[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 17 (Monday, January 29, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H978-H985]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
30-SOMETHING WORKING GROUP
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) is recognized
for 60 minutes.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to address the House
once again. I just have come to the floor on behalf of the 30-something
Working Group. As you know, and as the Members know, we work daily and
weekly on issues that are facing the American people and also to not
only inform Members of Congress but also allow the American people to
get a closer glimpse of what is happening here in the Capitol dome and
what is not happening here under the dome.
I am proud to report that there were a couple of days, we only worked
3 days last week, or 4, to allow the minority party to have their
retreat. During that time, Speaker Pelosi and a number of other
chairmen traveled to Iraq and Afghanistan to visit our troops and also
our commanders in the field.
I can share with you that the trip will be talked about a little
further by the Speaker tomorrow, but it is very, very important because
it is the number one thing that is facing the Nation right now, and
that is war in Iraq and also in Afghanistan.
Last week we spoke or talked here on the floor about the importance
of the President's State of the Union, what was said and what was not
said. There was some level of focus on the fact that Katrina was not
mentioned not one time during the President's State of the Union, with
me being from a hurricane State and representing a district that is
constantly hit by hurricanes and natural disasters, just being one
season away. Katrina, noted as one of the worst natural disasters of
our time and one of the worst responses by this Federal Government, did
not receive even a mention from the President of the United States.
I can say that there are several Members here in Congress that
continue to be concerned about Katrina and the area of housing and
follow-through and preparedness on behalf of our first emergency
responders, or that they have the tools to respond, but making sure
that FEMA has the proper oversight to be able to carry out the tasks
needed in the event of a natural disaster or terrorist attack.
One other thing I think is important to be able to identify is
veterans were not pointed out in this State of the Union. Looking at
Katrina and the State of the Union, we must come to grips with there
are two hard realities. One, if we have a natural disaster or a planned
terrorist attack that takes place in this country, is the Federal
Government ready to respond, especially on behalf of the executive
branch? That question is still left unanswered.
At the same time, when we start looking at issues of veterans,
looking at our troops, our men and women coming home, what will be the
state of affairs on behalf of those veterans?
I am saying all of this to line up the debate that is going to take
place after this week when we pass the continuing resolution that will
be on the floor on Wednesday of this week, of what is going to happen
the following week after that when the President sends his budget to
Congress.
It is important within that budget to embrace some of the values of
the American people and even legislation that we have filed in the
110th Congress and also that was filed in the 109th Congress.
[[Page H979]]
{time} 2145
I think it is important, also, to outline the fact that Americans
continue to disapprove of the direction that the President is heading
in dealing with the troop escalation in Iraq. I will be looking forward
to hearing more about the Speaker's trip not only tomorrow in her press
conference but also when she shares not only with the Democratic Caucus
but with this House of Representatives.
And to see after the State of the Union, the President's polling
numbers drop even to another low. What I understand from some reports,
as low as 30, 28 percent. I know the President is not going to win a
popularity contest, but I think it is important to be able to follow
the will and desire of the American people and on behalf of the
Congress.
Also, I took the opportunity today, Mr. Speaker, before coming to the
floor, to take a look at what congressional leaders are saying, not
just on the Democratic side of the aisle but even on the Republican
side of the aisle, and there is a great debate that is going on. I pull
here the Congressional Daily AM, which pretty much any staffer or
Member of Congress involved in the process here in Washington, D.C.,
can pick it up and find out what is going on throughout the whole week;
and on a number of the issues that are going to face the President,
some of his strongest supporters here in Congress are disagreeing with
him at this point. I think this could only boil down to Members of
Congress using common sense and standing up on behalf of their
constituents, either it be an entire State, if you are a Senator, or
Member of Congress that represents a district. I think it is important
that we exercise those values.
There will be an up-or-down vote on how the Senate feels about the
troop escalation in Iraq; and I believe, reading here, that the
Democratic leader, Mr. Reid, has said that that vote will be taken and
that there will be a number of Republicans that are going to have to
take that vote because there are going to be 21 seats to defend in the
Senate in the 2008 elections.
Now, saying that, Mr. Speaker and Members, this is not about
politics. This is about standing up on behalf of the American people. I
think Senator Webb said it best, Mr. Speaker and Members, that if the
President doesn't want to lead us in the right direction, then we need
to show him the way, something along those lines. And I think it is
important on behalf of the men and women that are in harm's way now and
the fact that we have oversight as the legislative body in this three-
branch government that we exercise our rights in this.
I want to read just a little bit here, continue from page 1 over to
page 2: ``Warner's opposition to sending more troops was a heavy blow
to the White House and administrative officials that hoped that the
former Senate Armed Services chairman, one-time Navy Secretary would
help convince colleagues to support the plan.'' I think it is important
that the Senator and past chairman of that committee stand up on behalf
of the American people in what is right, and I commend that on a
bipartisan basis.
I think the American people and Members here in the House know
exactly where Democrats stand on this issue of making sure that we
bring about the kind of oversight but at the same time not just
standing by and saying, well, the President is Commander in Chief; and
he is making all the decisions.
I see my good friend, Congressman Murphy, is here.
If this was left up to politics, then we would just stand back and
allow the President to continue to do what he is doing, and then we
could have Ground Hog Day all over again, as we had in November,
Democrats continuing to gain power because of the lack of leadership on
behalf of the Republican leadership to stand up to the President of the
United States.
