[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 116 (Thursday, September 15, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H7965-H8014]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H. RES. 437, ESTABLISHING THE SELECT
BIPARTISAN COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE THE PREPARATION FOR AND RESPONSE TO
HURRICANE KATRINA
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 439 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 439
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it
shall be in order without intervention of any point of order
to consider in the House the resolution (H. Res. 437) to
establish the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the
Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina. The
resolution shall be considered as read. The previous question
shall be considered as ordered on the resolution to final
adoption without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of
debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Rules; and (2)
one motion to recommit which may not contain instructions.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The gentleman from California
(Mr. Dreier) is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Rochester, New York (Ms.
Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.
During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the
purpose of debate only.
(Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 439 is a closed rule
providing for 1 hour of debate for consideration of H. Res. 437, a
resolution establishing a select bipartisan committee to investigate
the preparation for and response to Hurricane Katrina.
The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill
and provides one motion to recommit which may not contain instructions.
Mr. Speaker, the human suffering and physical damage wrought by
Hurricane Katrina is heart-wrenching and overwhelming. We all know that
very well. Lives have been lost and uprooted. Families are separated
without homes and without jobs.
Our initial focus has been on restoring hope and rebuilding community
on the gulf coast. With great urgency Congress came together and with
virtual unanimity passed legislation to fund the very important relief
efforts. Over $60 billion has been appropriated so far. Also critical
has been the outpouring of support and generosity from fellow Americans
and very importantly from 94 countries around the world. From small
businesses to large corporations, people are pitching in.
That said, as President Bush has stated, there were aspects of the
immediate response to Hurricane Katrina that were not acceptable. He
said that this week, and I am sure that it will be made clear in the
remarks that he gives to the Nation this evening.
Already we have seen the head of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency resign. Clearly, many lessons are to be learned from what has
happened. As debris is removed, water recedes and homes are rebuilt, we
in Congress must now assume our very serious and consequential
constitutional oversight role of the executive branch and Federal
agencies so that we can find out exactly what went wrong and what went
right in the early response to Hurricane Katrina.
{time} 1045
We need to get to the bottom of what happened, when it happened and
why it happened.
Mr. Speaker, to fulfill our oversight responsibility, we are
following precedent and honoring tradition by creating a bipartisan
select committee to look at the response of the government to Hurricane
Katrina. This select committee will allow us to take a sober, serious,
nonpartisan look at the development, coordination and execution of
relief by State, local and Federal authorities.
[[Page H7966]]
At the same time, we must take great care not to interfere with the
ongoing Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts. Critical personnel are
still on the ground and actively involved in a time-sensitive,
decision-making process. Congress can help uncover a better way
forward, but it should not disrupt the progress that is being made at
this moment.
Mr. Speaker, this rule serves as the most practical vehicle by which
to consider this critically important legislation. I urge my colleagues
to support the rule and the underlying legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, President Bush said that he took
responsibility for the recent failure of the Federal Government to
fulfill its ultimate duty of saving the lives of its own people within
its own borders.
But what does responsibility mean? If it means anything, it means the
sincere concern for what has happened under his watch. It means
stopping at nothing to find out why a Nation led by officials who claim
to care about keeping Americans safe presided over a recovery effort
which left behind so many innocent men, women and children as they were
crying out for help. It means caring about the truth, and it means
putting people before politics.
Today, this Congress has to offer the American people its own
definition of responsibility. The appalling aftermath of Hurricane
Katrina, which swept over citizens from Louisiana to Alabama to
Mississippi, was the product of a combination of failures: failures of
planning, failures of execution, failures of accountability. It is the
responsibility of this body to examine why our Federal Government was
behind so many of those failures.
There is only one way to do this and only one path the public will
respect, only one route to producing real answers to real questions
which the American people will trust. We need a 9/11-type commission
for Hurricane Katrina. The 9/11 Commission was our government's
response to the tragedy of September 11, 2001; and after an exhaustive
study, it produced a report that was trusted by the American people and
by the members of our government.
This trust was earned. The 9/11 Commission was not beholden to any
interests besides those of its own integrity and the good of the
country.
This honorable response to the tragedy of September 11 puts to shame
what has been proposed today in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. What was
perhaps our Federal Government's greatest failure to date to defend
life at home is being met with a failure of leadership and openness and
honesty in this Chamber today.
The Republican leadership of the House and Senate has called for the
creation of an overtly partisan congressional committee to investigate
the government's pre- and post-Katrina actions. They have specified
that it would be a committee appointed by Republicans, with a
Republican majority. They would give Republicans control of every
aspect of the proceedings, and they alone would control who would be
subpoenaed. They alone would control which documents could be examined,
and they alone would control the scope of the investigation. They would
have the power to take the investigation in any direction they chose,
with no checks, no balances and no incentives to get real answers. They
have nominated the fox to guard the hen house.
Mr. Speaker, I do not object to such a plan because Republicans would
be in control as opposed to Democrats. I object to it because it is the
Republican Party which controls the levers of government and, as such,
manages FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security and every other
Federal institution which must be examined.
The conflicts of interest that are present are so obvious that it is
incredible anyone would deny them, but the members of the majority do
not only do this, but they put forth one justification after another
for their plan, each one less convincing than the one before it. They
tell us that the structure of the committee is based on precedent and
cite the bipartisan commission which investigated the Iran-Contra
affair as evidence of this. Never mind that in that situation a
Republican President was being investigated by a Democratically
controlled committee, eliminating the political pressure to sweep
truths under the rug.
Last night, in the Committee on Rules, they told us, rather
incredibly, that nobody is better to evaluate in this body than its own
Members. But the American people do not believe that. After all,
accountability has not exactly been the hallmark of this Republican
leadership.
This majority did not investigate those who concealed the Department
of Health and Human Services' real estimate of how much the 2003
Medicare legislation that we passed would cost. It did not investigate
the role of top Bush campaign contributors in writing Vice President
Cheney's energy plan. It did not investigate the Valerie Plame scandal.
It did not investigate what led to our dehumanizing and shameful
treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba and Abu Ghraib in
Iraq.
Why did these investigations not take place? The majority has no
answer, except promising to us that this time things will be different.
Last night, the chairman did offer his personal assurances again and
again that the commission would allow the Democrats to ask questions.
