[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 2]
[House]
[Pages 2000-2001]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 13, MAKING 
          FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS, FISCAL YEAR 2003

  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 29 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                               H. Res. 29

       Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it 
     shall be in order without intervention of any point of order 
     to consider in the House the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 13) 
     making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 
     2003, and for other purposes. The joint resolution shall be 
     considered as read for amendment. The previous question shall 
     be considered as ordered on the joint resolution to final 
     passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of 
     debate on the joint resolution equally divided and controlled 
     by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee 
     on Appropriations; and (2) one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 2. Upon receipt of a message from the Senate 
     transmitting House Joint Resolution 2 with a Senate amendment 
     thereto, it shall be in order to consider in the House a 
     motion offered by the chairman of the Committee on 
     Appropriations or his designee that the House disagree to the 
     Senate amendment and request or agree to a conference with 
     the Senate thereon.

                              {time}  1215

  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost), pending 
which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration 
of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
  Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 29 is a closed rule providing for the 
consideration of a very straightforward 1-week continuing resolution. 
The continuing resolution itself, H.J. Res. 13, makes further 
continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2003. The rule provides 
that H.J. Res. 13 will be debatable in the House for 1 hour, equally 
divided and controlled by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) and 
the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey). The rule waives all points of 
order in consideration of H.J. Res. 13, and it provides 1 motion to 
recommit the underlying measure.
  I want to note that section 2 of the resolution provides that upon 
receiving a message from the Senate transmitting H.J. Res. 2 with a 
Senate amendment, it shall be in order to consider in the House a 
motion by the Committee on Appropriations chairman or his designee that 
the House disagree to the Senate amendment and request or agree to a 
conference with the Senate. This provision in this section of the 
report is necessary to permit the Committee on Appropriations chairman 
the authority to offer a motion to go to conference on the omnibus 
appropriations bill.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a clean continuing resolution that will ensure 
that the United States Government remains open through February 7 and 
that all Americans who are expecting any kind of Federal benefit, a 
Social Security check, Medicare payments, or veterans benefits will 
continue to do so without interruption.
  While we can debate the substance of the continuing resolution in 
subsequent general debate, I will note that as negotiations continue on 
the overall appropriations package, this continuing resolution will 
make sure that ongoing programs are continued at current rates under 
the same terms and conditions as fiscal year 2002, except for the 
defense and military construction bills that have already been enacted 
into law. Current funding expires at midnight on Friday, without action 
on the continuing resolution that this rule permits. Therefore, I urge 
my colleagues to join me in supporting this rule so that we may proceed 
to consideration of the continuing resolution and ensure that the 
Federal Government remains open until February 7.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, two important things will happen today on the floor of 
this House. First, we will debate and pass yet another continuing 
resolution, the eighth temporary stopgap measure for a fiscal year that 
began almost 4 months ago. This continuing resolution represents an 
abdication of responsibility that has become almost run-of-the-mill 
under Republican control. Today's resolution, which extends the date of 
the current CR through February 7, means that Republicans will be 4 
months late in addressing priorities like homeland security and the 
economy. America is struggling through dangerous, uncertain times; but 
the Republican Congress may as well still be on vacation.
  Republican leaders are hoping this shameful failure will be obscured 
by today's second important event: the President's State of the Union 
address. The Republican majority is expecting to hide behind the glib 
rhetoric we have all come to expect from President Bush.
  But political slogans only go so far, especially in the face of the 
wide and growing credibility gap facing a Republican Party that has 
spent the past 2 years saying one thing and doing another. And no 
matter how eloquent President Bush may be tonight, words alone cannot 
fix the primary problem this Republican government has created for the 
Nation at this difficult time.
  Simply put, there are two states of the Union in America today. For 
the vast majority of Americans, these are difficult and anxious times; 
but for the Republican politicians and the privileged few they 
represent, like the corporate lobbyists invited to the White House 
today for a special sneak preview of the State of the Union, the good 
times just keep on coming.

[[Page 2001]]

