fact, the industry is expected to lose $6.7 billion this year.
  Approximately 200,000 airline workers have lost their jobs since 
September 11, 2001, and another 70,000 workers are expected to be laid 
off.
  Last week, the world's largest carrier, AMR Corporation's American 
Airlines, averted Chapter 11 bankruptcy by negotiating $1.8 billion in 
labor concessions.
  And U.S. Airways only recently emerged from bankruptcy after winning 
approval for $900 million federal loan guarantee.
  Last week, I also had the opportunity to meet with representatives of 
the industry and airline workers.
  And they know that their fate is inextricably linked; that one cannot 
survive without the other.
  Today, through this motion, we recognize that and say: What's fair 
for the industry is fair for workers.
  In fact, members on both sides of the aisle want to help.
  This motion would instruct conferees to agree to a provision that is 
very similar to bipartisan legislation introduced last week by our 
colleagues, Mr. English of Pennsylvania and Mr. Oberstar of Minnesota 
[H.R. 1553, the ``Air Transportation Employees Assistance Act''].
  The Senate has already passed a plan to extend unemployment insurance 
benefits in its version of this legislation.
  The Members of this body should do the same thing to aid this 
struggling industry, and its workers and their families.
  That's precisely what this motion to instruct seeks.
  I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Pelosi), the distinguished minority leader.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. If we may go first to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Young).
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I am sorry. Did the gentlewoman wish to go? I will always yield to 
the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. PELOSI. I am pleased to yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, if the gentlewoman would yield to me 
briefly, let me explain that I thought we

[[Page H2872]]

had an understanding that I would explain the motion, that the 
gentlewoman would make her comments, and then the gentleman would close 
and we could yield back the balance of our time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Speaker, I apologize to the gentleman. I 
guess I did not understand exactly. But that is fine with me. No 
problem whatsoever.
  Mr. OBEY. Fine. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Pelosi).
  Ms. PELOSI. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Obey) for yielding me this time, and if that is not pleasing to the 
distinguished chairman of the committee, I am pleased to yield to him 
first. If it is okay, then I will proceed.
  Madam Speaker, once again I wish to thank the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) for his leadership on this important issue, 
important to America's workers. Today, we have an opportunity to do the 
right thing for America's aviation workers.
  Both the House and Senate versions of the supplemental appropriations 
bill include financial assistance for the airlines, as they should. 
Aviation is an essential cornerstone of the U.S. economy. Both the 
House and Senate bills focus primarily on mitigating for the cost of 
security provisions required by the Federal Government, as those bills 
should have that funding. But we cannot ignore the workers who form the 
backbone of the aviation industry.
  Madam Speaker, at least 150,000 workers in the aviation industry have 
lost their jobs since 9/11, including those who work for the airlines 
and related industries. Many of these workers have exhausted their 
unemployment benefits, and that was months ago. But with the industry 
still contracting, new jobs are impossible to find. Thousands more 
airline workers have lost their jobs since the Iraq war began and 
layoffs in the industry could reach 70,000 more. Concern about the 
exposure to the deadly SARS disease in Asia is now reducing air travel 
from the U.S. to Asia even further.
  The Senate has included $225 million for extended unemployment 
compensation for aviation workers. The House should recede to the 
Senate position.

                              {time}  1230

  Madam Speaker, it is the least that we can do. I urge Members to vote 
for relief for aviation workers. To support the Obey motion to instruct 
conferees, vote for the motion to instruct.
  Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I am not really opposed to what the gentleman is 
suggesting here. The Committee on Appropriations did add $3.2 billion 
to the wartime supplemental to deal with airline issues and to be 
helpful to the airline industry. So there is plenty of money to handle 
this issue, but I am going to vote against it because of the problems 
it could cause as we go to conference.
  We have a tight schedule. The committees on both sides of the aisle 
have worked extremely well. Just a few days after receiving the 
President's request, the Committee on Appropriations reported the bill 
to the House. As Members know, last Thursday we passed this bill with 
an overwhelming vote in the House.
  However, there are some significant differences between our bill and 
the bill presented by the other body. I just have the feeling this is 
going to be a fairly difficult conference because, while the House kept 
the bill very clean and close to what the President requested, to fight 
the war and provide for homeland security and to support those of our 
coalition who are helping us in this war effort, the other body, 
frankly, added quite a few things that were extraneous to the wartime 
issue; and that is going to make the conference a little difficult.
  I want to get this conference completed. Leadership has advised me, 
as well as most of the Members, that we are not going to take our 
Easter district work period recess until this bill has left the 
Congress and has gone to the President since it is important to what 
the President is doing in Iraq. I will vote against this motion. I want 
to again emphasize we need to move this bill quickly. If the conference 
gets tied up for more than 2 days, we will not get this bill to the 
floor in time for the House to take its usual Easter recess. In 
addition, I am opposed to motions to instruct in general. I have no 
objection to what the gentleman wants to do, but it is just procedural 
for me. I think it could complicate the conference on this very 
important wartime supplemental.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Biggert). Without objection, the 
previous question is ordered.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to instruct 
offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. OBEY. Madam 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. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.
  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.

                          ____________________