But this is not about politics. This is about protecting the American
people. This is about making sure that their will and desires are
represented here in the people's House, in the U.S. House of
Representatives, and I am pretty sure in the Senate.
And I am hoping that Democrats and Republicans will come together. As
you know, Mr. Speaker and Members, here in the 30-Something Working
Group, we embrace bipartisanship. We encourage bipartisanship. And the
good thing about serving in an elected body is when you are right and
you are on the side of the people, then you will return back to this
body. If you are wrong, I used to play football down at Florida A&M,
and we used to say the blind leading the blind and the two shall fall
in the ditch.
So I think it is important that if we know that the American people
are looking for a new direction versus the same direction that the
President was taking in the 109th and 108th Congress, the wrong
direction as it relates to Iraq, then that is a decision that every
Member of Congress has to make.
Mr. Murphy, I am so happy that you are able to join us right now. I
was just talking a little bit about what we finished off on last week.
I talked about the fact that the Speaker was in theater, two theaters,
in Iraq and also in Afghanistan. She just returned. She will be having
a press conference tomorrow to talk about that a little more. The fact
that on Wednesday we will be debating the continuing resolution and
will be here on the floor. We will have a follow-up.
The President's budget will be handed down, I think, February 5, and
some of the things which were not mentioned in the State of the Union,
Hurricane Katrina and the victims of Hurricane Katrina and those Gulf
States and also veterans that were left out of the State of the Union
speech, which is going to be the next major wave that this country is
going to be facing. How we are going to deal with the influx of new
veterans coming into the system? And you pretty much heard the rest
when you joined us.
But, welcome, and I yield to you.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Thank you for yielding, Mr. Meek.
You talked about our commitment, failed commitment, over the past
several years of Republican rule in this House to our veterans, and I
think of what message we send, Mr. Speaker and Members, to the young
men and women who are coming back to this country who have fought for
us in a war that they are beginning to understand, I think, has been so
badly mismanaged and a war in which this Congress has so miserably
overseen for the past 3, 4 years. But I also think about what message
it sends to prospective young men and women who may want to join our
Armed Forces, because we are so lucky in this country to have an all-
volunteer military, and it is a blessing for each and every one of us
who lives under this blanket of freedom that our volunteer military
provides.
The message that we are sending them today, Mr. Meek and Mr. Speaker,
is that, one, when we send them into battle, we are not going to do it
in a way that protects them with the armor and equipment that they
need, that we are not prepared to send them into a conflict that we
have planned for in advance for success.
But, even given all that, that when they come back to this country,
unconscionably, we are not going to make sure that they have the health
care that they need, that they won't wait in lines for procedures that
they need, that they won't have to pay exorbitant amounts of money out
of pocket for the drugs that they need to treat the injuries that they
suffered on behalf of this Nation.
So for me, Mr. Speaker and Members, the issue of veterans really ties
it all together for us because it talks about the values that we have
as a Nation to those who have served. It talks about the misguided
policies of this administration and the peril that we have put these
young men and women in.
As 30-Somethings that get to stand here and as a very new member of
this group, we all have friends and cousins and brothers and sisters
who are fighting there, and we hear the stories firsthand from our
generation or those just a few years younger than us as they come back,
and the stories only get worse. We give credit to those who served, and
we should give them the benefit of their service when they return here.
And I think you are very right, Mr. Meek, to point out that that was
a very noticeable absence from the President's speech, to give credit
to them not just in words, not just in Veterans Day and Memorial Day
ceremonies, but in the acts and in the funding that this
[[Page H980]]
body is charged to provide for those men and women both when they are
abroad serving for this country and here at home. And having watched
the 30-Somethings do work on this floor, I know what great advocates
you have been for those men and women who have served for us, Mr. Meek.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Murphy, I can tell you right now that a
number of those issues that we have been talking about over the last
couple of 30-Something hours that we have had here on the floor, and we
thank the Democratic leadership for allowing us to have this, this is a
very pivotal time. And I always share with the Members, even though we
come to the capital, Mr. Speaker, from our districts on a weekly basis,
work together here on this highly secured complex, the sun rises and
sets every day in this beautiful capital city as we look over the
capital Mall, and sometimes we take the very freedom that others have
provided for granted and the opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to lead.
I think when historians start to look at this time when there are two
wars going on, when you have millions of Americans without health care,
when you have Gulf States that are there that feel that they have been
forgotten, when you have veterans in the heartland of America and urban
America still sharing some of the same wounds of a lack of leadership
on behalf of the Congress, when you have veterans that are waiting 3
months to see the ophthalmologist, and when you have veterans clinics,
VA hospitals and clinics, some clinics that are only open twice a month
with a staff that rotates between that region that serves those
veterans, people will look back and say, what happened in the 109th
Congress or what happened in 110th Congress? Who stood up? Who stood up
on behalf of the American people?
I have a great deal of respect for the President and the Commander in
Chief, because he is the President and Commander in Chief, period. That
is where it is. I am an American. I am not an enlisted man, but I am a
Member of Congress, and I feel that the office deserves the respect.
I also believe that the American people deserve, Mr. Murphy, the same
level of respect or greater. And the great thing about our democracy,
like I said, we celebrate the very freedom that others have provided
us. Some of those paid the ultimate sacrifice for that to happen. Some
are sitting in wheelchairs right now. Some are forever mentally wounded
or injured by the whole experience in providing the kind of freedom
that they provided for us. Some of us take for granted that we have
veterans, some that are going into VA hospitals that are sitting there
practically all day for mental health counseling. Some are not
eligible. Some are still fighting for full benefits. And over the
years, I know of some of my constituents all the way from the Korean
War who are still fighting for full benefits to be granted by the
Veterans Administration, seeing these individuals in the state that
they are in now, under years of a Congress that has not paid attention.
