mr. forbes: mr. chairman -- mr. dicks: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from washington yields back. the gentleman from virginia. mr. forbes: my good friend mentioned we need to put regulations or statutes to make the department of defense comply. we have done that. the law requires that they do it and failed to do it in 2007, 2008, 2009, 1020 and won't do it this year and won't admit they are a bit closer. we mentioned unintended consequences, there are none with this amendment. we intend the consequences. you have to stop the partying until you do what the taxpayers are entitled to have required by law and that is just account where the money is going. we can't determine how much is going to spend on defense unless we know where the dollars are going. i hope we adopt this amendment. and i yield back. the chair: all time has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. dicks: i want a recorded vote. t

mr. latourette: i'm watching mr. dicks' hand signals. mr. chairman, it's my pleasure to yield one minute to another fine member of illinois, mrs. biggert. one minute. the chair: the gentlelady from illinois is recognized for one minute. mrs. biggert: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. chairman, we've been -- we're now six months into our fiscal year, and we have not been able to pass a dozen or more individual appropriations bills in the middle of the fiscal year, so we really -- and we inherited a spending regime. but we have a mandate from the american people to cut spending. we must do it equityably, fairly, and quickly. and i think that mr. latourette has come up with an amendment that is a really fair way to do this, don't pick winners and losers, and don't do this without having the proper hearings and oversight. by reducing our discretionary programs at the same rate across the board we don't risk alienating future priorities or vulnerable constituencies that may receive funding at risk of being terminated. this whole body i thin

mr. young: i yield to mr. dicks. mr. dicks: i want to rise in strong opposition to this amendment. first of all, working together on a bipartisan basis for the first time, we cut nearly $15 billion from the obama budget request in 2011 for defense and we did it on a very careful basis. this amendment would add another $56 billion to that cut. it would do damage to all of our acquisition programs. it would threaten the people in iraq and afghanistan and our efforts to conduct the global war on terrorism. so, again, i hope in a very strong bipartisan basis, we can reject this amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. gentlelady from california. ms. lee: how much time do i have remaining? mr. hastings: 30 seconds remaining. ms. lee: the bipartisan sustainable task force report released last year identify at least $1 trillion in cuts over the next 10 years without sacrificing our strategic capabilities. according to the g.a.o., major weapons programs have suffered in cost overruns and it's time to end this war in afghanistan. these wars i

mr. dicks: i yield three minutes to mr. moran of virginia, the ranking member of the interior and environment appropriations subcommittee. i give him four minutes. the chair: four minutes to the gentleman from virginia. mr. moran: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i've been on the appropriations committee for 17 years. 11 of them were under republican control. eight under a republican president. and i'm proud of the investments that we've made in this country during those 17 years. we are a stronger, more secure, more productive economy as a result of those investments. we've improved the lives of americans, we cleaned up our water, we've invested in transportation, our national defense, our education system. that's why we have the strongest economy and in fact continue to be the very best place on the planet to live and work and provide a better future for our children. what we are doing in this continuing resolution is to target those programs that are called domestic discretionary. they represent about 4.5% of the e

mr. dicks: i yield one minute to mr. cole from oklahoma, a valued member of the interior appropriations subcommittee. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. cole: it's been a great week for fiscal conservatives. we've actually enacted or are on the verm of enacting historic cuts and passing them through this body. we've let others come and participate with their ideas an suggestions. my concern is not the amount of money involved in the amendment, it's the method adopted to achieve the savings. across the board cuts essentially mean you lose the ability to eliminate to root out and to prioritize. in fact, you adopt the priorities of the people that wrote the original budget. with all due respect to my friends on this side that means we are adopting our friends on this side' priorities when we cut in this manner. so i think we should embrace the spirit behind this amendment. it's well motivated. but reject the method and go back to the thoughtful, targeted and tough kind of decisions that chairman roge

mr. dicks: would the gentleman yield? mr. reichert: yes. mr. dicks: i think we have got to solve this problem. this is very unfair that this one program -- this is a national program in every sense of the word. we have got to either get it authorized or do whatever we have to do to make this possible. i look forward to working with you to achieve that. mr. reichert: i thank the gentleman from washington and i look forward to working with you. i appreciate your enthusiasm and passion. i know all of us in this body would support this issue once we get it solved. thank you. i yield back. the chair: the chair recognizes the gentlelady from missouri. mrs. emerson: i move to strike the last word to enter into a colloquy with mr. broun of georgia. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for five minutes. mrs. emerson: thank you, mr. chair. mr. broun: i rise today to enter into a colloquy with my friend and distinguished chairwoman of the appropriations subcommittee on financial services and general government. i thank -- i'd like to thank you, madam c

