Announcement by the Acting Chair

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to say that I can identify with the gentleman from Oregon's frustration.

The frustration you see is not from a gentleman who does not have any power over the process. He is the ranking member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. But the rules of the House prevent the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee from funding transportation. It is an incredibly powerless space to be in.

Your job on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is to come up with good transportation policy. You just can't pull any of the levers that fund it. That is the frustration you hear from my friend from Oregon, and I don't discount that in the least.

What I do discount, however, is any suggestion that what is happening today is in any way unprecedented. My friend from Oregon first began serving in this House when Ronald Reagan was President of the United States, and not one Ways and Means major funding bill has come to this House floor under an open rule in any day of the gentleman's service--not one. Not one Ways and Means bill funding this government has come to the House floor under an open rule. Not under Republicans, not under Democrats, not ever--not ever.

There are lots of reasons for that. I don't need to get into arcane budget policy. But what I do need to say is we have an opportunity in conference to solve this problem. We are grappling with openness in this institution. I am excited about it, Mr. Speaker. A lot of folks say, oh, we can't have openness on the floor because we will have to take tough votes. I say, if you don't want to take tough votes, don't run for Congress.

We have a serious challenge, however, in whether or not we allow a committee, like the Ways and Means Committee, whose sole purpose, whose sole jurisdiction, covers tax matters--no one else covers tax matters other than the Ways and Means Committee. Do we allow them to grapple with funding issues, or do we bring an amendment to the floor, debate it for 9 1/2 minutes, and change Federal tax policy together? We can do that.

I am glad we are not doing Federal transportation policy in a 9-minute stint. I am glad we worked on it, again, not for days, not for weeks, not for months, but for years, together, to get policy that worked.

It is very puzzling to me, again, by any measure--by any measure. This is the best transportation process and the best transportation rule that this body has seen in a decade. We can choose to recognize that and improve upon it, or we can choose to continue the self-flagellation that seems to constitute government today. I don't understand it. I am very proud to be in this body. I am very proud to work with each one of you, and I am very proud of the work that we have done together.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the Democratic whip.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.

I need 10 minutes at least to respond to that assertion. There is no party with whom I have served over the last 35 years that has been any more into self-flagellation of the United States Government, the American Government, than his party. I will say with all due respect.

Mr. WOODALL. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOYER. No.

Mr. WOODALL. The gentleman is not talking about me. The gentleman is talking about my party.

Mr. HOYER. I talked about your party.

Mr. WOODALL. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. HOYER. But I will tell you that I disagree with the gentleman's basic premise. He talks about the rule. The rule is not the issue. I am against this rule. Its substance, that is what the gentleman from Oregon was talking about. He was talking about investing and making America grow, creating jobs. That is what we ought to be debating, not some rule for you to have a lot of amendments. You can have a zillion amendments. If they are all awful, it won't be a good rule.

I rise in opposition to this rule. I rise in opposition because it would make in order several amendments that undermine the will of a majority of both parties in this House, that the Export-Import Bank should be reopened immediately.

I said for a year and a half the majority of this House was for it; and for a year and a half, it was bottled up by a committee chairman in a closed process.

Since some Republicans blocked an extension of the Export-Import Bank's charter authority and let it shut down in July, hundreds of American jobs have been shipped overseas, and exporters and their workers have been unable to compete on a level playing field in foreign markets.

Last month, in a historic effort, virtually all Democrats and a majority of Republicans came together to end the gridlock and take steps to allow the House to work its will and hold a vote on reopening the Export-Import Bank. This rule seeks to reverse that process.

When that vote was finally held, Mr. Speaker, 127 Republicans finally got the opportunity to work their will--a majority of their Conference--and joined with every Democrat, save one, to reopen the Bank and create jobs in our country.

The will of this House is clear, unequivocal. The best way to reopen the Bank is by keeping, unchanged, in this highway bill the Heitkamp-Kirk language, a bipartisan amendment from the Senate that 313 Members, otherwise known as 75 percent of this body, voted for last week on this floor. The amendments that this rule would make in order are, in effect, a last-ditch attempt by the Bank's opponents to undo the will of the majority of this House.

I urge my colleagues to oppose this rule; and should it be adopted, as is likely the case, I urge every one of my colleagues who voted to reopen the Export-Import Bank last week to stand together in defeating every single amendment offered on the Export-Import Bank so we can stand together to defeat all of the amendments that are offered on the Export-Import Bank.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Mr. POLIS. I yield the gentleman an additional 25 seconds.

Mr. HOYER. It is a Senate bill and a House bill that are exactly the same. If they had been passed alone, they would be on the President's desk right now.

Once again, we need to help American exporters; but more importantly than that, we need to help American workers get and keep jobs. We talk a lot about it. This is an opportunity to do it. Defeat any and every amendment, no matter how sugary it may sound, to defeat the Export-Import Bank.

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I don't fault my friend from Maryland for not yielding. He had very limited time. I remember the days of the magic minute. Those were better yielding days.

Mr. HOYER. But I will yield to him on his time.

Mr. WOODALL. I appreciate that. The gentleman is always generous.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source