[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 20]
[House]
[Pages 28263-28270]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   CONSTITUTIONAL CHECKS AND BALANCES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. McNerney). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Walz) is 
recognized for 60 minutes.
  Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to be here with 
my colleagues, the members of the class of 2006, and I'm going to defer 
to my colleague from Kentucky who brought an initiative forward and one 
that we are excited about talking about. It's something that the 
American people should be excited about talking about. It's a refresher 
course and, I guess, to bring to the forefront again the most important 
document in this country, the Constitution.

                              {time}  1730

  With that, I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Yarmuth).
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Minnesota, the 
distinguished president of our class, for yielding and thank him for 
the superb job he has done in leading us through this wonderful year 
that we are spending as new Members of Congress.
  I want to start this segment by actually reading the first few words 
of the Constitution of the United States because too often I find that, 
as I go around the country and go around my district, the people have 
lost sight and I think many Members of Congress have lost sight of 
exactly what the Founding Fathers did 220 years ago. I think we are all 
familiar with the preamble of the Constitution, and it starts with 
those wonderful words ``We the people,'' those incredible words that 
actually go to the heart of what we are about as a democracy:
  ``We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect 
union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the 
common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings 
of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this 
Constitution for the United States of America.''
  Now, following those words, following that brief preamble, it says in 
article I, section 1: ``All legislative Powers herein granted shall be 
vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a 
Senate and House of Representatives.''
  I think it's amazing to think back to what was going on in those 
formative years of our Republic in 1787. The country had just rebelled 
against a monarch in England, and when they were establishing a 
government that would reflect the hopes and dreams of the people who 
had gone through that incredible war of revolution against England, 
they decided to create a government in which the ultimate power would 
rest in the people. That's why they said at beginning of the preamble, 
``We the people.'' They created in article I the representative body of 
government that we sit in today. They did that because they didn't want 
one person being the decider of everything that affected their lives. 
They wanted to vest the power to govern in themselves through their 
representatives in Congress.
  And so we sit here as successors to that incredible legacy. And it is 
not only our power to do that vested by the Constitution in article I; 
it is our responsibility. We have an obligation to govern on behalf of 
our citizens, ``we

[[Page 28264]]

the people,'' as reflected in our representation here.
  I think those of us who were elected for the first time last November 
know that, yes, we were elected partially because of the war in Iraq, 
but we were also elected because the people of the country decided that 
they really wanted to make sure their voice was heard in Washington. 
They thought their voice was being ignored. They said this is our 
government. We are going to change it by sending people there who will 
listen to us and will put our desires into action through the 
legislative process.
  So I thought it would be wonderful to call attention to the fact that 
article I does impose, again, not just these powers, but it also 
imposes responsibilities. And that's what we came here to do, and we 
recognize that. We want everyone in Congress, both parties, to share in 
this acknowledgment of what our responsibilities are under the 
Constitution. I am so proud to have with me tonight and so proud to 
serve with wonderful people who are committed to the same ideals.
  I would like to recognize Betty Sutton from Ohio, one of our 
wonderful new Members, to elaborate on article I and what we are doing 
to realize and to fulfill our responsibilities under article I.
  Ms. SUTTON. I thank the gentleman for his introduction here and I 
thank you for your leadership. The gentleman from Kentucky is taking 
us, hopefully, on what will be a bipartisan effort to restore the 
responsibilities of this Congress has under article I and just sort of 
bring that back to the forefront because checks and balances are very 
important in this government. I also want to commend the leadership of 
our president, Tim Walz, the gentleman from Minnesota, who is an 
outspoken advocate for the people that he represents, and, frankly, 
that's what article I is all about.
  As you point out, when we were elected to Congress, we were elected 
to represent the people of our districts. Not lobbyists on K Street and 
not operatives at the White House or even the President himself. Our 
responsibility and our loyalty are to the Americans, the people, first 
and foremost, who sent us here. That means we have to do the job that 
they asked us to do. And that job is important, and we know exactly 
what that job is because article I in some ways is a job description. 
As you point out, it's not about really just authority; it's about 
responsibilities. Nowhere in that job description in article I does it 
say we have to protect egos or political interests of the executive 
branch. Nowhere does it say that we have to do only things that the 
President tells us to do. And nowhere in that job description does it 
say that Congress answers to anyone but the American people.
  There has sort of been a slope here where past Congresses have ceded 
legislative power to the executive branch, and, frankly, I believe that 
when that happens, Congress is falling down on their job. I am really 
glad that we are here tonight to reinvigorate and rededicate ourselves 
to make sure that we are fulfilling our obligations and our function 
under article I because it is vitally important to so many issues, from 
the war in Iraq to all these judiciary issues.
  Mr. YARMUTH. I thank my colleague. She has expressed it very well, 
and that is exactly what I know she has done in our 10 months here.
  It also gives me great pleasure to recognize our colleague, another 
new Member from the great State of Florida, Congressman Klein, and I 
know he has some thoughts on this issue as well.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. I would like to thank the gentleman from 
Kentucky and all of my colleagues here in our freshman class. We all 
ran in these difficult elections almost a year ago, but I think the 
very strong message that came out of all of us coming to Washington was 
a very strong message from back home, and that is the responsibilities, 
as was suggested by our colleagues, that we all know, from our civics 
classes back in high school and elementary school, that the beauty and 
the strength of the United States and our democracy is all about checks 
and balances. It's what makes our system a democracy. We can look at 
other models in Europe and Asia and around the world and dictatorships 
and things like that, but the strength of what works in this country is 
checks and balances.
  What we believe is going on and the reason this emphasis on article I 
is so important and for our public and the people in this country to 
jump on this and work with us and recognize this and talk about it is 
because there has been a falling down of one side. We're out of 
balance. There are three legs to the stool. Each one has a specific set 
of authority. The judges, the judiciary, interpret. The legislature, 
that is, the Congress, has the authority to make the laws. And the 
executive has certain authority into executing and following and, 
through the agencies, doing certain things. But when one branch gets 
out of whack, it means the power is coming from another branch. This 
isn't about personal power. This is about the strength of our 
democracy. That is the exciting piece here.
  So this check and balance is not about President Bush, or any 
President. It's not about anybody in particular because there are 
future and past leaders that have all tried to exercise in certain 
ways. This is about where we are going in the future. I think as the 
gentlewoman from Ohio has already correctly mentioned, there has been a 
failure over the last number of years in the legislative branch, the 
Congress, in fighting back and asserting itself in terms of oversight 
and accountability and follow-through to make sure that the executive 
branch, the President and the executive branch, are doing what they are 
supposed to do, whether it is executing the war in Iraq and making sure 
that billions of dollars are not flowing out without any follow-up, 
whether it is an Attorney General that may not have necessarily been 
following some of the laws as we understand them or at least having the 
opportunity to ask the questions and not be stonewalled by the 
executive branch. This is what it's all about. It is a balance. It's a 
beautiful thing, truly, but it has got to work.
  As the gentleman from Kentucky has correctly stated, and I thank him 
for bringing up in our discussion article I, this conversation that is 
going to happen throughout our country for the next couple of months 
is, let's make sure Congress does its job, let's limit the executive 
branch to do what it has to do, and make sure that our system works in 
its form of accountability that we have.
  Mr. YARMUTH. I thank the gentleman.
  I would now like to recognize another colleague, another member of 
the freshman class and the first president of our class and also a 
member with me on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, where 
I think we perform one of the major powers and responsibilities that 
article I vests in the Congress: the function of oversight.
  Mr. HODES. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Yarmuth, let me start by saying how proud I am to stand with my 
colleagues, other new Members of the class of 2006, to talk about an 
initiative which you began, the article I initiative, to talk about 
reasserting the constitutional balance of power in Washington.
  For me, in coming to Congress as a new Member of this House from New 
Hampshire, it was absolutely fundamental to what I talked about in my 
campaign that the people of New Hampshire sent me to Congress to 
restore accountability, integrity, and oversight to government. They 
sent me here because what I said to them and what we now see is that 
Congress was a broken branch. Congress had not been exercising its 
oversight and accountability functions. And when Congress does not 
exercise its important power, its important right, its important 
obligation to the people to exercise oversight and accountability over 
the executive branch and other branches of government, things get 
unbalanced. It was that sense of checks and balances that our Founding 
Fathers put into the Constitution, and they put it in there for a 
reason.

