[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 102 (Friday, July 28, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H6023-H6029]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
WAIVING REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT TO
CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the
Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 958 and ask for its
immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 958
Resolved, That the requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII
for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee
on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is
waived with respect to any resolution reported on the
legislative day of July 28, 2006, providing for consideration
or disposition of any of the following measures:
[[Page H6024]]
(1) A conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 2830)
to amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reform the pension
funding rules, and for other purposes.
(2) A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
increase the unified credit against the estate tax to an
exclusion equivalent of $5,000,000, to repeal the sunset
provision for the estate and generation-skipping taxes, and
to extend expiring provisions, and for other purposes.
(3) A bill to provide economic security for all Americans,
and for other purposes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings)
is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate
only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as
I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time
yielded is for the purposes of debate only.
(Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. HASTINGS OF WASHINGTON. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 958 is a
same-day rule waiving clause 6(a) of rule XIII (requiring a two-thirds
vote to consider a rule on the same day it is reported from the Rules
Committee) against certain resolutions reported from the Rules
Committee.
This resolution applies a waiver to any special rule reported on the
legislative day of July 28, 2006, providing for the consideration or
disposition of any of the following measures:
A conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 2830) to amend the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 to reform the pension funding rules, and for other
purposes.
A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the
unified credit against the estate tax to an exclusion equivalent of $5
million, to repeal the sunset provision for the estate and generation-
skipping taxes, and to extend expiring provisions, and for other
purposes.
A bill to provide economic security for all Americans, and for other
purposes.
Mr. Speaker, this is the last week before Congress will recess for
the month of August so that Members can return home and spend their
time meeting and working with those they represent. As such, we will
not be returning to Washington, D.C., to conduct legislative business
until September 6. Currently, there are several pieces of legislation
of vital importance to the American people that are being worked on and
are near completion.
It is imperative that we pass this same-day rule so that the House
can consider these measures before the August recess. Once the House
completes consideration, these measures can be sent to the Senate for
deliberation before it recesses next week.
These important measures include a conference report to accompany the
Pension Protection Act and legislation providing permanent estate tax
relief and extending several important tax provisions in order to allow
workers and families to keep more of their hard-earned money.
Mr. Speaker, the House Committee on Rules may meet later today to
provide rules for the consideration of these measures once they are
completed. House Resolution 958 will help facilitate the timely
consideration of certain measures today.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the same-day rule so
that we can move forward to consideration of additional rules later
today and eventually on the all important must-pass bills for the
American people.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my good friend from
Washington (Mr. Hastings) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. I
yield myself 5\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this martial law rule.
For weeks and weeks and weeks, this House has wasted valuable time. We
have spent short workdays during short workweeks passing meaningless
legislation without doing a thing to actually help the American people.
{time} 1815
Today, the day before the August recess, this Republican leadership
is bringing to the floor legislation that will actually be harmful to
America's working families.
The martial law rule before us, passed last night by the Republicans
in the Rules Committee, makes three bills in order: first, the pension
conference report, which will lead to benefit cuts for millions of
workers; second, a tax cut bill mostly for the rich, including an
estate tax cut that affects only the very wealthiest in the country;
and third, this is my favorite, ``a bill to provide economic security
for all Americans, and for other purposes.'' Okay. Can anybody in this
House tell me what that means? Of course not.
Apparently, the Republican leadership will be presenting a minimum
wage bill that will be loaded down with sweetheart tax deals for the
wealthy and the corporate special interests, the same special interests
that call the shots in the Republican House.
So here we are voting on a rule to bring up bills that appeared
literally just an hour ago which no one has read, 1,200 pages of
legislation, Mr. Speaker, that the Members of this House have not had
an opportunity to review, 1,200 pages.
This is what passes for the legislative process in the House these
days, and it would be laughable if it were not so sad.
The Republican strategy is as apparent as it is cynical. They want to
clutter the minimum wage bill with so many giveaways to the wealthiest
Americans and to corporations that it will never actually become law.
That way, the dozens and dozens of vulnerable Republican incumbents can
claim that they voted to increase the minimum wage, while the corporate
special interests can claim victory for killing it.
Senate tax writes have already rejected, on a bipartisan basis,
proposals that combine the estate tax with a tax extenders package,
which is exactly what the House Republican leadership has put forward
today as an attachment to the minimum wage.
