[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 15]
[House]
[Pages 20444-20447]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

  (Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute.)
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise for the purposes of inquiring of the 
majority leader the schedule for the week to come, and I am pleased to 
yield to the distinguished majority leader, the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. DeLay).
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished whip for yielding 
to me.
  Mr. Speaker, the House will convene on Tuesday at 12:30 p.m. for 
morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. We will consider 
several measures under suspension of the rules. The final list of those 
bills will be sent to Members' offices by the end of the week. Any 
votes called on these measures will be rolled until 6:30 p.m.
  On Wednesday and Thursday, the House will consider additional 
legislation under suspension of the rules, as well as two measures 
under a rule: H.R. 2123, the School Readiness Act of 2005, and H.R. 
250, Manufacturing Technology Competitiveness Act of 2005.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the majority leader for that 
information.
  First of all, on the general proposition for the month of October, we 
had had discussions last week; and it is clear that the second week of 
October, it will not be practical to meet because of the various 
important dates on that week. The first week was somewhat in flux at 
that point in time.
  Could the majority leader bring us up to date on where currently the 
thinking of the leader's office is on where we will be on the first 
week of October?
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding. As the 
gentlemen knows, the Rosh Hashanah holiday falls in the middle of that 
week; and while we wanted to plan the voting schedule for that week 
around that holiday, and we are still trying to do that, we still 
believe it may be necessary for the House to be in session at some 
point in that week.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. I realize the problems 
of doing that; but many of our Members, particularly those who come 
from far away, are concerned about traveling on that Wednesday, as the 
gentleman knows, which makes it problematic because we will have to be 
very late Thursday. We will obviously accommodate what the majority 
believes it is going to do.
  In that regard, last week, we had thought we probably, or might, be 
in tomorrow. We are not going to be in tomorrow. Can the majority 
leader give us a view on what might be the status of next Friday? I 
yield to my friend.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. At this 
point we believe that we can complete the legislation we have scheduled 
for next week by Thursday night of next week. However, however, given 
the still fluid situation in the gulf coast area, we are not yet 
prepared to cancel the session next Friday.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I am presuming, and there 
was some discussion about this last week, that at some point in time in 
the next couple of weeks, we are going to have to do some sort of 
continuing resolution. Is that the gentleman's belief as well? I yield 
to my friend.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding. Yes, the way 
things look, the gentleman knows that we have passed all of our 
appropriations bills out of the House and did so before July 4. The 
Senate does not have the same schedule, and it is quite obvious to all 
of us that they will not be able to get all of their appropriations 
bills across their floor in a timely manner. So we do anticipate to do 
some sort of CR before the end of this month. Whether it is next week 
or the following week, we do not know yet.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, does the gentleman have any thoughts at this 
point in time regarding the length of time of the initial CR that we 
would consider? I yield to my friend.
  Mr. DeLAY. I thank the gentleman for yielding. No, I have not been 
advised by the Committee on Appropriations as to what they are 
thinking. I am sure they will start having those discussions with the 
Senate and the gentleman's leadership starting next week, because we 
are going to have to deal with that issue.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman.
  The GSE, the GSE bill was initially, our thought was that would be on 
the floor this coming week.

                              {time}  1715

  The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), the ranking Democrat on 
the Committee on Financial Services, is on the floor and has been very 
involved in this bill.
  I am not sure you even know this, but the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) informs me that there are very significant 
sums that would be available to the gulf area for housing in the GSE 
bill, which will be regular order, and the benefit would be that this 
money would be available, and we know we are going to have to spend 
money in that area.
  Can you tell me why the GSE bill is not on the floor? This deals, as 
you know, with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
  Mr. DeLAY. Well, we do understand that this bill came out of the 
Committee on Financial Services I think with a vote of 65 to 5.
  It is a bill that is anticipated, and we really want to bring it to 
the floor. To be quite honest with you, we have some Members on this 
side of the aisle that are still wanting to negotiate some changes in 
that bill before we bring it

[[Page 20445]]

