[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 153 (Thursday, November 17, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H10508-H10512]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.J. RES. 72, FURTHER CONTINUING 
                    APPROPRIATIONS, FISCAL YEAR 2006

  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 558 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 558

       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 joint resolution (H.J. Res. 72) 
     making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 
     2006, and for other purposes. The joint resolution shall be 
     considered as read. The previous question shall be considered 
     as ordered on the joint resolution

[[Page H10509]]

     to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one 
     hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman 
     and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Appropriations; and (2) one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 2. House Resolution 542 is laid on the table.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Petri). The gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Putnam) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to my neighbor and friend, the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Hastings), 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. PUTNAM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 558 is a rule that provides 
for consideration of House Joint Resolution 72, making further 
continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2006. As we approach the end 
of the week and the time that we will be taking in our districts to 
celebrate the Thanksgiving holiday, this particular rule and the CR 
probably are among the least controversial things that the gentleman 
from Florida and I will discuss today. I look forward to an abbreviated 
debate on this.
  The rule provides for 1 hour of debate in the House equally divided 
and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on Appropriations. The rule waives all points of order 
against consideration of the joint resolution and provides one motion 
to recommit.
  I want to commend Chairman Lewis, Ranking Member Obey, and the entire 
Appropriations Committee in the House for the determined effort this 
year to avoid an omnibus spending bill. This is something that 
unfortunately has become a routine part of our end-of-the-year 
appropriations process and Chairman Lewis under tremendous leadership 
with a great committee behind him has managed to avoid that this year, 
in fact, setting almost a record by completing all of the House's work 
on the appropriations process before July 4.

