[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 78 (Friday, June 16, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H4181-H4187]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                     THE 30-SOMETHING WORKING GROUP

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to come before the 
House once again, the 30-something Working Group. I would like to thank 
the Democratic leader, Nancy Pelosi, and also Mr. Steny Hoyer, who is 
our whip; Mr. James Clyburn, our chairman; and also Mr. Larson, who is 
our vice chairman.
  And I think that it is very appropriate at this particular time, Mr. 
Speaker, to talk about the great comeback by the Miami Heat in the 
series of the NBA finals. And I can say on behalf of Ms. Wasserman 
Schultz and those of us from the south Florida delegation and from the 
Florida delegation that we are very, very pleased of the outstanding 
play by the Heat. We want to continue to support them in every way 
possible. We know that they will be victorious. We have been wrestling 
with our friends in the back in the Speaker's lobby from Dallas and the 
surrounding area, letting them know that the final outcome will be a 
great parade in downtown Miami with the new NBA champions. As you know, 
as we look at it from a religious standpoint, you have to claim it. And 
we are excited.
  There are some extraordinary things that are happening now. Dwyane 
Wade. If Shaquille O'Neal falls on a Chevy truck, he would hurt it. But 
Dwyane Wade has been able to overcome the injury, and also several of 
the Heat players and the Heat fans have persevered. So we look forward 
to Father's Day. I know that Shaquille O'Neal and Alonzo Mourning and 
Dwyane Wade are all fathers, and we know on Father's Day they will 
deliver a gift to themselves and to me and to other folks.
  So I just want to say since we have the hour, Mr. Speaker, there are 
Members, I am pretty sure, from Texas, from Dallas who would love to 
come to the floor, whom we will not yield to at this time, to give 
their side of the story.
  We are happy we have this hour. We honor the Heat and we are glad 
that there is a great series going on. And while we are at it, before I 
yield to Ms. Wasserman Schultz to make comments on this, I want to 
thank the NBA for all the work that they have done not only in Dallas 
but in Miami, in their charities, and giving to the Heat center. At 
Little River Middle School, they have actually put some computers in, 
and they have been there over the years, but they have made a new 
commitment to that center and they have named it after the late wife of 
the Heat trainer. So we want to encourage the NBA to keep doing what 
they are doing.
  I yield to Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Thank you to my good friend from Florida, Mr. 
Meek.
  We are proud to wear the colors today, Mr. Speaker, and we have got 
the beads on. And because we could not be with the Heat in south 
Florida during their triumphant victory last night and the other night, 
we decided to stir up some spirit here and send some good karma home to 
them. And I can tell you that I have a little gastronomic wager with 
our good friend Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Dallas. I am looking 
forward to enjoying some lunch, courtesy of her and her staff after the 
Heat grabbed the championship. And hopefully, we will be able to be 
down there with them on Sunday and take home some of the spirit that we 
have been able to generate up here.
  Thanks to your good leadership and firing up the Heat troops up here. 
I have worn these beads all over the place the last couple of days and 
yesterday in the mall, walking with my husband and my kids, got stopped 
by a tourist up here saying, ``Go Heat.'' So we can feel it all the way 
up here.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, just as a point of information, as 
we start working in a bipartisan way towards the spirit of the Miami 
Heat, and it is bipartisan, we have Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart, Lincoln 
Diaz-Balart, also Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, also Jeff Miller from the 
Panhandle of Florida that have joined in in this Heat spirit. On our 
side we have Ms. Wasserman Schultz, myself, Congressman Alcee Hastings, 
and also Mr. Robert Wexler. So I mean it is kind of balanced off as it 
relates to who has the beads in support of the Miami Heat. We rallied 
them when they were down by 0-2, and we will continue to rally around 
them now that it is even.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, we would like to go into what we usually do 
when we come to the floor as it relates to the 30-something Working 
Group, talking about the issues that we have been meeting on, wanting 
to bring to the floor and share with the American people and also share 
with the Members of the House.
  We talk about the agenda that was released, ``A New Direction for 
America'' by the Democratic Caucus, and not talk about what we may do 
when we take the majority if the American people find it fit for us to 
take the majority, but what we will do, and I think it is important to 
say ``will.'' And I always say we have the will and desire to lead. We 
have the will and desire to pass legislation. We also have the will and 
desire, Mr. Speaker, to take the rubber stamp out of the Republican 
majority's hands and put it in the garbage because that is not what 
this Congress should be all about. It should be oversight. It should be 
evaluation of policies that we would like to pass, need it be health 
care, need it be Iraq policy, need it be economic development. And in 
our plan, it is important to understand that we want to make health 
care more affordable for Americans, make sure that we have a fair share 
as it relates to prescription drugs on behalf of the American people, 
making sure that we can move into the area of investing in stem cell 
research for medical research for some of the cure that we can do now. 
Also work toward alternative fuels, making this country independent of 
the Middle East and invest in the Midwest as it relates to E-85, 
alternative fuels, making sure that we pass legislation to bring about 
flex vehicles.
  Also helping working families. It is not a question of if we will. It 
is we will raise the minimum wage. And that is what we are saying on 
this side of the aisle. There is no question about it. The minimum wage 
will be raised, and that is a promise. Cutting also and reversing many 
of the Republican majority increases on student tuition. This is a very 
important point and we are going to talk a little further about it 
because we have legislation that is filed now to reverse that, make 
sure that families have tax credits and make sure students don't have 
to pay through the nose and come out of college in debt more than they 
are today.
  Also ensuring that seniors and individuals receive Social Security 
benefits, need it be survivor benefits or need it be the disabled or 
just simple retirement, not privatizing Social Security. The 
``security'' part is to make sure that when all else fails that there 
is some level of income for those individuals who have worked their 
entire lives. And requiring fiscal responsibility. This is the most 
important, if not the point, of the Democratic agenda of making sure if 
we say we are going to spend it, we had better show how we are going to 
pay for it. Not like we are doing now, spending and borrowing from 
foreign nations, making this country more indebted to foreign countries 
than at any other time in the history of the republic.
  So we will talk a little further about that and define this a little 
bit more as we go along.
  I would like to yield to my colleague, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, and we 
will focus more on these issues as we go through the points again.