to the floor; and we are in that process. As soon as we can get a 
consensus of where our Members are on that bill, then we will bring it 
to the floor.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, if the gentlemen from Texas (Mr. DeLay) does 
not object, let me yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Frank), the ranking member, because I know he has worked very hard with 
the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), as you well know, in a very 
bipartisan way. You mentioned 63 to 5, 65 to 5; and so we did not 
perceive there to be much opposition to the bill.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, we did obviously get overwhelming consensus in the 
committee; and the vote among the Republican members of the committee 
was something 6 to 1 in favor of the bill. By the way, we have had some 
negotiation since, as the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) knows 
because he has been participating in them.
  Some of the objections of some of the more conservative Members have 
been accommodated. Some safeguards were put in. Not everything was done 
that we liked on our side. We have been trying to be conciliatory, 
although people obviously had the power to go ahead.
  Then, most recently, we decided this is a way to get money, if this 
bill were to pass quickly, to do housing so badly needed in the gulf 
area, frankly bypassing some of the normal problems you would have in 
terms of the need for regulations at OMB.
  It would not go on the deficit. There has been a lot of concern about 
relief efforts that add to the deficit. This would be hundreds of 
millions of dollars, because it comes from the profits of Fannie Mae 
and Freddie Mac, not on the deficit.
  The only other point I would say, and I would hope the majority would 
have something to say about it, he said people do not like some things 
about the bill. Well, as I read the Constitution, I did not find the 
word negotiation in private among the majority party as part of article 
I.
  I thought bringing bills to the floor and having debates and votes 
was the way to do it. Now I understand you want to establish some 
limits. But I do think we are reaching the point where democracy is 
suffering.
  A bill adopted in an open process with hearings and debates in 
committee and amendments passes 65 to 5. It has been, what, months 
since that bill was voted out of committee; and there have been some 
negotiations.
  The notion that the bill cannot come to the floor until all but three 
Members of the majority are satisfied really flies in the face of 
democracy. If there are differences, what is the objection to letting 
the majority of the House of Representatives vote? We are not 
enormously far apart.
  I have voted in the past for this thing called Reg-Neg, negotiated 
regulations. I do not think it ought to displace democracy. We have a 
bill that has an overwhelming vote in committee. There are some 
legitimate differences. Why cannot we let democracy work, and then, 
whichever side wins, the bill passes and hundreds of millions of 
dollars are available for the gulf.
  Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, I know the leader understands those 
were largely rhetorical questions.
  The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), however, does express a 
view that a bill that can be very helpful to us that came out 65 to 5, 
overwhelming agreement, came out months ago. We do hope that this bill 
can be brought to the floor, certainly before, hopefully if not the end 
of next week, the week following. Because we believe it is the kind of 
legislation that people would be proud of. Democrats and Republicans 
came together, worked on it, came out with a bill, and it is a very 
good bill.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Waters), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Housing, has said 
giving assurance to the people of New Orleans, the poorer people in 
particular of New Orleans, and, frankly, a lot of African American 
people, that we will be committed to rebuilding the city so they can 
come back home is very important. The longer we delay on this bill, the 
longer we delay giving people what is very important reassurance at a 
critical time.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. DeLAY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
  The bill that passed out of committee, by the way, would do nothing 
for New Orleans, nor would it do anything for the disaster relief in 
Alabama or Mississippi either.
  What the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) is referring to is 
a negotiation that has been ongoing to create, out of this building 
fund, at the GSEs an opportunity to change the bill and allow housing 
to be built in these devastated areas. That is the process around here. 
It is democracy when Members are negotiating a change to the bill; and 
in changing that bill in the way that has been suggested and supported, 
obviously, by the gentlemen from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) other 
Members ought to have the opportunity to look at this bill and 
negotiate a bill that would receive the same sort of ratio here on the 
floor, rather than having a contentious battle on the floor and writing 
the bill on the floor.
  We try our best to write bills in committee, but when the bill 
changes from committee to the floor, negotiations are created, and we 
are in the process of those negotiations, and that is the way this 
process works. The gentleman from Massachusetts has been here a lot 
longer than me, and he understands that.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, one of the things I have been terribly 
worried about is the inability of Congress to move quickly to do 
something about the victims of Katrina. I am very, very worried that we 
are going to be seen as a body that cannot get its act together when we 
are confronted with this terrible disaster. We have an opportunity to 
utilize resources that will not be taken from our budget. We have an 
opportunity to use substantial resources that could be applied toward 
the rebuilding of homes, to getting people started again; and if we 
keep fumbling and if we keep fiddling, then we are going to come under 
great criticism because we are not doing what we can do.
  So I would just simply urge all of my colleagues, do not play with 
this. There are people who are suffering and people who are depending 
on us. We have got a great way by which to provide real assistance. Let 
us get it done.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. DeLAY. I guess the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) 
forgets or has a short memory. I think we came into special session to 
spend $10.5 billion just a few days after the disaster hit, came back 
the next week and spent $51 billion to go to immediate relief.
  We have passed some six to eight bills in the last few days that 
directly affect people and their ability to get their lives back 
together. I do not think anybody, and certainly not this House, is 
dragging its feet on anything.
  What the gentlewoman is talking about is a process that, frankly, 
will take months to get the money that we are talking about in order to 
build the houses that she wants; and being able to negotiate a few 
weeks or days to get this bill right and not get it wrong I think is 
very much the responsible way to proceed.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time.
  I appreciate the majority leader's response. There obviously is a 
difference of view of how soon that those dollars could flow from the 
ranking member of the subcommittee and the ranking member of the full 
committee.
  You mentioned days. I would certainly hope it could be days. Because 
I think we would all be advantaged in a