                              {time}  1030

  The committee has practiced due diligence and is working to pass each 
of these bills individually rather than having them attached as a train 
at the end of the year. This continuing resolution is necessary because 
our friends on the other side of the Rotunda are a little bit further 
behind in their appropriations process and we are working through the 
conference report stage.
  This CR will allow the appropriators to continue that conferencing 
work to ensure that we have a clean appropriations process where bills 
are moving individually in the regular order.
  Today we are considering the Labor, Health and Human Services and 
Education Appropriations Bill which leaves just three outstanding 
appropriations conference reports. The underlying resolution permits 
Congress to finish its work and provide the President adequate time to 
review the measures before signing them into law. H.J. Res. 72 simply 
extends the previous continuing resolution through December 17.
  In fact, Mr. Speaker, it is a one sentence change, only shifting the 
date to December 17 for the continuing operations for the government.
  The CR is a clean continuation of H.J. Res. 68, which passed the 
House in September by a vote of 348-65, and which funded programs and 
activities at the lowest of the House-passed level, the Senate-passed 
level or the fiscal year 2005 current rate and included language 
prohibiting agencies from resuming or initiating programs for 
procurement not funded in FY 2005 and prohibited agencies from awarding 
new grants and other forms of assistance during the period of 
continuing resolution.
  Throughout the appropriations process, the appropriators have 
demonstrated their commitment to fiscal responsibility by working 
within the framework we established in the budget resolution earlier 
this year. Again, I want to express my gratitude to the gentleman from 
California (Chairman Lewis), the ranking member, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and the entire committee and staff of the 
Appropriations Committee for their hard work this year.
  I urge Members to support the rules and the underlying continuing 
resolution so we can finish the appropriations process in regular order 
and continue on our way toward responsibly funding the needs of 
America.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Florida (Mr. Putnam) for yielding 
me time. I also thank him for bringing the real Florida orange juice to 
the 7 a.m. rules meeting this morning.
  I oppose this closed rule, Mr. Speaker, and the underlying 
legislation. Mr. Speaker, I wondered to myself earlier this morning as 
the Rules Committee majority members passed yet another closed rule 
which stifles debate and shuts off meaningful contributions from 
Members of this Chamber.
  What is the problem? Congress has only had since January 3 of this 
year to complete work on the 12 annual appropriations bills, the so-
called ``must pass bills'' that Congress works on every year.
  In case anyone is unclear, so far the President has signed only five 
of the 12 appropriations bills that must pass and become law before 
September 30. Defense appropriations? Not done. Military quality of 
life and Veterans Affairs? Not done. Transportation, Treasury, HUD? Not 
done. Of course, the bill which funds this very institution, the 
legislative branch appropriations legislation, well, we did that to 
protect our branch.
  And the sad part? No one is to blame but the party in control. It is 
an irrefutable fact, the last time that there was sole Democratic 
control of Congress and the White House, all 13 appropriations bills 
were passed by September 30. We had a balanced budget. And oh, yes, 
budget surpluses as far as the eye at that time could see.
  My, how times have changed. Now we have debt as far as the eye can 
see and disdain from much of the rest of the world. The people here are 
the modern day incarnations of Nero. The majority fiddles while the 
Nation burns.
  More than 45 days have passed since Congress passed its last 
continuing resolution, 48 to be exact; and in that time, Republicans 
have managed to pass a measly three of the ten outstanding 
appropriations bills at the time of the last continuing resolution. In 
baseball, their batting average would be pretty good. But in the real 
world where salaries and promotion are based on accomplishments and 
contributions, getting done 30 percent of what you are supposed to get 
done is absolutely abysmal. In any other job in America, 30 percent 
would get you fired. It should here too, Mr. Speaker, and I hope 
America is paying attention.
  So I ask, what in the world have the majority Members been doing over 
the last month and a half that they cannot get these constitutionally-
mandated appropriations bills done on time?
  We know that they have not dealt with FEMA. I have been trying to get 
them to deal with FEMA since the agency messed up Florida recovery 
efforts in the year 2004. And now look at where their neglect got us. 
Republicans have not dealt with the national security leaks in the Bush 
White House. They have not dealt with increasing access to health care 
or investing in affordable housing for low and moderate incomes. They 
have not dealt with unemployment in this Nation.
  In fact, this morning the chairman of the Rules Committee said to us 
that we have ``full employment'' in this Nation. He identifies that as 
6 percent. I guess there is no one looking for a job in San Dimas where 
he is from or the greater Los Angeles area.
  So forgive me, Mr. Speaker, if I feel it unnecessary to grant 
Republicans another 30 days to fix a problem that they, one, created on 
their own, and two, have shown zero ability that they are capable of 
leading our country in a responsibly fiscal manner.
  The problem is not Hurricanes Katrina or Wilma or other disasters. It 
is not even the failing war in Iraq. The problem Republicans have is 
their beloved tax cuts that 95 percent of the people in this country 
barely benefit from. Their problem is themselves and their failed 
fiscal policies.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H10510]]

