[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.
____________________