  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Thank you, Mr. Meek. It is a pleasure again to 
be here with you and spend some time talking about the priorities of 
the Democratic Caucus.
  Mr. Speaker, I know when you were in the Chamber this afternoon you 
talked about what you would like the American people and the Republican 
Caucus, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, would like the 
American people to believe. And I know it sounds good to continue to 
say that the Democrats do not have an agenda. Well, sadly for you, Mr. 
Speaker and our Republican colleagues, that is not true. Fortunately, 
for the American people we do have an agenda. We have had one for quite 
a long time. It is right here.

[[Page H4182]]

  Many times it is easier to graphically depict things as opposed to 
just using words, and we can take you through, as Mr. Meek just did, 
our agenda so that, Mr. Speaker, when you are finding yourself standing 
in front of a chair behind the podium on this floor, you can keep this 
in mind when you would like to say that we don't have an agenda because 
that is absolutely inaccurate. The Democrats' New Direction for 
America, as Mr. Meek said, pledges that we will make health care more 
affordable, unlike the rising health care costs that continue to 
skyrocket out of control in this country led by the Republicans for the 
last 14 years that they have controlled this Congress.

                              {time}  1230

  We will make a commitment to lowering gas prices and spend--yes, 
spend--the American taxpayers' dollars on exploring alternative energy 
sources instead of just having things like President Bush putting words 
in the State of the Union where he said out loud, America has an 
addiction to foreign oil and then proceeded to do nothing about it. No 
meaningful policy on the part of the Republicans in this body. No 
meaningful change in the energy policy. No reduction in gas prices.
  I want to digress from this chart for a minute. First of all, let's 
just demonstrate the difference between what a new direction for 
America would be versus the same old Republican policies that have 
failed the American people and don't work.
  Under Republicans for the last 14 years, Mr. Speaker, you have 
college tuition that has increased 40 percent. You have gas prices that 
have increased 47 percent. You have health care costs that have 
increased 55 percent. And median household income, Mr. Speaker, that 
has decreased by 4 percent. If that is the direction that Republicans 
would like the country to continue to go, then, you are right, the 
American voters in November should vote for the Republicans and 
continue more of the same. But if they want a new direction, if they 
want to make sure that we can have a leadership in this Congress and in 
this country that is committed to making sure that college and higher 
education is more affordable, not less, if they want to make sure that 
we can expand access to health care and instead of adding more people 
to the rolls that do not have health care and that go uninsured and 
that have to wait till their family members are so sick that they have 
to take them to the emergency room before they can get them some health 
care treatment, then they should continue to vote for more of the same 
and elect Republicans. If they want to make sure that they can move 
this country in the direction that most Americans would like to go in, 
then they will choose Democrats in the fall and we will make a 
commitment to expanding alternative energy sources, expanding our 
commitment to making sure that we don't have a continued addiction to 
foreign oil.
  Mr. Speaker, I find personally that sometimes graphic depictions, 
sometimes three-dimensional demonstrations are really incredibly 
helpful.
  You see, Mr. Speaker, this is a gas pump. Apparently our colleagues 
on the other side of the aisle, many of them don't appear to have seen 
one of these since they looked like this. The gas pumps from what I 
understand looked like this, oh, in about the 1950s. It appears as 
though many of our Republican colleagues haven't put gas in their own 
car since they looked like this, because if they had then they would 
realize that in most places in this country, gas is now more than $3 a 
gallon, that it costs a mom or a dad that drives their kids around in a 
minivan or in an SUV more than $50 to fill up their tank, and I feel 
quite certain that if our Republican colleagues were actually pumping 
their own gas, were actually having to observe the counter on the gas 
pump that shows, Mr. Speaker, just so you know, those gas pumps 
actually show you how much you are spending per gallon while you are 
pumping the gas into your car, maybe we could just pass this around on 
the floor and our colleagues could see what a gas pump looks like so 
that they could remember the pain that Americans go through when they 
have to spend that much on a gallon of gas. Then maybe we would have 
our colleagues on the other side of the aisle not continue to vote like 
the rubber stamps that my colleague Mr. Meek always talks about. Maybe 
they would get some courage. Maybe they would realize that they 
shouldn't be voting for an energy policy that actually gives money away 
to the oil industry, to an oil industry that has made record profits, 
Mr. Meek, more money than any corporation in American history in the 
last quarter of last year. It is just unbelievable.
  I am hopeful that by my three-dimensional depiction, by my bringing 
an actual model of a gas pump to the floor, Mr. Speaker, then maybe 
some of our colleagues will keep in mind the actual difficulty that 
most Americans are going through when they actually have to fill up 
their gas tank by using one of these. I just wanted to provide a public 
service to some of my colleagues.
  I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Thank you so very much, Ms. Wasserman Schultz. I 
am glad that you brought a visual aid down because I think it is 
important, Mr. Speaker, that we break this down for the Members because 
we want to make sure that Members don't go back home in November and 
giving political speeches saying that, oh, well, I didn't know we were 
doing that. Or I didn't know that we were breaking a record in 
borrowing from foreign nations. We want to make sure that the 
Congressional Record reflects that those of us on this side of the 
aisle actually brought it to the floor in a form that a middle school 
or a fifth grader can understand. And it is important that we break it 
down to this point so that no one can say that they misunderstood, they 
didn't quite know what they were voting for, I made a mistake or 
whatever the case may be because now, in this day, in this Congress, we 
are making history in all the wrong places and in all the wrong ways.
  I think it is important that we point this out. I want to make sure 
that I get that Washington Post article that talked about a special 
meeting at the White House. The innovation agenda, I want to make sure 
that the Members go on housedemocrats.gov and get a copy of the 
innovation agenda so that hopefully folks can be enlightened on what we 
have been talking about and promoting, not just yesterday, not just 
last month, this has been around, and the only reason why it is not 
implemented now is that the Republican majority will not allow 
legislation to come to the floor outside of the original thoughts of 
President Bush or the Republican leaders.
  I think it is important that we understand an innovation agenda. We 
talk about education and creating the workforce for the future, making 
sure that there is math and science education, that we work on that and 
we provide the necessary dollars for it.
  Invest in research and also development that promotes public-private 
partnerships, where many CEOs you will see on housedemocrats.gov have 
already become a part of what we are talking about and encouraging that 
to happen.
  Affordable, guaranteed broadband access throughout the country. Need 
it be if you are in the heartland of America, you are on the east 
coast, you are on the west coast, you are down south, you are up north, 
you should be able to have an opportunity at this broadband initiative 
that we have for all Americans.
  Achieving energy independence. We talked about that, within 10 years. 
Not maybe one day, not counting on the oil companies to do it but the 
Congress setting the stage, this House setting the stage for that to 
happen.
  Providing small businesses with the tools that they need to be able 
to create jobs.
  Mr. Speaker, I am just going to take about 10 minutes here breaking 
this thing down, if not shorter, of talking about how we are making 
history in all the wrong ways. The Republican majority, I must say, has 
done an outstanding job on behalf of President Bush. You have got to 
hand it to them. If there was an Oscar, an Emmy or a Grammy to give 
out, the Republican majority would get it as it relates to rubber-
stamping everything the administration hands down.