[[Page 28265]]

  They won a Revolutionary War against an empire, the British empire, 
with an imperial ruler at the top, the King of England. We wanted to 
make sure that we had a different form of government; that we had a 
form of government where the people were the top dog in the fight; that 
the ruler would never become imperial. That is why we have a President, 
we have a Congress which is divided between the House and the Senate.
  In article I, section 1, our founders were very clear. They said, 
``All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress 
of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of 
Representatives.'' What I saw and many of us saw when we ran was a 
President who was abusing presidential power in an unprecedented way. 
This wasn't a matter of parties. It was this President abusing power in 
an unprecedented way, and it could have happened whatever party that 
President was in, but this is what we saw, and we ran.
  The article I initiative, which you began, which we have joined, and 
which we are spreading, seeks to heighten the public consciousness of 
the importance of checks and balances in our system. As newly elected 
Democratic Members of Congress, we feel with particular importance the 
obligation we have to reassert the power that the Founding Fathers 
wisely gave to Congress. When we came, we took an oath of office to 
protect and defend and uphold the Constitution. Article I is the first 
article, and it is the first article for a reason. And we are well on 
our way as we have begun to exercise oversight throughout Congress with 
hundreds of hearings held in this 110th Congress on many issues and 
especially the war in Iraq and what has happened with this President 
and this administration. In the Oversight and Government Reform 
Committee, we have held oversight hearings about administration 
interference with the work of GSA, the folks who deal with Federal 
buildings, turning it into an arm of politics; administration 
interference with science at NASA; administration incompetence with 
FEMA, delivering formaldehyde-filled trailers to the victims of 
Katrina; incompetence and mismanagement by the State Department, 
failing to exercise oversight over contractors in Iraq, the Blackwater 
scandal that is beginning to emerge now. We have been holding the 
hearings that constitute the function of Congress not just to make the 
law but to exercise the oversight that keeps things in checks and 
balances.
  I am delighted to be with you tonight. We are going to talk about 
numbers of ways in which we are reasserting Congress' power and taking 
steps to bring the people back to the People's House and serve the 
interests of the American people.
  Mr. YARMUTH. I thank the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Hodes).
  And now, Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to introduce one of 
our more illustrious new Members, Mr. Hall from New York, who has done 
a great deal in his term of office to uphold article I.
  Mr. HALL of New York. Thank you so much, Congressman, for yielding.
  I am proud to join my fellow new Members of the class of 2006. 
Freshmen, new Members, whatever you want to call us, I am really 
honored to be here with all of you and to tell you, speaking of 
oversight, about my trip this last weekend to Iraq. I think it's one of 
the most important functions the Constitution gives to Congress, the 
power, the sole power, to make war and to fund that war should it 
decide that it needs to happen.

