[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 20]
[House]
[Pages 27726-27732]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       30-SOMETHING WORKING GROUP

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Dent). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to come before the 
House. We would like to thank not only Democratic leader Ms. Pelosi but 
the entire Democratic leadership, Mr. Hoyer, Mr. Menendez and Mr. 
Clyburn, our vice chair of the Democratic Caucus.
  Mr. Speaker, as you know, the 30-something Working Group comes to the 
floor to share not only with Members but also with the American people 
about what is happening good here in the Capitol and also what is 
happening bad here in the Capitol, and hopefully through a bipartisan 
effort we can move towards positive change here in the Capitol.
  Mr. Speaker, it saddens me to report the fact that this Congress, 
need it be whatever poll you look at, the American people by 33 percent 
think that we are doing a good job. Thirty-three percent of the 
American people feel that this Congress is doing a good job. I would 
tell you that if it was a grade

[[Page 27727]]

system, Mr. Speaker, I would assume that, and Members, I would assume 
that that would be a failing grade.
  I have two children that attend school. And if their grades were 
based on a 33 percent performance, I do not think that they would be 
moving to the next grade. And I think it is important, Members of 
Congress, Mr. Speaker, as we start to look at our responsibilities to 
the American people, not just to our constituents in our districts, but 
to the American people, because by them sending us to Congress they 
federalized us to come up here and run this country in the way that it 
should be.
  Mr. Speaker, I also want to remind the Members that this is the 
people's House. It is not my House. It is not Mr. Ryan's House. It is 
not Ms. Wasserman Schultz's House. Mr. Speaker, all due respect, it is 
not your House. It is the people's House.
  In the Senate, I must add, and we must let all of the Members, we 
must remind them in the Senate someone can be appointed to the Senate. 
Of course they have elections. But in a time, let us just say, Mr. 
Speaker, like in New Jersey, the Governor of New Jersey, the new 
Governor of New Jersey has the opportunity, who was a U.S. Senator, to 
appoint someone to be the new U.S. Senator from the State of New 
Jersey.
  But in the House, with a seat being vacated, let us just say someone 
from New Jersey is appointed to be the Senator. He cannot appoint 
someone here to the House of Representatives. He would have to set a 
special election for that seat to be filled constitutionally. So this 
is the people's House. And so when we start talking about the people of 
the United States of America, we are closer to them than any other, I 
think, than any other branch of government.
  I would like to say that on the heels of President Bush's speech 
today on Iraq's economy, I could not help, and Mr. Ryan and I just 
returned from Iraq. We visited three cities in Iraq and we went to the 
infamous Green Zone and Baghdad visiting our troops. Many of them were 
members of the Army, soldiers. Some, Mr. Speaker, on their third 
deployment to Iraq.
  I could not help but pay attention, and I got a copy of the 
President's speech and he released a 35-page, 32 pages if you look at 
glossy cover and all, 35 pages of his strategy for victory there in 
Iraq.
  But he talked about the economy today in Iraq. But I cannot help but 
say, Mr. Speaker, and to the Members, that it would have been good if 
the President could have talked about our U.S. economy. I think the 
reason why he did not talk about the U.S. economy is the fact that we 
have record deficits, some 3.5 trillion over the next 10 years' 
deficits. That is not the Kendrick Meek report. That is not the Tim 
Ryan report. That is not the Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz 
report. That is reality.
  We are record-breaking as it relates to borrowing money, Members, 
from foreign countries. This President, along with this Republican 
majority here in the House and in the Senate, has achieved $4.5 
trillion in borrowing money from foreign nations, more than 42 
Presidents before him. They were only able to, among all of those 
Presidents, I mean all of them, I am talking about since we became a 
country, $4.1 trillion that have been achieved. And I want to correct 
myself. I am sorry. I have so many numbers here, Mr. Speaker. I want to 
correct myself. I am glad Mr. Ryan brought this over. $1.05 trillion by 
this President. I said four and I will correct myself right now because 
in the 30-Something Working Group, Mr. Speaker, we believe in third-
party validators and sharing with the American people and the Members 
the truth about what is happening here in the Capitol. So maybe 4.05 
might have sounded a little better, but we believe in making sure that 
we give good information. 1.05 trillion, this president, the last 4 
years, 2001 to 2005; and he is not done yet. 1.01 trillion, 42 
Presidents in the history of this country, Republican, Democrat, and in 
their lifetime for some of them very early on were members of the Whig 
Party. From 1776 to 2000, 224 years, Mr. Speaker. And this is from the 
U.S. Department of Treasury. This is not from the National Democratic 
Party or anything like that. We just want to make sure, Mr. Ryan, that 
we have our third-party validators here.
  Maybe the President, Mr. Ryan, could have talked about the fact that 
health care costs increased over 60 percent for small businesses over 
the last 5 years. Major companies are cutting jobs, and not only their 
pension plan that they promised, but they are following our lead here 
under this Republican majority, Mr. Ryan, by the fact that we are not 
only increasing copayments and the wait for our veterans once they 
leave the military, they are following our lead. Companies like GM, 
Delphi, Merck, Verizon and now Ford are now ``reprioritizing.'' That 
means cutting jobs. That means cutting back on promises that they 
promised their employees from the beginning.
  The average family right now in the United States as relates to 
natural gas are paying three times more than they paid in 2001. The 
President could have talked about that, but he did not. He wanted to 
talk about Iraq because he needs to explain himself. Republican 
majority, they need to explain themselves.
  Sixty percent of Americans, Mr. Speaker, if we like it or not, do not 
believe that our leadership as relates to leading our effort in Iraq 
has a sound plan in getting us out of there. So we are going to talk 
about some of these things tonight. We are going to also talk about, 
Mr. Speaker, this ongoing culture of corruption and cronyism and 
incompetence. This is not the Kendrick Meek report. This is just 
today's papers. This is just today that is outlining a culture of 
corruption and cronyism and incompetence. So when historians look back 
on the 109th Congress and the contributions that we made, they are also 
going to look at the void in leadership and leading this country in the 
way that they should lead.
  We used to give speeches here on the floor, Mr. Ryan, and you know 
full well about putting burden on future generations.

