[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 34 (Thursday, February 26, 2009)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E472]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1105, OMNIBUS APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                                  2009

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                            HON. TOM LATHAM

                                of iowa

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, February 25, 2009

  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Speaker, today we come to the House chamber to 
consider a package of the remaining fiscal year 2009 appropriations 
bills. We are five months late in acting on these bills, and for no 
good reason.
  The net effect of this delay is two-fold: One, the delay has 
prevented a number of Federal programs from making necessary mission 
changes simply because those programs have been frozen in-place under 
the CR.
  Number two, the $410 billion contained in this bill represents annual 
spending increases for hundreds of programs. These increases are well 
above necessary levels, especially given that we just passed a stimulus 
bill that carried $301 billion in new discretionary spending--much of 
which is for the same programs contained in this omnibus measure, and 
that we fund every year in the annual process.
  In short, many of the programs in this package will get a double dose 
of funding. Unfortunately, this extra dose will be built into future 
spending, and that's not fair to the American taxpayer--why, because it 
locks in trillion dollar deficits.
  Apart from the problems with the spending totals in this package, we 
are allowing a laundry list of policy issues to pass through Congress 
without any public scrutiny.
  A number of these policy issues are troubling to many of us. For 
example, the omnibus eliminates the ``Reading First'' Program within 
the Department of Education. I don't remember debating this issue in 
the stunted '09 process.
  The ``Reading First'' Program was widely supported for its emphasis 
on raising reading levels, particularly among low-income children. Just 
yesterday, I met with an elementary school principal from Iowa who 
praised the program as one which has made a difference to lots of 
children in my State.
  Another policy change, done through a funding reduction, is a de-
emphasis on Yucca Mountain. At a time when we need to be looking at all 
forms of energy, why would we want to halt construction and design work 
at Yucca since nuclear waste storage is a big issue. At a minimum, we 
should have had a debate on this subject.
  In the end, this entire process has been a giant abdication of our 
responsibilities in this body, representing a shameful performance. Our 
constituents deserve better than the bill before us represents.
  I hope that for the FY 2010 funding cycle, the majority will re-
discover the value of regular order and transparency. In this way, we 
can add a little more credibility to the process, and the reputation of 
this House.

                          ____________________