                              {time}  1745

  I flew out on a congressional delegation that was led by our fellow 
classmate, Dave Loebsack, Congressman of Iowa. And after a few hours of 
sleep in Kuwait, we were flown in by a C-130 to Balad Airbase in Iraq. 
On the way in, the plane's crew deployed flares against a perceived 
threat from the ground. I never found out exactly what they saw, but 
they fired flares for protection.
  We got a tour of the base and the Air Force Theater Hospital there. 
We spent a night in the Green Zone. I slept in a guest room in 1 of the 
pool houses by 1 of Saddam's palaces, with a big Olympic swimming pool 
and gold fixtures and a marble bathroom that the guesthouse had. And I 
understand this is a subject of some friction with the Iraqis who feel 
that after 4 years we should have handed over the national palaces to 
the Iraqi people rather than inhabiting them ourselves, but that's 
another subject.
  I have good news and I have not so good news. The good news that I 
first perceived on my trip is that, first of all, I cannot state 
strongly enough my admiration and respect for our Army, Navy, Air Force 
and Marine personnel. Officers, medical teams, enlisted men and women, 
all are displaying creativity, commitment and a work ethic that should 
make all of us proud, even when they're carrying out duties other than 
they were trained for, such as an artillery officer doing civil affairs 
or training Iraqi police. They are more than up to the mission.
  The other good news is the money that we and our fellows here in 
Congress voted for MRAPs was definitely money well spent. We saw a 
picture of a Cougar MRAP that was hit by such a powerful explosive that 
it blew it up 25 feet or so into the air, hooked the utility lines, and 
brought them down with it as it landed upside down. Four soldiers 
inside that MRAP, 2 of them walked away; the other 2 spent a night in 
the hospital with relatively minor injuries and returned to their 
units. Their commander told us that in any other vehicle all 4 would 
have been fatalities.
  Now for the bad news. We have a lot of other vehicles. We were shown 
a huge parking lot. Imagine the biggest used car lot that you ever saw 
full of Humvees, Bradley vehicles, tanks, trucks, all kinds of vehicles 
that had been hit by IEDs. Some, including Abrams tanks, looked like 
they had been opened up by a can opener and had metal inside that had 
melted and resolidified. Tires, treads, electronics, and other useable 
parts were being salvaged, and the twisted steel that was left sold for 
scrap to Kuwait.
  Some vehicles were deemed fit for repair, but most of what we saw was 
clearly far beyond repair. The lot we looked at represented thousands 
of American casualties and billions of taxpayer dollars. We were not, 
by the way, allowed to take photographs of it.
  In the Green Zone, the most heavily guarded part of Baghdad, 1 of the 
safest, supposedly, parts of Baghdad, we were shown the concrete 
shelters every couple of hundred feet and warned to duck inside 1 of 
these shelters if an alarm sounded, because just the week before, 2 
American troops were killed by mortar fire in the Green Zone. Even 
sleeping in a guest room in Saddam's pool house, with the Olympic 
swimming pool and gold fixtures, we had to be ready to duck and cover.
  We had meetings with Ambassador Ryan Crocker, General Petraeus, 
briefings by the intelligence staff. And my synopsis of the 
conversations goes like this: Ambassador Crocker said, ``the Maliki 
government is somewhere between challenged and dysfunctional.''
  I asked repeatedly about what progress is being made toward 
restoration of clean drinking water, sewer service, and uninterrupted 
electrical supply. The answers from all of our briefers were vague. And 
current estimates are that electricity is only on 2 to 3 hours in 
Baghdad, maybe 12 hours a day in Ramadi or the Shia-controlled south.
  The next day we got to go to what they called the safest part of the 
country, which is Ramadi in Anbar province. Surprise; the last couple 
of months there has been a decrease in violence there as what they call 
the Anbar awakening happens with the sheiks deciding they're going to 
side with us rather than siding with the terrorists.
  Nonetheless, as we rode in the helicopter to the safe part of the 
country, we flew low and fast, close to the deck, with 2 .50 caliber 
machine guns out each of the front doors, and a couple of times they 
fired bursts of automatic weapons fire. And afterwards I asked what it 
was for, and the gunners said

[[Page 28266]]