  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Perhaps I misspoke earlier saying that this would be the least 
controversial item we would deal with this morning. I recognize that we 
all had to get up early to be at Rules this morning, and apparently it 
is affecting some of our temperaments.
  I would just point out that we finished all of the House's work, and 
I gave equal credit to both our chairman, the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Lewis) and the rest of his committee and the ranking member, the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), who finished all of our work by 
July 4, all of our appropriations processes in regular order, in an 
individual manner instead of having to bundle them up into a train at 
the end of the legislative season.
  To date, we have finished seven of those 11 appropriations bills. We 
will do the eighth in a couple of hours here on this floor today, which 
leaves three remaining waiting to be returned from their conference 
work with the Senate.
  So it is often said at times in the House that your opposition is the 
other party, but your enemy is the other Chamber. And when it comes to 
the enemy of time and being at the end of the legislative calendar, 
that, unfortunately, is the case with the appropriations process that 
we are waiting on regular order, the conference committees with the 
House and the Senate to finish their work on those three remaining 
bills.
  With respect to the gentleman's concerns about a closed rule, this is 
a continuing resolution that is one sentence long. It funds the 
operations of government from now until December 17. The stifling of 
debate is nonexistent. There are no speakers on either side for this. 
The fact that it is a closed rule indicates that there is really no 
other option about how to approach a continuing resolution other than 
should it be December 16 instead of December 17?
  Would the gentleman have the CR expire on Thanksgiving Day when no 
one will be in this Chamber to act to fund the operations of the 
government so that national parks remain open and Social Security 
checks continue to go out?
  What would the amendments be that the gentleman would offer if 
December 17 is an inadequate solution to funding the operations of 
government until we finish the three remaining conference reports on 
appropriations?
  To say that that is stifling democracy is nothing more than 
hyperbole.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would inform my good friend from Florida that getting 
up for a 7 a.m. Rules Committee does not alter my temperament. The 
suggestion that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle should 
have completed their work by September 30 is mandated by our 
responsibilities here in the House of Representatives. And I find it 
disingenuous to speak of the other body, which I heartily endorse what 
my colleague said with reference to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Lewis) in this House of Representatives but the other body is 
controlled by the majority. The White House is controlled by the 
majority. And it is y'all that have it all. And so under the 
circumstances, it is your responsibility to have done it by September 
30.
  To answer the gentleman, what we would have done perhaps if we did 
not go home for Thanksgiving and take Thanksgiving dinner up here. The 
gentleman asks for another date or debate about this continuing 
resolution, doubtless what we would have been able to do is stay here 
and that may have lit a fire under some of the people in the other body 
who need to get their work done.
  We have all sorts of problems in this Nation and there is no reason 
for us not to complete our work.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Just briefly, I respect the gentleman's observation that 
the majority party in the Senate is the party that I share, the 
Republican party, but I learned a long time ago to stop trying to 
answer for that Chamber over there. That is a tough body to figure out. 
The gentleman knows as well as I do that they tend to bog down in the 
oratory and slow down on the action.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio.)
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlemen for yielding me time.
  Despite what the Member from Florida said, there are some who would 
like to speak to this issue. He said what does 30 days matter? Should 
it be 29?
  Guess what? The Congress assembled on behalf of the American people, 
and this administration will borrow $1.3 billion a day every day for 
those 30 days. We will be $39 billion deeper in debt a month from 
today.
  What would we do if we had an open rule? Well, perhaps we could make 
some real cuts in wasteful programs in the budget, instead of attacking 
the vulnerable, the students, kids getting lunches at school. They are 
just eating too much. Kids in foster care, long term care for seniors.
  Maybe we could go where the real money is. They asked Willie Sutton, 
Why did you rob banks? Because that is where the money is.
  The Republicans do not want to go where the money is because that is 
where the special interests are, the people who fund their campaign 
machine to keep them in the majority, to keep them borrowing $1.3 
billion a day, indebting the American people as far as the eye can see.
  What cuts might we have to make? Well, let us see. The President has 
this bizarre idea that we should borrow a trillion dollars, one 
thousand billion dollars to go to Mars while we cannot meet the needs 
of people here on Earth, here in the United States of America. We do 
not have money for levees, jetties. We do not have money for the school 
lunch program. We do not have money for student loans, but we should 
borrow a trillion dollars to go to Mars. But before that, let us borrow 
$100 billion to go back to the moon to get some more dust. Great idea.
  No, personally, I would like to have an up or down vote on borrowing 
$100 billion to go back to the moon.
  A few other things, let us revisit Star Wars. The general in charge 
of Star Wars gave us some very, very encouraging news. He said the 
system to protect us against missiles that will never be fired against 
the United States because we could track them back and retaliate, they 
will smuggle a bomb in if they want to attack us. But he said it has a 
better than zero chance of working, better than zero after $100 billion 
and abrogating the anti-missile treaty.