  I hold here, Mr. Speaker, and this is no secret to many of the 
Members and it should not be a secret to the staff

[[Page H4183]]

that works here in the House of Representatives, this chart, this chart 
of the fact that in just 4 years, President Bush and the Republican 
majority has borrowed $1.05 trillion from foreign nations. We have the 
Republican Congress right under the President's picture because he 
couldn't do it by himself.
  Forty-two United States Presidents, 224 years, were only able to 
borrow $1.01 trillion from foreign nations. How could that be? One may 
say, how can you do this in 4 years? $1.05 trillion from foreign 
nations. In 224 years, 200 years shy of what the President has been 
able to do, $1.01 trillion.
  Let me tell you, that is staggering. That is not something that it 
happened in the forties or it happened in the thirties once upon a 
time. Calculate it. Forty-two Presidents, 224 years. Mr. Speaker, we 
are not just here as the 30 Something Working Group and dreaming up 
something. Those numbers are from the U.S. Department of Treasury.
  Who do we owe? Who has their hands in the pockets of the American 
taxpayer? I don't care if you are a Republican, independent, you don't 
vote yet, or whatever the case may be, a Democrat, you have to have a 
problem with these nations owning a piece of the American apple pie.
  Japan. Like it or not, I know it is painful for some of the Members 
to hear this, but this is the reality under a Republican majority. 
Japan, $682.8 billion that they own of the American apple pie thanks to 
the Republican majority rubber-stamping the Bush policies.
  China, $249.8 billion of the American apple pie that they own right 
now, not because of the American people lack of making the right fiscal 
decisions but it is because the Republican majority has allowed it to 
happen with the American taxpayer dollar.
  The U.K., $223.2 billion
  Caribbean nations, $115.3 billion.
  Taiwan, $71.3 billion.
  OPEC nations. Oh, my goodness, OPEC nations. We can't do enough for 
them, but they are buying our debt, $67.8 billion.
  Germany, $65.7 billion.
  Korea, $66.5 billion.
  And Canada, $53.8 billion.
  The reason why, Mr. Speaker, you see the American flag in silhouette 
as it relates to the United States of America, excluding Alaska and 
Hawaii and Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories, but just to show 
this silhouette of the mainland of the United States of America, the 
reason why we have that, if you want to do away with the debt, elect a 
Democratic majority because we have done it.
  The Republican majority, they are saying, well, we're going to cut it 
in half. It is almost like if there is a cliff, Mr. Speaker, and you 
are in a vehicle and you have to stop the vehicle before it goes over 
the cliff. We are saying stop. You are saying go at half speed. You go 
at half speed, you are going over the cliff regardless. We have stopped 
the deficit from continuing to continue on when we balanced it, without 
one Republican vote. And so it is important if the American people, if 
they are looking at the resume, they will elect Democrats to be able to 
lead.
  What are we doing right now, Mr. Speaker? I think it is important for 
us to outline this. We are saying pay-as-you-go. If you are going to 
spend a hundred dollars, you better talk about how you are going to pay 
for it. What the Republican majority is doing now, they are spending a 
hundred dollars and they are saying put it on a foreign credit card so 
we would owe foreign countries money and leave it for future 
generations and this generation, which is unfair to our young people. 
Before they even get a chance at life, they are already going to owe 
folks that they don't even know because of the wrong decisions that 
have been made here in the Republican majority and that they have been 
rubber-stamping.
  Substitute amendment to House Concurrent Resolution 95 in the 2006 
budget resolution. Mr. Spratt, who is our ranking member on the Budget 
Committee, put forth an amendment for pay-as-you-go like I just 
outlined. Not one Republican voted for it. To say that we are going to 
have fiscal discipline, not one Republican voted for it. 228 
Republicans voted against it.