The losers in this mess are hardworking American families who deserve
to make a wage that keeps them out of poverty.
No wonder the American people are so sick and tired of politics as
usual in Washington. For months, years even, a clear bipartisan
majority has existed in the House to support an increase in the minimum
wage with no strings attached. The Republican leadership has been
dragged kicking and screaming to this point. It is an amazing thing to
watch.
I would ask my Republican colleagues, why is it so impossible for you
to do anything good for working families? Why does it cause you such
pain and anguish and hand-wringing?
Congress has not raised the minimum wage since 1997. That is 9 years.
During that same period, Congress has raised its own salary eight
times. Now, that is what I call out of touch.
A Republican House staffer told the Columbus, Ohio, Dispatch, ``Not
too many people work at minimum wage anymore. I don't think it gets you
anywhere politically.''
Mr. Speaker, maybe I missed it and Columbus, Ohio, is on a different
planet these days because nearly 15 million Americans will benefit from
a minimum wage increase, 6.6 million directly and 8.3 million
indirectly. Almost 60 percent of these workers are women; 40 percent
are people of color.
The average corporate CEO, who will benefit, of course, from the
estate tax cut, earns more before lunchtime than a minimum wage worker
earns all year.
Mr. Speaker, I cannot say it more plainly. The priorities of this
Republican leadership are not the priorities of the American people.
What the American people want and what they deserve is a clean up-or-
down vote on increasing the minimum wage, period. They will not be
getting it today.
I am sick and tired of the priorities of this Republican Congress
being determined by who has the fattest checkbook, by who contributes
the most money to their campaigns.
Low-income workers do not have high-priced lobbyists. They do not
contribute huge amounts of money to politicians or political parties,
but these are the people who make this country work, Mr. Speaker. These
are the people who do the hard labor, each and
[[Page H6025]]
every day to keep this country running. They deserve a break. They
deserve a raise. They deserve the ability to provide for their
families.
For once, just once, I urge my Republican colleagues to do the right
thing. Reject this martial law rule.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Gene Green).
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for
yielding to me.
Mr. Speaker, this is Keystone Cops legislation. I fully expect to see
the Marx Brothers, Larry, Curly and Moe, as Members of Congress here
today.
Today, or tonight, we do not know if are going to vote on pension
reform, associated health plans, repealing of the estate tax, tax
extensions, or a minimum wage increase, or any combination or all of
the above. It will be late on Friday night before we vote on any of
these vital issues. Our constituents cannot be fooled by this late
night flim-flam.
We should have an up-and-down vote on a minimum wage increase, not a
vote on minimum wage increase and the estate tax at the same time or
pension reform or whatever else the leadership feels convenient to add
to this bill.
It is hard to hit a moving target, and rather than playing games, we
should remember that there are people in this country who make $5.10 an
hour. This is a real issue that impacts real people.
We have not raised the minimum wage since 1997. When adjusted for
inflation, the minimum wage is the lowest it has been in 50 years. When
it takes a full day's pay to fill up your gas tank, something is wrong.
A minimum wage earner makes only $10,700 a year. This is well below
the poverty threshold for a family of three which is $16,600 a year.
We need to lift these hardworking Americans out of poverty and have a
true vote on the minimum wage.
The estate tax may be part of the package. It is clear that my
Republican colleagues do not really want to pass a minimum wage bill.
The Senate has not been able to muster the 60 votes to pass the estate
tax bill in years. I do not know why we want to create an illusion that
we are passing the minimum wage law when we know that this law is going
to fail in the Senate.
Let us stop playing games with people's lives. Let us have a straight
up-and-down vote on the minimum wage so hardworking Americans can see
who stands with them and who stands against them.
I urge my colleagues to vote against this martial law legislation,
but also against any flim-flam or Larry, Curly and Moe legislation that
they may want to bring up in the middle of the night.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
Mr. Speaker, in the bill that we will be considering later on that
has the minimum wage provisions as my friend from Texas was talking
about, it also has some very important tax, what we call tax extenders
bills, that would otherwise expire.
One of those extenders is something I know is very important to the
citizens of Texas in that it allows sales tax deductibility for those
States that do not have a State income tax. The Speaker pro tempore is
one of those, my State is one of those, and my friend from Texas also
has that.