                              {time}  2015

  Well, I can tell the Members right now, Mr. Speaker, and this is not 
me speaking. They can check with any of the Federal agencies that do 
the reports or the auditor generals that put out reports on an annual 
basis. We are putting this generation in the present in jeopardy.
  So I am so glad that we have the opportunity tonight to come to the 
floor, and I am so glad that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) is 
here, and I am glad that we have a level of consistency for the 
American people to come to the floor and share this information.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to 
me.
  And I think he is absolutely right. That is the most startling 
statistic that he has shown us with the money that we have borrowed 
from foreign interests because we come to the floor nightly, sometimes 
for a couple hours a night, to talk about the future of the country. 
And there is no more important part, no more important aspect, of the 
country than our fiscal stability. And right now we have a Republican 
Congress, House and Senate, and the President, who are borrowing money 
consistently from foreign interests, and to have one President do in 4 
years what 42 Presidents could not do in 224 years is absolutely 
outrageous. And for anyone to stand up and somehow defend this fiscal 
policy that we have is an outrage, and it offends me, to be quite 
honest, because not only are we borrowing money which we have to pay 
interest on, we ran a $500 billion deficit, or close to $500 billion. 
We are not factoring in the war or anything else. We are spending $1.5 
billion a week in Iraq, which is a lot of money, and we are close to 
over $200 billion already there. But to have this money and spend it is 
one thing, but to not have the money and have to borrow it primarily 
from the Chinese, the Saudi Arabians, the Japanese, to borrow that 
money to plug our holes here in the

[[Page 27728]]