And just a little history lesson here, I will just share with you,
the chairman, I believe, in the 109th, the 108th Congress, the
Republican chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee went against the
Republican leadership saying, I believe this is what we should do on
behalf of the veterans. I believe that they deserve it. And he was
removed as chairman of that committee.
Those days are gone now. We are in control. We are going to stand up
on their behalf.
I am just saying I don't want to point out the fact that the
President did not mention anything about veterans, just that it is a
bad thing. It is a bad thing. I think he should have mentioned it,
especially at a time of war. But I want to make sure those veterans
know, Mr. Speaker, that we are not going to leave them behind, that we
are not going to let their memory kind of fade off, their contributions
fade off into the sunset because the President did not prioritize
enough to even put two words together to thank our veterans, or just
``veterans,'' period, just one word. Because he left that out of his
speech doesn't necessarily mean that this House of Representatives is
going to leave those veterans behind. So that is the reason why we
mentioned it. That is the reason why we raise up the Katrina victims
and those families that are still living through the nightmare.
And, Mr. Murphy, we are not even focusing on the whole family
experience. I mean, think of those families of veterans that are out
there. And the reason why I am mentioning the whole mental piece is
because, when I traveled to Iraq, I can tell you I used to be a State
trooper. I have seen some things in my 5 years being with the Florida
Highway Patrol. I am pretty sure in one tour in Iraq, a young man or
young woman or a middle-aged gentleman or what have you, when you see
that kind of activity, it is going to affect you. You are going to need
the kind of the assistance that this country should provide because you
volunteered, taking your words, to fight on behalf of this country. So
it is very, very important.
And those families that are having to live with those family members
that are trying to wrestle with those issues, some of those issues
don't make the local news, but they live it. Children are subjected to
it, and many of our veterans need counseling when they come back.
{time} 2200
And that is one of the hidden issues that is in this whole issue as
we start talking about not leaving our veterans behind. We have plans
to do that. We started this discussion just talking about the
President's budget, about making sure that this is reflected in the
President's budget.
Before I yield back to you in like 30 seconds, the President is going
to go to Illinois tomorrow, and he is going to be in New York after
that, visiting, pushing his economic plan. I can tell you right now, I
wish I had an envelope, but I remember Johnnie Carson used to hold an
envelope to his head and say a word, and I would say make tax breaks
permanent for the superwealthy.
You know, I am pretty sure that is somewhere in that envelope. Even
though we are going to go around, we are going to go to Caterpillar in
Illinois and talk about trade and how the economy works, and then he is
going to go over to New York and talk a little bit about the economy
and how strong, this, that and the other. But in the end game, it is
going to be about protecting the very individuals that have been
rewarded and protected at a time of war, to make it permanent, so that
the middle class will not have the benefits that they need.
So we highlight these things as a forecast of saying that there is
some room for the American people, everyday Joe and Sue, and those
individuals that are punching in and punching out every day, for those
individuals that are trying to make it to the next level that there is
something there to assist them.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Meek was right on. The
new class that was sent here to Washington was sent here to make sure
that this place is returned to that hardworking family that you are
talking about.
You know, we know the statistics, the terrible statistics of the
number of military families that are on food stamps, the number of
military families, ex-military families that have to come to the
government for some assistance just to get by every day. I mean, these
are amongst the legions of families across this country that are
scraping to get by every day.
We have a growing economy. You know the story, Mr. Meek. We have a
growing economy. Production is up. GDP is up. And wages are flat. Wages
for regular, ordinary Americans are going nowhere while wages for CEOs
and the folks at the very top of that economic scale are doing very
well.
And none of us begrudge folks that have done well in business making
a dollar. I mean, that is the genius of our American economy. But what
it does is it leaves all of those people behind while a very few at the
top are well off.
Here is where we come in, I think. I think we come in in that our
job, not necessarily to completely level that playing field, but our
job certainly is not to exacerbate the differences that already exist.
And when President Bush goes to Illinois, if he spends a little time
moving away from the motorcade and the Secret Service lines, he will
find a society there in which there are deep divisions between those
folks in the middle that are just trying to cling on to that middle
class, and the folks that are doing very well.
[[Page H981]]
Our job, you know frankly, is to not make that situation worse. And
the tax breaks that this previous Congress gave away to a lot of those
oil companies, to the deals that they cut with the drug companies to
give them record profits off this health care system, have left a lot
of people behind, have left millions of hardworking Americans
struggling, producing more, working harder than ever, and not seeing a
return for their dollar.
You know the costs of this war. I have heard you talk about it on
this floor. But we are spending $8 billion a month in Iraq right now.
And we need to start having a conversation about how we spend that
money here in the United States of America, and how we use that money
to retrain workers that have been laid off due to the globalization of
our economy.
We need to talk about how to spend that money to get kids an
education that they deserve, to get them out of school in 4 years,
rather than what is all too often happening, that it takes 6, 8, 10
years for some students to get degrees. That is where we need to be
investing.