So I would hope that while we have the minimum wage in the same bill
as the sales tax, it seems to me to be a pretty attractive package.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me just respond to the gentleman. What is frustrating to us here
tonight is the fact that for months and months and months we have been
trying to get a straight up-or-down vote on the minimum wage. We think
it is an absolute disgrace that the minimum wage has not been raised
since 1997, 9 years, and in those 9 years, Congress has given itself
eight pay raises. We think there is something wrong with that, and we
want to see passed and enacted into law an increase in the Federal
minimum wage.
So we want a straight up-or-down vote because we think that is the
best way you can get that.
Instead, what you do, you bring a minimum wage bill to floor to
provide some of your more vulnerable Members cover, and you bring it in
a package that you know probably is not going to go anywhere in the
Senate because the previous combination of the estate tax and the tax
extenders package has not gone anywhere in the Senate.
So this is about cover, political cover, and not about giving
millions and millions of Americans, hardworking Americans who have been
neglected by the Republican Congress for years, the raise that they
deserve.
The minimum wage has not been raised since 1997, and adjusted for
inflation, the current minimum wage is at its lowest level in more than
50 years. Minimum wage earners working 40 hours per week, 52 weeks per
year, make $10,712. That is nearly $6,000 below the poverty line for a
family of three. Thirty-five percent of those workers are their
family's sole wage earners; 61 percent are women; and almost one-third
of those women are raising children.
The average annual cost of family health insurance is more than a
minimum wage worker's income for a whole year, and given the cost of
gasoline, it takes a full day's pay for a minimum wage earner to fill
just one tank of gas.
What we want is not political cover. What we want is to give these
hardworking Americans, millions and millions and millions of Americans,
who constantly get neglected by this Congress, who always get a cold
shoulder when it comes to trying to provide them some help, what we
want to do is give them a raise.
If Members of the House deserve a raise, these low-income wage
earners also deserve a raise.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms.
Jackson-Lee).
(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise
and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished
gentleman for his leadership.
Wars are raging on the borders of Israel and Lebanon; wars are raging
in Iraq; our soldiers are being redeployed not once, not two times and
three times. I met with a young lady just recently. She has relatives
who have been redeployed three times or more. Funds for the war are
increasing, and my good friends on the other side, rather than stay
here and work on the issues of the day, will put forward legislation
that will have no place and go nowhere in the other body.
Frankly, the package that is being put through today under this
martial rule will cost $800 billion. Right now, I filed legislation to
provide humanitarian aid to Lebanon to help those who are noncombatants
get out safely, to find a way to help Americans who are stranded in
Lebanon to get safely home, and we are addressing legislation that
makes no sense.
I voted for a sales tax relief for the State of Texas. I am a Texan,
and I sure believe in helping home and many other States that suffer
under the burden of excessive taxes. But you cannot give an $800
billion tax relief that no one is going to address, in the Senate, in
regular order. It has to pass in the Senate and then the President
signs it. And at the same time, we fail to entertain livable wages for
Americans, a minimum wage increase for Americans, while we, of course,
have increases.
So when you look at this package and you see this, this is going
nowhere. This is to put Members on the line to be embarrassed or to go
home and say why did you vote against the sales tax. I voted for it
many times. I want it to pass, but it is not going to pass this way. It
is going to have to pass in negotiation between the House and the
Senate because Texas does deserve relief, but so do the millions of
those who are not being able to make ends meet.
What about your soldiers that are on food stamps, the very soldiers
who are on the front lines in Iraq? The privates are on food stamps,
and we have got $800 billion in tax relief to the richest of Americans
who do not even need it.
That is what the problem is with this legislation. We waited here all
day. I do not have a problem. We can be here all night. We can be here
until tomorrow. We can pass H.R. 945, the Lebanon Humanitarian Relief,
so we can protect
[[Page H6026]]
those noncombatants who are being bombed and who cannot even defend
themselves. I am not concerned about protecting Hezbollah, but I am
concerned about mothers and children and babies who cannot even get out
because they are on the road and they are being bombed. We need a
corridor that gives us that kind of separation.
But Mr. Speaker, this is no explanation. Let us get an up-or-down
vote on minimum wage. Let us try to address the crisis in the Mideast.