United States puts this country at risk, and it weakens our country.
  And we do not come here because we do not have anything better to do 
tonight. We come here because we take a constitutional oath and we 
swear our allegiance to the Constitution of the United States.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Article I.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Article I, section 1 of the Constitution creates 
this House. The first part of the United States Constitution creates 
this House. So we have an obligation for oversight. We have an 
obligation to balance the budget, and we have an obligation to protect 
the future of the United States of America. What more basic fundamental 
part of our jobs is there other than making sure this country is 
fiscally stable? And to go out and borrow over $1 trillion, I mean I 
think it is--this is very important for us to make this point again. In 
224 years, 42 Presidents borrowed over $1 trillion from foreign 
holdings, from foreign interests. Over $1 trillion in 224 years. This 
President and this Republican-led Congress has borrowed over $1 
trillion in 4 years from foreign interests. That weakens our country.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, can the 
gentleman say that again because I just want to make sure that the 
American people and not only the American people, but the Members who 
represent them on both sides of the aisle understand what is going on.
  This is unprecedented. This is not something that happened 4 or 5 
years ago. This is not something that happened 20 years ago. This is 
not something that happened 40 years ago. This is not something that 
happened 200 years ago. This is something that is happening now to this 
country, the first time in the history of the Republic. So when folks 
say, well, we have to do this, that we have a war going on and we gave 
unprecedented tax cuts to millionaires and we had 9/11, you know 
something? Forty-two Presidents had World War I, World War II, had 
Vietnam, Korea, the Great Depression. I mean, they had a number of 
issues thrown in the face of this country that we had to deal with. And 
now under this Republican majority, under the President we have in 
office now, we are breaking records. We are not breaking records as it 
relates to our economy and growth. We are breaking records as it 
relates to putting this country further in debt and borrowing from 
foreign countries.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. And, Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to 
yield, people say what does the 30-Something Group have to do with all 
of this, what does our group have to do with all of this? Listen, this 
is the future of our country. There is no greater issue for the 30-
somethings or the 20-somethings or those kids in school right now or 
those college students right now. There is no greater issue because the 
money, we do not just borrow it from the Chinese. We have got to pay 
interest on it, and our national debt right now is $8 trillion. So who 
is going to pay this and who is going to pay the interest on it? And I 
think it is $300 billion a year we are paying just in interest on the 
debt that we have. $300 billion. So just imagine if we could get to a 
position where we were in the late 1990s.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, I think that is a very important statistic 
to discuss during the course of our conversation this evening. The 
interest payments that the American taxpayers are required to make 
every single year amount to some $300 billion on the debt that has been 
accumulated because of the policies of this White House, this 
Republican House of Representatives, and this Republican Senate.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, the Republican majority tomorrow is 
going to extend or reinstitute tax cuts for the wealthiest people in 
the country.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. And how are they going to pay for them?
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Up to $70 billion, they are going to go to the 
Chinese, to the Saudi Arabians, Mr. Speaker, to the Japanese 
governments.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. To the Koreans.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. To the Koreans, and they are going to borrow the 
money. There is no one, Mr. Speaker, that could possibly hear this 
argument, no Member of Congress that could possibly hear this argument 
and not think to themselves why would we cut taxes by $70 billion for 
the wealthiest people in the country and have to borrow the money from 
the Chinese to pay for it?
  Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I 
think it should be rephrased. Why should we borrow more money from 
foreign governments and from foreigners who invest in this country to 
pay wealthy Americans money? This is not a tax cut. This is a welfare 
program financed by nonAmericans, to a substantial degree, to provide 
more disposable income to the most affluent among us. I dare say this 
sacrifices our national security.
  We hear many in this Chamber, particularly on the Republican side, 
express concern about China. We are in the position now where we need 
China to fuel our economy. We need many of those Middle Eastern nations 
who are not democratic to fuel our economy. As Mr. Ryan and Mr. Meek 
pointed out, in excess of $1 trillion has been borrowed from foreigners 
to pay for tax cuts for the most wealthy of Americans.
  This makes no sense, Mr. Speaker. It makes no sense from a national 
security perspective. If we have concerns about China and China's being 
a potential adversary, why do we continue to borrow money from the 
Chinese communist regime? Why, Mr. Speaker? It is a question I would 
like to have somebody answer.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I am not sure, quite frankly, if there 
is a good answer. I mean, what could possibly be the good answer? And 
the rhetoric that we get from our friends on the other side is that the 
tax cuts are stimulating the economy. The tax cuts are creating jobs. 
And this is laughable. Where? Where? In the Delphi Corporation? Ford 
just announced they are cutting 30,000 jobs. General Motors? Who is 
creating the jobs? And I heard our friend on the other side say a 
little bit earlier he had a company in Texas that went from two jobs to 
four jobs.
  I mean, that is laughable. Ford cuts 30,000, and the argument coming 
from the other side is there is one company in Texas, Mr. Speaker, that 
went from two jobs to four jobs. Now, that is economic growth.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, here in the 30-
Something Group, we believe in third-party validators. We believe in 
making sure we share with the American people and also with the Members 
of this House, Mr. Speaker, because sometimes there are a lot of things 
that are said. Some folks come to the floor and try to make sure that 
they provide information that somebody might have told them or they may 
say ``they said,'' but we are actually giving good information, third-
party validators. Some are U.S. Government agencies. Some are groups 
with great credibility.
  I can tell Members right now and every American knows because they 
just pick up a newspaper or turn on the news, Mr. Ryan mentioned just a 
few companies, but GM, Delphi, Merck, Verizon, and now Ford just to 
name a few, Mr. Speaker. So when we start talking about the tax cuts, 
we can go down memory lane to just a month ago. There is so much 
happening to the American people versus for the American people that we 
do not have enough time to share it all. We just do not have enough 
time to share it all.
  I mean, we would have to take 10 hours on this floor daily just to 
report to the Members of the House what is going on in this House. We 
could not look at another Congress and say, well, that happened in the 
101st Congress or that happened in the 93rd Congress or that happened 
in the 3rd Congress. No. We are setting a new chapter in the record 
book as it relates to not governing in the way that we should. And I do 
not want to say ``we,'' Mr. Speaker, because it is the Republican 
majority, and I just want to make sure Members understand. Folks talk 
about what

