[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 194 (Tuesday, December 18, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H16820-H16826]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
30-SOMETHING WORKING GROUP
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ellison). 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's an honor to be here before the
House once again. And a lot has been done and I'm so glad that we're
here and 30-something, once again, may be our last opportunity in this
year of 2007. We appreciate the courage and the commitment by those of
us that are in the majority. And we talked about a number of things
that we would do and that has actually happened, Mr. Speaker. And a lot
has happened this year, and, Mr. Speaker, I know that your constituents
and others as it relates to Minnesota and what has taken place there
and the tragedies that y'all have dealt with and how this Congress has
responded to that tragedy of the bridge falling, and so many of your
constituents are in recovery as we speak, and being from south Florida,
hurricane ravaged area, we know what recovery means. And it's important
for us to respond in a bipartisan way.
But I can tell you, some of my colleagues that were on the floor just
prior to me hitting the floor talking about earmarks, it's very
interesting. I am, you know, it's one of those days, and I'm glad that
I was able to make it to the floor and that we were able to take this
hour, and we want to thank the majority leader and also the Speaker and
the majority whip and our leadership as it relates to the Democratic
Caucus and our vice Chair for getting here, because to talk about
earmarks, it's very interesting because we've reduced earmarks by 40
percent. I mean, that is something that the Republicans did not do over
a number of years. You wouldn't even know who put an earmark in if it
wasn't for the transparency that the Democratic Congress brought to
this process.
Now, I'm going to tell you right now, I'm very happy that I was
elected to come to Congress and that I'm going to get the opportunity
to go home and tell my constituents what I've done for them in
Congress. That's what it's all about. Why are we here representing 600,
700,000 individuals, Americans? To not only represent them here in
Congress, but to also, quote, unquote, bring home the bacon on behalf
of your constituency, to make sure that they have what they need, to
make sure when a county commissioner or someone that sits on a parish
board has an opportunity to come to their Member of Congress and say we
need something from the Federal Government, meanwhile back here in
Washington, DC, we have Republicans that have voted in the last five,
or four Congresses for tax breaks for billionaires. Their name's not
attached to it. We come here, we bring transparency, we bring
accountability. We bring accountability to this process. And then they
come to the floor with the audacity to say, well, you know, oh, these
earmarks. Well, you know, I don't know, but I'm pretty proud of the
fact that the city of Pembroke Park is able to do something about the
water treatment that they've been yearning for, struggling city. I'm
very proud that the city of Miami is able to say thank you Congressman
for representing us in the U.S. Congress.
Meanwhile, the Republicans, for years and years and years, have been
able, Mr. Ryan, to give tax breaks to
[[Page H16821]]
the billionaires and gazillionaires. Here we are bringing government
back to the people and being criticized by the other side of the aisle.
So, Mr. Ryan, there's a lot that we have to talk about. This is a
historic day. We passed energy independence and security act. That's a
historic piece of legislation. And all our colleagues have in the
minority to talk about, earmarks that have been reduced by 40 percent
and have been highlighted by this Congress.
{time} 2130
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
The thing is there's like hundreds of people on the other side of the
aisle who are taking earmarks, who feel like that it's better that they
make the decision for their own district as to where the money should
be spent or some bureaucrat in Washington makes the decision as to
where the money is spent. Somebody's spending the money. Now, it's
either the elected Representative who's going to spend the money or
it's going to be someone here in DC who's going to spend the money and
has no idea of what the dynamics of the district are, what your long-
term economic development plans are, what the health and safety welfare
needs are of your district.
So I think it's best in a democracy for the elected Representative,
who gets to have meetings in their office with different constituents,
as to who will decide where this money is spent.
Now, is the autism center in Youngstown, Ohio, pork? I got three-
hundred-and-some-thousand for that. Is the water line in a poor
community to make sure that we have clean water, is that pork?
I love it when the Members from the western part of the country come
to the House floor and talk about all this government spending. You
know, in California, in Arizona, there are congressional districts that
would not even exist if it wasn't for a Federal investment. There are
congressional districts that they're in a desert. How do you think the
water gets from the Colorado River to your congressional district?
Through osmosis? No. There is Federal investment that is invested in
these different congressional districts, you know, the Colorado River
Basin Project and all of these different projects that bring water to
your district and your constituents.
So I think it is absolutely absurd for people to come to the House
floor, and we've done exactly what we said we were going to do. We made
this process transparent. There's nobody here that thinks you should be
able to hide something. So now when you make an investment or you claim
an earmark, your name goes on it, and it says Rich Center for Autism in
Youngstown, Ohio, at Youngstown State University, Congressman Tim Ryan,
17th District.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Murphy was running for office a year and
some change ago, talking about if he gets to Congress what he would do
for his constituents, that he would provide the kind of representation
that they deserve, turn this saga of Iraq and that other issue of Iraq
back to domestic priorities, bring home the bacon on behalf of the
district and his constituents.