  Again in 2005, a substitute amendment to the budget, saying pay-as-
you-go. Not one Republican voted for it, Mr. Speaker. 224 Republicans 
voted against it.
  I am coming in for a close. I just want to share this with you. I 
mentioned the issue about energy. Oh, well, the Republican answer, the 
Republican majority here in this House because I do know some 
Republicans who do feel that the Congress should not be rubber-stamping 
everything that the administration puts forth, and let me just read my 
article real quick to bring this into focus. I thank my colleague for 
bearing with me.
  November 16, 2005 front page of the Washington Post: White House 
documents show that executives from big oil companies met with Vice 
President Dick Cheney's energy task force in 2001, something long 
expected by environmentalists but denied as recently as November 2005, 
last week by industry officials testifying before Congress. The 
document obtained this week by the Washington Post shows that officials 
from ExxonMobil, also Shell Oil Company, BP of America met in the White 
House complex with Cheney aides who were developing a national energy 
policy, parts of which became law, parts of which are still being 
debated.
  I wanted to just read that to show you that when we talk about 
alternative fuel and we talk about flex vehicles, I don't think the oil 
companies are with us on this.
  This is actually a picture of an ExxonMobil pump where it shows 
regular, special, super. That is keeping us, like the President says, 
addicted to oil. And that is an interesting statement, too, by him.
  E85 is an alternative fuel. ExxonMobil has said you cannot use your 
Mobil credit card to purchase this product. I can take a Mobil credit 
card when I go there to put gas in the tank, I can go in there and buy 
a bag of chips.

                              {time}  1245

  I am not a cigarette smoker, but somebody can go in and buy a carton 
of cigarettes with their Mobil card. Someone can go in there, probably 
end up in some States, buy a Lotto ticket with their Mobil card. But 
they can't buy an alternative fuel that is made here in America by 
American farmers and should be supported by the American people.
  They are trying to make it even harder. They are putting the block in 
front of them, because they want to keep this thing going. Now I am not 
a Member of the House with a conspiracy theory; but, Mr. Speaker, Ms. 
Wasserman Schultz talked about record profits.
  Here are the facts. This is not fiction; this is fact. In 2001, a 
meeting took place in the White House. Then all of a sudden we started 
being handed down legislation, Republican majority by the Bush 
administration. Oil profits went up $34 billion in 2001. I think that 
was a meeting worth scheduling.
  In 2003, oil profits went up $59 million, billion, goodness gracious. 
I am getting confused by saying a million, a billion dollars. In 2004, 
$84 billion in profits; and 2005, $113 billion.
  What I can't help, Mr. Speaker, is to say that it will be over $113 
billion in oil profits in 2006 even before the year has ended, because 
when you have the Republican majority passing subsidies, and you don't 
have to spend your own money for quote, unquote, innovation, you can 
have those kinds of profits and have the American people paying through 
the nose.
  Last point on the relationship, just one more chart here. I could 
care less about the former CEO of ExxonMobil as a person. You know, I 
am not going after him as a person. I am just saying that the 
Republican majority has allowed this to happen. He has $398 million of 
a retirement package, and on top of the Republican majority's tax 
policy, he gets a $2 million tax break.
  You want to talk about the winners and losers in America, this is a 
perfect example; and this is allowed to happen here in this House and 
here in this democracy because the special interest has a special 
relationship. Here is the King and the President, talk about 
relationships.
  We are on the side of the American people; it is just that simple. 
``Energizing America,'' HouseDemocrats.gov, you get a copy of it, and 
you will see whose side we are on. If you are a Republican, you got to 
have a problem

