[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 8271-8272]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

  (Mr. BLUNT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute.)
  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend from Maryland, the 
majority leader, to tell us about next week's scheduled bills.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the Republican whip for yielding.
  On Monday the House will meet in pro forma session at 2 p.m. On 
Tuesday the House will meet at 12:30 p.m. for morning hour and at 2 
p.m. for legislative business, with votes postponed until 6:30 p.m. On 
Wednesday and Thursday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for legislative 
business. On Friday no votes are expected at this time.
  We will consider several bills under suspension of the rules. A final 
list of suspension bills will be announced, as is the custom, by the 
close of business tomorrow. We expect to consider the Iraq/Afghanistan 
supplemental appropriations bill. In addition, we also hope to consider 
the farm bill conference report. And it is possible, if the budget 
conference were completed, that we might consider that as well.
  Mr. BLUNT. I thank my friend for that information.
  Is it likely on the two conference reports you mentioned that the 
farm bill conference report will come before the budget conference 
report?
  Mr. HOYER. It's likely that that will happen. I can't assert that, 
but I think it's likely.
  As you know, the farm bill has been up to agreement and then back. I 
understand it is now agreed to and that Mr. Peterson would like to 
bring it to the floor, assuming that the agreement holds, on Wednesday. 
So I think it's likely.
  Mr. BLUNT. I am told if we went to the new budget, there might be 
some additional PAYGO items, but the current budget makes that farm 
bill more workable. So I think that might be the case.
  Mr. HOYER. If the gentleman will yield, I see the chairman on the 
floor. The chairman and I have discussed that issue, and that's why I 
indicate that it is likely. Mr. Peterson has worked extraordinarily 
hard, along with a lot of others. But because he's on the floor, I want 
to commend Chairman Peterson for the work that he has put in on this. 
It's been a very rough conference and a very rough agreement. But he 
and Mr. LaTourette have worked closely together, and I congratulate 
them both.
  Mr. BLUNT. That's right. Mr. Goodlatte and Mr. Peterson have talked 
to both of us a lot about this bill, and I think it's coming to some 
conclusion now.
  Mr. HOYER. I said Mr. LaTourette. I'm sure he's worked hard, too, but 
Mr. Goodlatte is the ranking member.
  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. LaTourette was probably working on the Coast Guard 
issues in the farm bill.
  I would like to ask the gentleman on the supplemental, I noticed in a 
number of printed reports that one of the reasons we didn't get to the 
supplemental was that the Blue Dogs were claiming some credit that the 
PAYGO issue, which you and I actually discussed last week, was a 
problem. At that time you thought that we might be able to waive PAYGO 
for both the GI portion of the supplemental and the unemployment 
insurance portion of the supplemental. I wonder where we are on that 
topic of PAYGO as it relates to those two issues.
  Is that a decided issue yet, and how would you expect that it may be 
decided?
  Mr. HOYER. First, let me say that I don't believe that the PAYGO, 
under the proposal that has been made, applies to the GI Bill, to the 
Webb bill, or to whatever bill there might be. Stephanie Herseth 
Sandlin has a bill as well. Mr. Mitchell has worked very hard on his 
bill. But however that might be considered, we believe that technically 
it does not need a waiver of PAYGO. But, clearly, the unemployment 
insurance, which would be considered as an emergency, as was the 
stimulus for stimulating the economy, would be dealt with as an 
emergency.
  Mr. BLUNT. I was fortunate enough to have a meeting with Secretary 
Gates this week, and he, of course, encourages us to get this 
supplemental done quickly because, otherwise, they immediately get into 
trying to transfer funds around and things that may be available but do 
create huge management problems. I do hope we can get this done before 
the Memorial Day break, as you suggested we would.
  Mr. HOYER. Will my friend yield?
  Mr. BLUNT. I yield.
  Mr. HOYER. We were trying to get it done quickly this week. There 
were some delays, as I recall, in the process. That was not the only 
reason, as the gentleman has observed. But we hope to get it done 
quickly.
  Mr. BLUNT. You mentioned the other alternatives to the so-called Webb 
bill, and the Herseth Sandlin bill that is cosponsored by Mr. Boozman 
on this side, I'm told by our Members and frankly some people from the 
Pentagon that it has some real merit over the other bill. Since we 
don't have any options in that bill, at least the bill we were talking 
about this week, no options to bring alternatives to the floor, I would 
hope that we could look at all of the alternatives in that part that 
benefit our servicemen and women and be sure we're bringing the best 
alternative the House has available to it to the floor next week.
  Mr. HOYER. I appreciate the gentleman's comments.
  I will say that Congresswoman Herseth Sandlin has worked very hard on 
that. I'm sure Mr. Boozman has as well. The committee has addressed 
that bill. It's a good bill. It's not as extensive, as you know, as the 
Webb bill, which has also been worked on pretty hard by former 
Secretary of the Navy Webb, Jim Webb, the Senator from Virginia. Both 
bills obviously seek to make sure that our warriors who come back, 
those who have defended freedom in Iraq and Afghanistan, that when they 
come back, we invest in their education so they, in turn, can grow our 
economy and our country and do what