It probably never occurred to us that we would not have been able to do
that, but this is ultimately a promise that he cannot keep.
Only allowing a hand-picked group of witnesses to be questioned
prejudices the investigation before it has even begun. If a true
interest in a fair, open, thorough and independent investigation runs
that deep with my Republican colleagues, why not just create the
independent panel?
That is the central question I have for my colleagues today. Why will
you not support the creation of an independent commission? What are you
afraid of? The American people clearly had faith in the 9/11 Commission
model. Why do you not?
A commission controlled by the politicians of one party charged with
investigating itself will face tremendous internal political pressure
to eliminate embarrassing truths from the public eye, to defer blame
and to hide facts. That is the fundamental truth, because we all know
how politics works.
Politics, by the way, is exactly why those recent scandals I just
mentioned were never investigated.
Is the creation of an independent commission an abdication of our
responsibility? Absolutely not. In fact, exactly the opposite is the
case. If we intentionally create a partisan, political investigation,
that, Mr. Speaker, would be an abdication of our responsibilities.
The American people need answers, they need true accountability, and
the only way that we can live up to our responsibility and give them
answers they can trust is through an independent commission.
The public already overwhelmingly supports the creation of such an
independent commission by 76 percent, and over 160 Members of this
body, representing more than 100 million of our Nation's people, have
already supported the creation of such a commission through a
substitute resolution by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), my
colleague. Its findings would not just help us to prevent another
terrible disaster from taking place, they would also help our
government to regain its credibility in the eyes of the public.
A Newsweek poll from earlier this week found that fully 57 percent of
the general population has doubts that government officials will
respond well the next time a disaster strikes. Those doubts would not
be reduced until people believe that a real, independent investigation
of Katrina has taken place. But the findings of the congressional
commission being proposed by the Republican leadership will be forever
tainted by the pervasive public belief that details were overlooked or
truths hidden for political reasons. We have plenty of evidence to
believe that.
Mr. Speaker, 2 weeks ago, our government missed an opportunity to
rise to the occasion when it was sorely needed. The consequences were
worse than we could have imagined. We cannot afford to miss another
opportunity here today, and we object to the fact
[[Page H7967]]
that this resolution is titled ``bipartisan commission'' because,
truly, there will not be one.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
As I prepare to yield to my friend from Charleston, let me just say
that the short answer to the question posed by my friend from Rochester
about why it is we would not establish a commission, it is very clear.
Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution states it, that we have to do
our job. We have the responsibility to deal with this issue.
There are very important questions that have been raised by Democrats
and Republicans and people from the outside community; and we, as the
representatives of the people, have the responsibility to get to the
bottom of this. That is what the establishment of this bipartisan
committee is, in fact, going to do.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Charleston, West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), my very good friend and
hardworking member of the Committee on Rules.
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the creation of
a select bipartisan committee to investigate the preparation for and
response to Hurricane Katrina.
As representatives, we are elected by the American people, and it is
our duty to ensure that the numerous Federal agencies of which we have
oversight and that we fund on an annual basis serve the taxpayers
efficiently and effectively, and I think from the images that we have
seen and from the reports from that area of the country, we have had
serious problems.
This is a job best performed by the elected leaders of the United
States. We are charged with the responsibility of oversight. We can be
trusted by our constituents to find the truth.
To those who are critical of the makeup of this committee, I say to
them, the United States Congress has responded in similar fashion 41
times, most recently with the formation of the Select Committee on
Homeland Security in 2002 and 2003.
Mr. Speaker, we must form this bipartisan committee quickly so that
the Members from both sides of the aisle can begin the vital task of
finding the problems that plagued the response to Hurricane Katrina on
the local, State and Federal levels. If we fail to act expeditiously
and devolve into finger pointing and bickering, we are putting other
areas of our Nation at greater risk. Mother Nature will not wait for
the United States Congress to act.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), a member of the Committee on Rules.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule and to
the underlying resolution.
The Federal response to Hurricane Katrina was absolutely
unacceptable. The American people deserve to know what went so terribly
wrong and what we must do to make sure it never, ever happens again.
Unfortunately, the partisan committee being proposed by the
Republican majority will not give the American people any confidence
that Congress is asking tough questions and demanding straight answers.
Apparently, Mr. Speaker, after the flood comes the whitewash.
For over 4 years, the Republican majority has refused at every turn
to hold the Bush administration accountable for its mistakes. There has
been no meaningful oversight, no tough investigations on anything.
Instead, Congress has turned a blind eye, and the bill we have before
us represents more of the same.
The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), our colleague, has a
different approach, a better approach. The commission established by
his legislation would be truly independent, and its recommendations
would carry far more weight. This independent commission would be
similar to the 9/11 panel that was such an effective, meaningful force
for change.
Because what the American people deserve at the end of this process
is a document that does not necessarily agree with everything I say or
does not cover the President's back, which is what the Republicans are
trying to do today, but that actually helps fix the problems that
Hurricane Katrina exposed.
Let me be clear, Mr. Speaker. The purpose of the commission
established by the gentleman from Florida's (Mr. Hastings) bill is not
simply to assign blame. Rather, an independent commission would take a
tough, honest approach to an incredibly complicated problem.
Pre-identifying vulnerable areas, strategically deploying resources,
anticipating potential stumbling blocks as we prepare for disasters,
these need to be the guiding principles of our national response plan.
An independent commission would produce recommendations that enhance
our national response plan and enable FEMA to be structured
appropriately.
Furthermore, this commission will show whether or not, as I believe,
FEMA lacked appropriate leadership, leadership with experience in
disaster management, and then recommend ways in which the agency can be
better prepared, both in terms of personnel and resources. Unlike the
President, I do not think Brownie did a heck of a job. An effective
response to a disaster or crisis cannot happen unless the best
qualified people are coordinating the efforts, equipped with the best
resources.
{time} 1100
The partisan committee put forward by the Republican majority just
does not cut it. Instead, it would be made up of Members of Congress,
and there are three problems with that approach:
First, there are some Members whose time would be better spent
dealing with the immediate recovery and reconstruction needs created by
the hurricane. Second, Republican politicians would be
``investigating'' other Republican politicians. And, third, some of the
problems we saw in the gulf coast include bad funding choices made by
Congress itself.
Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government's response to Hurricane Katrina
was a national disgrace. The job of this Congress is not to run
interference for the Bush administration; it is to do what is best for
the American people. Seventy-six percent of the public want an
independent commission because, quite frankly, they do not trust the
Republican majority to do it right. They have a pattern of sweeping
problems under the rug, of turning everything into a political fight.
That pattern has to stop, and we can stop it today.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this rule.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
and as I prepare to yield to my friend from Moore, Oklahoma (Mr. Cole),
I want to say to my good friend from Massachusetts that it is very
clear that Members of the United States House of Representatives do
have the ability to deal with a disaster and at the same time engage in
a very, very important investigatory process.
It is also very important to note that this is not going to simply be
Republicans asking questions of other Republicans. As I said earlier,
and I know my friend from Rochester raised this when she said it was
nice of me to say that Democrats would have the opportunity to ask
questions, but we know that Democrats, by virtue of this being a
bipartisan committee, will be able to be deeply involved and engaged in
this process as well.
Once again, I think it is important to note, as my colleague and
friend from West Virginia said, that we are the elected representatives
of the American people and this is our constitutionally mandated
responsibility which we should not pass on to someone else.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr.
Cole), a hard-working member of the Committee on Rules.
Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House
Resolution 439 and in support of the underlying resolution.
Mr. Speaker, the minority objects to House Resolution 437 on the
basis that the bipartisan committee it creates will be inherently
unbalanced and unfair. One suspects they believe it will be unfair
largely because while they will have full rights of representation on
the committee in question, they will inevitably be the minority on any
panel that fairly represents the composition of both the House of
Representatives and the other body.
It would be easy and entertaining to lampoon the consistency of the
so-
[[Page H7968]]
called Party of the People rejecting a committee composed of the
elected representatives of the American people in favor of one made up
of individuals who are both unelected and unaccountable to the voters
of this country, but I will avoid that temptation.
Frankly, there are deeper issues here. The first is our faith as
individuals in the efficacy of democracy itself. As the minority in
this House for 11 years, I fear my friends on the other side of the
aisle have lost their faith in the American people, because of the
choices they have made at the ballot box in recent years. Having served
as a member of a seemingly permanent minority in the Oklahoma State
Senate earlier in my career, I understand the frustration on which that
sentiment is based.
However, as adherents to the ideals of democracy, we should trust
that over time the people will get it right and that if our views are
sound, they will prevail. In the meantime, our job is to argue our
point of view in the court of public opinion and accept the outcome at
the polls when the verdict is rendered.
The second issue at stake here is the wisdom of empowering people who
are neither elected nor accountable to perform the task our
Constitution assigns to the elected representatives of the American
people. Frankly, I share the sentiments Winston Churchill famously
voiced when he said ``democracy is the worst form of government, except
for all those others that have been tried.''
Mr. Speaker, it is fundamentally unsound and undemocratic to turn
over the function of congressional oversight to a group of individuals
who have neither been elected by the people nor accountable to the
people for their actions or recommendations. Appointing a commission is
the easy way out. It is a way for us, the representatives of the
people, to avoid our responsibilities. Its members, however expert and
well-intentioned, did not design or create the agencies and processes
we wish to examine in connection with Hurricane Katrina. We did.
Similarly, they will not be responsible for reforming these agencies or
finding the solutions to our current problems. Those duties belong to
the elected representatives of the American people.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle often complain there is
insufficient congressional oversight. This is our chance to exercise
that oversight, and the voters will surely hold all of us accountable
for how well we do the job.
My fellow Members, let us have faith in the American people, our
democratic institutions, and ourselves. Let us do the job we were
elected to do, rather than hand it off to those who were neither asked
nor chosen by the American people to govern their affairs. I urge
support of House Resolution 439 and the underlying House Resolution
437.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, if an independent commission is an
abdication of our authority, why did we all vote unanimously to
establish the 9/11 Commission?
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Hastings).
(Mr. HASTINGS of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from
New York (Ms. Slaughter), the distinguished ranking Democratic member
on the House Committee on Rules, for yielding me this time.
A footnote right there, Mr. Speaker. I hope the irony is not lost on
the House that the gentlewoman, a New York Member, is being lectured to
about homeland security issues and why there is no need for an
independent Katrina commission. New Yorkers were told 3 and 4 years ago
that there was no need for an independent commission on 9/11.
I note peripherally that the distinguished chairman of the Committee
on Rules has other business and has left the floor; but I was prepared
to ask him, and perhaps his replacement in the chair for the majority
can answer for me, what did the House of Representatives do in the last
3 years with reference to the tragedy of 9/11? What we wound up doing,
because the victims and New York pressed forward, was establishing an
independent commission.
The chairman pontificates that we should exercise our constitutional
mandate; and so does his replacement, my friend and colleague on the
Committee on Rules, say what our constitutional duty is. Every one of
us is mindful of our constitutional duty. But are you then prepared to
admit that we did not exercise it correctly in the 9/11 Commission
period and that is why the 9/11 Commission came into existence in the
first place?
Last year, as we all know, four hurricanes ravaged my home State of
Florida and some of the gulf coast. Three of them literally destroyed
parts of the district that I am privileged to represent. In the
immediate and long-term aftermath, our communities saw FEMA's
shortcomings. We saw that a once-reliable agency had been placed on the
back burner as an afterthought in the Department of Homeland Security.
Natural disaster preparedness and response programs have become trapped
in a homeland security bureaucracy.
FEMA has lost its focus, and Floridians and others know that. Our
delegation literally begged the committees of jurisdiction to hold
hearings on what we saw in Florida. I even introduced bipartisan
legislation in March with our colleague on the majority side, the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), to address what we perceived to be
FEMA's largest problems. Yet every time we took our concerns to the
committees, we were told it is not a big enough problem to consider on
its own. Our staff was told we do not think that an oversight hearing
is needed.
Well, Mr. Speaker, what America saw in the gulf coast resembles the
Federal Government's absolute incompetence that Florida saw last year.
Despite a whole lot of lip service, nothing has changed.
The 9/11 Commission was created to provide a full and complete
accounting of the 2001 terrorist attacks. Implicit in this mandate is
the simple fact that Congress alone would not or could not provide such
a full and complete accounting. There is no reason to expect that the
Republican Katrina commission will do any better.