[[Page H4184]]

with the way this House has rubber-stamped what the President has 
handed down.
  If you are an Independent, you have to have a problem with the K 
Street Project that was alive and well to allow the special interests 
to do a pay and you play as it relates to getting policy passed on to 
the House. If you are Independent and if you are a Democratic, you have 
to have a problem that there is no input as it relates to bipartisan 
approach to policymaking.
  Because if there were, and we did have a bipartisan approach, I 
wouldn't be able to stand here with a straight face, Mr. Speaker, and 
share with the Members and American people what has happened here in 
this House with the facts backed by third-party validators by the U.S. 
Department of Treasury and the Congressional Record.
  I just want to make sure that we break out many visual aids because 
some Members of the House seem to be a little confused about what is 
happening and what is not happening.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. You are absolutely right. No apology 
necessary. It is really important that we have this time on the floor, 
and that is why we appreciate Leader Pelosi giving us this opportunity 
to make some substantive arguments that actually demonstrate how we are 
going in the wrong direction and also to lay out the Democrats' plan 
for taking us in a new one.
  What has really boggled my mind since I arrived in the Congress, at 
the beginning of last year, is that our friends on the other side of 
the aisle seem to have no qualms about just ceding their decisionmaking 
authority here to the executive branch. Why show up for work? Why run 
for Congress? This is not an easy job. This is a job that requires a 
lot of responsibility, it requires thoughtful decisionmaking, it 
requires time away from our family and all of which, at least each of 
us on our side, and I know many of our Republican colleagues feel this 
way, that this is an awesome responsibility that we are given when we 
are elected to the United States Congress.
  The Founding Fathers did not separate the United States Government 
into three branches in order for the Congress to just be a rubber stamp 
of the executive. They feared tyranny. They feared an executive that 
was too strong, and they wanted to make sure that there was a system of 
checks and balances, so that when questions that come from the 
executive come before the Congress, that we aren't just a rubber stamp, 
that we aren't here just to say, yes, Mr. President, absolutely, can I 
get your hat, can I hold your coat, Mr. President.
  Our role here is to ask questions, to exercise oversight, to put 
forth initiatives and to actually represent our constituents, like you 
said, in the people's House. That is why I was very surprised, but 
pleasantly, to see the former leader of this Chamber under the 
Republican revolution, Mr. Gingrich, the former House Speaker, when he 
cited in the Knight Ridder newspapers, third-party validator that we 
like to bring out on this House floor, so that that way people 
understand it is not just what Kendrick Meek says or Debbie Wasserman 
Schultz or Tim Ryan or Bill Delahunt. Mr. Gingrich cited a series of 
blunders under the Republican rule from failures in the aftermath of 
Hurricane Katrina to the mismanagement of the war in Iraq. He said the 
government has squandered billions of dollars in Iraq.
  You know, we just had 10 hours of debate yesterday, which if you 
listen to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, according to 
them, what President Bush is doing, everything is wonderful. Everything 
is coming up roses.
  Now, I think we could all acknowledge in this entire Chamber that we 
are, although I certainly am never pleased about any one individual's 
demise, because, obviously, we value life, but there were not too 
many Americans shedding tears about Mr. al Zarqawi's demise and the 
American contribution to it. The world, such as when we removed Saddam 
Hussein, is a more peaceful place without him being in it.

  But you cannot, based on one individual's demise, in the cesspool 
that has been created by this President's policies in Iraq, you cannot 
say, now, you know, everything is great, this is the beginning of the 
end, this is the turning point.
  Listening to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. In the 
last 10 hours, one would think that this bombing of the leader of al 
Qaeda in Iraq was the be-all and end-all, and that is the thing that 
Americans were looking for to end this. Nothing could be further from 
the truth. That is why 42 people were killed in Iraq today, 42.
  I mean, it is not like much has changed on the ground in that 
country. Our real security agenda that would take this country in a new 
direction, if we were able to win the majority back in November, 
Americans would see the direction that Democrats would take this 
country.
  We would make a commitment to our troops. We would make sure that we 
had a real commitment to our troops, that we changed the military into 
a 21st-century one of military strength, and we would honor them. We 
would rebuild a state-of-the-art military by making the needed 
investments in equipment and manpower so that we can make sure we can 
handle the diverse needs and the diverse activity that we have going on 
across the globe.
  What happened to Afghanistan, Mr. Meek? I mean, when we first were 
attacked after 9/11, and we went into Afghanistan, and the Americans 
were united in that effort, we actually removed the Taliban. We were 
able to bring that country into the 21st century, restoring quality for 
women, and making sure that we had a democracy, democratic seedlings 
planted there.
  Now, you fast forward to 2006, because we virtually pulled out of 
Afghanistan, save for about 17,000 troops that are still left on the 
ground. Now you have the rise of the Taliban again. You have Afghani 
women who are saying that they have been subjected to the same 
inequality and the same requirements of wearing the burqa and not being 
able to get an education.
  We have abandoned Afghanistan; and, instead, we have added our 
resources in our effort to making Iraq more of a cesspool than it 
already was. If we are able to implement our real security agenda, we 
will make sure that our troops are well equipped, that we are funding 
the appropriate activity and making sure that we actually go after 
Osama bin Laden. We will make sure that the war on terror is waged both 
here in the United States and across the globe and that we strike a 
balance, so that Americans don't have to worry about being attacked in 
the United States.
  We will make sure that we make a commitment to moving the country in 
a new direction militarily instead of continuing to fund an endless war 
in Iraq, that no matter what has been said in a 10-hour debate that 
occurred on this floor, still has no end in sight, still has more than 
2,500 troops dead, and we know more to come every day.
  Mr. Meek, you are a member of the Homeland Security Committee and 
Armed Services Committee, so you are certainly more expert in this area 
than I am. But I literally heard in the last day and a half a policy of 
denial on the part of our Republican colleagues. It would be nice if 
they put both hands on the ground and yanked their heads out of it so 
that we could all come together and have a real debate, a real debate.
  Yes, bring out that rubber stamp, because that is exactly what 
happened on this vote this morning. If we were allowed to have a real 
debate, if we were allowed to put forward our alternative, if we were 
allowed to file amendments, I would have been willing to consider to be 
able to vote for something and would have been appreciative for the 
opportunity to vote for something other than what the majority tried to 
cram down.
  They certainly did cram it down their colleagues' throats. We refused 
to allow it to be crammed down ours. You know what, I don't check my 
brain at the door of the Chamber when I walk in the door. I represent 
my constituents.
  You know, not everyone will agree with me back home in the 20th 
district of Florida. That is okay, because I wasn't elected to be a 
rubber stamp. I was elected to be a Representative, a United States 
Representative, someone who stands up for what I believe in and stands 
up for what my constituents believes in. I was not elected to rubber-
stamp anyone's policy, not Nancy Pelosi's, not Mr. Boehner's, not the 
President. I was elected as an individual.