[[Page 27729]]

the Democrats are doing? What we are doing? Somebody said something 
about what the Democrats are going to raise. We cannot even bring our 
proposal to the floor. Do my colleagues know why? They say Democrats 
are lazy, that they do not want to put anything together. Guess what. 
We have a number of plans to put this country back in order and make 
sure that we clean out this deficit spending that the majority is 
doing, and they will not allow us in the Rules Committee to come to the 
floor and put our proposals on this floor and let us do it on an up-or-
down vote. What they are doing is they are borrowing from this 
generation and future generations.
  Just a few weeks ago, what was it, 14-something billion dollars they 
took from students, they took from parents that are trying to educate 
their children? We are getting our clock cleaned by China that, I must 
add, we are borrowing money from to give billionaires and millionaires 
tax cuts. We are borrowing money from them. They have more engineers. 
As a Member of Congress that represents a father or mother that wants 
to see their daughter become an engineer, forget about it. Unless they 
are a millionaire or a billionaire, that is the only way she is going 
to get to college so that she can be able to make this country strong. 
We are weakening this country and giving subsidies to companies that go 
overseas, Mr. Speaker, to have a better deal than they are going to 
have here on U.S. soil, to have better opportunities for our young 
people.
  No Child Left Behind, Mr. Speaker, was a piece of legislation that we 
all thought at the beginning that could be a bipartisan work product 
that we can fund to help our future generations and present generation 
so we can compete against other countries. No. What we are doing now is 
we are making it easier for U.S. companies to go overseas, send our 
jobs overseas, and have GM, Delphi, Merck, Verizon, and now Ford lay 
off workers here. This is not the Kendrick Meek report, Mr. Speaker. 
This is reality. This is not Walt Disney World. This is the U.S. House 
of Representatives.

                              {time}  2030

  It starts here. We are the People's House. The Republican majority 
has allowed this to happen. Now, if someone is a Republican or an 
Independent, or, you know, Libertarian, Green Party, and says I am not 
a Democrat, I do not subscribe to that, you must subscribe to it, 
because it is dealing with your household. This is not just Democratic 
households that the Republican majority cut $4 billion plus out of 
student loans and student aid. That is going to increase, increase the 
cost to send your child to college.
  So I would say, gentlemen, for the Members that are in their offices 
right now, for the Members that are paying attention to us on the floor 
right now, they have to put in their newsletter to their constituents 
that you need to look at that college fund that you are setting aside 
for your child, because, guess what? You need to increase it. Because 
we just made life harder for you.
  Why do we make life harder for you? We made life harder because we 
had to make sure that the oil companies had their subsidies while they 
are making record breaking profits. We had to make sure that the 
millionaires and billionaires get their tax cut.
  It is not just our report. Just pick up the paper. Just take a look 
at what is going on in this Congress right now. It is not that. It is 
not the fact that, oh, well, we had to cut the student loan and student 
opportunities, we had to cut Medicaid and we had to instruct the 
Veterans Affairs Committee to cut out of their budget millions for 
veterans to make their lives longer, to make those health care clinics 
for veterans, have them have fewer hours.
  Gentlemen, in some areas of this great country of ours, there are 
clinics that are only open for 1 day a week for the veterans. One day. 
So now we have instructed, or the Republican majority has instructed, 
because we all voted against it, to then cut over $600 million. So that 
means that maybe they will be open for half a day, Mr. Speaker.
  And the President today wants to talk about the economy in Iraq. 
Wants to talking about what we have done with Iraqi contractors. 
Please. Why do not we talk about what we have done in U.S. cities?
  Mr. DELAHUNT. If the gentleman will yield for a moment. You know, how 
about building some roads here in the United States? How about 
rehabilitating schools and constructing new schools with taxpayer 
dollars generated at the Federal level.
  Rather than doing that for the United States here, what about our 
fellow citizens who were ravaged and are expressing frustration ever 
every single day in the national media in the aftermath of Katrina, and 
Rita, and other natural disasters, who are living in cars. What about 
doing something here, Mr. President, for Americans, rather than 
assuming the cost of nation building in Iraq?
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I think the President needs to recognize, and I am 
not saying this facetiously, he is not the President of Iraq. He is the 
President of the United States of America. And I do not say that to be 
flippant. I say that because this President's sole focus throughout his 
first term and into the second term has been Iraq.
  And to give a speech today as Ford announces that they are cutting 
30,000 jobs in the United States of America, as Delphi is in 
bankruptcy, as General Motors is having great difficulty competing, he 
is giving a speech on the Iraqi economy. It is like we are having a bad 
dream. I mean, come on. At some point, should not someone around the 
President or somebody in this Congress tug him on the shirt sleeve and 
say, hey, Mr. President, we need you. We need your help. This country 
needs a domestic economic policy.
  Borrowing money from the Chinese to subsidize tax cuts for the top 1 
percent is not a domestic agenda
  Mr. DELAHUNT. At a minimum, the American people deserve a debate. 
They deserve a debate. They deserve a debate about the implications, 
not just in terms of our national security, but the implications for 
the economic future particularly of your generation, by virtue of the 
costs that are being borne by American taxpayers, let alone my sons and 
daughters and your generation with their blood in Iraq.
  I mean, from what we can infer, since the American taxpayer is 
bearing almost the entire burden of nation building in Iraq, let us 
have a debate about the concept of nation building as a key critical 
ingredient in the foreign policy espoused by this White House and 
embraced by this Republican Congress.
  Because that, I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, is a marked 
transformation in traditional Republican principles. We have heard, 
even in the course of the campaign in 2000 and from previous 
Presidential campaigns, a denigration of nation building in terms of 
our foreign policy. And yet, what we have done is we have embarked upon 
a nation building exercise as part of our foreign policy, as part of 
our international relations. It is being borne by the American 
taxpayer.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. The problem with this whole situation, this whole 
scenario, is that as we are spending $1.5 billion a week in Iraq, and 
we are borrowing money from the Chinese, over $1 trillion in the last 4 
years, not investing in the United States, not investing in education, 
not investing in research and development, not fixing our health care 
issue, we are weakening ourselves as a country.
  Now we all as Americans want to say we want to be good to other 
countries. We want to be helpful to other countries. But if you are not 
strong at home, what good really are you to the rest of the world? We 
need a strong America, because if America is not strong, you are going 
to see a communist China rear its ugly head.
  And talk about having a debate about an issue. It was in today's 
paper and on the news last night and today. Osama bin Laden. There is a 
name we have not heard for a while. Osama bin Laden is still alive 
leading the jihad.
  Why are we not having the discussion about where is Osama bin Laden? 
This is the man who coordinated and organized the attack against the 
United