That is why I and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) and
156 of our colleagues yesterday introduced H.R. 3764, legislation
establishing a real independent commission, immune from political
influence and absolute partisanship. And while they cannot officially
cosponsor our bill, a significant part, 76 percent, of the American
people agree with us. They question this Congress' ability to exercise
real oversight and are calling for an independent and bipartisan
Katrina commission.
Supporting the American people's concerns, you, Mr. Speaker, said at
one point, and I quote, ``Our party controls the levers of government.
We're not about to go and look beneath a bunch of rocks to try to cause
heartburn.'' Put another way, Mr. Speaker: we helped create this mess,
and we are not going to be able to investigate it ourselves. So forgive
me, Mr. Speaker, if I question the majority's ability to conduct
effective oversight with this type of political candor.
Substantively, the Republican plan is partisan. And because my
colleagues say it is bipartisan does not make it so. It is inadequate.
In stark contrast to the 9/11 Commission, Republicans outnumber
Democrats on the majority's partisan Katrina commission. In contrast to
the 9/11 Commission, which was given 18 months to do its job, the
majority's partisan Katrina commission is only given 5 months. As the
chairman put it last night, do it quick, do it fast. Quickly, he said.
Despite the 9/11 Commission's $15 million budget to do its job, the
majority's commission they propose is only given $500,000.
Footnote right there. What about the committees of jurisdiction
already in existence in Congress? And what about creating a circus
atmosphere that drains resources from this Congress do you not
understand?
Shamefully, the House will not have an opportunity to vote on the
Hastings-Menendez independent Katrina commission legislation, because
Republicans have blocked us from offering it. Just as they always do,
Republicans block what they cannot defeat.
Despite what Republicans will suggest, today's debate is not about
politics. It is about the need for truth to
[[Page H7969]]
assure the American people that we all know their needs. For my
constituents, it is about the failures of this Congress, and for others
it is about the failures in New Orleans and in the States and at the
Federal Government. It is about saving lives and rebuilding
communities.
Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to
temporarily control the time of the gentleman from California (Mr.
Dreier).
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from Oklahoma?
There was no objection.
Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I just want to make a couple of
quick points, and then I will reserve the balance of my time.
I would disagree very strongly with my good friend from Florida about
the 9/11 Commission. There were, in fact, many investigations in this
Congress about the tragedy that took place
on 9/11, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence amongst them.
We did actually do oversight.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I beg to differ with the
gentleman about what the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
did. I serve on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The
Senate Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence conducted an
investigation; the House did nothing.
Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, and I respect
the opinion of my good friend from Florida, but I think there was
oversight.
But I would actually agree with his fundamental point in the sense
that I think oversight is more effectively done by the elected
representatives of the people, by the appropriate people who are
responsible for implementing the solution. I do not think we should
take that model and follow it again here.
I also would suspect that the situation between a deliberate attack
on the United States and a natural disaster are very different.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui), a member of the Committee on
Rules.
Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for
yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, when Hurricane Katrina came ashore and ravaged the gulf
States and the levees in New Orleans, Americans united in their support
of those in need and the communities devastated by this terrible
disaster. As Katrina passed over the gulf States and in the days that
followed, Americans saw firsthand the devastation and human suffering
that resulted. We were also eyewitnesses to the tragedy of hundreds of
thousands of people who had escaped the wrath of the terrible storm
only to then be stranded in the Superdome, the convention center, or
trapped on the roofs, surrounded by rising flood waters with little in
the way of food, water, or medical care. Mr. Speaker, we saw and felt
the ensuing heartbreak. Mothers became separated from their children,
elderly parents were unaccounted for, and siblings were trying to look
after each other.
With the passage of time, our outrage and frustration set in.
Reporters and the media managed to get to the heart of the disaster;
yet there was little sign of our Federal relief efforts. Just as the
American people united to aid the victims of Katrina, so too must
Congress. Our constituents demand no less. They are more interested in
getting answers than pointing fingers. They want to know that we are
finding solutions and making recommendations to ensure our responses
are never again at a snail's pace.
It is time for Congress, as part of the Federal Government, and
therefore an element of the relief response, to shoot straight with the
American people. An independent commission, removed from the partisan
fray, is better positioned to find answers. Why were we not preparing
our responses to Katrina near land? Where was the coordination between
Federal, State, and local efforts? There are many questions that must
be answered and an independent commission is a means that can provide
the answers.
{time} 1115
We saw the successful implementation following the tragedy of
September 11, and following this model Congress will reassure the
American people the answers that the independent commission finds and
the recommendations they make are ones in which the Nation can trust.
I know my constituents are closely following this. My hometown of
Sacramento lies in a floodplain at the confluence of two great rivers
and faces the constant threat of floods. If we find ourselves in dire
circumstances, can my constituents be assured that they can count on
prompt Federal Government response?
This is not a blame game. I am not interested in pointing fingers,
nor are the American people. They are more interested in identifying
areas of weakness and making the necessary improvements. This is about
preventing another tragedy similar to what we witnessed in New Orleans
and the gulf States. We must ensure that the Federal Government does
its job of protecting the American people, and with an independent
commission we will do so.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), the ranking member on the Committee on
Homeland Security.
(Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition
to House Resolution 437. This resolution puts a partisan congressional
committee in charge of the investigation.
The rule that has been offered does not allow for meaningful debate.
It also does not allow for an amendment offered by the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Hastings) that would create an independent commission to
investigate this catastrophe. I am also an original cosponsor of that
amendment. Letting Congress investigate the government failures of
Hurricane Katrina is like letting the fox guard the hen house. We are
not protecting what we need to protect, and there will be a lot more
questions than answers in the end.
More than ever, the last 2 weeks have shown that we need an
independent assessment of what happened. Where did the Federal
Government go wrong? What could the State and locals have done better?
What happened to citizens' preparedness?
In my role as ranking member of the Committee on Homeland Security, I
have looked for answers and have tried to put together a timeline of
events. I am submitting with my statement today for the Record a
timeline that the staff of the committee has put together for me
showing what happened compiled from public sources. This document shows
the complexity of the issues and the need for an independent assessment
of what happened.
