[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 53 (Thursday, April 22, 2004)]
[House]
[Pages H2335-H2337]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

  (Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I take this time for the purpose of inquiring 
of the majority leader the schedule for the following week.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished whip for yielding 
to me.
  Mr. Speaker, next week the House will convene on Tuesday at 12:30 
p.m. for morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. We will 
consider several

[[Page H2336]]

measures under suspension of rules. A final list of these bills will be 
sent to Members' offices by the end of this week. Any votes called on 
these measures will be rolled until 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday.
  On Wednesday and Thursday, the House will convene at 10 a.m. We plan 
to consider H.R. 4181, which would permanently remove the marriage tax 
penalty from the Internal Revenue Code. In addition, we expect to 
consider a short-term extension of the highway bill, as the current 
extension expires at the end of this month.
  Finally, I would like to remind all Members that we do not plan to 
have votes next Friday, April 30.
  Mr. HOYER. Ms. Chairman, I appreciate that information.
  With respect to the transportation reauthorization bill, can the 
leader tell me for what length of time we will extend the existing 
authorization?
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield further, it is 
just an extension of the authorization. As far as length of time, the 
bill has not been written yet, but in the discussions that I have been 
privy to, I am advised that it could very well be about 2 months.
  Mr. HOYER. The same period as we had on this bill.
  Mr. DeLAY. Yes.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman.
  With respect to the fiscal 2005 budget resolution, do you expect we 
might see a conference report on the budget next week?
  Mr. DeLAY. If the gentleman will yield further, based on the feedback 
that I have gotten from the gentleman from Iowa (Chairman Nussle) of 
the Committee on the Budget, I believe that we could very well see the 
budget resolution conference report be completed in time so that we 
could vote on it sometime next week.
  Mr. HOYER. Is the pay-as-you-go provision still a major stumbling 
block in the conference, or does the gentleman know?
  Mr. DeLAY. If the gentleman will yield further, I am not privy to the 
discussions between the other body and the House in the conference 
committee, so I really cannot answer that question.
  Mr. HOYER. With respect to the marriage penalty tax bill, will this 
bill be considered in the Committee on Ways and Means?
  Mr. DeLAY. The marriage penalty bill, yes, will be marked up by the 
Committee on Ways and Means, I believe.
  I am being corrected, and I appreciate the correction. I think it is 
not going to be marked up by the Committee on Ways and Means. It is 
coming straight to the floor.
  Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, the reason I asked the question, 
obviously, is members of the Committee on Ways and Means had not heard 
about marking up that bill. Is there some reason we are not pursuing 
the regular order and having that bill reported back out of the 
committee?
  Mr. DeLAY. If the gentleman will yield further, this is a very 
simple, straightforward provision. It is the same provision we have 
carried and passed by this House many times. It is not very 
complicated. I am advised that the chairman of the committee did not 
feel that he needed to use the time of the committee to mark up such a 
very simple bill that has been discussed and debated on this floor many 
times, and passed by the House many times.
  Mr. HOYER. I cannot help myself for making this remark, Mr. Leader, 
but I am not surprised that the chairman of the committee feels it 
would not be necessary to go to the committee to ask for approval to 
have something passed out of that committee. We Democrats particularly 
know that that is the case.
  Mr. Leader, we have information that leads us to believe that on 
subsequent weeks we are going to be considering the child care tax 
credit, the 10 percent tax bracket and possibly AMT. Is that 
information accurate?
  Mr. DeLAY. If the gentleman will yield further, as the gentleman 
knows, when we passed the Jobs and Economic Growth Tax Act last year, 
we accelerated several important provisions from the 2001 tax bill. Our 
goal was to allow more families and more businesses to keep more of 
their money, thereby encouraging private sector investment and consumer 
spending. These investments are driving, we feel, the economy forward. 
They are helping create more than half a million jobs in this year 
alone.
  Over the next few weeks, I expect the House to continue those efforts 
by considering legislation, as the gentleman has outlined, that will 
ensure that families do not face a tax increase next year by extending 
marriage penalty relief, continuing the new low 10 percent bracket, 
extending the $1,000-per-child tax credit, and I believe the Committee 
on Ways and Means is considering an AMT reform. That will be done over 
the next several weeks.
  Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, I take that as a yes.
  The gentleman mentioned extending the $1,000 child tax credit. Do you 
think this time we might include those families that are making less 
than $26,000 on this go-around? That has been pending for many, many 
months now, and, seeing as how you mentioned it, I thought I might 
inquire as to whether or not we might finally include the poorest 
working Americans in the benefit that has been extended to those that 
are doing a little better.
  I yield to my friend.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I cannot 
prejudge what the Committee on Ways and Means might decide to do on 
that particular bill, but I have a feeling that if this bill became 
law, the gentleman's concerns would all be taken care of.
  Mr. HOYER. I doubt that there is any bill that can pass that will 
take care of all my concerns, Mr. Leader, but I appreciate the 
information.
  On those additional items, do you expect them as well not to go 
through the committee process and be considered by the committee, but 
come directly to the floor?
  I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding further.
  As the gentleman has already found out, I thought it was being marked 
up this week and was told differently. I do not know how to answer that 
question, other than the fact that each bill will be considered on its 
own merits by the Committee on Ways and Means, and they will have to 
make a decision whether the bill merits a markup or allow it to come 
straight to the floor.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Leader, the last question I would ask you with respect 
to these tax bills, is it your expectation that the minority will be 
given the ability to offer a substitute on the bill coming up this 
week, the marriage penalty, but as well on the subsequent bills?
  I yield to my friend.
  Mr. DeLAY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding further.
  Of course, I obviously would defer for a final decision to the 
Committee on Rules, but I imagine, as is our long-standing tradition 
and custom of the House procedures, particularly in regard to tax 
measures, I would believe that they would prefer to limit the number of 
amendments, if any, to limit those amendments to germane substitutes.