Let us help by getting real pension reform. Let us speak to the
American people. Let us not play jokes here in the Congress of the
United States of America.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Woolsey).
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, as a former welfare mom, I know what it is
like to try to get by on a paycheck that is not enough to make ends
meet.
Today's minimum wage earner is trying to live on a wage that has not
been raised for 9 years. Minimum wage has not been raised in 9 years,
but you can be sure the cost of food has gone up over that period of
time. The cost of health care has skyrocketed. The price of gas is
higher than most people ever imagined it could be. Over 6 million
people are trying to live in the year 2006 earning $1,997.
So what is the Republican majority's solution to solving the problems
for those who do not have enough?
{time} 1830
They want to give more tax cuts to those who have more wealth than
the average American can even imagine. They want to excuse the richest
7,500 families in this country from contributing like they ought to. It
is time we stand up for those who don't have enough. It is time we say
no to those who want too much.
I urge my colleagues to oppose creating an American aristocracy by
repealing the estate tax. Vote ``no'' on this rule until we have a
clean up-or-down vote on the minimum wage.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to state for the record, just so
there is no question as to where the Republican majority is coming
from, let me read to you a quote that appeared in a June 22 story of
the Associated Press entitled ``GOP-Run Senate Kills Minimum Wage.''
This is a quotation from our House Majority Leader.
He says, and I quote, ``I have been in this business for 25 years and
I have never voted for an increase in the minimum wage. I am opposed to
it, and I think a vast majority of our rank and file is opposed to
it.''
That is what the other side thinks about the minimum wage, and that
is why we need to demand an up-or-down vote.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Maryland,
our distinguished whip, Mr. Hoyer.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts. I agree with
what the gentleman has just said. The Republican leadership is opposed
to raising the minimum wage, opposed to lifting 6.6 million people out
of poverty. No Member of the House should harbor any illusions about
what the Republican leadership is doing, therefore.
Today, the Republican leadership is engaging in a political stunt, in
my opinion; a cynical sham, a cruel ploy to undermine a long overdue
increase in the Federal minimum wage, an increase that would benefit
literally millions of American workers and their families. Democrats
have continually fought for a clean up-or-down vote on increasing the
minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour over 2 years, the first
increase in 10 years.
Hear me: Groceries have not been frozen in price. Gasoline hasn't
been frozen in price. Rents haven't been frozen in price. But wages of
minimum-wage workers have been frozen for 10 years, and we continue to
fight today about this.
The fact is, I believe a majority of the Members of this body support
an increase in the minimum wage, even if the Speaker, the Majority
Leader, and the majority of the House Republicans do not. But the will
of the House will be thwarted today if this rule passes.
On June 12, the Appropriations Committee adopted on a bipartisan vote
an amendment to the Labor, Health and Human Services and Education
appropriation bill that would increase the minimum wage by $2.10 per
hour over 2 years. That bill has been languishing unconsidered for the
last 2 months. In response, the Republican leadership has refused to
bring that appropriation bill up for a vote.
On July 13, 64 Republicans joined all Democrats in indicating their
support for an increase in the minimum wage by voting for a Democratic
motion to instruct on the vocational education bill. But instead of
providing for a fair up-and-down vote on the minimum wage, the
Republican leadership today has combined an increase in the hourly rate
with an estate tax cut that will benefit the heirs of the wealthiest
estates in America and drive our Nation hundreds of billions,
approximately $800 billion further into debt.
If nothing else, Mr. Speaker, this bill certainly tells the American
people precisely where the Republican priorities lie. Their priorities
lie with Paris Hilton and other heirs of the super wealthy, not the
hard-working Americans who work 40 hours a week earning a minimum wage
and are living in poverty in the richest Nation on the face of the
earth.
Mr. Speaker, this Republican bill wreaks of cynicism. It is a
political stunt designed to give vulnerable Republicans in tough
elections the opportunity to say they voted to raise the minimum wage,
even though they know this bill is a shell game. We will give with one
hand and take with the other.
The estate tax will not pass. It has not passed. We have already
passed it. We don't need to pass it again. But it is put on this bill
as a poison pill to kill it because the Republican leadership opposes
raising the minimum wage. What a shame.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman
from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I have served here 26 years.