they were clearing intersections. I presume that means firing in front 
of the lines of vehicles to make them stop and not drive directly 
underneath us.
  When we entered the marketplace to see the new, safe Ramadi market 
and the new business center, the small business center that had opened, 
we were driven there in a Cougar MRAP and told to wear our body armor 
and our helmets while we were inside the MRAP. And when we took them 
off and walked around the marketplace, we were surrounded at all times 
by a ring of dozens of soldiers carrying automatic weapons, and they 
were wearing their helmets and their body armor. So, if that's the safe 
part of Iraq, I wonder what the dangerous part is.
  On the way home we stopped in Ramstein, Germany, launched to a 
medical center, visited some of our troops. I saw 1 of my constituents 
there and had my picture taken with him, and interrupted his lunch to 
shake his hand and thank him for his service.
  There were several Romanians there who were injured, a number of 
Americans, all of whom from Iraq were hurt in Baghdad, attacked in 
Baghdad, and then there was 1 attacked or wounded in Afghanistan.
  Their spirits, in general, were great, and the medical staff was 
terrific. I can't say enough about our medical core either. And they 
really appreciate the visits. They really appreciate the donations from 
home that are coming from individuals, from school kids, from veterans 
groups and from corporations of everything from fleece and coats and 
underwear and toothbrushes, anything you might need, duffel bags, 
because these are soldiers evacuated from the point where they were 
wounded in the field by helicopter to Balad and then stabilized and 
sent off to Germany.
  So, there are good things, but there are also enough negative things 
going on there so that I returned with the same conclusion that I went 
there suspecting, which is that the $200 billion more that we're being 
asked for by President Bush for Iraq, based on the presumption that the 
Maliki government, which our own ambassador describes is dysfunctional, 
will be up to the task of resolving and reconciling the differences 
between the different sects is wishful thinking; and that after a year 
and another $200 billion, where will we be? What kind of guarantee, 
what kind of even probability do we have of a stable country to leave 
behind? If the sheiks in Anbar can get together, if the mullahs in the 
south, the Shia south can get together, if the Kurds in the north can 
get together and stop attacking Turkey long enough to have the country 
that they've always wanted, then perhaps we can bring our troops home 
and get to business spending that money here on things that Americans, 
at least in my district, are telling me they need built, infrastructure 
they need repaired, schools that they need to be improved, and other 
things that constitute Nation building here at home.
  That is the short version of my report. I thank you so much for 
letting me share that with you.
  Mr. YARMUTH. I want to thank my colleague.
  Before I introduce another one of our esteemed colleagues from the 
class of 2006, when you talk about your observations after having gone 
to Iraq, and many of our colleagues have gone, sometimes I think people 
get the impression that we're just acting like any other pundit talking 
on television. But, in fact, what you're doing and what the other 
Members of our body have done when they go to Iraq is to fulfill their 
responsibilities under article I. Because article I says that Congress 
shall have the power to provide for the common defense, it says to 
raise and support armies, to provide and maintain a Navy, to make rules 
for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces, and so 
forth, to provide for organizing, arming and disciplining, this is the 
militia. But all of these powers and responsibilities are given to the 
Congress not just to say okay to the President, the Commander in Chief, 
but to make the decisions as to what the appropriate levels of support 
for those various responsibilities are.
  So when we talk about going to Iraq to assess the situation there, to 
talk to our troops, that is not just to go for a matter of curiosity or 
journalistic curiosity, it's actually to fulfill our responsibilities 
because we are responsible to make decisions as to what appropriate 
levels of support are.
  And with that, I would like to call on my distinguished colleague 
from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).
  Mr. ELLISON. Well, my colleagues, let me thank you again for this 
excellent dialogue.
  We have to, as the difference makers in this 110th Congress, tell the 
people what's going on, what we're here for, and to reclaim the 
Congress as a co-equal branch of government articulated in article I, a 
co-equal branch of government that resides and has all legislative 
powers herein granted shall be vested in the Congress of the United 
States and shall consist of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives.
  And so as I heard my colleague, Mr. John Hall, articulate his trip to 
Iraq, I was forced to reflect upon my own. And I didn't go there out of 
an idle curiosity seeker, a person trying to go on an interesting trip, 
but as somebody who is going to be called upon to execute a vote, to 
push a button, red or green or otherwise, as to monies that will be 
sent forth and as to other business that will be happening in Iraq. 
That's our job, we claim it, we do not abdicate it, and it would be 
wrong and a dereliction of our duty to do otherwise.
  So, let me commend you and everybody who has gone to that place where 
our constituents, some of them have spent up to 18 months at a time as 
they face extended deployments.
  And I also want you to know that I sat down at a table with young 
people from my district in Minnesota where we ate lunch. I was struck 
by the fact that wherever they go, they've got these big old guns that 
they carry with them, everybody. It's like a wallet, but it probably 
weighs quite a bit more than that. And that's just the lives that they 
lead. But they distinguish themselves and make us proud by their 
courage. And it is political authority, politicians like us that make 
decisions whether they stay or whether they go. So we had better at 
least spend a little bit of time there with them, and we had better at 
least try to get in their shoes and identify with what they're going 
through just a little bit and feel that 130-degree heat that they're in 
every single day and feel the dust and sand under their feet and the 
hum of those helicopters. I'm sure you were humming around in those 
Black Hawks with the windows out and the machine guns on either side, 
strapped in in four places and feeling the heat of those propellers as 
the air hits against your helmet. It's the kind of experience that we 
go through so that we can have some real sympathy and empathy with the 
people who we are charged to represent. So, hats off to you, 
Congressman. I appreciate it.
  I'm not going to talk long because I love the switching around that 
we do. But I just want to make one other point as we look at article I 
and we reclaim and assert our responsibility under the Constitution as 
Congress. It is also important to understand that we have asserted our 
authority in the area of promoting working-class prosperity for people.
  I am so proud that one of the things we did for the first time in 9 
years is raised the minimum wage, Mr. Speaker. The hardest working 
people in America getting paid the least got a raise under this 
Congress. And I don't want people to make that into any kind of a small 
matter. Thousands and thousands of Americans benefited by raising the 
minimum wage for the first time in 9 years. I'm talking about the folks 
that clean the bedpans, mop the floors, sit in those cold or hot 
parking booths all across this country and really do the tough, tough 
work, getting paid not much of nothing. And you know that if you make 
minimum wage, basically, if your employer can pay you less, they 
probably would. So what we did is we raised that minimum wage so people 
can have a little bit better of a life. So now instead of moms having 
to tell kids, ``Honey, you can't go on that class trip,'' ``Honey, 
you're going to