I'm so glad that he's here tonight because we've been here three
times. This is his first time. I'm glad that he's here because I want
to know what's wrong. I mean, I just, Mr. Speaker, I personally want to
know what's wrong with coming to Washington, DC, representing your
constituents, and doing what you said you would do.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Fighting for kids with autism, fighting
for teenage pregnancy programs, fighting for children's mental health,
I mean, that's what's in these earmarks.
Why is the so-called pork spending that I'm bringing back to the
Fifth District? For a children's mental health program in Danbury, for
an after-school program in Torrington, for a teenage pregnancy center
New Britain. You know why? Because the Republican Congress, along with
this President, for the last 6 years and the last 12 years have gutted
every single one of those programs that helps poor kids, helps poor
families, helps the disabled, that helps poor, the disadvantaged, the
dispossessed, all of those programs that are just trying to give people
a little bit of a leg up, trying to give them access to the apparatus
of opportunity that all the rest of us have, were stolen out from
underneath them.
So guess what we're doing with these earmarks. We're going and
funding basic social services to try to treat kids with autism, to try
to cure children of a mental disease and mental disorder that they
have. And we're forced to do that because we have been sitting through
a Congress, and Mr. Ryan and Mr. Meek have been talking about it for
several years, that has made a choice over the last several years, has
made a choice to fund a whole bunch of tax cuts for people at the
upper, upper echelon of the income scale and at the expense of all the
people that we are now putting first again, the folks that are supposed
to be helped by government, that is, middle-class, regular folks who,
through no fault of their own, might have had a little opportunity
stolen from them. We're going to try to help them out again here.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. The issue here is that the earmarks are a very
small percentage of the Federal budget. All of these bills have been
bipartisan. If you look at all of the appropriations bills that have
passed out of the House, there has been a significant number of
Republicans who have joined with the Democrats to make these
investments, especially Members of the Appropriations Committee that
have looked at these issues very carefully to make these investments in
a bipartisan way.
The energy bill, of which our friends on the other side, Mr. Speaker,
have derided us and it's a Democratic this and a Democratic that, 314
votes; 314 votes, which is 70 or 80 Republican Members of this body
have joined with us to try to increase CAFE standards, make investments
in alternative energy, make investments in the middle America and the
Midwest. This is on a bipartisan basis.
So it seems like those folks who come to the floor seem to be on the
fringe level of the party that they're talking about these things. But
I think it's important for us to talk about some of the investments
that we have made here.
There has been a significant shift in priorities. Now, we haven't
come anywhere close to achieving what we have wanted to achieve since
we have taken over. We don't have 60 votes in the Senate, and the
Republicans have done a good job of blocking a lot of our legislation
that we've tried to pass.
The President has vetoed SCHIP, which is the State Children's Health
Insurance Program, that we wanted to provide 10 million middle-class
kids with health care, and the President vetoed it twice. And the
fringe Republicans, many have joined with us. Ray LaHood, Steve
LaTourette, a lot of good Members of Congress have joined with us to
try to override that veto, but the President was able to sustain it.
So we asked to cover health care for 10 million kids, $35 billion
over 5 years. President said we're spending too much money. Turned
around within days and asked for $200 billion more for Iraq that we're
going to borrow from China. And so some of the investments that we're
trying to make, I think it's important for the American people to know
what we have done.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Tell them.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. We've raised the minimum wage for the first time
since 1997. We've cut student loan interest rates in half from 6.8
percent to 3.4 percent, which will save and increase the Pell Grant by
$1,000 over the next 4 or 5 years. We will save the average student or
their parents, whoever's footing the bill, $4,400 over the course of
their loan that they take out. Those are significant investments to the
middle class. We're going to fix the AMT, which would come in and zap
23 or 24 million people.
But I think it's important that we share with the American people,
Mr. Speaker, the investments that we have made here, that are different
than what the President wanted us to do, and we can go through this.
But medical research, $607 million above the President's request.
That's a lot of money, $607 million to research Alzheimer's, cancer,
Parkinson's and diabetes. Now, I think the American people want us to
work together to try to fund some basic research.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, this is one of these moments at the
end
[[Page H16822]]
of the session, I mean we're like days from Christmas. We're still here
in Washington, D.C. We've already started Hanukkah; Kwanzaa's on its
way.
I think it's very, very important for us to point at the fact that
this Congress has worked harder than any other Congress in the history
of the Republic. I mean, I'm not talking about coming in number two or
coming in number three or coming in number four, but we've taken more
rollcall votes in the history of the Republic.