[[Page 20446]]

bill, particularly if we could pass it with the overwhelming majority 
that was received both in the subcommittee and in the full committee.
  Moving on, Mr. Leader, in addition to the bills you have listed for 
next week, do you anticipate any Hurricane Katrina-related legislation 
will come to floor? And if so, will those bills go through the 
committee of jurisdiction and be considered under rules on the floor 
that allow full debate?
  You mentioned, as a preface to that, obviously almost all of us voted 
for the $52 billion. But I think everybody on the floor was concerned 
about the level of information we had about what had been spent of the 
$10 billion, how much was going to be spent, on what, of the $52 
billion.
  In that context I ask that question.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, the total of $62 billion that we have 
authorized FEMA to spend is designated already in present law. FEMA 
already knows what they can and cannot spend that money on, and that I 
know has created some frustrations with people. You cannot have it both 
ways. You cannot say this is too much money, and we do not know how to 
spend it, yet be frustrated when FEMA is complying with the law and 
when they are spending the money. That creates a problem.
  As the gentleman knows, the problem is we have a disaster unlike we 
have seen in this country, not just the hurricane but the displacement 
of hundreds of thousands of people for a very long period of time and 
displaced not just out of the area but out of their State, which has 
created new concerns and new problems; and we are trying to address 
those immediately.
  But the administration is addressing many of these issues within the 
law through waivers or redesigning certain programs, and a lot of it is 
being taken that way. But there are some things that we must do. The 
committees, hopefully working in a bipartisan way, are looking at all 
of those kinds of issues; and that is where the six or eight bills that 
we have passed over the last 2 weeks have been coming from.
  Understanding that those students, for instance, that may have lost 
their Pell Grants, in anticipation of going to universities that have 
closed, need some fix. We fixed that. We tried to develop a system 
where we could make available more TANF funds earlier, and we fixed 
that. We went down the line fixing those things that we thought needed 
fixing immediately. We are still working on others.
  I have to tell you that the Senate does not see it the same way, and 
they are sitting on these bills and not passing them, and I would urge 
all Members of the House to contact their Senators and talk to them 
about picking up these bills and passing them, because they are 
incredibly important to people that need these changes.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time. I thank the leader for 
that observation and information.
  I would urge the leader, as we bring additional bills to the floor, 
that we give the opportunity to have these bills fully considered by 
the floor. We want to move them. We want to move them quickly.
  The overwhelming majority of us on both sides of the aisle have voted 
for all of the bills that you just referenced on the theory, as you 
said, that we need to move ahead on the Pell Grants and TANF and on the 
dollars themselves, on liability issues.
  But the failure to give full consideration to them, assuming full 
consideration does not mean days and weeks delay but a full day of 
consideration of these pieces of legislation, we believe is 
appropriate, particularly if we deal with another very large money 
bill.
  We hope it goes through committee, and we hope it comes to the floor 
with an opportunity for Members to make suggestions in forms of 
amendment, either cutting or adding or shifting, as the case may be, 
those resources. Because we think that is, you know, the theory of the 
process is, our collective judgments are better than our individual 
judgments. And that is what democracy is.

                              {time}  1730

  Mr. DeLAY. The gentleman is absolutely right, and I hope Members will 
pay attention to this unusual process that we are using. The gentleman 
is right. To what extent we can, we ought to use regular order, but 
these are unusual times. And there are things that need to be done 
immediately. And I do not think the people that have been devastated by 
this disaster want us to wait a week to vet things and that kind of 
stuff, particularly if you were one of those students that was trying 
to get into another university and could not transfer your Pell grant 
to that other university. I think they are appreciating that we are 
trying to move as quickly as possible so they can do that. That is just 
one example of many examples.
  The point is that we are trying to do this in a bipartisan way. If 
there are ranking members that are not being consulted, then I want to 
hear about it. Members should understand that we are trying to get it 
out to the Members and we are more than willing to hear anything from 
anybody, so they should be working through their ranking member and on 
our side of the aisle, their full committee chairman. But there are 
some things that we need to get to the floor as quickly as possible.
  At any rate, it is taking several days to get these bills done so 
Members have an opportunity to participate and have their input. We are 
going regular order on most of the bills, but there are some that need 
attention immediately; and that is why we moved quickly in consultation 
and cooperation with the other side of the aisle. And we thought these 
were all bills that had everybody's consent because we even checked 
with the Senate, we checked with the administration, and we thought 
these bills could move quickly. Unfortunately, the Senate sees it 
differently.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman. I would simply add again that as 
the gentleman indicated, trying to go regular order, obviously, both 
sides understand that these are things we need to move with great 
dispatch so we can help the people that need help and get it to them 
when they need the help. We are all for that.
  On the supplemental, the President has indicated there is going to be 
a need for another supplemental. Do you know when we might consider 
such a supplemental; how much that supplemental might be for? And if we 
start considering it early, while the $52 billion is still available to 
be expended to assist those, it will give us a little bit of time to go 
through the process that the gentleman indicates is the best process.
  I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. DeLAY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I do not know, other 
than in the press, and in many of these issues the press has gotten it 
wrong, that there has been any supplemental suggested by the President 
of the United States. He has not contacted my office. As far as I know, 
he has not contacted the Speaker's office, nor the chairman of the 
appropriations office about another supplemental. Quite the contrary. 
They are trying to avoid having another supplemental and trying to 
spend the money properly and get it to the people that need it. So I am 
not aware of any supplemental certainly in the short term.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that information.
  Now, there is some speculation about an energy bill being considered. 
Obviously, gasoline prices are extraordinarily high. The American 
public is very concerned about their energy costs, about the policies 
of this country. Do you anticipate an energy bill coming to the floor 
any time within the next 2 weeks or 3 weeks?
  Mr. DeLAY. I appreciate the question, because Members need to be 
aware that the Committee on Energy and Commerce is working on a fuel 
bill to try to address the concerns, particularly of supply and the 
lack of refining in this country.
  The gentleman knows that there were a lot of issues that were dropped 
out of the energy bill that was signed by the President about a month 
ago