[[Page 28267]]

have to wear those sneakers a few months longer,'' now, instead of dad 
saying, ``No, son, you can't sign up for baseball,'' or, ``Yes, we're 
having macaroni and cheese again,'' now they can say, ``No, we're going 
to do a little better this time. We're going to make your life a little 
better. We're going to make your quality of life a little better.''
  So I just want to say, Mr. Speaker, that I'm so proud of my 
colleagues and this whole 110th Congress to be able to do a little bit 
better for the hardest working Americans in our country.
  Mr. YARMUTH. I thank the gentleman. And it's interesting because, 
again, you can find a foundation for all these things we're doing in 
these very words in article I, because one of our responsibilities is 
to provide for the general welfare. And when we're talking about the 
minimum wage, we're talking about the general welfare of the people.
  I would like to return to our distinguished president, who has a 
distinguished military record of his own, since we've been talking 
about our efforts with regard to Iraq and the military.
  Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Well, I thank the gentleman. And I thank the 
gentleman from New York for his clear testimony and for fulfilling his 
obligation, not only as a Congressman, but as a citizen, to ask the 
hard questions. When we send our soldiers and our warriors into harm's 
way, it's all of our responsibility to ask, is this the right mission? 
Are they being provided for with the right equipment? Are we doing 
everything necessary to ensure that that's happening?
  And quite honestly, the problem around here up until January of this 
year was that people were being told that it was unpatriotic, it wasn't 
right to question those things because the President, under his 
administration, was determining that he was the unitary executive, he 
was the decider. Now, that's the President's right, that's this 
President's right or any right, I guess, to determine how they're going 
to look at that.
  The foundational principles, though, of this country don't let us 
just get to pick and choose. We go back to the document that the 
gentleman from Kentucky keeps referring to. The Constitution of the 
United States clearly lays out for us, and I think it's kind of 
interesting and maybe even critical for us, it might be the teacher in 
me that goes back to this, I have been rereading a book on the 
Constitutional Convention by two professors from Georgia that take 
James Madison's notes about what was happening at that time and that 
summer when they were thinking how they were going to form this 
government.

                              {time}  1800

  When the President talks about he doesn't need 435 commanders in the 
field or whatever, what he does need to understand is that these 435 
Members were the very first piece of decision-making that went into 
that convention.
  I would like to quote a little bit if I could from this, to my 
colleagues and to you, Mr. Speaker, about what was going through their 
minds as they were formulating this and what our responsibilities as 
article 1 is. Keep in mind that they met on May 30, and on June 1, the 
first piece of legislation once they got a quorum and they decided they 
were going to go with a Federal or national government, here are some 
of the notes that were compiled. Here is Mr. Mason.
  Mr. Mason argued strongly for an election of the larger branch by the 
people. It was going to be the grand depository of the democratic 
principles of the people. It was, so to speak, to be our House of 
Commons. It ought to know and sympathize with every part of the people. 
It ought to therefore not only be taken from different parts of the 
whole, but also from different districts of the larger members, which 
had several instances, particularly in Virginia, different interests of 
views arising from differences of produce, differences of habit, all 
kinds of differences.
  Mr. Madison considered the popular election of one branch of the 
national legislature as essential to a free government. He thought, 
too, that the great fabric to be raised would be more stable and 
durable if it should rest on the solid foundation of the people 
themselves and their elected representatives as the pillars. They went 
on to formulate how they were going to do that and have the debate of 
who should elect the Senate and how those things should happen. But 
there was no doubt in anyone's mind by the framers of this government 
about where the pillar and where that foundation should lay.
  I think it is interesting, then, to take a look at this of when they 
talked about the next branch, when they started talking about the 
executive branch. On June 1, the delegates began considering the 
structure of the executive. They were not sure yet what duties would 
fall to the executive or even whether a single person would hold that 
position. The major issue that faced them was one of balance. If the 
executive branch was too strong and independent, many delegates feared 
it might result in another monarchy like the ones they had recently 
revolted from. But if the executive was too weak and depended solely on 
the legislature, it might be ineffective. Thus, checks and balances 
were key to this.
  In going through and looking at these, the different issues that are 
coming up or the clauses that went into this, it was apparent from the 
very beginning that the Founders of this Nation clearly understood 
that. As we said earlier, and my colleagues each said, this isn't about 
a piece of legislation. This is a platform or a framework to get back 
to where this country came from. This isn't about President Bush. This 
is about all subsequent Presidents. And so be it, be that Democratic, 
Republican or whatever it would be, that those individuals still must 
fall within this framework.
  I believe, and I think my colleagues that are here tonight believe, 
that that was one of the motivating factors for sending many of us here 
almost a year ago to the day. It wasn't just ideology. It was about the 
framework of the genius that went into the Constitution and the thought 
processes that formed that.
  So in listening to this and listening to Mr. Hall describe his trip 
to Iraq, he is fulfilling his constitutional duties as an elected 
official and fulfilling the things that we know are necessary. I would 
go back to talking about this MRAP. If you remember, without the 
oversight, it was the administration that sent our soldiers with the 
army that we had, not the one that we would want. No one asked about 
body armor. No one asked about up-armored Humvees. Those were the 
questions that should have been asked in this chamber. But they were 
told, no, go along with the executive.
  Well, article I is about saying, we will never just go along because 
that is not our duty. I am pleased to see each of my colleagues here. I 
know the passion that each of them feel for this issue is a passion for 
this great Nation. It is a passion for the founding principles. It is 
not a revisionist history. It is not a power grab. It is functional 
government that delivers for its people. That is what we need to get 
back to.
  With that, I would like to, if I could, yield to the gentlewoman from 
Ohio.
  Ms. SUTTON. I thank the gentleman. What great points, and thank you 
for reading that because we can all use sort of that reminder that the 
Founding Fathers recognized the dangers of an imperial Presidency where 
edicts from the White House might carry more weight than laws passed in 
Congress or rulings handed down by the court. And that is what we are 
here to do, to get things back in balance.
  Unfortunately, as we have sort of expressed earlier, some of us, that 
the White House at present has routinely refused to provide information 
to the Congress. As the gentleman from Minnesota points out, that is 
not what was envisioned when our Founding Fathers put together the 
fantastic, amazing, living document that we are here today to reclaim.
  Earlier this month, I heard testimony from executive branch witnesses 
that they were refusing to answer questions before Congress on whether 
or not there is corruption in the Iraqi Government. We hear this right 
after