[[Page 27730]]

States on 9/11. And we are having this huge debate about Iraq and what 
we should do and when we should leave and how it should go. What about 
Osama bin Laden?
  Mr. DELAHUNT. Let me ask you this. Was al-Qaeda in Iraq prior to the 
invasion of Iraq?
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. No.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. This working group that we have plays a very 
important role in making sure that the Members know that we in the 
minority party here in this House know exactly what they are doing and 
what they are not doing.
  And I can tell you that it is just so powerful, and it serves, to our 
benefit politically if the country did not have to suffer. You know, as 
an American I must say, gentlemen, that politically we could just say, 
well, let us go home. Let us not come to the floor, Mr. Speaker, and 
share with the Members about what they are not doing and what we should 
do. Come to the floor and share our proposals from the Democratic side 
that will fall on deaf ears on the other side, because they do not want 
to hear our ideas, gentlemen, they just want to criticize what we are 
trying to do to save this country of ours.
  The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) mentioned earlier that all they 
are doing is weakening the country. Now, the facts are, like it or not, 
Members, on the Republican majority side, like it or not, the bottom 
line is is that the
9/11 Commission put out a report card. And the Republican majority gets 
a big fat F because we have been, and as ranking member of oversight on 
the Homeland Security Committee, we have worked time after time again 
and put forward proposal after proposal to make sure that U.S. cities 
are prepared for a terrorist attack.
  Interoperability. Mr. Speaker, I want to break that down for the 
Members. That is making sure that first responders can talk to one 
another, which we learned from 9/11, that firefighters could not talk 
to police officers, police officers could not talk to firefighters, 
they could not talk to the port authority, they could not talk to 
others as it relates to helping Americans get out of those buildings. 
And guess what? Lives were lost. Lives were lost.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. From September 11 of 2001 to today, has anything 
changed in terms of our preparedness for a major terrorist attack such 
as we experienced in New York and here in Washington? Has anything 
changed according to the 9/11 report of any consequence, of anything 
substantial whatsoever?
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Well, do not ask me. I mean, look at what the 9/
11 bipartisan commission said. I was watching Tim Russert, one of the 
respected reporters here in Washington, DC, at NBC. And he had the 
chairman, who is a Republican, past Republican governor, and the vice 
chairman that was a Member of this House, respected Democrat, on both 
sides of the aisle they respect him.
  And they both said that the administration, present administration, 
Mr. Speaker, and the Republican majority, gets a big fat F. They did 
not want to grade. Well, let me just put it this way. They did not want 
to grade it, but they said that it is low. Okay. And I think it is 
important that we understand that interoperability that was a big issue 
that first responders asked for, they could have saved not only first 
responder lives, but American lives if they could have talked to one 
another, because they could not, because they did not have the ability.
  Okay. You would assume that we would run out and get that done. No. 
We did not get it done. The Republican majority did not get it done. It 
was not prioritized. Yes, the money went there, but guess what? There 
is a bunch of politics that is going on as it relates to the money and 
the execution of making sure that U.S. cities have what they need.
  Now, Americans again, another example, looked at what happened in 
Katrina. The Coast Guard could not talk to the police officers. The 
police officer could not talk to the military. The military could not 
talk to fire departments that came down to help. Fire departments could 
not talk to game and fish that were on boats trying to rescue people.
  Why? Because the interoperability is not there. We mandate highway 
dollars. I used to be a State trooper in the State of Florida. I can 
tell you right now, sometimes we used to be told, you need to write 
those seatbelt tickets. Why? Because the Colonel of the Florida Highway 
Patrol says so? No. Because if we do not write seatbelt tickets and we 
write speeding tickets to folks not wearing their seatbelts, we will 
lose our Federal money.
  You think that if this Congress did that as it relates to making sure 
that we have interoperability that would save lives if a terrorist 
attack was to happen? Now it is not a secret. Wherever Americans are 
living now, Mr. Speaker, first responders could not talk to one 
another, because the dollars have not been prioritized as it relates to 
making sure that it happens on behalf of U.S. cities.
  I want to make one other point, a couple of points if I may, and I 
will be quick. Failure to secure the materials for weapons of mass 
destruction in the national priority. We still do not have HAZMAT 
uniforms for many of our first responders that are out there.
  Failure to improve air cargo inspection as a priority.