[[Page H4185]]

  Unfortunately, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, they do 
check their brains at the door. They bring in that big old rubber 
stamp, and they just pound it on whatever is put in front of them by 
the Republican leadership and say, yes, Mr. Leader, yes, Mr. President, 
I am glad to do your bidding and the heck with the checks and balances 
of the Constitution and our role here as a Member of the United States 
Congress.
  At the end of the day, why be here, why run, why make the sacrifice, 
why leave your family behind? We only need one of their Members. We 
only need Mr. Boehner or Mr. Hastert here. They are the only ones that 
bother showing up to work because these other guys on the other side of 
the aisle, they just do what they are told to do anyway. Really, they 
could go spend quite a bit of other time doing something useful and 
certainly could make sure that the country could begin to see what is 
really going on in this Chamber.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. I am glad you pointed out the fact that a lot of 
rubber-stamping is going on. The reason I voted against the Iraq 
resolution today, Mr. Speaker, is I will not dishonor the memory of 
those individuals that have died and those individuals who have been 
forever maimed or lost a leg or limb or that mother or that father that 
will never see their son or daughter, or that child that will never see 
their father, aunt, uncle or niece again.
  The reason why I did that is that many men and women in uniform are 
fighting on behalf of, what, a democracy or something like it. You have 
a resolution that says, Democrats, we are not even going to allow you 
to put anything on the floor, we are not going to allow you to amend 
the resolution.
  The rules are set on the third floor up here, Mr. Speaker, in the 
Rules Committee that says we won't even allow an alternative 
resolution. They say we won't even allow. Yes, welcome to the floor, 
and you will talk. But you know something? Talk is cheap. Action means 
everything.
  So as a member of the Armed Services Committee along with my ranking 
member and along with a lot of other members of the Armed Services 
Committee, we voted against the resolution today, not because we 
believe in something else; we do believe this democracy. But we do 
believe in a fair debate in oversight and policy.
  That is why it is important, Mr. Speaker, that we move in a way that 
will have our Constitution honored at the same time, and we move in a 
way as it relates to fairness for every Member of this House.
  One thing that Leader Pelosi, if the Democrats take control will be 
the Speaker, had said we will work in a bipartisan way. Ms. Wasserman 
Schultz talked about the whole rubber-stamping issue. This rubber stamp 
has been used far too many times for the Republican majority. How did 
we get in the deficits, the deficits as far as the eye can see? Because 
of the rubber stamp?