I do not understand the opposition from the other side of the aisle
against creating an independent commission that the American people
have asked for. It was done, with opposition from Republicans, after 9/
11; it was done after Pearl Harbor; and after the Khobar Towers
terrorist attacks. We have always had it. Indeed, the type of
commission proposed by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) and
others has historically been used after large events that affect the
country. Why not here? What does Congress want to protect? What is
Congress trying to hide?
After 9/11, Congress did the right thing. On September 20, they sent
the largest contingent ever to travel to New York City to view the
devastation of the World Trade Center and console the families of the
victims. It has been nearly 3 weeks since Hurricane Katrina hit the
gulf Coast, and there have been no official congressional delegations
to the region.
Mr. Speaker, what do we have to hide? Indeed, I have twice requested
the Committee on Homeland Security to travel to the area and was
refused. I was told that it did not make good sense for Congress to go
down and conduct oversight and fact-finding missions at the time. Yet
we went to New
[[Page H7970]]
York, but now we cannot go to my area of the country.
Now we want Congress to take charge of this investigation. For the
good of the Nation, let us put aside partisan politics and not create a
strawman committee. I encourage a vote against the rule so we can
consider the independent commission option, give it a vote and let the
American people know we are listening to their requests.
[[Page H7971]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.001
[[Page H7972]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.002
[[Page H7973]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.003
[[Page H7974]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.004
[[Page H7975]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.005
[[Page H7976]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.006
[[Page H7977]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.007
[[Page H7978]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.008
[[Page H7979]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.009
[[Page H7980]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.010
[[Page H7981]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.011
[[Page H7982]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.012
[[Page H7983]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.013
[[Page H7984]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.014
[[Page H7985]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.015
[[Page H7986]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.016
[[Page H7987]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.017
[[Page H7988]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.018
[[Page H7989]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.019
[[Page H7990]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.020
[[Page H7991]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.021
[[Page H7992]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.022
[[Page H7993]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.023
[[Page H7994]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.024
[[Page H7995]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.025
[[Page H7996]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.026
[[Page H7997]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.027
[[Page H7998]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.028
[[Page H7999]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.029
[[Page H8000]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.030
[[Page H8001]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.031
[[Page H8002]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.032
[[Page H8003]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.033
[[Page H8004]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.034
[[Page H8005]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.035
[[Page H8006]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.036
[[Page H8007]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.037
[[Page H8008]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.038
[[Page H8009]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH15SE05.039
[[Page H8010]]
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, time and time again here on the floor of
the House I hear speeches: ``We will never forget 9/11; we will better
prepare and defend America.''
But the most basic lesson of September 11, where we tragically lost
so many first responders in the collapse of the towers, was that they
lacked secure interoperable communications. They could not talk and
communicate with those first responders, and many died needlessly. We
have not learned that most basic of lessons.
In fact, President Bush this year zeroed out Federal assistance to
local communities for secure interoperable communications. How quickly
some have forgotten, yet they say it will never happen again.
Well, Hurricane Katrina was not a terrorist attack, but the Federal
response was worse and degraded from the capabilities that we had on 9/
11. On that day, FEMA was a high-functioning, independent,
professionally run agency. Today, it is subsumed into this gigantic
morass of the homeland security bureaucracy, downgraded to subagency
level with a political hack as its director, and most of the
professional staff has resigned and gone on to run State management
agencies around the country. There are still some good professionals
there, but the leadership, appointed by the White House, and the fact
it was subsumed in the bureaucracy at the insistence of the Republican
majority and the White House, they took away its independent agency
status.
We had a vote on the floor to restore its independent agency status.
We predicted these problems, but they opposed that amendment. Now they
want to investigate themselves. Will the other side of the aisle fess
up, like the White House never does, that they were wrong to follow the
lead of the White House to downgrade this agency, to politicize it,
subsume it in a huge bureaucracy, and that we are less capable than we
were on 9/11 to respond to these types of disasters? I think not.
Mr. Speaker, we need an independent agency outside of this highly
partisan body. They will not admit to those mistakes. There were
certainly mistakes made at the local level, and they will probably
highlight those, and those should be rectified, too. But all mistakes
should come out, the failings of the Federal Government, the State
government, and the local governments, with an independent, nonpartisan
commission. That would be greatly preferable to this coverup that is
going to go on here.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Marietta, Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), a hard-working member of the Committee
on Rules.
Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this
time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Resolution 437. I
think we are completely doing the right thing for the right reasons.
I have heard the other side of the aisle argue that what is the
hurry, you are rushing to create an oversight committee and let us wait
a couple of months. I want to point out to my friends on the other side
of the aisle that we are still in the hurricane season. In fact, we are
just getting into the hurricane season, and we need to get this
investigation going as soon as possible. It is very important that we
not wait. We have a 5-month opportunity to study this problem and find
out exactly where the responsibilities lie.
The other side of the aisle also is suggesting that this is a
Republican majority investigating a Republican administration. I point
out we were not focusing just on the Federal aspects of this, as they
would like us to do, but we are also focusing on the local and State
aspects of this. There are Democrats and Republicans all up and down
the line. This is not a partisan thing. This is a way to do it. This is
what Congress has a responsibility to do and has done 41 times over the
last 30 or 40 years. I could name any number of instances. My
colleagues on the other side of the aisle know that is true.
The creation of an outside independent commission, as they call it,
they are calling for doing that and spending an additional $5 million
to $10 million. We do not need to do that. We have the staff within
this Congress on both sides of the aisle, both in the majority and on
the minority, and hopefully we would not spend more than $500,000 to
get this work done and get it done in a bipartisan fashion. That is why
we call it the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the
Preparation for and the Response to Hurricane Katrina. I am fully in
support of that.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from California (Mr. George Miller).
(Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California asked and was given permission to
revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, for so many reasons my
colleagues on this side of the aisle have articulated, this resolution
should be rejected. Because it is neither bipartisan in terms of its
authority, nor bipartisan in terms of its power, nor bipartisan in
terms of its subpoena power. That will all rest with the majority.
The question that must be answered is how is it that FEMA, which 5
years ago was a world-class agency that was being praised by
Republicans and Democrats alike, by local officials, by governors, by
mayors, by the international community, who were coming and visiting
and taking lessons from FEMA, how in 5 years was that agency so
incredibly hollowed out that it could not respond to Hurricane Katrina?
This President and this administration made some horrible decisions
about putting political hacks and their cronies in charge of the agency
that is in charge of the safety of the people of the United States,
whether it is western fires, earthquakes, floods, tornadoes or
hurricanes. He appointed political hacks. Is he going to investigate
that himself, as he says?