I think it's also very important, and I feel goose bumps by this
whole thing. I pay attention to history. I also pay very close
attention to the present. We're looking at a President right now that
has made more veto threats than he's made in the last 5 years or 4
years, what have you, that he's been President of the United States to
this Democratic Congress. We're looking at the AMT. We're talking about
individuals being able to file their taxes, and we said that we were
going to pay for it. This President is saying that he doesn't want to
pay for it, that he wants to borrow the money. But the bottom line is
that we're going to be here to make sure that we pay for it in the long
run, in the second half of this Congress.
We're not going to allow the President to play this Congress as a
fiddle. This President is talking about, Oh, well, I want Iraq funding
a part of the appropriations bill that's going to pass and all. He has
the veto pen. He also has 40 Republicans here in this Chamber to make
sure that we don't override him on this issue of Iraq. We voted for
appropriations for Afghanistan, and we had a number of Republicans that
voted against it, some 200-plus. I don't feel in any way bad about the
position that we've taken.
I'm so glad Mr. Manatos is on our side. You know, our colleagues who
came to the floor right before our hour. I sent upstairs for this chart
to make sure that we enter this chart into the Record one more time. I
think it's important that we look at the 42 Presidents before this
President were only able to borrow $1.01 trillion. We're talking about
the Great Depression. We're talking about World War I. We're talking
about World War II. We're talking about Korea. We're talking about
Vietnam. We're talking about Grenada; that's new. We're talking about a
number of conflicts that have taken place. We're talking about economic
downturns. We're talking about the S&L scandal. We're talking about a
number of issues that have faced Americans over the years.
This President, President Bush, along with his Republican minority,
thank God, but enough to be able to cause trouble over in the Senate
with this 60-vote phenomena that we've learned about in this 110th
Congress with Republicans saying, Well, you know, we're going to use
procedural rules to be able to hold up what the Democratic Congress
would like to do in this Congress.
This President was able to borrow $1.19 trillion. That number is
higher now. This chart is not updated, but I think it's important for
our Democrats, Independents, Republicans to know that we believe in
fiscal responsibility here on this floor. We believe in the American
way.
We used to talk about our children paying this bill, but now we're
talking about we are paying this bill, countries like China and others.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. MEEK of Florida. So I know Mr. Ryan is trying to get in the
middle of this. He's always trying to get in the middle, and I'm just
trying to make my point. I don't want you to take it personal. I'm just
trying to make my point.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Thank you so very much.
I think it's important, and I kind of feel like a Baptist preacher on
the first Sunday. You want to be able to make your point, and you want
to be able to climax, but Mr. Ryan comes in and gets in the way, but
it's okay. He has a good point. He's a great American.
I think it's important that we look at our responsibility right now
and in the present for being able to stand up for those that have
elected, woke up early one Tuesday for us, voting for representation,
that we give voice to their cause and their need.
I think it's also important, especially as it relates to the
diversity of our caucus, need it be Blue Dogs, need it be moderate,
need it be to the left or whatever the case may be, it represents
America.
I think the reason why Republicans voted for Democrats last time,
Independents voted for Democrats last time, Democrats voted for
Democrats last time is because they're looking for change. We're here
to provide that kind of change, but we start looking at obstructionists
here in Congress using procedural, using the rules of the House, using
the rules of the Senate. The minority is protected in this process,
standing in the schoolhouse door, if I may use that, of allowing us to
stop from the report that we got today, November 13, or yesterday,
November 13, total deaths in Iraq, 3,888; total numbers wounded in
action and returned to duty, 15,832; total numbers wounded in action
and not returning to duty, 12,829.
{time} 2145
We pay attention to those numbers in the 30-something group because
the American people are paying attention to those numbers, and I think
it's very important, Mr. Speaker, that we continue to lift this issue
up.
So as we look at what we are facing right now, Members, there's
nothing wrong with us representing our districts and being able to
bring dollars back because this is something that has not happened over
the years. We have been borrowing the money to be able to continue the
war in Iraq. We have been borrowing the money as it relates to going
after Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. We have been doing the things we
need to do. But I think it's very important, Members, that we tell our
story.
Today a very historic piece of legislation passed this floor when we
look at the Energy Independence and Security Act. And I think we should
not allow this day to pass without talking about the courage of
Democrats and Republicans passing this bill.
I yield to Mr. Altmire.
Mr. ALTMIRE. Before the gentleman gets into the energy bill, Mr.