                              {time}  2045

  We want to shake down people at the magnetometers when they walk 
through the TSA. Meanwhile, we have containers being placed on these 
commercial airlines that are unchecked.
  Failed to implement an airline passenger prescreening program based 
on consolidated terrorist watch lists. Still, you have the 
administration, you have the majority that has failed to do that. We 
have proposals to do that. I am on Homeland Security. Take it from me, 
it is on a partisan vote and it goes down if it is heard at all, 
especially not on this floor.
  Failed to review and make changes in the congressional intelligence 
oversight process. I am going to tell you right now, there are some 
things that we should have great oversight over but, I hate to report, 
there are things that we don't even have an opportunity to have a 
hearing on. I just want to make sure the Members of the House 
understand, the majority rules here. They set the agenda. They say when 
something is going to happen. I mean the Republican majority. They set 
the agenda. They make sure that we have these hearings and they denied 
hearings as relates to this.
  For Republicans to say, well, the Democrats are stopping us from 
doing certain things, we cannot stop them right now, Mr. Speaker, the 
Republican majority. That is something that the American people have to 
do. I can tell you right now, it is not political rhetoric. This is 
reality. I want to be proven wrong. But this is the report card. The 9/
11 Commission has said it and we have been on this floor time after 
time asking for a Hurricane Katrina independent commission. The State 
of the Union that is coming up, I don't represent anyone in New Orleans 
or in the gulf States, but I asked a person that is a victim, an 
evacuee of that storm, to take my gallery pass for the State of the 
Union. I want her to be here, to look at the President and this 
Republican majority and all of us when he marches in here on the floor 
and talks about how great things are. Meanwhile back at the ranch in 
New Orleans and in the gulf coast, some areas don't even have power. 
And they are asking Louisiana and they are asking Mississippi to carry 
the weight on the cost of recovery. Meanwhile, we have people walking 
on this floor with a straight face coming here talking about we need 
tax cuts to help the economy and my constituents need a tax cut, 
because of the millionaires and billionaires that are getting it.
  I want to thank my colleagues for allowing me to get these points out 
because it is important that we share this information.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. They are excellent points. I think your idea about 
taking your one ticket and allowing a victim of Katrina and the natural 
disasters that befell our gulf States, invite them to come and sit in 
this gallery is an excellent concept. We as a group ought to

[[Page 27731]]