[[Page 28268]]

we hear our distinguished colleague from New York talking so eloquently 
about what he saw and what he witnessed. And we hear about our 
responsibility to come forth with the knowledge that we gain when we go 
to Iraq and I, too, have visited Iraq. We hear witnesses come in, 
though, from the administration when you start to ask questions about 
corruption that may be going on in that country, where we have paid, 
those of us here, the American soldiers, the troops, the price that 
they have paid. You speak so eloquently of them, Congressman Hall, and 
their dedication and their heart. I have to tell you, they are 
breathtaking to watch in action. But we have to question if money is 
missing. We have to question when equipment is missing because the 
troops pay a price. The American people are paying a price for what we 
are doing in Iraq.
  At any rate, the reality of an administration that instead of 
providing information so that we can investigate, they stonewalled 
providing information and in that case and in so many other cases, and 
I am sure others are going to mention them, it is our responsibility to 
ask the questions, to get the information and make sure that we make 
policies that are worthy of those soldiers and are worthy of the 
American people.
  I am so proud to be here with you all tonight, the members of the 
freshman class as we begin this campaign to reclaim our responsibility. 
Before I yield back, I just want to mention one thing that was 
striking. The gentleman from Minnesota mentioned that the President has 
rights under article II. But I think that we would all be better served 
that rather than thinking of the President having rights, he should 
think of them as responsibilities, because they are not personal 
rights. It is a job description for him, too, in article II.
  Mr. YARMUTH. I thank my distinguished colleague from Ohio. It is kind 
of interesting, because since we are going back to the kind of 
legislative history of the Constitution, in the Federalist Papers which 
do constitute, I guess, whatever official legislative history there 
was, one of the things that James Madison wrote in article number 51 
was, he said, ``But the great security against a gradual concentration 
of the several powers in the same department'' which would be the 
executive or the Congress ``consists in giving to those who administer 
each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives 
to resist encroachments of the others.''
  So when you talk about the efforts of the White House, in this 
particular case, to withhold information that the Senate requires, and 
we issued subpoenas, which would be our constitutional means of 
requiring the information to resist the encroachments of the other 
branch of government, we have been stonewalled on a number of 
occasions. And this is the type of activity that the Founding Fathers 
anticipated. They gave us the constitutional means to resist those 
encroachments. We need to continue to recognize those and to use them 
whenever we have to.
  Now, my colleague from Florida has been standing there for quite a 
while.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Thank you, the gentleman from Kentucky and the 
gentleman from Minnesota. It was great. It reminded me of being back in 
school of reading the Federalist Papers and those kind of things. But 
for those folks listening in this room and around the country, I think 
we all understand very clearly this is a living, breathing document, 
the Constitution. It has changed over the years, not the language, but 
the belief, but the fundamental goals and the values behind it are all 
the same. I think when I speak to people back in Florida, and they say 
to me, ``Get control over the problems in Iraq,'' whether that is 
changing the policy or making sure that the armor is there and that our 
military is properly supplied. ``What happened in Katrina? How could 
our government, when we saw those pictures on TV, how would could this 
be the United States?'' We look at third-world countries around the 
world and surely we go and support them, and yet in our own cities we 
saw the failure of the government. And unfortunately, at that time, 
very little ``buck stops here'' kind of response. People died 
unfortunately, billions of dollars in property loss, and just the 
bruising of the American psyche, not to mention the loss of personal 
lives in New Orleans and other places. It was so wrong on so many 
levels. I think that hurt America. But the key in what our 
responsibility is, Members of Congress and Americans together, is to 
say, let's learn from the errors. Let's learn from our mistakes. That 
is where the accountability, the balance of power, asking the 
questions, getting the answers, learning from those mistakes, whether 
it is in Iraq and finding out where those billions of dollars of cash 
have gone so it doesn't happen again, whether it is foreign policy or 
whether it is policy that affects everything in this country. We saw a 
bridge collapse. Are we looking at all the bridges in the United States 
to make sure that our infrastructure is safe?
  Mr. Ellison obviously is deeply involved and truly has been a great 
leader and hero to your community because you obviously knew exactly 
what needed to be done there. But these are the questions. Where is 
America today? And the only way we are going to continue to be this 
great country, this beacon around the world, is to be able to have a 
thriving democracy that doesn't let one end of the spectrum, in this 
case the executive branch, run over and not allow the Members of 
Congress and the American people to ask the questions, get the answers, 
learn and move forward in a very, very positive way, which is the 
American value that we all have.
  Americans can do anything they want. We know that. But you can't have 
Washington stopping it. Unfortunately, until this most recent Congress 
of which we are all privileged to be a part, we had year after year 
after year where Congress unfortunately didn't do its job in many of 
our opinions. I am very proud to say that we are making many of the 
right moves here. We have a lot more work to do. Let's make no mistake 
about it. Americans demand and expect us to do our job, to do it with 
fervor and excitement and make sure we correct some of these mistakes 
and move forward.
  But we need help from the executive branch. They have to realize 
there are limits to those responsibilities. There are no personal 
issues here, but responsibilities of moving this country ahead. If 
everyone will get out of their corner a little bit and come together, I 
think we can solve all these problems and do it in a very positive way.
  Mr. YARMUTH. I would like to recognize my colleague from New 
Hampshire with a question. And that is, we are about to engage in a 
fairly contentious series of votes concerning appropriations measures. 
According to article I, section 8, one of the most important powers 
that this Congress has is the power of the purse. As a matter of fact, 
in another Federalist Paper, number 58, James Madison said that, ``This 
power over the purse may, in fact, be regarded as the most complete and 
effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate 
representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress from every 
grievance, and from carrying into effect every just and salutary 
measure.''
  As we look forward to our deliberations and our discussions of the 
appropriations process, I would like the gentleman from New Hampshire 
to discuss our responsibilities in that regard.
  Mr. HODES. Thank you. As I have listened to the colloquy we have had 
here on the floor today in this Chamber where such important issues of 
war and peace, spending, raising revenue are debated on a daily basis 
now and thinking about the beginnings of the country, and you have 
asked about the questions coming up about appropriations, and we have 
had passed numerous appropriations bills. I think we have passed 12 
here in the House of Representatives. The Senate has not yet acted on 
all of them, because, of course, once we pass the appropriations bills, 
and they must originate under the Constitution here in the House of 
Representatives, they go to the Senate. The Senate has to pass them. 
They come back and forth and they go up to the President. Of course the 
President