This Congress, powerful Members of the Senate and the House, made
decisions about using FEMA as a honey pot to take resources out of and
divert them elsewhere. The Committee on Appropriations chairmen of both
houses, the leadership, the Republican leadership of both houses, are
they going to investigate that themselves?
That is like asking Enron to investigate corporate ethics, baseball
to investigate steroids, Dick Cheney to investigate energy policy. It
just cannot happen, and the American people know that. That is why,
when they are asked on this question, 75 percent of the American people
want a 9/11 Commission. They want a 9/11 Commission because they saw
that the 9/11 Commission was the only way that the citizens of this
country were going to get the answers, not the answers the politicians
wanted them to get, and that is what this bipartisan, phony committee
is about. They want to give you the answers they want you to get. The
citizens want the answers to the questions that they want to ask.
The power in our democracy is with the citizens, and the citizens
want a citizens' committee. They want a citizens' committee to answer
these questions because the questions are going to have to be asked of
a Republican President, a Republican Congress, a Democratic mayor, a
Democratic governor, a Republican governor and that simply will not be
able to be done.
The President has said he takes responsibility. The question that
must be asked is: Did he act responsibly as the President of the United
States to protect the people of this country? So far, the question is a
resounding, no.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Pelosi), the minority leader.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member, the gentlewoman
from New York (Ms. Slaughter), for yielding me this time and commend
the members of the Committee on Rules for their important work on this
subject, particularly the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) who is
the author of the legislation, along with the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Menendez), the chairman of our caucus, on legislation which will
bring truth to this situation, an independent commission, modeled after
9/11, respected by the American people.
Following the tragedy of 9/11, the American people expected and
deserved
[[Page H8011]]
the truth. People of New York and New Jersey were strong advocates for
such a commission. The people in Louisiana and Mississippi and the gulf
region are displaced. They are trying to put their lives back together.
They have lost their homes, their jobs, their livelihoods, their
communities. They really do not have time to lobby Congress for an
independent commission.
But our country is grateful to the 9/11 families because they not
only gave us that commission to review that terrible tragedy that
befell our country, they gave us a tradition of transparency and
finding the truth and holding people accountable and hoping to do so in
a way that prevents future loss of life.
{time} 1130
We endanger the American people when we ignore the truth. So on
behalf of the people in the region, I plead with my colleagues in this
body to reject any sham committee. Supposedly bipartisan; not so.
Supposedly bicameral; not so. One thing we know, it is a vehicle to
whitewash, to whitewash, and not have a true look into what went wrong.
There was a natural disaster, a terrible natural disaster in the gulf
coast States. It was compounded by a manmade disaster because the
Federal response of FEMA fell so very, very short. And FEMA, now its
Director has resigned, but FEMA is fraught with problems systemically
throughout it.
That does not mean that many, many people who work for FEMA and many
people, our first responders, police and fire, health care providers in
the area and volunteers from every walk of life did not rise to the
occasion. They certainly did, and we commend them for the sacrifice
they were willing to make to rescue others in the time of the immediate
recovery. But there are so many unanswered questions; and instead of
having a sham, why can we not have a real commission to look into this?
So the choice on the floor today, we have heard all of this
discussion over and over. The fact is that we should be spending our
time figuring out how we are going to help the people of the region
rebuild their communities, to create jobs, to educate their children,
to rid themselves of the toxic, literally toxic, environment, and that
is the situation that they are in there. Instead, we are wasting the
public's time on a subject that is unworthy of this tragedy, and it did
not have to be.
I certainly respect the congressional role of oversight. We have
called for it over and over again, whether it was the war in Iraq or
the price gouging at the pump of gasoline for America's consumers,
whether it is Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo. Name it. There are so many
subjects that this Congress has been delinquent in its duty in doing
oversight. So I fully support congressional oversight by the committees
of jurisdiction.
In order to expedite help to the region, I suggested to the Speaker
that we have a truly bipartisan committee that could streamline how we
would go forward. At the time, I intended it just to be on the positive
side, and that was early, when Katrina was just hitting, and then when
we saw things go wrong, we added the charge that we would see what went
wrong. So the idea of this Congress having a role in terms of oversight
in a bipartisan special committee is one that I supported. I suggested
it.
But what the Republicans came back with was really a slap in the face
to the people who were affected in the region. We owe them the truth.
Why is this Congress afraid of the truth? Over and over again, Iraq,
name it, price at the pump, why is this Congress afraid of the truth?
Sometimes it is really important, as we try to find our common ground,
we stand our ground where we cannot find that common ground, but we
always have to come down in favor of the people, to yield on points.
Because we are here to get a job done. Maybe not exactly the way we
would want to get it done, but get a job done. So now, today, the
Republicans are putting up an obstacle to doing just that.
So I urge my colleagues to honor the sacrifice, the situation, that
has affected the people in the region by at least telling them the
truth and vote against this committee today, to vote against this
committee, to say come back to the drawing board when they want to have
honesty in what we are doing. But, first and foremost, we must have a
truly independent commission, again, in the manner of the 9/11
Commission that took testimony, that issued a report, that gave
transparency and openness to the process and gave some level of truth
to the American people.
Because the people in the gulf States, many of them affected are poor
and economically disadvantaged and not as sophisticated, perhaps, as
some of the people stricken with grief in the New York/New Jersey area
at the time of 9/11, and in Pennsylvania and in the Pentagon. Because
these people are of a different economic status and because they are
living in shelters and the rest and not really able to speak for
themselves to the Congress of the United States, we, the House
Democrats, will speak for them in asking for the truth and appealing to
our Republican colleagues for us to work together in a completely
nonpartisan way to help meet their needs.
I know that some Members have visited the region, certainly those
affected. The gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) spoke with such
eloquence on the floor yesterday. Senator Landrieu, in the Senate last
week, brought the Nation to tears with her presentation on what she saw
in her beloved State of Louisiana. And the gentleman from Louisiana
(Mr. Jefferson) has told us firsthand of what he has seen there. The
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), our ranking member on the
Committee on Homeland Security, spoke from authority in standing on the
committee but experience as a Mississippian. They know because they see
firsthand.
I could only see secondhand, joining the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms.