consider asking our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to allow 
these seats to be filled by American citizens who have had their lives 
disrupted and their futures placed in doubt and listen to this 
President tell them that things are good in America and that their 
government is helping them. Maybe that might prompt some action, Mr. 
Speaker. Because just recently, 2 nights ago, there was on one of the 
networks a story about Americans living in cars waiting to go into 
trailers. How long do we expect our fellow citizens to endure that kind 
of an existence? We can feel sorry for those all over the globe that 
experience poverty, that experience tragedy in their lives, but our 
first obligation is to our own citizens.
  When we speak of nation-building, Mr. Speaker, let's start building 
America again. That is where we should begin. In terms of your points 
regarding our lack of preparedness for a terrorist attack, let's be 
very candid. Those levees that were breached in Louisiana, they were 
breached because of natural forces, forces of nature. They very well 
could have been breached by a terrorist attack. And what did we see? We 
saw a lack of preparation, Mr. Speaker, that offended every American 
and really, I would suggest, shook the rest of the world because they 
saw an America that they did not realize existed, an America that was 
ill-prepared to take care of its own people.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I think that the key point to this whole thing with 
the Katrina scenario is that the President ran on he was going to make 
the country stronger, that he could protect us better than his 
opponent, which is fine. Katrina happened. It was not a surprise 
attack. It was not a surprise that Katrina hit the gulf coast. This 
hurricane was on the Weather Channel for 5 days. And we say, were we 
really ready? Unfortunately, as Mr. Hamilton and Governor Kean said, 
that there will probably be another terrorist attack in the United 
States. We don't want that to happen, of course, but we are not going 
to have 5 days to prepare for a terrorist attack in the United States. 
You are not going to be able to turn on the Weather Channel and they 
are going to say, a terrorist attack is coming for New York City and 
you have 5 days to prepare for it. That is the number-one 
responsibility that we have. Article 1, section 1 creates this body and 
we have an obligation to protect this country. We are not going to have 
forewarning. We are not going to be tipped off by the Weather Channel. 
And if we cannot do it with 5 days' preparation, it frightens me at 
what stage we are at right now and the job we are not doing because we 
are so focused on all these other things.
  I would be happy to yield to my friend who just strutted in from 
wherever she was.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I can tell you I just strutted in from helping 
my first graders with their homework. Just so you know, I have my 
priorities straight.
  I spent a couple of minutes listening to your exchange and cannot 
help but chime in here and express my deep concern which I know my good 
friend from Florida (Mr. Meek) shares as well. We had our Governor and 
FEMA represent our delegation in advance of Wilma. You have got Katrina 
and we all are very familiar with the lack of preparation clearly and 
the aftermath of Katrina and the disaster literally of the aftermath of 
Katrina but then you fast-forward a couple of months to Wilma when we 
had 2 months that FEMA could have learned from some of those mistakes 
and dealt with the preparedness issues that they were really poor on 
and the aftermath response issues that they received incredibly poor 
marks on. You would think that they would have fixed it. But in our 
case, our Governor and FEMA represented to us that we were the model 
State. I say this not to be too specific about any one State's 
preparation, but FEMA and the Florida government represented that our 
State was the most prepared.
  We can tell you that if our State and their response to Wilma is the 
pride and joy, is the model for preparation in disaster response, then 
we should all be deeply concerned about the other 49 States and their 
preparedness and potential response for a natural or a man-made 
disaster like a terrorist attack.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I think this goes right to the point that our 
friends on the other side, as much as we like some of them, are unable 
to govern. They just don't know how to do it. There is just total 
incompetence, from the economy, from the poverty levels, the 
macroeconomic situation, balancing the budget, lack of fiscal 
restraint, fiscal recklessness in borrowing $1 trillion from foreign 
interests over the past 4 years. They just are unable to govern the 
country. They have had their chance. They have controlled the House and 
the Senate and the White House, one party, they have had a chance to 
implement their agenda, and nothing seems to be going right.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. You are absolutely right. On top of that, 
because we are about third-party validators and it is not all about 
just what we say, you have Governor Kean and Mr. Hamilton who the other 
day gave them a list of Fs on almost every major aspect of preparedness 
and what we should be doing in terms of response to a potential 
terrorist act. It is just one more example of their lack of caring, of 
their lack of competence, of the cronyism, of the corruption. Find a C 
word and this Republican leadership and the administration absolutely 
fit the bill.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Can the gentlewoman please elaborate on the C 
words?
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. We have got the first C word which is 
corruption. It seems like every day we have yet another example, a 
tragic example, it wrenched my heart to hear that we had a colleague of 
ours, the former gentleman from California, who pled guilty to bribery, 
so we have got corruption. We have ethics charges, some which are just 
accusations, some which have been validated, up and down the ranks of 
many of our Republican colleagues. That is one C word. Then you shift 
from corruption to cronyism. There is rampant cronyism throughout this 
administration. You have only Michael Brown, Brownie, to use as an 
example. When the President would put in place someone whose claim to 
fame in terms of his qualifications for being the lead expert on 
disaster preparedness and response was being the president of the 
Arabian Horse Association as opposed to having a deeply long resume in 
emergency preparedness, that just smacks of cronyism. What was his real 
quality in terms of being hired for that job? He was James Allbaugh's 
roommate. That was the real qualification when he got that job. You 
have Mr. Savavian, who was the procurement director in the White House 
who now has been fired because he was accused of wrongdoing.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. He had the opportunity to resign and then the 
next day he was indicted. Go ahead.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Thank you just for the filling in of the 
facts. The list goes on in terms of the cronyism that is rampant 
through this administration. So you have corruption. You have cronyism. 
Then you have, as the gentleman from Ohio just described, the total 
lack of competence. Example after example. The proposal on Social 
Security. The way they handled Katrina. The way they handled Wilma. The 
deficit. We have an $8 trillion deficit.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Iraq.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Iraq. You have an $8 trillion deficit now. We 
have got corruption, cronyism, competence.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. It is a culture.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. It is a culture.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. This is not a one-time event.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. I must say that never before in the history of 
this country has there been leadership, all of these issues of cronyism 
and corruption, never before at these levels in the history of this 
country. It is not the Kendrick Meek report, the Debbie Wasserman 
Schultz report, or the Tim Ryan, the Bill Delahunt report.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. This country deserves better than that. That is the 
point that we are trying to make. We

[[Page 27732]]

do not have to settle for a dictator like some people do in some 
countries. We are allowed to have high expectations for our leaders in 
the country.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. I want to acknowledge the presence of a good colleague 
and a good friend and clearly a solid Republican, Steve King from Iowa. 
Let me pose a question to him. The gentleman from Iowa is down here on 
a regular basis and is an ardent advocate of his point of view. I know 
we are running out of time.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. I hope he yields to us for the time we are 
yielding to him because we only have about 6 minutes left.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. I think we are coming back for another hour, so we will 
get him on the other side here.
  I will just make this statement and ask for his comment. We have been 
at war for almost 3 years. It will be 3 years this March. We have not 
had a single oversight hearing on Iraq in the committees that I serve 
on, including the House International Relations Committee. Not one.