Speaker, and we do have a lot to talk about because that's an historic
vote that is going to change this country in the long term for the
better, I did want to follow up on what the gentleman talked about
earlier and was finishing his remarks that about the legacy that this
Congress over the past 6 years has left for our children and our
grandchildren, the legacy of debt. And I want to take a little walk
down memory lane, and we have talked about this before, to think about
what happened in the last 4 years of President Clinton's
administration, where we had 4 consecutive years of budget surplus, a
surplus that was forecast as far as the eye can see. In 10 years the
estimated $5.5 trillion surplus, according to CBO, from 2001 through
2010, that was the estimated surplus dollars that we were going to
have. And you will recall back in the 2000 election between Governor
Bush and Vice President Gore, what was the debate? The debate was what
are we going to do with this surplus? We had this enormous surplus,
$5.5 trillion. Are we going to pay down the debt? Are we going to shore
up Social Security? Are we going to do tax cuts? Are we going to create
new programs? Everyone had an idea. You know what? We're not having
that debate anymore because instead of having 10 years of budget
surpluses, we have had 7 consecutive years of budget deficits, and
those deficits are now forecast as far as the eye can see. And to make
matters worse, the 10-year projection from 2001 to 2010 because of this
administration is a $3.5 trillion deficit, $3.5 trillion dollars in the
red. So that's a swing of almost $9 trillion. And I would suggest to my
colleagues if you had said to an economist in 2001 at the beginning of
this administration's first term, if you had said, how could you
possibly come up with the scenario where we would have a $9 trillion
swing from positive to negative in the projection of having a surplus
to a deficit? Is that even possible? And any economist you ask would
say, no, it would be impossible to mismanage the economy to such an
extent over just 7 years that you would have a $9 trillion swing. So I
sat and listened to the group that came before us, a group that
lectured us on fiscal responsibility.
[[Page H16823]]
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Altmire, I think you just hit a point there.
Mr. Ryan, the 30-something Working Group, I can say, gentlemen, that
we do our homework. As we talked about our colleagues on the minority
side criticizing earmarks on the majority side, Mr. Ryan, would you
please share with our illustrious support staff that we have here?
Mr. Speaker, this is the reason why the 30-something group exists, so
that we can, some may say, push back. We say tell the truth.
I yield to Mr. Ryan.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Well, it's interesting that one of the gentlemen,
Mr. Speaker, that was down here complaining about earmarks just minutes
ago prior to our getting down here, and we are not here to play gotcha
but we are here to reveal what has happened here, in this bill loaded
with earmarks, loaded with all this pork, one of the gentlemen down
here, Mr. Speaker, had requested 20 earmarks worth $38 million but
turns around and comes to the House floor and is critical of the Rich
Center for Autism in Youngstown and dam safety projects and after-
school programs and some of the other districts that are here and
calling it pork and in one of the instances was trying to in some way
disparage the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) in his project that
he had that was named after him and the same gentleman is now
supportive of the Thomas Road Improvement Program that is now under way
that his predecessor, Representative Bill Thomas, submitted with his
own name on it for the project but yet comes down and is critical.
So our point is not to play gotcha. Our point is to say that Members
of Congress should be able to direct a certain amount, and it's only a
small percentage of the budget. I don't even know if it's .5 percent of
the entire budget.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Bill Thomas that used to be the chairman of the
Ways and Means Committee.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Right.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. So I think it's important, Mr. Speaker, for us
to note that that's the case.
And, Mr. Ryan, I am going to kick it back to you and Mr. Murphy was
very kind because it was his turn, but I am going to tell you Mr.
Thomas ran the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Altmire, and meanwhile had
something named after him. And for Members on the minority side to come
to the floor and talk about present Members that are bringing home the
resources on behalf of their constituents, I can see if one did not put
in a request.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MEEK of Florida. I will yield, Mr. Ryan.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. We have got more here. The gentleman from
California, the previous gentleman, who just made fun of us for all the
earmarks, had 20 earmarks worth $38 million and is supporting one now
named after the former Chair of the Ways and Means Committee.
Another gentleman down here that was from Michigan got press
releases, and you will love this one, $3 million for an extended cold
weather clothing system through the Army. He was just down here making
fun of everybody, and he's requesting thermal underwear. And it's not
funny because the reason we are here is to make sure that we are
getting this all out. And for Members of Congress to come question the
Rich Center for Autism. And I know Mr. Altmire has a lot of issues. We
have all got issues.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MEEK of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Connecticut.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, the point is to make your
case. If you want money for thermal underwear, come down and make your
case in front of your colleagues. If you want money for autism, make
your case. But the fact is you can't come down here and hold everyone
else on one side of the aisle to a standard that you're not willing to
hold yourselves to. It's a simple request here, Mr. Ryan, to be
consistent. If you're going to be against earmarks, then be against
them. But if you are going to make the case that there's waste and pork
in the bill, sometimes you've got to look inward.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Altmire, I want to thank
you first.