[[Page 8272]]

the veterans of World War II did. But we're looking at those and 
they're under discussion.
  Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman for that.
  When you look at the anticipated spending and the scoring on those 
bills, both of them add so many new things to the benefit area that 
there's very little money spent in the first year. And since it takes 
that long to really get the new system up and running, I would just 
suggest again that the closer we are to a system that the military can 
be supportive of, both individuals in the military and the 
institutions, I think all of us want to take a step forward on those 
things that relate to servicemen and women and particularly those 
servicemen and women that may have been left out of past benefits for 
those who served. That would relate most directly to the National Guard 
and the reserves who are called up maybe for multiple periods of time 
but never for a long enough period of time at one consecutive time of 
full-time service to qualify for past benefits. We want to do that, but 
certainly we want to do that in the very best way, particularly when 
you look at how long it takes to retool the way that these benefits are 
made available for that to happen. Since it appears at this point that 
we'd have no alternative to bring, in this case, a better House 
alternative to the floor, I hope we are putting the right set of 
building blocks together to really build a better future for those who 
serve and are willing to put their lives at risk and their other 
activities on hold for us.
  Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BLUNT. I would.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding and certainly agree 
with the sentiments he has just expressed, which is why, of course, we 
want to see this move forward quickly in the supplemental. But the 
alternatives that the gentleman has expressed are being looked at.
  Mr. BLUNT. I'm also wondering, as we approach the Memorial Day recess 
and we have had this series now of days of the highest gasoline prices 
ever, will there be any legislation on the floor to reduce the price of 
gasoline as we go into Memorial Day and the other summer driving 
seasons?
  Mr. HOYER. We certainly, as you know, passed a number of pieces of 
legislation which have attempted to look at a number of different 
issues. One, of course, was the manipulation by the OPEC nations to 
artificially inflate prices. The other thing we have looked at is price 
gouging at the pump. We passed that. The other item we looked at, of 
course, was the energy bill itself. And the other was we asked the FTC 
to look at manipulation. We wrote to the FTC about 3 weeks ago. The FTC 
gave attention to our letter and is now exercising, as I understand, 
its jurisdiction under the legislation that we passed to look at 
prices.
  In addition, we have numerous hearings scheduled. We've had some this 
week, next week, and the week after looking at various different 
aspects of this. Clearly, our consuming public, whether they be 
commercial, which are probably having the most critical problem because 
that's their livelihood, as well as those of us who are not driving for 
commercial sake but for important sake, to get to school, to get to 
work, to get to hospitals, to do all those things, we are very 
cognizant, as I know all of us are, of the strain that is being put on 
the consumers of our country.

                              {time}  1700

  Not only are they seeing an economic downturn, but at the same time 
that they are having reduced capacity to purchase things critical to 
them, gasoline and home heating oil are going up almost every week 5 to 
10 cents. And so we are addressing that. We met with all the chairmen 
who reported out the energy bill last year and asked them to address 
this issue short term, medium term and long term.
  Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman for that.
  I would like to find something to do that would have this impact as 
we get into this driving season. I know that Mr. Ryan introduced a bill 
today that would take the money that otherwise would have been used for 
earmarks on both sides of the aisle and use that to offset the loss of 
revenue to the highway trust fund of a gas tax holiday. That would be 
one of the things that we could do in the next 2 weeks that should have 
immediate impact at the pump by Memorial Day if we did it before that 
Memorial Day break. But if we could do something to reduce gas prices, 
that would be a major thing.
  Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield on that?
  Mr. BLUNT. I would yield.
  Mr. HOYER. One of the things I know I am personally for, and I think 
the Speaker is for that, as well, and we have urged the administration 
to take action, is not purchase additional oil for the Strategic 
Petroleum Reserve at this time. I would be opposed to taking oil out of 
the reserve. But if we stop purchasing oil for a period of time, reduce 
our demand as we fill the SPR, not only will we reduce demand, 
economists tell us that would have an effect on price, perhaps about 
the same as the gasoline tax holiday that you refer to.
  There are a number of pieces of legislation. Mr. Welch has a bill. 
Mr. Lampson has a bill. And many, many other Members have a bill. The 
administration, we believe, can do this on its own. We think that would 
be good policy while we have this crisis to stop filling up, not 
reducing, but to stop filling up our own reserve and reduce demand. 
Economists tell us that would have a positive effect on bringing prices 
down as well.
  Mr. BLUNT. Based on the increase in prices, if in fact that would 
have the same impact as a gas tax holiday, maybe we should do both. I 
suspect there would be substantial support on the floor to do both.
  The only other item I am going to mention today is the Colombia Free 
Trade Agreement. It was 1 year ago tomorrow that the House, the Senate 
and the administration made an agreement on trade. That was about a 
year after the Colombia Free Trade Agreement had been negotiated. We 
have not passed that agreement yet and don't have any schedule on the 
floor. I would hope that we will continue work to get the Colombia Free 
Trade Agreement and the other trade agreements but particularly the 
Colombia agreement to the floor and do that in the spirit of the 
agreement that the Speaker and administration and Senate negotiators 
announced a year ago.
  I would yield.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I want to say that both the Speaker and I believe that the 
administration, in reaching an agreement that you refer to, made a 
positive step in terms of incorporating within trade agreements a 
consideration of workers' rights and environmental concerns so that our 
manufacturers and our job producers in the United States had a fair, 
more level playing field in which to compete and that our workers were 
competing with workers who had the right to organize and were getting 
decent wages.
  The Colombia agreement, as you know, was not sent down here after 
agreement between the administration and the House leadership. The 
response was to simply not take it off the agenda but take the time 
limit during which we might consider that. That was an interim step 
which did not, as the Speaker has pointed out, take Colombia off the 
agenda. It simply didn't put it on the agenda for immediate 
consideration. But that is still on the agenda. It is still available, 
a force, and it is still under discussion.
  Mr. BLUNT. I hope we can get it done.

                          ____________________