you and mr. dicks had a very brief discussion on mr. dicks asserted that if you were to cut the homeless program for veterans, that it would have an impact. your response to that was that veterans health care is going to be plussed up. well, in my state last week my governor offered closing the homelessness office of the governor. florida is one of those states, because of its weather, that attracts a significant number of people not only veterans but others to live outdoors. i began by talking about the least of us. i don't want to participate in no program that's going to hurt the least of us when the best off of us in society have gone about our business ordinarily. and something is wrong with this picture, not your responsibilities in offering a budget, but i just don't see how you're going to take police officers ost streets and expect crime to go down. how you're going to eliminate the most successful -- not eliminate but cut the most successful program empirically documented, the headstart program, that dmon stratively show that

mr. dicks: thank you. ms. woolsey: i do believe canceling the v-22 and saving $10 million to $12 billion over 10 years would be real fiscal savings. thank you and i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from kansas. those in favor will vote aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. for what purpose does the gentleman from kansas rise? >> to ask a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings offered on the amendment by the gentleman from kansas will be postponed. pursuant to clause 6 of amendment 18, further proceedings will continue on which they were postponed in the following away, amendment 370 by mr. flake, amendment 87 by mr. pompeo of kansas, amendment 63 by mr. gutierrez of illinois, and amendment 86 by mr. pompeo of kansas. the chair will reduce to two minutes the time for any electronic voting after the first vote in this series. the unfinished business is a request for a recorded vote on amendmen

mr. dicks: mr. chairman, i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the the gentleman from arizona will be postponed. the clerk: section 1309, level for department of justice, general administration, justice information sharing technology shall be $78,285,000. section 1310, level for department of justice, general administration, task task call law enforcement wireless communications delrks 136 million. section 1311, level for department of justice, general administration, detention trustees $1533,663,000. section 1312. level for department of justice legal activities, salaries and expenses, general legal activities $865,997,00. section 1313, level for department of justice, united states marshals service, construction $16,929,000. section 1314, level for department of justice, federal bureau of investigation construction shall be $106 million -- mr. holt: mr. chairman, i have an amendment. the chair: will the gentleman specify which amendment? . mr. dicks: amendment 235. the chair: amen

mr. dicks: i completely agree with my friend from washington state, mr. hastings, the chairman of the natural resources committee, that this violates the law of the land. and there is no scientific basis for what is happening here. we have submarines and nuclear power carriers that are offloading waste in birmington, washington, that go to idaho that are supposed to go to yucca mountain. and we made a commitment to the people of idaho we would move that waste out of here in the 2025 time frame. now, this is -- this project is being stopped without -- i was here when we passed the law, and this is being stopped without congress changing the law. and i think it's a travesty, and we're wasting billions of dollars. we should go ahead and finish this project and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. all time having expired the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from nevada. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the nays have it. does anyone stand up? the amendment is not

you and mr. dicks had a very brief discussion on mr. dicks asserted that if you were to cut the homeless program for veterans, that it would have an impact. your response to that was that veterans health care is going to be plussed up. well, in my state last week my governor offered closing the homelessness office of the governor. florida is one of those states, because of its weather, that attracts a significant number of people not only veterans but others to live outdoors. i began by talking about the least of us. i don't want to participate in no program that's going to hurt the least of us when the best off of us in society have gone about our business ordinarily. and something is wrong with this picture, not your responsibilities in offering a budget, but i just don't see how you're going to take police officers ost streets and expect crime to go down. how you're going to eliminate the most successful -- not eliminate but cut the most successful program empirically documented, the headstart program, that dmon stratively show that

it seems to me that, if i recall right, mr. rogers or even mr. dicks might be able to help me, i believe we have about 40% of the people in this country who pay no taxes whatsoever. and so when you talk about shared sacrifices, thosere people who are being given lots of things by the rest of us, but they certainly are not sacrificing in the sense that other people are who work a pay taxes. >> are you talking about -- >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. chairman rogers, appreciate all the time and effort your committee put into this, mr. dicks, certainly appreciate your input. you know, when we're elected on november 2nd, it was a clear mandate in regards to they want government to operate differently, the american people. but the bigger problem is, we're out of money. and every one of these on this list i will tell you that i can sit down and go through them and there's a number that are near and dear to my heart that i wish we didn't have t touch. i think that's the case i'm sure with you, mr. dicks, and with the chairman. >> i represent t