That is the right thing for our economy. That is the right thing for
our kids. And ultimately it is the right thing for our men and women
that are fighting overseas. So I appreciate the focus that we are going
to hopefully be able to add to the President's visit, to make sure that
when he goes out there into the world that he sees all of America, that
he does not just see the folks that have been the beneficiaries of the
largesse of government in this Congress for all too long, the oil
companies, the drug companies, the Fortune 500s, that he sees the rest
of the folks that are struggling.
Now, he is going to get an opportunity, as you know, Mr. Speaker and
Members, to do right by those folks, because hopefully we are going to
get to his desk an increase in the minimum wage, we are going to get to
his desk a decrease in the student loan rate. We are going to put on
his desk for his signature a repeal of those massive tax breaks to the
oil companies.
He is going to have a choice then, and I hope he listens to what
happened on election day. I hope he listens to the legions of folks who
sent us here, some of us for the first time and others back for another
tour of duty in this Chamber. I hope that he listens to the folks that
are asking this government to start sticking up for people that have
had very little voice, very little voice except for some people
standing here late at night trying to shed light on what has been
really happening in this country, Mr. Meek.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Murphy, that is an outstanding segue to even
talk about what has passed this floor already. You mentioned many of
those measures. Eighty percent of the American people, overwhelmingly,
Mr. Speaker, feel that the first 100 hours here in the U.S. House of
Representatives have been very fruitful and have put forth a great
surge of support and hope on behalf of everyday working Americans.
Speaking of the minimum wage, I understand that it is up for
consideration in the Senate next week, hopefully next Tuesday. I know
there are some discussions an $8 billion possible cost for tax breaks
for businesses within that. I know that there will be some sort of
discussion between the finance Chair in the Senate and Mr. Rangel over
here in the House, Mr. Speaker, from Ways and Means.
We are going to continue to have hearings on the economy. We are
going to talk about globalization tomorrow in the committee, I believe
at 10 a.m., over in the Longworth Building. We are going to the effects
of it, how does it deal with the American worker, how do we benefit
here. And that is going to be a great discussion for us to continue to
have, especially with the President moving around and speaking to
different groups about trade.
I think it is also important as we start to look at this issue of the
minimum wage that we keep at the forefront. So I want to make sure that
the Members stay engaged; I want to make sure that the American people
stay engaged and informed on what is happening.
I think another issue that is coming up and I mentioned it a little
earlier, on Wednesday, we are going to be dealing with the continuing
resolution. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, some of the things that were
mentioned in the State of the Union, it is interesting what we have
already incorporated into the House.
Democrats led the way in making sure that we adopt pay-as-we-go
rules. Democrats led the way by saying that there will be no earmarks
in this continuing resolution that will come to the floor on Wednesday.
And we talk about earmarks. And we are bringing about earmark reform.
But earmarks in some areas, especially when you look at the bad
situation that the country is in right now, this does not go away. I
mean, we are continuing to hold this chart up. I just want to make sure
that the American people and Members understand that we had very little
to do with the situation of the $1.05 trillion that has been borrowed
from foreign nations, and more than has been borrowed over 224 years
with 42 Presidents and a number of Congresses in between, of $1.01
trillion.
We did not just get there. We got there by giving unaffordable tax
breaks that we could not afford to the superwealthy, giving away tax
breaks to individuals who did not ask for it. So that just does not go
away.
There is a lot of work between making sure that we are able to do
what this Democratic Congress has done in balancing the budget and
taking us into surpluses versus what the Republican Congress has done
in taking us backwards.
Mr. Speaker and Mr. Murphy, we are joined by my good friend from Ohio
(Mr. Ryan). Mr. Ryan, we have been talking about a number of issues
surrounding not only the Speaker's visit to Iraq and Afghanistan with
some other Democratic leaders and also chairmen, but also talking about
the issue of the veterans not being mentioned in the State of the
Union, nor the Gulf States. But we said we are not going to leave them
behind. So we gave an update on the minimum wage. We are happy to hear
from you, sir.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I had an interesting weekend, and I am
glad to be with you and our new friend from Connecticut. I had a very
interesting weekend because everyone in Niles, Ohio, in the Mahoney
Valley, was talking about the first 100 hours. So I found it very
interesting that so many people were actually paying attention to what
was going on here.
I think a lot of it had to do with Speaker Pelosi and the first woman
Speaker being here. But there was a genuine excitement that things had
changed in Washington, D.C. and I am sure you felt it in Miami. I know
you were there. I talked to you last night. You were there. And I am
sure they felt it up in New England.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. You gave a couple of speeches over the weekend.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I did, yeah. I actually spoke at the Akron Press
Club, which I felt was very important. And then I spoke at Our Lady of
Mt. Carmel grade school, my old Catholic grade school. And we had a
little alumni affair there.
It was interesting, because there were so many people talking about
what had happened down here, the historic nature of the changes. And
when you look and you think about all of the political promises that we
have probably all heard in our careers at one point or another about,
we are going to do this, we are going to do that, and you hear people
say that.
But for Speaker Pelosi and the majority here to lead and run
campaigns all over the country and make those assertions and make these
promises and then to come within the first 100 legislative hours and
actually deliver on these issues is impressive. And I think it tries to
restore some of that credibility that has been lost, I think, over the
past couple of years.
So we immediately stabilized a lot of families. I mean, it is not
implemented yet, but our goal: minimum wage, cut student loan interest
rates in half and help negotiate down the cost of prescription drugs.