Eight years before that I was in the State legislature. And before
that, I studied legislatures. They are a subject of fascination to me
because I believe deeply in democracy. I have never seen democracy so
degraded in a purportedly legitimate institution as by this bill today.
It is solely intended to allow Members of your party, Mr. Speaker, to
pretend to be for an increase in the minimum wage to get them safely
past an election. There are plenty of ways, if they were really for
increasing the minimum wage, they could join and give us the majority
to do it. But you are allowing them to be dishonest.
This proposal that links the estate tax and the minimum wage in a
bill that you know is not going to pass the Senate is the most
ethically repugnant, intellectually dishonest, morally bankrupt ploy I
have ever seen in a legislative body. For you, Mr. Speaker, and your
party to perpetrate this conscious, deliberate deception, not just on
the American people, but particularly on the poorest and hardest
working among them, is something I would have thought previously even
you would have been ashamed to do.
Apparently, shame has become entirely irrelevant to you and your
party.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I feel a great deal of
respect for my friend that just spoke, and I want to go on record as
saying that I am one of those that is not in favor of raising the
minimum wage. I have never voted for that. And my State, by the way,
has, if not the highest, one of the highest minimum wages in the
country.
But I am going to vote for this bill. And I am going to vote for this
bill not because I embrace the minimum wage, I am going to vote for
this bill because it has the estate tax provision in there. I am going
to vote for this bill because it has the sales tax deduction for
Washington State and other States that don't have sales tax
deductibility. And my expectation is, my expectation is that the other
body will vote accordingly and pass the bill, therefore, we will have
the minimum wage increase that my friend from Massachusetts talked
about.
It seems to me it is the best of all worlds in the give and take of
the legislative process as we near a recess.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield to the gentleman from
Massachusetts.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I thank the gentleman for his honesty.
[[Page H6027]]
He is against the minimum wage, so he is going to vote for this bill. I
would simply point out that I am for the minimum wage so I am going to
vote against this sham.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Well, reclaiming my time, I am glad the
gentleman told me that.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
Mr. DeFAZIO. We are mixing our symbols here. You have heard of
Christmas in July and you heard the gentleman before me. This is truly
Christmas in July for the wealthiest among us, those who have estates
worth more than $10 million, so they won't have to carry a share of the
burden of paying for our country.
But this is really more of an April Fools in July. The calendar lies
to us. Because the Republicans are saying that there is some
equivalence between raising the minimum wage, something in 10 years of
Republican rule that has never been raised, from $5.15 an hour. Three
million kids are dependent upon sole wage earners who earn the minimum
wage, living in abject poverty at $10,000 a year.
Some of them are pumping gas into the limousine of Lee Raymond. Who
is Lee Raymond? He is the guy who just retired from ExxonMobil with a
$400 million pension extorted from the American people by gouging at
the gas pump. Guess how much this bill would be worth to Mr. Raymond's
heirs if he died next year? $128 million. A $128 million tax savings
for one individual in this proposal, which will be financed on the
backs of working Americans for the next 30 years.
Because, guess what, we are running a deficit. So if we are going to
give Mr. Raymond's heirs a $128 million tax break, then we are going to
have to borrow the money to do it. We would borrow $80 billion a year
to give the Paris Hiltons and, yes, the Lee Raymonds, and the others
who have estates worth more than $10 million a bye. And they say that
is a trade-off for after 10 years of delay and disassembling to give a
tiny increase that still won't bring 6 million Americans up to the
poverty level who are earning the minimum wage.
Shame on you for Christmas for the wealthiest among us in July and
shame on you for April Fools on working Americans.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt).
Mr. DELAHUNT. I thank the gentleman for yielding. And as I listened
to my friend from Oregon, I was thinking that we are helping the
wealthiest of Americans by borrowing from China, by borrowing from
China to subsidize that tax cut and further adding to the deficit.
But, Mr. Speaker, by the time I am finished speaking, Exxon will have
made $158,160 in profits, as opposed to 17 cents earned for the 2
minutes worked by the gas station attendant. In the hour allotted to
the debate, Exxon will have made over $4,744,800. And if you are
currently paid the minimum wage, you will have made $5.15. In a 40-hour
week, Exxon will make a staggering $189,792,000 compared to the $206
earned by someone on minimum wage. Of course that is before taxes.