                              {time}  1045

  Whoa, that is good. Well, maybe we could visit that issue in an open 
rule.
  How about corporate farm subsidies? The American people are going to 
borrow around $25 billion this year to give subsidies for surplus crops 
being grown by corporate farmers and others. Well, maybe we could visit 
that issue on the floor. No, they would not want to touch that. There 
is a lot of money coming in there.
  How about the $19 billion in the energy bill in subsidies to the oil 
industry in the hope that they will take money, borrowed by the 
taxpayers, given to them to go out and explore? Of course, those same 
oil company execs, of course they were not under oath, I have got to 
admit that, said that that money, the head of Exxon said it is nothing, 
it is chump change, and it has no effect on our operations. So maybe we 
could take back that $19 billion and spend it on lunch for hungry kids 
or maybe we could put the money back into the student loan program that 
you want to cut out in the reconciliation bill.
  Then we have a few tax giveaways out there, offshore companies like 
Accenture, largest homeland security contractor in the history of the 
United States, $10 billion, who has moved their headquarters to the 
Bahamas so they will not pay any taxes in the United States of America, 
but they are going to defend us against foreign enemies, but they just 
do not want to pay any taxes here. I would like to be defended against 
them and those giveaways.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

[[Page H10511]]

  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman clearly has come to the floor 
a little bit early, because all of these things are going to be 
eligible for debate here in another several hours when we move forward 
on our deficit reduction package, and the gentleman will have an 
opportunity to exercise through his vote that savings process, that 
deficit reduction process.
  But I am just curious, in all the gentleman's rhetoric, what would 
you do differently about the continuing resolution that funds 
government through December 17 until we finish our regular 
appropriations process?
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I would schedule some 
up-or-down votes on these sorts of major cuts in a much expanded 
reconciliation under an open rule.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would further yield, does 
the gentleman object to us funding the government through December 17?
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I object to borrowing $1.3 billion a day between now and 
then without any attempt at fiscal restraint.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Would the gentleman shut down the government to prevent 
that from occurring?
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, that was the ploy of your party. That is 
not mine, but I would take the time to keep Congress here.
  What we are talking about is Congress going on vacation, Congress 
going away for 2 weeks, have Thanksgiving at home, while we are taking 
food out of the mouths of kids and depriving students of loans through 
the reconciliation bill, borrowing $1.3 billion a day on behalf of the 
American taxpayers and getting them by another $39 billion. That is 
what we are talking about.
  On the reconciliation vote, if you would bring the reconciliation 
bill up as an open rule, you know that is a closed rule, too. You are 
negotiating cuts only with your side of the aisle. You do not intend to 
get a single Democratic vote; and the biggest cut in the bill is 
student loans, the party of opportunity. The second biggest cut in the 
bill is Medicaid; dump those problems on the States and deprive people 
of needed health care. Then, of course, we have the cuts in food 
security and other things in that bill.
  But we are not going to be allowed to offer amendments to cut Star 
Wars, the return to the Moon for $100 billion, corporate farm 
subsidies, tax giveaways. We will not be allowed to offer any 
amendments during the consideration of that bill. I would stay here 
through next week and have debate day after day and go through a series 
of amendments up or down on bringing some fiscal responsibility to this 
Congress.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The gentleman is passionate about his concern for the fiscal well-
being, but he is clearly misdirected in the sense that he will have an 
opportunity to vote on a number of these deficit reduction measures, a 
number of these savings, a number of these government reform 
mechanisms; and he will have the opportunity to present all of the 
things that he talked about in his own recommittal motion, which is a 
right that has been granted to the minority party.
  So all of the things that he talked about, all of the things that he 
objects to, the sound agricultural policy that guarantees that we 
continue to have the safest, cheapest food supply in the world, if you 
want to cut those things, you can put it in your program. If you do not 
like the fact that we are taking Pell grants up, you could object to 
that through your recommittal motion.
  The point is that we are here today debating the rule on the 
continuing resolution of the government because we have three regular 
order appropriations bills yet to move, because I believe, to our 
credit and to this Chamber's credit, to the credit of the entire House, 
we are not moving a last minute omnibus choo-choo train that all of us 
have to go home and then discover something in that that we are not 
real terribly proud of. I think it is a credit to the appropriators on 