[[Page 20447]]

that would be having an effect right now. We are going to revisit those 
issues.
  There are other issues that have come to mind. People are starting to 
understand that as the cold weather starts closing in on us that the 
cost of fuel oil is going to be astronomical, that the increase in 
electricity costs are going to be astronomical. The cost of natural gas 
is going up, and we all understand that supply is the real problem; and 
we are going to try to address that and hopefully address it as soon as 
we can, do it in regular order, and bring it to the floor for 
consideration of this House.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman. Do you have any idea what ``as soon 
as possible'' is, the time frame? Next 3 weeks, next month, late 
October, November? Do you have any idea on that?
  Mr. DeLAY. There is really no way of knowing. It is really up to the 
committee and how fast they can do their work. I might say that the 
chairman of the committee's wife is having a baby today so that has 
created a problem. Not for him, but for our schedule. So they are 
working as hard and as fast as they can, and it is incredibly important 
for us to deal with this issue as soon as possible.
  Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, and I agree with you that is not a 
problem. Please convey the Democratic congratulations to the chairman 
and more importantly his wife, the mother.
  Two last bills I will ask you about, Mr. Leader, and I appreciate the 
time we are taking on this. Reconciliation: There was a discussion 
about putting off reconciliation. We have put off reconciliation at 
least until the end of the month, as I understand it probably until 
October. Can you tell me whether or not we still anticipate 
reconciliation moving forward and, if so, are there going to be two 
bills? One the $35 billion in mandatory spending cuts among which is 
$10 billion in Medicaid cuts, and/or the $70 billion in tax cuts that 
was included in the budget reconciliation instructions.
  Mr. DeLAY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding and for the question. 
The gentleman probably knows that I think today the Committee on the 
Budget has sent a notice to the House that they have postponed the 
process until the end of October because of what is facing us now. We 
thought it would be better to do that, and the Committee on the Budget 
agreed. And so this process will not even be started until the middle 
of October.
  As the gentleman also knows, the budget that was passed by the House 
allows for two bills, one an entitlement reform bill and another a tax 
bill. We anticipate taking advantage of both and trying to reform 
entitlement spending so that real money is getting to real people that 
need it. And we also anticipate some sort of tax bill because we feel 
like, particularly under the present circumstances, to continue this 
good economy that we have got, we hope to enhance it even more.
  Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, the last bill I would ask you about is 
the subject matter that has been one of the biggest subjects that we 
have been considering this year. The President put it on the agenda, 
the Social Security privatization, private accounts act. Can you tell 
me whether or not we anticipate a Social Security bill coming to create 
private accounts or privatize in some way Social Security coming to the 
floor this year.
  Mr. DeLAY. The Committee on Ways and Means remains focused on 
developing a comprehensive retirement security package. And I still 
hope that the House will be able to consider legislation in this area 
before we end this session. That is about as much as I am informed as 
to where the bill is, what is in it, and when it will come.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman. Let me say on behalf of the 
minority, the Democrat side of the aisle shares your concern and 
commitment to assuring retirement security for our people. As you know, 
we strongly disagree with the suggestion that has been made by the 
administration with reference to the creation of private accounts and 
what we perceive as privatizing parts of Social Security. But I want 
you to be assured that we share your view that we want to make sure 
that retirement accounts are secure and that Americans have 
opportunities to participate in the creation of retirement accounts. I 
thank the gentleman for his observation.

                          ____________________