mr. chairman. good. >> the rules committee will come >>thrder. we are a guest first the oversight plan, okay, so first e ay.are here for consideration of adoption of the oversight plan of the committee for the 112th congress.th congress, and we have a motion from the gentlewoman from grandfather community. the gentlewoman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i move that the committee adopt the oversight plan for the 112th congress and authorize its transmission to the committee on oversight and government reform and the committee on house administration in accordance with the rules of the house. >> you've heard the gentlewoman's motion. let me just say clause 2d-1 of the rules require each standing committee not later than february 15th, the first session, to adopt an oversight plan and since this is valentine's day, february 14th, i guess we're just getting in there. the committee staff has circulated the text to all members last wednesday, which more than meets the 24-hour require

mr. inslee: mr. speaker, i rise -- mr. dicks: it's mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman will suspend. chair requests that members and staff in all the aisles remove audible conversations. the chair: the gentleman from washington. mr. inslee: mr. chairman, i rise to ask what happened to the party of teddy roosevelt? what happened to the party that helped us adopt, under richard nixon's leadership, the clean air act in what happened to the republican party that used to be allied in the adoption of the clean air rule that was so helped the health of americans? what happened to the party that adopted the clean air act 40 years ago which has helped save over 200,000 lives. i ask why, today, in this continuing resolution, the republican party has abandoned any pretext whatsoever to stand for clean air when they eviscerate the clean air law in their continuing resolution? this is a sad statement, to think that a party that at one time helped us clean up the air and reduce cancer deaths, reducing respiratory element, reducing heart attacks have seen fit

mr. dicks: will the gentleman yield? i want him to know we're prepared on our side to accept his amendment. mr. fortenberry: i appreciate that. thank you for the kind words. >> will the gentleman yield? we also will accept the amendment. mr. fortenberry: with that i'll yield back, mr. chairman. the chair: all time has been yielded back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from nebraska. those in favor of the amendment say aye. and those opposed say no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? >> mr. chairman, i rise to offer an amendment, h.r. 1, amendment number 23. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 23 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. hastings of florida. the chair: pursuant to the order of the house of today, the gentleman from florida, mr. hastings, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florid

mr. terry: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. dicks: mr. chairman. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from -- mr. dicks: i move to strike the requisite number of words. the gentleman has spoke twice on this issue, was that by unanimous consent? mr. terry: would the gentleman yield? mr. dicks: i want to answer my question first. the chair: the chair believes that the gentleman from nebraska spoke only once. mr. dicks: yield to me, please. mr. terry: i yield. i spoke one time right now. i don't know who you are confusing me with. mr. dicks: i thought you spoke twice, i'm sorry. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from -- for what purpose does the member from louisiana rise? >> move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> i rise in strong support of this amendment because i think if you look across the country, of course we had a water shed election in november, if you listen to the voters, and so many of us who did hold town hall meeting

mr. dicks: vote for the holt amendment. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new jersey. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the noes have it. mr. dicks: madam chair. i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: the gentleman -- pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new jersey will be postponed. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18 proceedings will now resume on those amendments printed in the congressional record on which further proceedings were postponed in the following order. amendment number 189 by ms. woolsey of california. amendment number 208 by mr. cole of oklahoma. amendment number 514 by mr. price of north carolina. amendment number 404 by mr. walden of oregon. amendment number 516 by mr. camp of michigan. amendment number 195 by mrs. lummis of wyoming. amendment number 165 by mr. carter of texas. amendment number 204 by mr. scalise of louisiana. amendment number 458 by mr.