                              {time}  1630

  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, let us assume the 
substitute is germane. Will we be allowed the opportunity to offer a 
germane substitute?
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, again, I would 
defer that kind of decision to the Committee on Rules; but, obviously, 
in most cases that I can remember a tax bill, there have been 
substitutes to the tax bills as long as they are germane.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that observation.
  Lastly, I would say to the leader we understand this morning that the 
National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice briefed the Republican 
Conference. I want to say that we have been offered the opportunity to 
have the National Security Adviser brief the Democratic Caucus. I think 
we will take advantage of that. But, Mr. Leader, clearly the present 
situation in Iraq is not what any of us would want.
  During the course of this effort in Iraq, and immediately before it, 
we had briefings on this floor. Secretary Rumsfeld and from General 
Myers, from Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz, from Mr. Tenet, the Director of 
the CIA, from Mr. Mueller of the FBI, numerous others. And we came 
together as Republicans and Democrats and had the opportunity to be 
briefed. We had the

[[Page H2337]]

opportunity together to ask questions. Some of those, as my colleague 
knows, were in closed session because we discussed security 
information.
  I want to say to my friend that we were disappointed that we did not 
do that this morning. Both of our caucuses are partisan; they represent 
parties. We were disappointed that this briefing was given on a 
partisan basis. We do not think that is in the best interest of the 
country; we do not think it is in the best interest of this Congress.
  Mr. Leader, I would urge you to, on behalf of your leadership, join 
with us in assuring that, A, we have a number of bipartisan briefings 
from the principals involved as to what is going on. Our public is 
concerned, my colleague's people, my people, very concerned about what 
is happening to our troops, very concerned about our success in Iraq. I 
say that, as my friend knows, as one of those who supported the effort, 
supported the funding of this effort. But all of us have to be 
concerned about the situation.
  So I would ask the leader if he might comment on the fact that we 
have historically had under Democratic leadership, Republican 
leadership, bipartisan briefings. I would hope that we could continue 
to have such. As I say, I think it is in the best interest of the 
country.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I can 
appreciate his disappointment, but I need to point out to the gentleman 
that this is not limited to Republicans. The gentleman has already said 
that Dr. Rice would gladly brief his caucus. Just as the President 
meets with bipartisan leadership, he has meetings with bipartisan 
Members of Congress, he also has meetings with Republicans. And he has 
on occasion had meetings with Democrats. This is not limiting or 
closing out anybody. It is just in this particular case we invited the 
NSC director to speak to the Republican Conference.
  We have had and have notified your leadership that bipartisan 
briefings will be held by the NSC director as bipartisan meetings, as 
the gentleman has pointed out, have been held by the Secretary of 
Defense, the Chiefs of Staff, the CIA, and many, many others. It is 
just an added briefing that we felt we wanted to have. And certainly, 
the NSC director made sure that the same courtesy was paid to the 
Democratic Caucus, and she is more than willing to come before the 
Democratic Caucus.
  No one is trying to be shut out, but there are times when our caucus 
wants to talk to this administration and we ought to be allowed to do 
that as long as we get briefings and open briefings in a bipartisan way 
as well.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for that comment. I 
understand his observation. The gentleman will remember one of the most 
wrenching caucuses in which I participated was a bipartisan caucus 
after we tragically lost those 18 members of the service when the Black 
Hawk went down in Mogadisho, Somalia. And as you may recall, it was 
extraordinary. I think we must have had 350 of our Members in HC-5 in 
which Secretary Christopher and Secretary Aspin came and reported to us 
on the situation on the ground.
  I understand what my colleague is saying, and he certainly has that 
right; but I think that the fact that we can meet together to get 
information together so that we are all getting the same information 
and hear one another's questions, hear one another's concerns, which 
reflect the concerns of the 280 million Americans, many of whom have 
young people overseas, and some, as he knows, because he has met with 
them as I have that are not so young in the National Guard and Reserve, 
we think it would be useful to do that in a bipartisan way together so 
that we could all hear the same information and therefore be able to 
work together to assist in solving what is a very difficult problem, 
ensuring to the greatest extent we can the safety of our people and the 
success of our mission.
  But I thank the gentleman for his observations.

                          ____________________