And then open up two new sectors of the economy by repealing the
corporate welfare and investing that in alternative energy sources,
which will lead to more research from the private sector, investment by
the private sector, and try to open up this new alternative energy
sector of our economy, and then the stem cell research bill, which will
allow us in the health care industry to open up and do
[[Page H982]]
further research to move the economy forward.
So we are trying to do some compassionate stuff, some progressive
stuff, but at the same time stabilize. It has been interesting. It has
been fun to go back home. Mr. Meek, as you remember the last couple of
years, you would have to go back home, and you are talking to your
constituents, and there is not a whole lot to say.
You know, we were often talking about what we were trying to prevent
from happening, or motions to recommit or amendments we offered for
PAYGO in all of those committees and Charlie Stenholm and Dennis Moore
who offered all of those provisions to try to balance the budget by
implementing PAYGO. Well, we implemented PAYGO from the House side.
I think it is very important that we were able to actually go out and
do that. So I am excited about what is happening here.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I would just say, it is funny
because there was kind of a low bar set. And I at some levels am
pleased that I was not in the same shoes that Mr. Ryan and Mr. Meek
were, that I did not have to go back to my constituency for the last
several years and answer for what has happened here, because the answer
is, not much.
You know, folks out there were struggling with these energy prices
just going through the roof. Health care was becoming harder and harder
to find, good health care at least. People were crying out for work on
immigration. People were trying to get help bringing up their wages to
a liveable wage, and they were not hearing anything. I mean, it was
deafening silence from down here.
So I do not have as much comparative experience as you, Mr. Ryan and
Mr. Meek, do. But walking around the district in Connecticut for the
past several weekends it has been euphoric. And I used that word the
last time I was down here with you.
It is really this sort of sense that, oh, my gosh, our government is
working again. Our government is back to work again; and it used to be
that that is what happened. It used to be that there would be a
problem, you would go to your legislator, they would come down here and
they would do something about it.
And people have come to expect inertia. That is what sort of was just
the run of the mill down here in Washington, that you have a problem
and then you have to wait about 5, 10 years, in order to get something
to happen.
I felt the same thing, Mr. Ryan, that people you know, it is too bad
frankly that people have come to be surprised by the fact that there
could be immediate action. Because that is what they should get from
their government, and they are getting it now.
{time} 2215
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. And it is exciting because it is just starting, Mr.
Murphy. It is just starting.
And when you meet with the Speaker and you see the intensity in her
eyes and the focus about this was really just the beginning and we are
not here to say, well, we did our first hundred hours and we are done.
We are going to chalk it up and we are done. This is about continuing
to move forward. We have got to reauthorize No Child Left Behind.
And when you talk to Chairman Miller, who is the Chair of that
committee, you see the look in his eyes about an opportunity to change
the face of education in this country, to finally put some resources
back behind No Child Left Behind to where it actually will work.
And when you look and you see, and I know, you know, Senator Kennedy
is talking about putting money in there to help school districts figure
out how they can possibly extend the school day and extend the school
year so that we can make sure that our kids are on par with kids from
Korea and some of these other countries where they go an extra couple,
3 weeks a year more than us, which equals another year or two over the
course of a 12-year education cycle. These are the kind of things that
we want to implement here.
And if it wasn't for the, and we got into this, too, a lot back home.
You know, a lot of people had an almost unrealistic expectation that we
came in, we can come in now, Mr. Murphy, and Ms. Wasserman Schultz and
wave a magic wand and all of a sudden there is a lot of money here.
Well, we have got a lot of making up to do because of the irresponsible
fiscal inadequacies and inability of the Republicans to actually
balance the budget. So we have got to go up and clean that mess up. We
have got to figure out how to extract ourselves from this morass we are
in in Iraq and then finally make the investments that we want to make.
So we have got a lot going on here, Mr. Meek, and we are very excited
about the proposition that we have in the future. When you look at the
opportunities that we really have in this country, I think they are
great. But it is about focusing on the human capital in the United
States of America, Mr. Murphy, and making sure that we make the kind of
investments into the health care, education in the United states and
the stem cells and the alternative energy are going to put us on a
strong path to move forward.
And I would be happy to yield to my friend from Connecticut.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. I will just key off of an important word
there and that is investments. You know, how you balance the budget
into the future is to make sure that you are doing the right things now
to make sure that our economy is humming 10 years and 20 years from
now. So when you talk about this investing in renewable and alternative
energy sources, I mean, that is going to be our export. That is going
to be what America can renew its economy around, is our ability to be
the producer of all these new energy technologies.
When you talk about investing in education, making sure that kids are
educated so that America, which right now grows as an economy because
we have the best-trained, best-educated work force in the country,
continues to be that beacon of economic development due to our work
force. Those are the type of investments that have been long cast aside
but now we are going to start making again so that we make sure that
you know when we are long gone from here that we have left an economy
and we have left a budget that makes sense.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Will the gentleman yield?
It was interesting, because one of our friends from the other side
gave a 5-minute speech about the values of free trade. I think pretty
much everything he said I agree with, and I voted against almost
probably every trade agreement that has come before this Congress since
I have been here. And I agreed with everything he said. We are trading.
It creates value. It invests in our countries. We all understand all
that.
The problem is that we are not making the investments into the United
States that will help us grow new sectors of the economy that will
replenish the jobs that we may be losing.