                              {time}  1300

  Defense contractors and contractors in Hurricane Katrina were able to 
steal money from the American taxpayer through a lack of oversight 
because of the rubber stamp.
  States are suing the Federal Government under Leave No Child Behind 
because we are only funding it to the low 30 percent and allowing 
States and local governments to be able to have what they need to have 
to carry out the mission of educating our children.
  The trouble is because the Republican majority has rubber stamped 
everything that the Bush White House has handed down, and when we look 
at tax policies, how does a billionaire here, Mr. Speaker, have a $398 
million retirement package with a cherry on top, $2 million tax break, 
of the policies of the Republican majority? Still we have individuals 
going to work for $5 and some change on minimum wage.
  So I think it is important that we look at this whole issue rubber 
stamping, and we look at this issue of following Article 1, section 1 
of the U.S. Constitution and making sure that we do what we are 
supposed to do here at the House.
  I yield to Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your leadership so 
much and really the opportunity to be here with you almost every night. 
I am going to have to catch back up to the two of you guys, and I have 
some family in town this week. I look forward to continuing to talk 
about the new direction that the Democratic Caucus will take this 
country when we are given the opportunity in November.
  I look forward to continuing this debate and this discussion on our 
commitment to making sure that we do not privatize Social Security and 
that we enact responsible legislation that truly shores it and does not 
use scare tactics against our seniors, implying that there is some sort 
of crisis that does not exist when Social Security will remain solvent 
for at least the next 47 years; that we make sure we enact a truly 
effective energy policy, invest in alternative energy resources and 
make sure that we actually generate the ability to become insulated 
from foreign oil, instead of giving away the store to the big oil 
company; that we make sure that we really expand access to health care, 
that we reduce the number of uninsured Americans and that when a child 
is sick, when an American is sick, that they can afford to go to the 
doctor and that cost is not the obstacle to basic health care.
  Those are the things that we remain committed to. That is an agenda 
that we have put forward and that we look forward to talking about as 
the months progress through to the November election. I look forward to 
sharing the podium with you and talking about that for the next several 
months.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. I want to thank Ms. Wasserman Schultz for coming 
down to the floor today, as you always do, and we continue to work on 
these issues that are facing Americans.
  Mr. Speaker, I think it is important that since we are all kind of 
draped up in the flag this week and talking about who is a patriot and 
who is not, and I will not stand judgment even on my Republican 
colleagues, many of whom that have cast dye on some of the Members of 
the Democratic aisle of saying who is with the troops or who is not 
with the troops.
  I just want to say that fact, not fiction, always prevails in history 
and also in the future.
  We want to make sure, in the Republican budget, that we point out the 
fact that there will be a copayment for veterans. There will be a 
copayment of some $250 for veterans because that is what is in the 
Republican budget package. That is a fact. Their prescription drug 
costs will go up. That is a fact. So, if we want to get all draped up 
and teary-eyed and saying I have a tattoo, saying I support the troops 
more than you do. My car that I got is painted that I support the 
troops. It is not what you say or hear on this floor. It is about how 
you vote and where your dollars are as it relates to respecting the men 
and women that laid down their life, many of whom and those individuals 
that have that will never walk again to allow us to salute one flag 
here today.
  I think it is important, and I take issue with the fact because I 
will not let their memory be dishonored. I take issue with the fact 
that individuals are coming to the floor saying one thing and doing 
another with their vote as it relates to those individuals.
  When our men and women come home, they are going to have issues. They 
are going to have issues because they are not going to be able to deal 
with the effects of the IEDs that are going off, their friends being 
maimed, and still there is no policy as it relates to how we are going 
to deal with the issue of Iraq, how we are going to take the training 
wheels off the Iraqi government.
  The only resolutions that have been put forward to deal with those 
issues are on the Democratic side of the aisle, and because the 
President does not want to talk about it, the Republican majority does 
not want to talk about it.
  What is so frustrating is the fact that we have plans on this side to 
have discourse and dialogue in a bipartisan way so that those 
individuals that are there now in some areas in the Western parts of 
Iraq, eating meals Ready to Eat, okay, MREs, for those individuals and 
those individuals that are talking to their children by long distance, 
saying I am coming home soon and they really cannot answer the question 
because I have a 9-year-old son and I have an 11-year-old daughter.
  I have been to Iraq twice, but you know something, when a Member of

[[Page H4186]]

Congress goes to Iraq we are coming back in two or three days on a 
Federal plane, being served food and drink. We are coming home. We are 
going to land at Andrews Air Force Base, and the air force people, God 
bless them and I love them, they are going to give us a ride back here 
to the Capitol. We are going to get out and we are going to go home, 
not like those individuals who volunteered, not drafted, volunteered to 
serve this country.
  If they agree or not, they deserve a policy on Iraq, not just a 
cheerleading resolution saying, well, we are going to do a lot of wordy 
stuff; then we are going to mail this over to the troops and say we are 
with you. They know that they are with us. There is not a Member of 
this House, there is not a person I have received a phone call from, 
that says I do not support the troops and I do not think you should 
support the troops.
  That is not what this debate is about. The debate should be about how 
we are going to deal with the Iraqi government, how we are going to 
continue to pull coalition forces in.
  Guess what, you would assume under the resolution that passed today 
and with the speeches that the President is giving, that we have 
coalition partners that are running in saying how can we help. There is 
something wrong, Mr. Speaker, when the coalition is getting smaller of 
nations that are involved in this effort with the United States of 
America.
  I think if I start giving a speech, and I am home giving a political 
speech, a campaign speech and folks started leaving the room, that 
means I am saying something that they disagree with, that they do not 
believe in.
  So I think it is important, Mr. Speaker, that we pay very close 
attention and tell my colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle 
that we pay very close attention. This is not a Republican executive 
committee. This is not a Democratic executive committee. This is not 
the Reform Party. This is not the Green Party. This is the U.S. House 
of Representatives, and I want the record to reflect in this time that 
we are making history in all the wrong places. We are allowing foreign 
countries to own a piece of the American apple pie who have never 
owned, at these numbers in the last 4 years, a piece of the American 
apple pie. The Republican majority is allowing it to happen, and it is 
unpatriotic for us to even think about being unpatriotic at a time such 
as this.