Welcome to Wonderland, Alice.
It has been 10 years since the Federal minimum wage was last
adjusted, the longest period of time in which Congress has refused an
increase. During that time, the price for gas has skyrocketed a
whopping 136 percent, health care costs for working families have
jumped 97 percent, college tuition has ballooned 77 percent, and the
price of bread and milk has risen 25 percent.
Far too many families are struggling to make ends meet, living
paycheck to paycheck and going deeper and deeper into debt. It is not
about paying at the pump any more, now working families are feeling it
in the aisles of the local supermarket or when they visit the
drugstore.
We will not have a straight up-or-down vote on a clean minimum wage
bill to help our working families, many of whom face a bleak future
thanks to the Draconian budget cuts proposed by the administration and
passed by this Congress. Instead, if we want to see the minimum wage
addressed in this session of Congress, we are being forced to approve
tax cuts that benefit the wealthiest among us and the Nation's
corporations. That is just wrong.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on
both sides?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington has 25 minutes
remaining, and the gentleman from Massachusetts has 5\1/4\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to yield 2
minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott).
(Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, a number of Members have come to this
floor and have wondered why there isn't moral outrage. Well, when you
have a President who leads you into war on all kinds of
misrepresentations, when we have now lost 2,500 Americans, and when we
have spent $400 billion with no moral outrage about that, who would
expect there to be moral outrage about the fact that somebody is making
$5.15 an hour in this country?
{time} 1845
Now, we have Members of Congress, of course, who have indexed their
salary to inflation. And this year we are all going to pick up $3,300.
Nobody is going to blink. That is a third of what a minimum-wage worker
makes working all year.
If we had indexed the minimum wage to inflation, they would be making
almost $13 an hour. But, of course, we can't think of doing something
like that. That would be humane to the people that we have kicked off
welfare and all the other things we have done in this society.
We have taken away pensions. We have put companies in bankruptcy. We
have shifted jobs overseas, and the few that are working in this
country, we want them working for as little as possible.
Well, the Republicans found a cure for that. They waited till after
the news had closed for Friday. In the darkness of the night, on a
Friday, they are going to pass a bill that they are going to use for
their press releases on Monday when they get home to their districts: I
voted to raise the minimum wage. I care about the working people of my
district, they will proclaim in loud voices.
But the fact is, they know this bill isn't going to pass. And what is
going to pass, they hope, is the $300 billion for the richest among us,
those poor rich people who can hardly get by. Their hearts are
bleeding, but the Republicans are taking care of it. Don't worry, you
rich folks. They have got you in mind. They don't care what happens to
the poor.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Sherman).
(Mr. SHERMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, this bill is a sham concealing an insult
hiding a hypocrisy. It is a sham legislative process to bring a bill of
thousands of pages, which has yet to be distributed to any of us, for a
midnight vote.
It is an insult to turn to the hardworking people working for $5.15
an hour and tell them that, first, you will get a little bit more, but
it still will be less purchasing power than you had decades ago. But
second, you will get it only if it is tied to relief for those who pay
the estate tax.
You know, people have misnamed the estate tax the death tax. It is
really and literally the millionaire's tax. The tax falls only on those
who are heirs. It reduces the amount they will inherit, and only on
those who are heirs to estates of over $7 million a family.
We Democrats have proposed that we permanently lift the estate tax on
all families on the first $7 million. That would cost about $22 billion
a year.
This bill has provisions virtually abolishing the millionaire's tax
and, therefore, will cost this country, when fully phased in, $66
billion a year.
So a few quarters an hour to those who are earning the minimum wage,
and $44 billion a year to those who are heirs of estates above $7
million a family.
[[Page H6028]]
That would be an insult. But don't worry about it, because it is
shrouded in a hypocrisy. You see, this bill isn't designed to go
anywhere. It is designed to come to the floor, we vote on it at
midnight, then the Senate won't pass it.
If you have voted against raising the minimum wage a dozen times, as
most of the Republicans in this House have, don't think you can get
well by voting for this bill.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I have no more speakers, if
the gentleman is prepared to close.
Mr. McGOVERN. How much time do I have left, Mr. Speaker?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 1\1/4\ minutes.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me urge all my colleagues, both Republican and
Democrat, to oppose this rule. This is a martial law rule. There are
1,200 pages of legislation that nobody has read. This is not the way
this House should be run.