Jackson-Lee), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green), the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Gene Green), going to Houston to meet with the victims
of Katrina in the Astrodome and also in the George R. Brown Convention
Center. We saw children, little children, adorable little babies that
we could hold in our arms, and 90-year-old great grannies, all of them,
not the little babies, they did not speak for themselves, but their
older siblings said, ``We want to go home.''
They praised the hospitality, the warmth, the generosity of the
people of Houston. And they are to be commended. As I said when I was
in Houston, I do not know of any city in America that could have risen
to the occasion so quickly and so compassionately as Houston. Mayor
White, Judge Eckels, the Commissioner of Harris County; Representative
Noriega, so many people in the community came together to help the
victims of Katrina. But still, with all of the respect that they
extended to their guests, with all the health care, with all the care
and feeding, still, of course, there is no place like home.
So let us find out how we can bring these people home. And a good way
to have them come home and have confidence in the future that, should
another hurricane strike, and we know that it will, that the
precautions will have been taken, the accountability will be assigned,
and that the people will be protected. We can do that by finding the
truth. We can find the truth with the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Hastings), the gentleman from New Jersey's (Mr. Menendez) commission,
Senator Clinton leading the way in the Senate on this important issue,
and we can do it by rejecting this committee.
I stand open and welcome to any cooperation with the Republicans when
the Speaker is ready to cooperate on true bipartisanship, true
openness, and true accountability to the American people.
With that, I just close again to say that our hopes and prayers are
always with the people of the region. It is our resolve that they will
be made whole as soon as possible, and that has to be a bipartisan
commitment.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I ask for a ``no'' vote on the previous question so I can amend the
rule and allow the House, instead of H. Res. 437, to consider H.R.
3764, which creates an independent 9/11-like commission to investigate
the events involving Hurricane Katrina. I offered this amendment in the
Committee on Rules last night, but, sadly, it was rejected.
[[Page H8012]]
I want to reiterate that 76 percent of Americans in a recent ABC/
Washington Post poll preferred that a commission of outside experts,
similar in nature to the 9/11 Commission, and, in fact, I wish for the
same people, to investigate the devastating events surrounding
Hurricane Katrina, and that is not just Democrats that were asked.
Sixty-four percent of Republicans in that same poll said they, too,
supported an independent commission to investigate the government's
preparedness and response effort.
Please vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can authorize an
independent commission that will not be influenced by partisan politics
instead of a Republican-controlled committee investigating the failings
of a Republican-controlled administration. Too many people's lives were
turned upside down because of the failure of governmental officials to
adequately prepare for and respond to the impact of Hurricane Katrina.
Let us not fail them a second time.
I urge a ``no'' vote.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the amendment
be printed in the Record immediately prior to the vote on the previous
question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). Is there objection to the
request of the gentlewoman from New York?
There was no objection.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, as we deal with this great challenge, one cannot help
but think back to the days following one of the most tragic events in
our Nation's history, that being, of course, the attacks on the World
Trade Center, flight 93 going down in Pennsylvania and, of course, the
plane hitting the Pentagon. We all know that, following that tragedy,
Democrats and Republicans came together. They came together committed
to ensuring that we would never see the kind of terrorist threat that
happened on September 11 hit the United States or our allies or anyone
in the world again. And that really embarked us upon this massive
global War on Terror, and that has been the focus of the Federal
Government. We know that the top priority on September 11, 2001, became
this bipartisan goal of trying to deal with the global War on Terror.
Mr. Speaker, I am very proud of the Democrats in this House who have
come together in a bipartisan way to work with Republicans in our
shared goal of winning the global War on Terror. It is an important
struggle, and it is one which many say will last beyond our lifetimes,
but I am convinced that Democrats and Republicans will continue to work
together to ensure that we win that global War on Terror.
We know that 2\1/2\ weeks ago we faced another kind of disaster. It
was a natural disaster that hit our fellow Americans, our fellow
citizens, on the gulf coast. And we know that, as we sit here today,
another hurricane, Hurricane Ophelia, continues to pose a threat in the
Carolinas. And I will tell the Members, as I stand here at this moment,
Mr. Speaker, I live constantly with the prospect of a massive
earthquake hitting the largest, most important State in the Union,
which I am proud to represent here.
We in California deal with the threat of fires on a regular basis. I
represent the Angeles National Forest, and that threat is a very
serious one. And in the wake of those fires following that, we, of
course, have terrible mudslides which impact tremendous numbers of
people.
We have gone through disasters in the past. Obviously, as President
Bush has said, this is the worst natural disaster in our Nation's
history, Hurricane Katrina. But we have faced many, many struggles. In
California, one of the most prominent was the Northridge earthquake on
January 16 of 1994. I know my friend from San Francisco, the
distinguished minority leader, suffered the Loma Prieta quake.
And I will say that, having gone through all of this, Mr. Speaker, it
is absolutely absurd, it is absurd, to believe that any Member of this
House, that any Member of this House would not want to get to the truth
of exactly what happened in the case of Hurricane Katrina.
{time} 1145
Now, earlier this week, President Bush came forward and said that he
takes full responsibility for the Federal Government's problems when it
came to the preparation for and the response to Hurricane Katrina. Just
yesterday, Governor Blanco, the Democratic Governor of Louisiana, said
that she takes responsibility for what took place in her State.
Now, Mr. Speaker, we have a Republican President and a Democratic
Governor coming forward and saying they take responsibility for their
roles in the governments that they serve, the Federal Government and
the State government.
The gentleman from Illinois (Speaker Hastert) has come forward saying
that it is very important for us to work in a bipartisan way. He has
tried to work with the minority leader to make sure that, in appointing
this select committee, we will have a chance to work in a bipartisan
way. Speaker Hastert has just called for members of the Committee on
Appropriations to go to the gulf coast to look at this situation and to
report back to us, because the very important responsibility of
oversight right now that the Committee on Appropriations has over the
$60 billion-plus that we, in a bipartisan way, have appropriated to
deal with this, needs to be addressed. So this notion that there is not
a bipartisan commitment to get to the bottom of this is absolutely
ludicrous.
I want to make sure that if my State faces an earthquake, a fire, a
mudslide that we are able to have the best response possible. I will
tell my colleagues that this bipartisan committee is something that I
think can play a very important role in ensuring that for all of us who
face the prospect of a disaster in our States that we will be able to
address it in a better way.