First of all, Mr. Speaker, let me just say this: let me tell you, as
I was walking to the Chamber, I saw that the Speaker's vehicle was
still here in the Capitol. I saw that the majority leader's vehicle was
still here at the Capitol. This is now a little bit before 10 p.m.
within the closing days of Congress. We have worked day in and day out.
We are here away from our families, many of you away from your
families, days before Christmas, to be able to work on behalf of the
American people.
I think it's important for us to understand that we would not even be
having the discussion about who got what if it wasn't for the
transparency that this Democratic Congress brought to this process
first. So for Republicans to come to the floor and start talking about
who got what, it never would have happened, Mr. Murphy, if it wasn't
for what we have done. It never would have happened if it wasn't for
your class and Mr. Altmire's class coming and saying we want
transparency, that we want the American people to see what we are
doing, that we want to take more rollcall votes than any other Congress
in the history of the United States. We want ethics; we want
responsibility; we want fiscal responsibility; we want to make sure
that the Veterans Affairs get more money than they have ever had in
history, the veterans health care system, in the history of the
Republic.
We want accountability as it relates to Iraq, and we want this
President to know that this is not a rubber-stamp Congress. If it was
not for you, Mr. Speaker, including yourself, asking for the kind of
accountability the American people have been calling for, that have
been yearning for, voting for and they finally got it, for the minority
party to come to the floor and start criticizing things, where they
make over 20-plus earmarks, to come to the floor and criticize, that's
why I'm so glad, Tom and Tasha and Michael, that we are here tonight,
Mr. Speaker, to make sure that we set the record straight.
We talked about the hypocrisy of the democracy. This is a perfect
example of what happens when things go unchecked. I am so glad that we
exist. I'm so glad we have air within our bodies to be able to come to
the floor.
I yield to Mr. Altmire.
Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman allowing me to
speak out of turn.
I have the high order of being asked to do the Speaker pro tempore
duties beginning in a few minutes here, and I do greatly appreciate our
friend and colleague, Mr. Ellison from Minnesota, for covering for me
while I give these remarks, and then I am going to take the chair.
The gentleman hit it right on the head. We would not be having this
discussion were it not for this Congress on the very first day we were
in session adding transparency to the earmark process. In the past we
couldn't have this discussion because earmarks were put in in the dark
of night. Earmarks were not identified by sponsor. Earmarks were put in
at each stage of the process unidentified. You didn't know where they
came from. You didn't know the details of the earmarks.
Now we are able to have a discussion, and every Member of Congress
who has an earmark in the bill that we are going to pass this week and
send to the President has the responsibility to justify those earmarks.
And if the gentleman wants to justify his earmark for cold weather
clothing, he's able to do so.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Altmire, let me just clarify what
you're saying. In the past if somebody had come down to this floor and
had spent an hour railing against the massive amount of earmarks in the
bill, we wouldn't know that that person had requested some 20-odd
earmarks in the bill. We wouldn't know unless we had these rules in
place.
Mr. ALTMIRE. That is absolutely correct. And you wouldn't be able to
look at the final product, at the bill, and look at every single
earmark in there. I think they said there were 9,000 earmarks in the
omnibus bill that we were passing today compared to 16,000 total
earmarks that were in the last Republican budget that was passed. I
believe that was fiscal year 2006. And I am going to talk about why
fiscal year
[[Page H16824]]
2007 didn't have any earmarks. But fiscal year 2006 had 16,000 earmarks
unidentified. We couldn't have this discussion. We couldn't come to the
floor and talk about who put in these earmarks, who has to justify the
merits of those earmarks. But we can have that discussion today because
this Congress, on the very first day in session, one of the very first
things we did, one of the very first votes that Mr. Murphy, Mr.
Ellison, and myself cast as Members of Congress was to add transparency
to the process, to shine the spotlight and add sunshine to the earmark
process. So now we know.
And I am more than willing to justify the money that I am sending
back to my district to help stimulate the economy and create jobs in
western Pennsylvania. I would assume that the speakers who came before
us are willing to justify their earmarks in there. But don't come down
to the floor and lecture us on whether or not there should be earmarks
in the process.
And if the gentleman would just allow me to finish, because I do have
to take the chair, and again I thank Mr. Ellison.
{time} 2200
In FY 2007, I think I said 2005 and 2006, FY 2007, the Republicans
who controlled this House at the end of 2006 were unable to complete
their work on nine of the 11 appropriations bills.
Now, we heard some rhetoric in the group that came before us, and
we've heard for the past several weeks, even months, about how we are
not doing our duty because we're putting all these bills into an
omnibus bill and sending it to the President before the end of the
year. I want to take a walk down memory lane on this, too.