People who are watching this on TV are scratching their heads and
wondering how in the world can Members of Congress vote on legislation
that they have never seen, that they haven't had a chance to read. But
that is exactly what we are being asked to do tonight, and that is
wrong.
What is happening right now is a deliberate attempt to, essentially,
give people cover on the minimum wage, on a bill that will die.
This is not going to be enacted into law. We know that because the
Senate has already made it clear that they are not going to support
this legislation. And so this is political cover for Republicans who
are afraid that they are going to be criticized for not voting for the
minimum wage.
If you want a minimum wage, then vote for it up or down. Don't
clutter it up with tax breaks for millionaires and for special
corporate interests.
The fact of the matter is that it takes a full day's pay for a
minimum-wage earner to fill just one tank of gas. The average CEO earns
821 times more than a minimum-wage worker. The average CEO earns more
before lunchtime than a minimum-wage worker earns all year.
Let's not be cynical. Let's defeat this martial law rule. Let's give
the Members of this House an opportunity to vote on the minimum wage up
or down. That is what the American people deserve. Vote ``no'' on this
martial law rule.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance
of time.
Mr. Speaker, this rule allows for consideration of two very important
bills, bills that have been worked on extremely hard on both sides of
the aisle and on both sides of the rotunda. One of them is the pension
reform bill that has been worked on by the respective committees for 5
or 6 years on a bipartisan basis. The bill that we will take up later
on pension reform is the conference report. But because of the timing
and some logistics, this is the best way to address this issue is to
take the bill up and pass it so that the Senate can act on it next
week.
The other bill is a minimum-wage increase bill. I don't know how many
times this body, in the last several months, has had procedural motions
regarding the minimum wage. So we are going to have a minimum-wage bill
before us later on tonight. And with that bill, with the expectation
that the other body will talk about it and will pass it favorably, will
be something that this body has addressed several times.
The estate tax, or the death tax, has been addressed by this Congress
on two occasions. The first occasion was to totally eliminate it. And
it passed this body on a bipartisan basis. The second time was a cap
that we will take up, very similar to what we will take up later on. It
also passed on a bipartisan basis. So the issues that we are taking up
and allowing to take up with this rule aren't new to this body.
So I urge my colleagues to vote for this same-day rule and to vote,
later on, for the rule that will allow consideration of these two
measures that I just talked about. They are important to our
constituents; and the sooner we do it, the better off we will be.
And I must say too, Mr. Speaker, the expectation is that both of
these measures that we will take up later on tonight will be passed by
the other body next week and they will become law. And amongst that is
the minimum-wage increase that my friends on the other side of the
aisle have been talking about.
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. The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. McGOVERN. 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.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 217,
nays 192, not voting 24, as follows:
[Roll No. 418]
YEAS--217
Abercrombie
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boustany
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, Tom
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
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Gutknecht
Hall
Harris
Hart
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hostettler
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Jenkins
Jindal
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
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
Nussle
Osborne
Otter
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Poe
Pombo
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schmidt
Schwarz (MI)
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--192
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
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
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Ford
Frank (MA)
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth
Higgins
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
[[Page H6029]]
Lipinski
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Melancon
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz (PA)
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOT VOTING--24
Baca
Bilirakis
Boehlert
Buyer
Coble
Davis, Jo Ann
Deal (GA)
Evans
Gohmert
Istook
Jones (NC)
Lewis (GA)
Linder
McKinney
Meehan
Meeks (NY)
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Oxley
Payne
Platts
Salazar
Stark
{time} 1929
Messrs. CARDOZA, AL GREEN of Texas and BARROW changed their vote from
``yea'' to ``nay.''
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. NUNES. Mr. Speaker, on the legislative day of Friday, July 28,
2006, I was unavoidably detained and was unable to cast a vote on
rollcall vote No. 418. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea''
on this vote.
=========================== NOTE ===========================
July 28, 2006--On Page H6029 under vote changes Stated for: Mr.
NUNES. Mr. Speaker on the legislative day of Friday, June 28,
2006, I was...
The online version should be corrected to read: Mr. NUNES. Mr.
Speaker on the legislative day of Friday, July 28, 2006, I was...
========================= END NOTE =========================
____________________