                              {time}  2100

  There are so many questions that the American people have. There are 
so many questions that we all have, and yet, I would submit that we are 
not exercising our constitutional mandate to serve as a check and 
balance on the executive branch. I mean, we do have these allegations 
of an order of magnitude of corruption that is ongoing in Iraq today.
  Let me just quote you from the Washington Times, not a liberal 
journal. I think you will grant me that.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, I will.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. This is a quote from October 28, a column by Bill Gertz 
and Rowan Scarborough, again, people that would not agree with me or my 
colleagues on this side of the aisle. Here is what they said: Defense 
officials tell us the scandal involves massive corruption in Iraq 
related to the United States and international funds meant for 
reconstruction efforts and the failure of the administration to control 
these funds.
  I am ranking member on a subcommittee that has requested for months 
an oversight hearing just simply on these allegations, and I am met 
with silence. Let me tell you that is wrong. It is a disservice to the 
American people. It is a disservice to the institution, not a single 
hearing in 3 years.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, I thank 
my friend and the gentleman from Massachusetts and colleague on the 
Judiciary Committee.
  I have been to Iraq for the express purposes of oversight of those 
construction projects, about $12.5 billion administered by the Army and 
the balance of that $18.5 billion by other entities, the sea bees. Yes, 
I actually faced a number of questions from the people in Iraq. I did 
not get to the bottom of that. I do not know that they are in a 
position to actually have oversight on this in that fashion, but your 
point that you have made is one that is somewhat new and fresh to me. I 
have done due diligence, I think, to an extent to see where that 
money's been spent there. I would very much like to sit down with you 
and have this conversation so that we could bore into this.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, but the American people have a right of 
transparency and watching and hearing from these people. You make that 
effort and I understand that you do and you ask questions, but we need 
to do this in the light of day. There is pervasive corruption ongoing 
in the rebuilding of Iraq. It is offensive, and this comes from 
conservative columnists as well as our own military personnel and from 
multiple, different sources. Yet, the leadership in this House is 
denying the American people the right to hear.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Just a few examples of what you are talking 
about, we are talking about the role of the White House in promoting 
misleading intelligence when it came to how we got into the war and the 
Iraq's weapons of mass destruction or lack thereof. We are talking 
about the responsibility of senior administration officials for the 
abuses at Abu Ghraib. We are talking about the role of the Vice 
President's office and the award of Halliburton contracts, no 
information on that, no accountability. The role of the White House in 
withholding the Medicare cost estimates from Congress. The identity of 
the energy industry campaign contributors that met with the Vice 
President's energy task force.
  We could keep going about the corruption, the lack of information, 
the lack of competence, and in fact, when we come back at our next 
opportunity in our next hour, we will continue to go on about that.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. How about the gentleman, I cannot remember his 
name, a couple of weeks ago came up who had $87 million worth of 
contracts in Iraq he was in charge of and he was stealing money, 
hundred of thousands of dollars. In the 1990s he was convicted of 
fraud, but yet, this administration hired him again. That is 
incompetence. That is cronyism. That is an inability to execute the 
proper role of government.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, we just got back from Iraq. We are 
not even a week out of Iraq. We visited three Iraqi cities, and it was 
my second trip. I can tell you this, that when you hear uniformed 
personnel say, well, you know, some of the money, I mean it is like you 
know people take some of the money for themselves; it is something that 
happens here in Iraq. This is an accepted kind of thing. This is the 
U.S. taxpayers' money, and we are just saying, oh, well, you know, that 
is the way things happen over here.
  Let me tell you, when the auditor general really starts to report 
what is happening with the money we are giving, that is being taken 
away from U.S. cities and the U.S. taxpayer, meanwhile the majority 
says, oh, let us govern, we will make sure that we are fiscal and we 
are responsible, well, when we come back in the next hour I want to 
talk about being responsible. I think it is important we do that. We 
will be back in an hour.
  I just want you to give the Web site out before we close.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. [email protected].
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Mr. Delahunt, 
Mr. Ryan, Ms. Wasserman Schultz and to thank the Democratic leadership 
for allowing us to have the hour. We would also like to say it is 
pleasure and honor to address the House of Representatives.

                          ____________________