One of the other first votes that Mr. Murphy, Mr. Ellison and myself
took, our freshman class, was resolving those nine appropriation bills
from last year that the Congress left to us. And that happened because
after the elections that Congress said, You know what? We're taking our
ball and going home. Forget it. We're not going to complete these nine
bills. We're going to leave it for the next Congress. And that next
Congress was this Congress. It was the Democratic-controlled Congress.
And we finished all nine appropriations bills in a month. And those
nine appropriations bills funding us right now, the current operations
of the government, contain no earmarks, zero. So we went from 16,000
earmarks the year before last to zero for those nine of 11
appropriations bills that we have today.
So, yes, the omnibus bill that we are passing this week does contain
earmarks, but let's not forget the fact that the current year's budget,
which we passed in this Congress, had no earmarks. And we were stuck
with that right from the start, specifically because the previous
Congress failed their job and left it for us to resolve.
And at this point, I will yield to the gentleman from Connecticut.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Altmire, let me just take a quick
guess, let me throw a hypothesis out there about why folks on the other
side of the aisle and those that were talking tonight might be a little
angry.
Everyone gets passionate down here, but when Mr. Meeks talks, it's
kind of like happy passionate. On the other side of the aisle it feels
a little different. And listen, I would be too, I guess. And this is my
guess, I would be, too, if I had spent decades building up a brand of
my political party based around fiscal responsibility, and then, in the
course of 1 year, in the course of 1 year the party that you tried to
portray as the tax and spenders, the fiscal irresponsibles, that party,
after having been in control of the Congress for less than a year, for
the first time in 12 years does all of the fiscally responsible things
that you couldn't do, passes a rule saying that every single bill that
comes before this Congress has to be paid for. You can't pass anything
on this floor that expands the deficit. First time that's happened
since the Republicans took control of this Congress. That was Democrats
that did that. Passes a balanced budget in 5 years, that's Democrats
doing it. Leading a Congress that is shrinking, rather than expanding,
the annual operating deficit of the Federal Government. That's
Democrats; that's not Republicans.
So, I guess I would be angry, too, if I was a Republican in this
House and I looked at the party that I thought I joined, which was the
fiscally responsible party, and found out that that mantle now lay on
the other side of the aisle. So, that might explain something, Mr.
Ryan. And I guess knowing that, maybe a little bit of it is
justifiable.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. You know, obviously there have been situations
decades ago where, you know, everyone was spending too much money. And
for us to put in the PAYGO rules that say you've got to pay for every
dime you spend one way or the other I think is a significant step in
the right direction. Nobody here wants to continue what has happened
over the last 6 years.
And when you look at what's happened, over $3 trillion in debt has
been borrowed from China, Japan and OPEC countries. Our friends on the
other side, when they were in charge, raised the debt limit five times
in order to go out and borrow more money. And we see the situation that
we're in now. So we're trying to, slowly but surely, rein all of this
in and make very strategic investments.
And I would say, Mr. Speaker, that you can go to the Web sites for
the Speaker and our caucus and what we're doing. We're making
investments into alternative energy, research and development, so we
can open up new sectors of the economy. We're making investments in
education, saving the average family who takes out loans and utilizes
the Pell Grants $4,400 over the course of that loan. That's a middle-
class tax cut. What we're going to do with the AMT, the alternative
minimum tax, we're going to prevent 23 million people from getting a
tax increase next year. And that's a middle-class tax cut. These are
people making $50,000 to $75,000 a year. We're going to prevent that
from happening.
Significant steps in criminal justice. Cops on the beat. In
communities like Youngstown, Ohio, the city doesn't have the tax base
to keep hiring more and more cops, so it's harder to develop your
economy if you don't have security. So, these are the kinds of
investments that we're making.
So, in closing, as we wrap things up, because I think we're going to
wrap things up here in a minute, first, Mr. Speaker, I would like to
submit these two articles for the Record so that not only are these
earmarks represented openly, as our rules have provided, but there are
also press releases that some of our Members on the other side who have
been on the floor detesting earmarks, their press releases can now be
submitted for the Record.
[From the Bakersfield Californian, July 11, 2007]
Get an Eyeful of Earmarks
Earmark--a.k.a. ``pork barrel''--spending has almost as
dirty a reputation as its porcine namesake.
Earmarks are items from a pot of money--$29 billion in
2006--from the $2.4 trillion federal budget that is set aside
from the complex federal appropriation process for
congressmen to dole out for specific projects in their
districts.
There are two problems with earmarks:
Some ideas are silly, flag-waving expenditures with little
widespread redeeming value.
Good or bad, finding out what the money is for and who the
patron congress member is can be a nearly impossible task for
the public until it is too late to change the spending
outcome.
That could be changing, and Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-
Bakersfield, may be among the 34 of 435 members of Congress
who voluntarily released his list of requests in time for the
public to comment. Rep. Jim Costa, D-Fresno, has not.