[[Page 28269]]

has now threatened a veto on the spending necessary to run the Federal 
Government, to run the program for health and human services, to 
educate our kids, to heal the sick, all the programs that we have in 
the Federal Government, he has threatened to veto. And then if he 
vetoes a bill as we saw with the SCHIP bill, it will come back here 
where Congress will have the power to vote to override that veto and 
put it into law despite what the President says. All those powers and 
all the debates arise out of what my colleague from Florida noted was a 
living, breathing document. This great democracy of ours comes down to 
the words and the spirit that are embodied in the Constitution of the 
United States
  Many Americans around the country really have lost sight of the 
humble beginnings of the country and the need for the powers in article 
I.

                              {time}  1815

  We were a ragtag country, mostly woodsmen and woodswomen that were 
fighting against this imperial monarchy. We won a revolution and were 
then immediately faced with terrible challenges. We had no Navy. We had 
no commerce. Our Army was weak because we had just been through a 
revolution. We didn't have much money. We had no trade. We had few 
ambassadors. We had very few friends. It was the Constitution that had 
to lay out all the powers that would serve as the basis for what is now 
a $1 trillion a year appropriation in terms of what the Federal 
Government raises and spends, or borrows and spends in past Congresses.
  The challenges we faced coming in here, we are faced with fiscal 
irresponsibility, in which Congress was borrowing and spending. In 
fact, the war in Iraq is a perfect example. That war, which is now 
suggested will cost $2.4 trillion when all is said and done and all is 
added up, has been done with borrowing. It has been done by putting it 
on the backs of our children and our grandchildren. Fiscal 
irresponsibility. Just waste of taxpayer money, which we were sent here 
to deal with.
  The Constitution lays out clearly that it is Congress's duty to lay 
and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, words these days that 
don't mean very much. They are fancy, old-fashioned words. We have got 
to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general 
welfare. We are allowed in Congress to borrow money on the credit of 
the United States because it was very important at the very beginning 
of the Nation that this government be given the power to deal 
commercially and get the money it needed in a responsible way to run 
the affairs of the country. But it was up to Congress to appropriate 
the money to run the programs, provide for the common defense and 
general welfare.
  Today, we are faced with a tough situation and it will probably take 
us all through the fall as we deal with the President, who has 
threatened to veto the responsible measures that we, in Congress, 
coming together as voices of the people, have decided are necessary to 
run this country. It is up to Congress, really, to say what those 
programs should be because that is the power the Constitution gives us.
  Mr. Speaker, I heard with great interest the quotes from Madison, the 
quotes in the book. There is another quote from Madison that really 
talks about why Congress is the place that provides for the welfare and 
defense of the country. Madison wrote in Federalist Papers No. 52, and 
the words, it's a little old-fashioned, but folks will get it, ``As it 
is essential to liberty that the government in general should have a 
common interest with the people, so it is particularly essential that 
the branch of it under consideration,'' the Congress, ``should have an 
immediate dependence on, and an intimate sympathy with, the people''. 
In other words, it was clear from the founding of this Nation that this 
body, this hall, this place where we stand before there was C-SPAN, 
before there was television, this place is the place of the people.
  The 435 people who gather here, each representing 650,000 or so 
people of the United States, are the folks who, in what I have 
described to my constituents as the hurly-burly of democracy, come 
together to decide how things should be governed, what kind of money do 
we need, and how are we going to spend it.
  So that is what we are going to be seeing this fall play out. We 
don't know how it will end, where it is going to go. The Senate will 
have a role, certainly the President has a role. But so far it appears 
that with this President, the role now, unlike the past 6 years of the 
109th, 108th, 107th, which, with all due respect for my colleagues on 
the other side of the aisle, the Republicans, were Republican-dominated 
Congresses where the veto word was never mentioned, all of the sudden 
the President has now decided that it is time to veto almost everything 
that is coming out of Congress. He vetoed SCHIP, a bill to ensure 10 
million of our neediest children for health care. Vetoed. We are going 
to send it back. Threatened vetoes for our appropriations bills to run 
the Federal Government. He is going to send them back.
  This is a new light, apparently, that has dawned on this President, 
that suddenly a Democratic Congress sending him legislation is all of a 
sudden going to be subject to vetoes. With this initiative, we are here 
to reassert the importance, the power, the responsibility of this 
Congress to act for the people who sent us here.
  Mr. YARMUTH. I thank the gentleman from New Hampshire. I would like 
to yield to the gentleman from New York, with this segue; that we all 
come from different parts of the country. Isn't it amazing that the 
Constitutional Convention in its wisdom, the Founding Fathers, I think 
recognized that even if you had an all-powerful executive, that person, 
that man or woman could never know the needs and the priorities of 
every nook and cranny of the country and that you coming from New York 
or from New Hampshire or Ohio or Florida would all assimilate all of 
our needs and priorities into a budget and a priority list for the 
Nation. That is why he vested this type of power in the Congress and 
not in the executive branch.
  Mr. HALL of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. It is true 
that all of our areas and our districts around the country are 
different in many ways, but it is also true that they are the same, and 
our people have the same needs in many ways.
  The gentleman from Florida talked about Hurricane Katrina. The 
gentleman from Minnesota mentioned the trailers that FEMA didn't know 
were contaminated with formaldehyde. Two weeks ago, in my district, the 
town of Deer Park discovered they had lead contamination in their 
highway department building and their town hall that was measured at 
5,000-plus parts per million of indoor air contamination of lead.
  My office called and we got FEMA to send a trailer over 2 days later 
so they could set up some computers and telephones and at least have a 
rudimentary office in the parking lot next to their closed-down office 
being remediated for lead contamination.
  Three days later, the following Monday, I found that FEMA had come 
and towed the trailer away because it was contaminated with 
formaldehyde. Two-plus years after Hurricane Katrina, they still don't 
know which of their trailers have formaldehyde in them and which ones 
don't.
  That is why oversight is needed. Whether it is the Veterans' Affairs 
Committee, which has performed significant oversight, whether it is the 
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee looking at Coast Guard 
sweetheart deals with military contractors that resulted in eight 
vessels being lengthened by 13 feet and rendered unseaworthy, the 123s, 
as they call them, so they are now being scrapped in Baltimore Harbor, 
or whether it is oversight of the conduct of the war in Iraq, this body 
needs to perform oversight, and I am glad after the last 6 years, it is 
finally doing so.
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, we have just about 5 minutes left, so I 
thought all my colleagues would like a last chance to talk about what 
article I means to them and where they think we in this Congress can do 
our best work in furtherance of the goals of article I.