Now, people in Youngstown, Ohio, obviously, don't like to lose their
jobs. But if there was a job there that they could get trained and go
into and make the same kind of living and have the same stability for
their family and provide for education and health care for their own
family, they would be fine with it. So you can't have free trade and
then not invest in the stem cell research. You can't have free trade
and then not invest in the alternative energy research to help
stimulate the economy and create new sectors that will ultimately yield
employment for our folks in our communities.
Be happy to yield to Madam Chair of the Legislative Appropriations
Subcommittee.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Thank you to my good friend from Youngstown,
Ohio.
You know, your comments sort of bring to mind that our good friends
on the other side of the aisle want to have their cake and eat it, too.
They were the ones responsible for putting us in this situation where
we have to adopt a continuing resolution that is essentially
continuation funding that in order to put a finger in the dike and make
sure that things don't get any worse and that we can begin the process
for the 2008 budget and getting our fiscal house in order. It was them
that only were able to pass two out of all of the spending bills that
were in their hopper. It was them that left us this mess.
And now, you know, you will see over the next couple of days, Mr.
Murphy, our good friends on the other side of
[[Page H983]]
the aisle actually stand up and criticize their own budget, which is
what the CR is. They will try to put our colleagues on our side of the
aisle who were just elected, who, you know, campaigned against fiscal
irresponsibility in a box and make it seem like somehow this continuing
resolution is what we crafted when we are in a situation where it is
shut down the government or pass the simplest, most effective way of
getting us across the finish line so that we can move on and really
address the concerns that we talked about during our 30-Something hours
in the 109th Congress, which was that we are in the worst financial
shape that we have been in in decades, that we have a foreign debt that
is more combined than any of the 42 previous presidents combined.
And yet they will try to have their cake and eat it, too, criticize
us on their budget that we are going to have to continue but, at the
same time, not claim responsibility for it. It is really going to be
shocking.
So it is something that I think it is important that we talk about
and that we lay out there. Because, you know, this process, the
appropriations process is one of the most inside baseball, nitty-
gritty, intricate things that we do, and there are Members that have
been here for years, and I am just, as a new member of the
Appropriations Committee, you know, even though I am chairing a
subcommittee, I still have a significant learning curve. So explaining
it to the people that we represent, while they are watching it all
unfold on TV, is really somewhat difficult. So it is critical that
people understand that.
I actually talked to some of our colleagues on the floor tonight when
we were talking about the CR and, you know, all lamenting that we are
not able to craft a bill that we would all love to support with the
increases that the veterans deserve and the increases that are
deserving in education, that are critical in terms of education and
health care and health and human services and housing. I mean, those
are all programs that Democrats have campaigned on and fought for. But
because we have colleagues that spent like drunken sailors, that had no
regard for the fiscal house that we are now charged with putting back
in order, we find ourselves having to cinch the belt as tight as
possible just so that we can get through and start making things right.
I think each of our colleagues, particularly the freshmen like you,
Mr. Murphy, are going to have an important task of going back to your
constituents and explaining that we have got to be responsible here
first. Give us an opportunity to get through the mess that we were left
and then we can really show you what we can do.
Be happy to yield.
Mr. MURPHY. Just for brief comments, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, I think
you are right. I think the American people, this process may be
mystifying to them at some level, but they didn't send us here to just
bring back the world. They understood that things needed to be put in
order. They understood that there were going to have to be some
difficult decisions made here; and, quite frankly, I think they
realized that a lot of the decisions that were being made here over the
past 12 years, in particular over the last few years, unfortunately,
when this government decided to give, they were giving to the wrong
people. And, in fact, they found the means to give out some favors, to
give out some money. They just happened to be giving it to the people
that didn't need anything more.
So we can start making those different decisions. But, before we do
that, it is going to take a little while to sweep up the shop room
floor. And that is what we are doing now.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Will the gentleman yield?
What I think is an important point here is that we could have come in
and not passed the pay as you go. We could have done the irresponsible
thing. And everyone says, well, the Democrats are controlled by all
these interest groups. Well, we could have been irresponsible and said
this interest group is going to get this and this one is going to get
that, and we will borrow the money from China, as Mr. Meek had the
chart up, and we would pay everybody back.
I am telling you, Madam Speaker, she is great. We are doing the right
thing. We could have done the easy thing, and we could have paid
everybody back and made increases that were irresponsible because we
would have continued down the charts where we are borrowing the money
from China, paying the interest. They are taking that money, investing
it back in their economy, buying submarines and everything else. But we
did the right thing. So we have got to take the hit now, but the long-
term economic interest of the country is going to be much better off.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. What we talked about night after night here
and what our colleagues and our leadership have all talked about, we
have all been singing off the same song sheet, that we have to make
sure that we handle the Federal budget just like folks struggle in
America to handle their household budget every single day, not to spend
more than you take in.
There are families all across America, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Meek, Mr.
Ryan, that have to make really difficult decisions. Would they like to
go and buy a new wardrobe for their children? Would they like to get
the car completely overhauled? Definitely important and certainly would
improve their quality of life, but they can't make those decisions if
the money is not coming in in order to cover those expenses.
So at a certain point, if you don't stop the bleeding, if you don't
make those fiscally difficult decisions, then it just gets worse.
We could have been, you know, we could have played right into their
hands, which is, I am sure, what they expected us to do, which was what
they always accused us of being tax-and-spend liberals and that we were
going to just give away the store and that we were going to satisfy
every interest group that is in the column of supporters that we have.