Early disclosure is the key element to any credibility
claim. With that in mind, why wouldn't everyone list their
proposed earmarks the way McCarthy has done?
See the first bulleted item above. A good project gains
stature, but a stinker may, like Dracula, die a deserved
death when the light of day shines on it.
Thus, disclosure has the potential benefit of increasing
the quality--and hence the justification--of earmarks.
But can earmarks be justified at all?
Yes. The federal budget process tends to look at the big
picture--after all, it is measured in trillions of dollars.
An earmark can focus on a small, highly localized need that
is easily overlooked in vast appropriation measures.
McCarthy requested 20 earmarks worth $38 million for the
22nd district (Kern and San Luis Obispo counties) and another
$142 million for Edwards Air Force Base and China Lake Naval
Air Weapons Center.
He may not get any funds, but some examples include
$122,000 to help the Bakersfield Police Department deter gang
violence; $7 million for the Lake Isabella Dam safety
[[Page H16825]]
project; $500,000 for Cal State Bakersfield to help nursing
education.
A classic example is the Thomas Road Improvement Program
now under way. In his final year in office, McCarthy's
predecessor, Rep. Bill Thomas, provided desperately needed
highway funding that otherwise would have been sucked up by
politically powerful Southern California and Bay Area
jurisdictions.
Whether an earmark is good or bad is up to the individual
voter. But at least now you know what is being requested. (A
full list of McCarthy's requests was published in the July 1
Californian.)
Walberg Secures House Approval of Funding for Biological Weapons
Prevention
Washington, August 16.--U.S. Congressman Tim Walberg (R-MI)
announced today that 2008 funding for Dexter Research Center,
Inc. was approved in the Department of Defense Appropriations
Bill that recently passed the House. The bill will now go to
the U.S. Senate to be voted on as part of the fiscal year
2008 Appropriations process.
``The Department of Defense must have the capability to
respond to chemical and biological attacks, and this
important project will increase the safety and security of
our men and women in uniform,'' Walberg said.
With this funding, the Michigan company will help develop a
Total Perimeter Surveillance (TPS) system based on infrared
technology able to identify and trigger an immediate response
to chemical and biological attacks against Department of
Defense facilities.
``We are excited to have this opportunity to leverage our
science and manufacturing capabilities to help make our
national defense sites even more secure,'' said Robert Toth,
Jr., President of Dexter Research Center.
Funding details:
Dexter Research Center, Inc. (Washtenaw County)
$2,000,000--This project funding will go towards assisting in
the development of a Total Perimeter Surveillance (TPS)
system capable of identifying and responding to chemical and
biological attacks. The TPS solution, based on novel infrared
technology, can provide complete perimeter threat detection
and identification with sufficient advanced warning to
Department of Defense facilities to meet current threat
requirements.
Walberg Secures House Approval of Funding for Sonobuoys
Washington, August 13.--U.S. Congressman Tim Walberg (R-MI)
announced today that 2008 funding for sonobuoys, produced by
Sparton Electronics of Jackson, was approved in the
Department of Defense Appropriations Bill that recently
passed the House. The bill will now go to the U.S. Senate to
be voted on as part of the fiscal year 2008 Appropriations
process.
``Funding for sonobuoys, produced by Sparton Electronics,
is important for the security of our naval personnel and
Jackson County,'' Walberg said.
Funding details:
Sparton Electronics, (Jackson County) $2,500,000 increase--
This project funding will go towards procurement of sonobuoys
for the Department of the Navy. The sonobuoy remains the
Navy's primary sensor for detection and localization of
submarines by air anti-submarine warfare (ASW) platforms.
Sonobuoys provide the only means to rapidly sanitize large
areas of water prior to fleet units arriving in the area.
Walberg Secures House Approval of Funding for Peckham Industries
Products Used by Military
Washington, August 17.--U.S. Congressman Tim Walberg (R-MI)
announced today that 2008 funding for Peckham Industries was
approved in the Departments of Defense Appropriations Bill
that recently passed the House. The bill will now go to the
U.S. Senate to be voted on as part of the fiscal year 2008
Appropriations process.
Peckham produces Fleece Insulating Liners, a Cold Weather
Layering System and a Multi Climate Protection System all
used by United States military personnel.
``These three projects greatly benefit our brave men and
women in uniform and Eaton County,'' Walberg said.
``It's a privilege to provide our soldiers with the
equipment they need,'' Peckham CEO/President Mitchell
Tomlinson said. ``These contracts represent much needed jobs
and opportunities created for persons with disabilities.
We're proud to continue providing the highest quality, high
performance cold weather gear available to our military.''
Funding details:
Peckham Industries, $3,000,000--This project will go
towards the production of Insulating Liners for Extended Cold
Weather Clothing System for the Department of the Army. This
product was created in direct response to soldiers'
complaints of bulkiness and lack of breathability in previous
attire.