Mr. Speaker, I am a proud institutionalist. I know that is not a
popular thing to say; but I serve on the Committee on Rules, and by
virtue of that, I think it makes me an institutionalist. This is my
25th year serving here, and I am proud of the role that I have been
able to play in trying to address very important institutional
concerns, and we have been able to address many issues in a bipartisan
way.
Now, I will acknowledge that, on occasion, the Committee on Rules can
be a very partisan place; but on occasion we also can be very
bipartisan. We just reported out a rule that enjoyed strong bipartisan
support dealing with Coast Guard reauthorization, and passage of rules
like that are noncontroversial, they do not get attention, and those
are things that we have worked on. In fact, I would argue that we do
more things coming out of even the Committee on Rules in a bipartisan
way than we do the things that we do that are very, very strident and
partisan. But if you look at other committees around this place, Mr.
Speaker, such as the Committee on Transportation, the Committee on
Energy and Commerce, the Committee on Financial Services, you can go
right down the line, Democrats and Republicans come together to address
major public policy concerns that are out there.
Now, Mr. Speaker, everyone wants to make sure that no one suffers
again as the people have along the gulf coast. I do feel for our
colleague Mary Landrieu in the other body, and the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Taylor); but I also think it is important for us to
note that in the other body, our colleague Trent Lott lost his home. We
have seen tremendous loss from people like the gentleman from Louisiana
(Mr. Jindal) on our side. So the point is that this is a disaster which
has impacted Democrats and Republicans, and that is why I believe that
it is incumbent upon us.
Because article I, section 8 of the U.S. Constitution makes it very
clear that we have the responsibility for congressional oversight,
oversight of the executive branch; and this bipartisan select
committee, Mr. Speaker, will focus not just on the Federal Government.
It will focus on State government, on local governments, on even
private entities that have been involved in this process.
Accountability is something that an independent commission will not
have anything to do with. The 9/11 Commission was not accountable at
all. We are
[[Page H8013]]
accountable as the elected representatives of the American people to
the American people. And I think that it is very clear that moving
quickly is the right thing to do. The reason that I believe that it is
important for us to move quickly is that, as I said, Hurricane Ophelia
is at this moment posing a threat to the Carolinas, and there are other
disasters on the horizon.
I believe that Democrats and Republicans should come together. The
Speaker, again, has reached out to the Democratic leader and very much
wants to have appointments made, and Democrats will be able to ask any
question that they want; they will be able to participate in the
process of bringing witnesses before the committee. Again, everyone
wants to make sure that we take the steps to ensure that this never
happens again.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this rule. I urge my
colleagues to support the underlying legislation which will establish
this very important committee so that we can address this question and
ensure that the American people will not go through what we have seen
happen in the last several weeks.
The amendment previously referred to by Ms. Slaughter is as follows:
Previous Question for H. Res. 439, the Rule for H. Res. 437 The Select
Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane
Katrina
Amendment to H. Res. 439 Offered by Rep. Slaughter (NY)
Amendment in nature of substitute:
Strike all after the resolved clause and insert:
``Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this
resolution it shall be in order without intervention of any
point of order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3764)
to establish a congressional commission to examine the
Federal, State, and local response to the devastation wrought
by Hurricane Katrina in the Gulf Region of the United States
especially in the States of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama,
and other areas impacted in the aftermath and make immediate
corrective measures to improve such responses in the future.
The bill shall be considered as read. The previous question
shall be considered as ordered on the bill to final passage
without intervening motion except: (1) one hour equally
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority
member of the Committee on Rules; and (2) one motion to
recommit.''
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
move the previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The question is on ordering the
previous question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. 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.
Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair will reduce to 5 minutes
the minimum time for electronic voting, if ordered, on the adoption of
the resolution.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 222,
nays 193, not voting 18, as follows:
[Roll No. 471]
YEAS--222
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Bass
Biggert
Bilirakis
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boustany
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis (KY)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeLay
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Feeney
Ferguson
Fitzpatrick (PA)
Flake
Foley
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Gutknecht
Hall
Harris
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hostettler
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Osborne
Otter
Oxley
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Pombo
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Sodrel
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--193
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carson
Case
Chandler
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doyle
Edwards
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Ford
Frank (MA)
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth
Higgins
Hinojosa
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz (PA)
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Spratt
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Wexler
Wu
Wynn
NOT VOTING--18
Barton (TX)
Beauprez
Bishop (UT)
Doggett
Doolittle
Hinchey
Istook
Jindal
Jones (OH)
Melancon
Nadler
Rogers (MI)
Rothman
Schwarz (MI)
Solis
Tanner
Weiner
Woolsey
{time} 1213
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia and Mr. BACA changed their vote from ``yea'' to
``nay.''
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
Stated for:
Mr. SCHWARZ of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 471 I was
inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Emerson). The question is on the
resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
[[Page H8014]]
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 221,
noes 193, not voting 19, as follows:
[Roll No. 472]
AYES--221
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Bass
Biggert
Bilirakis
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boustany
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis (KY)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeLay
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Feeney
Ferguson
Fitzpatrick (PA)
Flake
Foley
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Gutknecht
Hall
Harris
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hostettler
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris
Mica
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Osborne
Otter
Oxley
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Pombo
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schmidt
Schwarz (MI)
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Sodrel
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Sweeney
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOES--193
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carson
Case
Chandler
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Ford
Frank (MA)
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth
Higgins
Hinojosa
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lipinski
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz (PA)
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Wexler
Wu
Wynn
NOT VOTING--19
Barton (TX)
Beauprez
Bishop (UT)
Hinchey
Istook
Jindal
Jones (OH)
Lewis (GA)
Melancon
Miller (FL)
Murtha
Nadler
Rogers (MI)
Rothman
Shays
Tancredo
Tanner
Weiner
Woolsey
{time} 1225
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.
Stated for:
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 472 I was inadvertently
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I missed rollcall vote No. 472 on
September 15, 2005. This was a suspension vote on agreeing to the
resolution H.J. Res. 439--a resolution to establish the Select
Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to
Hurricane Katrina.
If present, I would have voted rollcall vote No. 472, Establish the
Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and
Response to Hurricane Katrina--``aye''.
____________________