  It is a tragedy, Mr. Speaker; but it is the truth. Just take a look 
around the country. We will see hard-working Americans struggling to 
make it through the weakest economy in a generation. Since President 
Bush took office, 2.3 million private sector jobs have been lost, the 
worst jobs record for any President since the end of World War II. The 
unemployment rate is stuck at a 6-year high. We will see millions of 
Americans whose retirement plans have been crushed by the fall of the 
stock market. The Dow dropped below 8,000 again yesterday; and overall, 
the market has lost trillions of dollars in value since President Bush 
took office. We will see firefighters and police officers who still sit 
exposed on the front lines of homeland defense, desperate for help from 
this Congress. It has been nearly a year and a half since September 11, 
but Republicans have done shockingly little to increase America's 
defenses here at home.
  Mr. Speaker, Democrats have fought for these priorities. We have 
proposed economic stimulus plans to create at least 1 million new jobs 
this year, put money and purchasing power in the hands of consumers, 
and provide relief to struggling small businesses; and we have tried 
time and again to make Americans safer at home by meeting critical 
homeland security needs.
  Unfortunately for the American people, Mr. Speaker, Republicans have 
the power in Washington, and just take a look at the government they 
control. We will see an out-of-touch Republican Congress that 
arrogantly refuses to do the job they have been elected to do: address 
critical needs like homeland security and education. Republicans will 
not help firefighters or increase port security, but they have relaxed 
their own ethics rules in the House of Representatives. Mr. Speaker, we 
will see a Republican Party that has but one answer for every problem: 
budget-busting tax breaks for millionaires that will do nothing to 
stimulate the economy this year. Soldiers and firefighters are putting 
their lives on the line to keep Americans safe at home, and President 
Bush is pushing $90,000 tax breaks for everyone making $1 million or 
more a year. Middle-class Americans are struggling through the worst 
economy in a generation, but the Bush plan would provide half of all 
taxpayers with less than $100.
  Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, it appears that Republicans just do not 
understand the real state of the Union for the vast majority of 
America, because if they did, they would not insist on sacrificing the 
security interests of all Americans to pay for tax breaks for the most 
privileged few. That is just wrong. It is time that Republicans stopped 
stiffing homeland security to pay for tax breaks for millionaires, and 
it is time they stopped using their political power to divide this 
great Nation.
  Mr. Speaker, last week I attended a mobilization ceremony for a 
reservist in Grand Prairie Texas who had been called to active duty. 
These brave men and women are making a great sacrifice for their 
country, leaving their families and jobs to support our troops 
overseas. I was struck by their courage and by their willingness to put 
aside their own personal concerns to serve their country. That spirit 
of unity and sacrifice has made America great for the past 2 centuries. 
I hope it is the spirit President Bush remembers tonight during his 
State of the Union and that the Republican Congress puts into practice 
so that we can finally address our economic and homeland security 
challenges.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, after 9-11, it became obvious to all of us, I think on 
both sides of the aisle, that we needed to equip the people at the 
local level who will respond to terrorist attacks with the best 
equipment that we could possibly find to make certain their equipment 
was compatible and safe enough to do the job. For reasons that I find 
difficult to fathom, the White House has resisted efforts to do that on 
four separate occasions.
  The first example is what happened on the supplemental a year ago. 
After 9-11, the committee, on both sides of the aisle, agreed that we 
ought to add more money for first responders, and we tried to do that. 
The White House strenuously resisted. In fact, at one point the 
President personally told us that he would veto one dime more than the 
White House had appropriated for homeland security items. Despite that 
fact, on a bipartisan basis, the House and the Senate approved $400 
million in funding for first responders in that supplemental.
  Then, last year, in their second supplemental which the 
administration sent up, they still provided no request for first 
responders. Again, the House and the Senate, acting on a bipartisan 
basis in both Houses provided, after much White House resistance, $551 
million for first responders for firemen, for policemen, and the other 
folks at the local level who are our first line of defense against 
terrorist attacks in our communities. The President vetoed $350 million 
of that $500 million.
  Finally, the administration did request $3.5 billion for first 
responders in the regular 2003 appropriations bill, but it then 
proceeded to back the political strategy in the House that prevented 
the veterans under the VA-HUD bill from coming to the floor; and it 
prevented the State, Justice, Commerce appropriations bill from coming 
to the floor. As a result, neither of those bills which were supposed 
to contain funding for first responders, neither of those bills passed. 
And then, when the continuing resolution finally passed, which was 
supposed to contain $650 million for first responders, the White House 
saw to it that the agency would not apportion that money among the 
States and localities.
  So after we have that track record, the White House resistance to 
bipartisan congressional support for adding money for first responders, 
the White House chief of staff went on national television last Sunday, 
Mr. Card did, and told Mr. Russert, the moderator, and the entire 
country that the only reason first responders were not getting their 
money is because the Congress had not done its job.
  Baloney. In capital letters, BALONEY.
  The fact is that both political parties, on a bipartisan basis in 
both the House and the Senate, on four separate occasions tried to meet 
our responsibilities in providing the funding that was needed for first 
responders and, the White House, in each of those instances, either 
flatly rejected the money or saw to it that they would use their power 
in order to squeeze down the amount of money that we wanted to provide 
for those initiatives.
  So now, what I am going to urge Members to do when we get to the 
resolution today is to vote for a motion which we will offer which 
restores that needed money for first responders.
  It is time for two things to happen: it is time for the White House 
to stop peddling fiction about why the first responders at the local 
level do not have badly needed money to deal with terrorism problems at 
the local level; and, secondly, it is time for us to actually get the 
money out to them so that we do not have to sit, the next time we have 
a terrorist attack saying, gee whiz, I wish we had done something.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________