Peckham Industries, $3,000,000--This project will go
towards the production of a Cold Weather Layering System for
the United States Marine Corps. The CWLS is part of the
Marine Corps' Mountain and Cold Weather Clothing and
Equipment Program, which provides lightweight, durable combat
clothing that allows Marines to operate in all kinds of cold
weather environments.
Peckham Industries, $2,500,000--This project will go
towards the production of a Multi Climate Protection System
(MCPS) for the Department of the Navy. The MCPS is a modular
ensemble that provides total performance by layering thermal
protection and shell garments.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. And I would just like to say, go to our Web site.
Look at what we've done for K-12, student aid, rural development, the
farm bill. All of the things that we've passed out of here have been
investments, actually met the President's budget numbers, so it's just
a shift in priorities.
So, I'm saying I think we've made significant progress this year, and
we hope to expand it next year.
And with that, Mr. Meek, I yield back to you.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Well, Mr. Ryan, I want to thank you and Mr.
Altmire, and also Mr. Murphy and Ms. Wasserman Schultz and others who
have been very active in our 30-Something over the year. I want to
thank those that are involved in preparing not only material that we
meet on on a weekly basis, but also what we bring to the floor.
I want to thank all of the staff and those that are involved, the
Speaker's office, the majority leader and the whip's office, the
majority whip and the Democratic leader, and also the Vice Chair for
everything you do to make our 30-Something hour possible.
I don't know if we'll have the opportunity to come to the floor
tomorrow, which some project may be our last night on the floor, but we
want to thank Mr. Michael and also Mr. Tom, Ms. Natasha and Mr. Adam
and so many others that have spent time on this.
Mr. Speaker, there has been a lot done this Congress. We're going to
be talking about it more. And like Mr. Ryan said, go onto
www.speaker.gov to get information on 30-Something.
I want to commend those Members of the minority party that voted with
the majority party to be able to make it so for many of the things that
Mr. Ryan has talked about.
We look forward to the President's State of the Union that will be
coming up in January. Many of, I'm pretty sure, his talking points will
come from what has already been accomplished by this Democratic
Congress or has been brought to the President by force because of the
vote that we have here and the will of the American people.
We know that this is the holiday time of the year, and we would like
to also recognize not only the contributions of our religious
communities out there, but also those that work within our charities
that have made it so for those to be able to not only have warm meals,
but also to have gifts at this time of year.
Also recognizing those Members that served in the first half of this
Congress that did not make it to the second half of this Congress,
those Members of this House and also the Senate that have moved on to a
higher place. We ask for blessings for their families, and also for
their loved ones that have been left behind. We try to provide the kind
of representation that they tried to put forth on the Democratic and
also the Republican side of the House.
Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful, and all of us in the 30-Something
are very grateful for coming to the floor.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Meek, if you would yield for just a
moment. I just wanted, on behalf of Mr. Altmire, who sits in the
Speaker's chair today, to just thank you and Mr. Ryan for allowing two
new guys into the 30-Something. This has been just a wonderful year for
us, made even more wonderful by being able to be closer to the good
graces and large brains of both you and Mr. Ryan. So, I mean that
sincerely, by the way. You did not have to open up the 30-Something
Group to both Mr. Altmire and myself and some of the others that have
had the opportunity to come down and be part of these discussions that
we've watched on TV for years before we came here. And I would like to
extend our thanks to you and Mr. Ryan and Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Well, Mr. Murphy, we definitely appreciate it.
And I'm going to take that part of the Congressional Record and put it
in the foyer of my office here in Washington, also the large brains
part, put it in the foyer. But if it wasn't for the support of our
leadership allowing us to come to the floor. But also, I think, Mr.
Speaker, those individuals that are in harm's way and their families,
two wars going on, we appreciate their contributions.
We appreciate those veterans, since we're giving what we call
``shout-
[[Page H16826]]
outs,'' giving those veterans that allow us to salute one flag, we
appreciate them, those folks that put it on the line and some that did
not make it.
But we look forward to coming back in the second half of this
Congress and finish the unfinished business. We want the American
people to have faith in this House, have faith in this Senate, and also
a level of respect for the Commander in Chief, that we're going to work
this thing out here in Washington, D.C., on behalf of those that have
sent us up here to represent them.
I look forward to the second half of the Congress. I want to thank
the staff, thank the folks in the Clerk's office for doing all that
they've done, even the staff over in the minority office for sticking
in there over many hours in this first half, because we have not only
made history, but we have also put in more hours than any other
Congress in the history of the Republic.
With that, Mr. Speaker, we encourage people to go to www.speaker.gov,
and we yield back the balance of our time.
____________________