  We should be coming together as Republicans and the one Independent 
in this House and Democrats, and figuring out how do we work our way 
out of this. It will take a generation fiscally for us to work 
ourselves out of the deficit that has been put forth here today and has 
been led on by the Republican majority because it has been handed down 
by the Bush White House.
  Now, the President can invite as many Members of the House and the 
Senate to the White House for tea and coffee and cookies, but guess 
what, that is not going to cut it. That is not going to cut it. What is 
going to cut it is a Republican majority saying, you know something, 
enough is enough, let us put politics aside; let us make sure that 
Democrats are a part of a conference committee in a real discussion on 
a strategy of dealing with Iraq, dealing with education, dealing with 
how we are going to treat our veterans when they come home.
  They are going to be at the dining room table with their families, 
and we cannot be stuttering when they get back as it relates to our 
commitment to those individuals that has sand in their teeth and are 
away from their families 12 months, in some cases being extended beyond 
that another 6 months, to say that, oh, well, we had to up on your 
copayment because we promised that we will provide health care to you 
because we want to make sure we guarantee these tax cuts for these 
billionaires.
  Now, I think it is important and I think that we should get 
passionate and we should get emotional about what we should be doing 
versus talking back and forth at one another. We have to see it in 
black and white in the Congressional Record and legislation and 
resolutions that are passed here on this floor that are going to 
benefit those individuals in harm's way.
  If that is going to be the topic of the day, then let it be the topic 
of the day. Let us see resolutions that come to the floor from the 
Democratic side of the aisle about how do we deal with Iraq, with 
Republican input. Let us see if there is some sort of resolution 
outside of a bunch of words saying, well, you know, we feel that the 
war on terror, and you know, the President and people are doing good 
work, and you know, the indicators show what the indicators show.
  That is not policy. That is a speech for someone to go home and say 
you see, I voted for this because it said a lot of good things, but it 
did nothing. To say that we are passing this to send a message, well, 
guess what, that message is not penetrating the reality of this war, 
and it is important that we deal with it in a way that the American 
people and the troops know that we have their back 110 percent or 
reassure Americans that we have their back 110 percent by not shunting 
our policy responsibility. Right now we are punting. The Republican 
majority is punting because the White House does not want to do 
anything. Yet the White House, the White House says we listen to our 
military commanders.
  Can we bring our military commanders out. We have eight generals that 
are retired that have said that they do not agree with how the way 
things are going now, eight of them, eight generals, eight generals 
that are saying they do not know what is happening. They have questions 
on what is happening, eight generals. So many generals are saying I was 
there, these policies are not right, but no one wants to listen. I 
guess they are not patriots now. I guess these generals, they have a 
cowardly way about them because they disagree with the President and 
they disagree with the Republican majority.
  The thing about it is, in America someone should be able to say what 
they want to say, and there should not be any repercussions. I think, 
too, it is fighting in Iraq to try to bring some sort of democracy to 
Iraq. We are so much in the front seat, the Iraqi government cannot 
even get in the front seat because we have a policy that no one can 
figure out on the Republican side.
  So I guess we are not going to figure it out. Forget about what those 
Democrats are saying in the House and Senate, about how can we do it in 
a comprehensive way and pull it together.
  Maybe, Mr. Speaker, other coalition forces and other countries may 
come in and say now how are you going to deal with Iraq and have the 
Iraqi government take over security operations in Iraq, maybe we want 
to be part of it because we do not want to continue to go on with the 
plan of just saying let us just go on.
  I will use this analogy by saying this as I close, Mr. Speaker. To 
pass a resolution without true instruction on how we are going to deal 
with the issue in Iraq is almost like taking a carton of milk out of 
the refrigerator and opening it, saying, oh, it is sour, let me put it 
back in, it will be fresh tomorrow. It may be okay when the issue is a 
carton of milk, but it is not okay when we are dealing with the lives 
of the American troops that are in Iraq and in harm's way at this time.
  It is not the right policy, and it is not the right thing to do when 
we have got kids coming home from school saying is Daddy or Mama home 
yet. It is not the right policy as it relates to those individuals that 
are our generals and our commanders in Iraq that are looking for some 
policy direction from the Congress on what we feel because we are the 
representatives of the American people. It is not the right way to do 
things.
  So I am here to say, Mr. Speaker, we want to talk about what we are 
going to do. We know we have a new direction for America. We know we 
have a security policy on this side of the aisle. We know that we have 
a policy as it relates to innovation. We know that we have a policy as 
it relates to the fact that the minimum wage will be raised. It is not 
a question of we are not. It is going to be raised if we are in the 
majority.
  We have a promise to the American people of sending in a new 
direction on this side of the aisle, that if we get the control of this 
House of Representatives, that we will institute pay-as-we-go policies 
to make sure that we work towards balancing the budget, and you have a 
commitment on this side of the

[[Page H4187]]

aisle, Mr. Speaker, from the Democratic side of the aisle that if we 
become the majority, that this country will be working towards energy 
independence within 10 years, using alternative fuels and passing 
policy that will have motor companies building flex vehicles so that we 
no longer have to be dependent on the Middle East and that we can fund 
and support the Midwest as it relates to corn, as it relates to sugar 
cane, as it relates to other energy-related issues to make E-85 here in 
the United States of America.
  Maybe, just maybe, we will not be having the debate up here and 
resolutions of the House, spending a day and a half with speeches on a 
resolution that was written, handwritten by the Republican majority 
without not one word, not even an ``and,'' ``not,'' a ``but,'' not a 
comma, not a dot, by the Democratic side of the aisle and expect for us 
to come to the floor in a democracy and just say, okay, I will vote for 
it?

                              {time}  1315

  You wrote it, so I will vote for it, even though there was no input. 
My only input is to come in here and press the red or green button. 
Because the way you wrote it is the way you want it. And I think the 
American people are going to stand up against that kind of policy.
  With that, I say for the Members to go on, if they want to get a copy 
of anything we talked about here today, to housedemocrats.gov/
30something, that is housedemocrats.gov/30something. You can get 
everything, every chart that I showed here, Mr. Speaker.
  I would like to thank the Democratic leader for allowing us to have 
this hour, and I want to thank my colleagues in the 30-something 
Working Group for all of their assistance and time that they have 
spent, and I would like to thank the staff. It was an honor addressing 
the House.

                          ____________________