But, instead, what we did is we stuck to our principles. We stuck to
what we talked about was important to the American people, not spending
more than you take in and particularly not caving to what would be
politically expedient, which was the tax cuts, as you referred to, Mr.
Murphy, for people who don't need them.
Because what they like to conveniently leave out is that they only
count, you know, there are only certain things that they count in the
ledger. They only count the things in the ledger that are actually
things you can put down as I spent this much money on this particular
program. But they fail to actually account for the tax cuts that pull
money out off the ledger, which makes it so that there is not that
revenue available to fund the needs, and that adds to the deficit
itself.
They also don't include Social Security and Medicare when it comes to
the whole appropriation process. All of that is off budget. They don't
like to count the supplemental bills that they pass. All of that is off
budget.
So it is just, you know, we are going to get back to being up front
and honest with the American people in our budgeting process, and we
are going to get our fiscal house in order.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. And if we get an opportunity as we go through the
oversight of the war, oversight of FEMA contracts, there are millions
and millions and millions, if not billions, of dollars that have been
wasted through the war, the contracting, the Halliburtons. You know,
story after story we hear off the record, that is all going to come out
through the hearings. You know, if Halliburton has a truck and the tire
goes out, they just get rid of the truck and they buy a whole new one.
Well, that is at the taxpayers' expense. And there are stories after
stories after stories of these kinds of things happening.
So part of what we are doing is we are making the tough decisions
today, the responsible decisions today, get into the oversight, find
out where the waste is; and I really hope that we continue to push Mr.
Tanner and Mr. Cardoza's bill that says we audit the whole government,
because this government is clearly incapable of functioning in the 21st
century economy.
If we are going to have the resources that we need, Mr. Meek, to
invest in education, to invest in the health care, to invest into those
things that are important, that are going to yield benefits, business
incubators and research and development and stem cells like we
[[Page H984]]
did with the corporate welfare to repeal some of that, that was easier
to do than getting to the nuts and bolts execution of government, but
it is going to be a lot of hard work over the next few years to figure
out where we are wasting money, what programs aren't working.
Now we may have and be in agreement that the principle of a program
is what we all agree on, end poverty, provide health care for kids,
whatever the case may be. But the actual execution of that program may
not be yielding the kind of results that we want or at the level we
want.
There is still too much poverty. There are still too many kids out
there that don't have health care. There are still too many kids that
qualify for S-CHIP that aren't signed up for it. So, you know, over the
course of the next year or two, as we go through the oversight
hearings, we are going to be able to determine what programs work,
which don't and which ones we need to fix. That is difficult to do.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. We are going to be the Congress.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. We are going to be the Congress. That is right. We
are going to be the Congress.
{time} 2230
And, you know, it is not government is the problem, government is
wrong, government is your enemy; it is going to be, wait a minute. This
is something that is supposed to work and we are going to make it work.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I see Mr. Meek is ready to jump in here. But
we are going to be the Congress and exercise our role, our
accountability, our oversight, and be the legislative branch instead of
the administration lap dog. Because that is what this body was for the
last 6 years certainly. When President Clinton was in office, it was
the opposite. It was, let's see what we can do to torture the
administration and make it impossible for them to get what they wanted
done and wanted to accomplish.
Then, of course, President Bush comes into office and it is like they
all lost their hands. They lost their hands, they checked their brains
at the Chamber door, and it was whatever this administration wanted.
And there is a new leadership in this institution and 32 new Members,
all of whom came here to step up to the plate and ask the difficult
questions and exercise this body's constitutional role, constitutional
authority granted to us by the Founding Fathers, which hopefully at
some point our colleagues on the other side of the aisle will remember
as well.
I would be happy to yield to the gentleman.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Ms. Wasserman Schultz, I think it is important,
and Mr. Murphy and Mr. Ryan, that everybody understand the reason we
are here. We are going to play the legislative role. We talked about
the lights being turned on in some of these committee rooms. And I was
sitting here kind of looking through a few things, and I grabbed this
February 5 edition of Time magazine, and it talked about, Madam
Speaker, this upcoming Time I just received it in the mail, only 648
days until the election, why so many candidates are jumping in so
early. And it talks about this being the most open Presidential race
since 1928.
There is some interesting comments in here and obviously editorials,
but I think that you see so many people getting involved because they
see a vacuum here, a vacuum of the fact that things are not happening
the way that it should happen. And Ms. Wasserman Schultz alluded to the
fact that, being lap dogs, we sometimes say here on the 30-something
Working Group rubber-stamp Congress, what have you, of the 109th
Congress. We don't want to be that.
I ran into one of my Republican colleagues in the tunnel walking from
the Cannon building over to the House today for a vote and I asked how
is a certain piece of legislation. And she responded, well, you know, I
have a post office bill. I am not going to belittle, I have done a post
office bill before; it is good to identify outstanding Americans. But I
just want to make sure that people understand, even here we have what
we call suspension bills. Those are bills that we all agree on but it
has to be passed by the Congress, Madam Speaker.
But what is happening now that has not been happening, I go back to,
I alluded to this earlier, reading is fundamental. We know that some
people here in Washington, D.C. don't bother to read newspapers, things
of that nature; but we will leave that for another day. Congress Daily
A.M., National Journal. And I just want to read what is going to happen
tomorrow; today is Monday, what is going to happen on Tuesday. I can
tell you, usually this would not be printed in this Congressional Daily
Weekly because committees didn't meet. The Foreign Affairs Committee
only had one hearing on Iraq in the 109th Congress; thus far, Mr.