[[Page 28270]]


  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Speaker, when I think about article I, I think this 
passage in the Federalist Papers where it says that we are to be in 
intimate sympathy with the people, I got to tell you, that when I sat 
down along with my colleague Congressman Hodes and Congressman Klein 
with the Financial Services Committee to listen to people who had faced 
foreclosure in their homes because of the subprime lending crisis, I 
thought about article I.
  Mr. Speaker, I thought about article I because article I is that 
provision that empowers me as an individual Member of Congress to want 
to listen to people who are facing foreclosure; listen to the mortgage 
originators who say, yes, we do need to have some regulation of what we 
are doing, there are some cowboys out there; to listen to these 
community bankers; and to listen to people who say, look, I made all my 
mortgage payments, but there is a foreclosure on the left and a boarded 
building on the right, and my house where I paid every payment is now 
suffering loss in the value of it because of this foreclosure crisis.
  I was in intimate contact with article I as I sat there in earnest 
and sincere humility listening to people and what they were going 
through, when I was so proud to sit there on that committee to be able 
to respond to the people. Because we have to go back there every 2 
years. We can't take a vacation from the people in the House. We got to 
listen every week. Week in, week out, we are in touch with our folks.
  So Mr. Speaker, Mr. Yarmuth, I just wanted to say that article I, 
what it means to me is sympathy with the people and action on their 
behalf.
  Mr. HODES. Mr. Speaker, I can't help but think about the importance 
of the power of the purse. James Madison said, ``The House of 
Representatives can not only refuse, but they alone can propose the 
supplies requisite for the support of government.''
  The power over the purse is our weapon to use, and I am hoping that 
this Congress will no longer be the President's enabler when it comes 
to his misguided policy in Iraq. Earlier this week, he asked for an 
additional $46 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, bringing 
the total request this year to almost $200 billion. By the time we are 
done, we are going to be at $2.4 trillion in Iraq. That is enough to 
provide college educations for every student who wants to go to a 4-
year college for free at a private college or university. We could 
provide health care for every American for a year for the money we are 
spending.
  It is going to be up to Congress to make tough decisions on whether 
or not we are going to use the power of the purse to take charge of 
this President's misguided policy.
  So I am in contact and intimate sympathy with my constituents in New 
Hampshire who have said to me loud and clear, ``Do something to stop 
this President's policies in Iraq.''
  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, just briefly, I thank the gentleman for the 
time. As we began, the 2006 election was not simply a change of course, 
but a return to checks and balances. Members were elected, as my 
colleague over here says, to hear from their constituents. We were also 
elected to speak for our constituents, and we have to be their voice. 
That is what article I is all about.
  So I am glad that this is probably the beginning of many hours to 
come, where we are going to come to this House floor and we are going 
to talk about article I and reclaim that responsibility.
  Mr. YARMUTH. I thank the gentlewoman. Finally, our president.
  Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for being 
here. It couldn't have been put better. We represent the entire bread 
of this country, from New York to New Hampshire out to Minnesota, 
Kentucky down to Florida. And there is more to come and there will be 
more to talk about this.
  I am just reminded, remember how the Constitutional Convention ended? 
All of us remember this story from school, where Benjamin Franklin was 
asked what he was thinking about, and he said, I remember looking at 
that sun sitting behind General Washington and thinking during the time 
that this was crafted, is that a rising or a setting sun? And he said 
when they had ended, I could say with happiness, it is a rising sun.
  This country's democracy is still healthy, it is still moving 
forward, the checks and balances are still here, and this country knows 
that it is the true secret credit of where our greatness lies.
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman and I thank all my 
colleagues. It has been a wonderful hour. I think the dialogue we have 
had tonight not only discusses an important issue, but also reflects 
the greatness of the Founding Fathers because it created this body in 
which we can have this type of discussion. So I thank my colleagues 
once again. We will have many more discussions like this.
  Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.

                          ____________________