both sides of the aisle and a credit, frankly, to both Chambers, and as 
the gentleman from Florida has pointed out, under Republican 
leadership, that are bringing us 11 individual appropriations bills 
that can be voted on up or down.
  You have an opportunity to make your position publicly known on each 
of those bills, rather than having things stuffed into a last-minute 
train, which all of us object to and which diminishes the status of the 
House.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I join the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), my colleague, in 
asserting that we should stay here and complete the task that is before 
us.
  I say to my very good friend from Florida that your and my chairman 
of the Rules Committee speaking about closed rules in another time made 
the following statement, that closed rules are anathema to democracy.
  When you argue that we are going to have time to do this, when we 
take the budget deficit matter up, what you are talking about is 1 hour 
on the rule, 1 hour on general debate, you say 2 hours, I will accept 
that, on general debate, 10 minutes in the motion to recommit, and that 
then is what 435 Members and five delegates have that they can deal 
with in terms of time.
  The problems pointed out by my friend from Oregon are significant, 
and the things that you have heard me say in the Rules Committee, the 
things that disturb me and distress me most are these things having to 
do with education.
  No one can tell me that they are not prepared to make the sacrifices 
for our children to have afterschool programs; and yet, what we are 
going to find in that program are substantial cuts. There are no 
afterschool programs in the counties that I represent.
  In Medicaid, it is no secret what is about to happen. When we cut 
Medicaid, any way you cut it, you can slice it, dice it any way you 
want, States, get ready, because you are getting ready to have a 
significant problem with tax increases at that level.
  What part of national sacrifice do we not understand? What part of 
closed rule that I heard so often in 1992 does the majority not 
understand that that does not give the Members of this body the 
opportunity to come forward with amendments that might make sense with 
reference to fiscal responsibility here in the House of 
Representatives?
  Those are some of the issues.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and we have kicked off quite a 
debate here this morning. We know that it is going to be a long day as 
we approach the debate over the Labor, Health and Human Services 
appropriations bill, the ongoing debate over the continuing resolution 
to fund our government, and later today the deficit reduction package, 
which I dare say will not take food from any child in America's mouth, 
despite the overheated rhetoric of the gentleman from Oregon, 
respectfully the gentleman from Florida and a number of others on that 
side of the aisle who it would appear from their media statements 
discuss in the salons and parlors of the Beltway whether Republicans 
hate children or old people more.
  I dare say that as we bring up this Deficit Reduction Act, which 
finally for the first time since 1997 puts us back on a serious track 
to finding savings not just in the discretionary side of our spending 
but in the mandatory side which makes up over half of Federal spending 
today and which slows the rate of growth in government, again, one of 
those Washington, D.C.-style cuts, where budgets grow 7 percent instead 
of 7.3 percent or they grow 6 percent instead of 6.3 percent, and we 
find $50 billion worth of savings in a $2.5 trillion per year budget.
  So $50 billion in savings over 5 years in what would then be a $14 
trillion pot. I think that almost any American would say I think that 
my budget growing 7 percent instead of 7.3 percent is acceptable, and I 
dare say to my friend from Florida, who represents, among other 
counties, Palm Beach County, Florida, the home of Lake Worth Avenue 
among other places. I think there are a number of counties that would 
gladly trade their tax base for his, and I would also say that I 
believe that somewhere in Palm Beach County there is an afterschool 
program

[[Page H10512]]

of some shape or form. There must be an afterschool program somewhere 
in all of Palm Beach County, Florida.
  I believe that as we move through this debate it is important for us 
to be responsible in our rhetoric and keep our eyes on the ball, which 
is the looming fiscal crisis that is out there if Congress does not 
have the courage to get its arms around mandatory spending, which is 
consuming Federal spending, making up over 50 percent of it today and 
two-thirds of Federal spending.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield just 
for a quick correction?
  Mr. PUTNAM. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, that is Worth Avenue in Palm 
Beach, not West Palm Beach. Our colleague Mark Foley represents that 
area, a Republican.
  I represent Pahokee and Belle Glade, which are also in Palm Beach, 
and you are talking about no tax base. I just want to have that 
correction made.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the gentleman referred 
to the entire county, not his piece of the county, and I certainly am 
well aware of Pahokee and Belle Glade and the challenges that they have 
gone through.
  But I believe somewhere in your county you have an afterschool 
program.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. In private schools.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Petri). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________