Lantos has had five hearings, and we are not even past the first month
of the new Congress. This is still January.
Let's see what is happening tomorrow. Armed Services Committee is
going to have a hearing on Afghanistan security and stability. Armed
Services is going to also have a subcommittee hearing on military
personnel. The Budget Committee will meet on the economic outlook of
the country in full committee hearing. Education and Labor on generic
discrimination of workers. That is happening. That is a subcommittee
hearing that is taking place. Energy and Commerce will also have a
hearing on the National Laboratory Security, Oversight and
Investigation Subcommittee. Oversight Government Affairs and Reform
Committee is going to have a climate change politics hearing; that is a
full committee hearing. Science and Technology, Fuels, Infrastructures,
Research and Development. That is a subcommittee on Energy.
Transportation and Infrastructure, Coast Guard deepwater system, going
to have a subcommittee. That is the Coast Guard and Maritime
Subcommittee hearing that will take place. Transportation
Infrastructure, Railroads, Pipelines, Hazardous Materials, that is a
subcommittee hearing that is going to take place. Ways and Means, trade
and globalization at 10:00 tomorrow, full committee hearing. Ways and
Means once again, subcommittee will be meeting.
I just wanted to point that out, Madam Speaker. If we were in the
109th Congress and the 108th Congress, we wouldn't even be here right
now, Monday. We wouldn't even be here on a Monday. People are paying
our salary to legislate and to bring about the kind of oversight.
I just want to point that out, because Mr. Ryan spoke a little
earlier of the fact that we are actually doing, Ms. Wasserman Schultz,
what we told the American people we would do, Mr. Murphy, and that is
lead. Six in 2006. Oh, it is a big dog and pony. It is not. We are
giving the American people exactly what we told them we would do, which
is accountability. And that is a paradigm shift for politicians here in
Washington, D.C. I yield to Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Thank you, and it is. The other day I walked
into the Chamber, Mr. Murphy, from that end of the room, and I noticed
that there is a really huge, huge dictionary on the Republican's side
of the Chamber which, quite honestly, it doesn't appear has gotten that
much use on their side of the aisle, because words like accountability
and oversight and checks and balances, and the things that have been
with us through American history, maybe they tore the pages out that
had those definitions or maybe they just chose to ignore them or just
skipped over those pages when they were using it because, obviously we
have a dictionary on the floor for a reason, but now, Mr. Meek, just in
great detail went over the number of different hearings that we will be
engaging in to exercise the oversight and the accountability that the
American people badly are seeking that has just been nonexistent.
And, Mr. Meek, I want to touch just quickly on one particular bit of
oversight that we are going to be engaging in on Wednesday. I have the
privilege of sitting on the House Judiciary Committee, and we will be
holding our first hearing of the 110th Congress on Presidential signing
statements. Now, that is something that we really haven't had a chance
to talk about too much on the floor during 30-something, but I would
like to explore it down the road a little bit, especially after we hold
this hearing.
Most of the American people, I think, don't realize that what this
President
[[Page H985]]
has done, and other Presidents, many Presidents have exercised this
option, the constitutionality of which I think is somewhat troubling.
But this President has used Presidential signing statements more than
any other Presidents combined. He has added more than 700 signing
statements to legislation that we have adopted in both Houses of
Congress. And what he does is he adds a note essentially to the bottom
of the bill or to the margin of the bill next to a section that he
doesn't agree with and he says: ``I either reserve the right to not
enforce this section or to interpret this section in this way.'' I
mean, literally taking authority for the executive branch that I
believe the Founding Fathers didn't envision. I mean, he did that with
the PATRIOT Act, he did that with a number of significant pieces of
legislation, Mr. Meek, and it is really, really troubling.
The executive branch in the Constitution does not have the right to
interpret legislation. That is not their job. It is the Judiciary's
responsibility to interpret legislation; it is the administration's job
to execute what is laid before them by the Congress. Now, he certainly
has the right to veto legislation that he doesn't agree with, but he
doesn't have a line item veto; he doesn't have a line item veto in the
budget, and he can't X out a portion of a bill that he doesn't like.
And we are going to be holding a hearing on Wednesday, and we will have
the Department of Justice representatives there to question very
carefully where they think they get this legislative authority, and
reassert Congress's role in oversight in this one area and in many
others, as you detailed.
I guess we are in the wrapping-it-up stage, because that is when the
Web site chart comes out. I will be happy to yield to our good friend
and freshman colleague, the gentleman from Connecticut.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Thank you, Ms. Wasserman Schultz. And the
guilt is deep inside me that I am stealing Mr. Ryan's thunder for twice
in a row here.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. If the gentleman would yield, life is about letting
go.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Moving on.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. You have got to move on. And you are the guy.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. I am glad I can help you with that
cathartic experience.
WWW.speaker.gov/30something is where you can find information on a
lot of things we have talked about here. I am here to work, Ms.
Wasserman Schultz and I know there are about 40 other first termers who
are here to do the same thing.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Actually, not to be the teacher exercising
oversight over the freshman, but probably give out our e-mail address,
too, so people know where they can contact us.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. The e-mail address is 30SomethingDems@
mail.house.gov. So I like nothing more than to be the student in this
relationship, Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. I am with you and the 40-something new Members
of Congress.
Madam Speaker, it was an honor to come before the House once again. I
want to thank the Democratic leadership for allowing us to have the
hour, and we yield back the balance of our time.
____________________