mr. terry: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. dicks: mr. chairman. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from -- mr. dicks: i move to strike the requisite number of words. the gentleman has spoke twice on this issue, was that by unanimous consent? mr. terry: would the gentleman yield? mr. dicks: i want to answer my question first. the chair: the chair believes that the gentleman from nebraska spoke only once. mr. dicks: yield to me, please. mr. terry: i yield. i spoke one time right now. i don't know who you are confusing me with. mr. dicks: i thought you spoke twice, i'm sorry. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from -- for what purpose does the member from louisiana rise? >> move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> i rise in strong support of this amendment because i think if you look across the country, of course we had a water shed election in november, if you listen to the voters, and so many of us who did hold town hall meeting

mr. dicks: i want to associate myself with the remarks of the ranking member, mr. moran. this is a program that was created because the arts institutions in the district of columbia, many of them do not get any support from the district of columbia government, there's no state government, in new york, they get money from the city, from the boroughs, from the state government. for the major arts institutions. this program was a very modest program that helps 23 performing arts institutions that -- which are extremely important, all of which have very solid educational programs that help inner city youth here, we have a high population of inner city youth in the district of columbia. so i just think this has been a proven program. it is very modest. it's been cut in half. last year, i think we had about $9.5 million, it's been cut in half, i think we should leave that. i think the committee has made a decision and to go further would be in my mind punitive. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by

mr. dicks: i yield to the distinguished ranking member. ms. delauro: i thank the gentleman and i would say to my colleague and friend, i might add, and my friends here, that this is in fact in the same category of a program of teach for america, the national writing project and other projects, just to name a couple, who have been designated by the majority as earmarks. this is the same category of programs. we cannot be talking about a series of programs on the one hand which are categorized as earmarks and then on the other the same -- in the same breath than, say, these because they are a specific interest to me or anyone else that in fact and they are not. if we are going to be -- if we are going to be -- really, the majority is going to be true -- if the majority is going to be true to its -- mr. young: i'm not getting in this. ms. delauro: its principle and it has been a very, very defined principle. it has been one which i quoted specifically the chairman of the proceedings committee who made a special point of letting not only us but th

mr. dicks: i move to strike the requisite number of words. the chair: you may have the last 50 seconds. mr. dicks: i was in almost all the meetings in our caws can. this bill was read provision by provision, sentence by sentence and the -- the clerk, the staffers who wrote these provisions under the direction of our chairman at that time. this was carefully considered. any idea from the gentleman from new jersey that it wasn't is just an outrageous statement on his part and he ought to be ashamed of himself. the chair: the gentlelady has 15 seconds. ms. delauro: i would just say that once again, what we're doing here, this amendment does mirror the prior amendment where we had a discussion. we keep saying it over and over again, your inability to come here as you promised to create jobs for the american people, to lower the deficit for them, and to turn the economy around has failed in this effort. the chair: all time having expired, the question son the amendment offered by the gentleman from iowa. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no.

thank you, mr. chairman. >> would the gentleman yield? mr. moran: i would be happy to. mr. dicks: this has been one of the most successful conservation programs and brings in the private sector and they add two or three times to the contribution here, and i think this is a program that is very worthy and should be supported, and i hope the gentleman's amendment will be accepted. mr. moran: i greatly thank the chair and the full committee. i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. nadler: the conservation fund is a good program. i have no objections to the program. it's just a bad offset that the gentleman is choosing to move ahead with. mr. speaker, the $50 million included in the continuing resolution to support diesel emissions act grants is a good program. mr. calvert: because heavy diesel engines can operate 20 to 30 years after they enter service, many of these engines operating today were man

mr. dicks: the selective service is a readiness issue. if we don't have the process all set up, it would take two years to restore it. and if -- we are in a national emergency. that's why we put it in place because if we were in a until emergency and had to get more people and didn't get it through the all-volunteer force, we have to have a way to do it. so we put this in place several years ago. it was very bipartisan at the time. i can understand the gentleman's skepticism but this is the first we have heard of this. it would be better for the committee to look at this and maybe have a hearing on this and then we can address it again in the 2012 bill. i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from oregon. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the nos have it. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from oregon will be postponed. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 243, line 8, section 1589, the level for ind

that event continues honoring mr. reagan. tonight the speaker is dick cheney. he's as far as president reagan's 100th birthday. he will speak tonight. and you can see that live at 10:15 this evening. tulsa, oklahoma. you are next. on our independent line. caller: good morning, sir. i think it's a completely different era and people tend to forget reagan was a democrat and switched to a republican. now, i think the difference between then and now are the financial situation, the ideas, there's just so much, it's almost hard to compare the two. i think he would appreciate some of the aspects of obama's policies and he would appreciate some of the drive of the tea party people. but all in all, i just think it's just too big of a difference of time to reaganly compare the two. so i would say that he would probably be ok with it, but i would hope he would be an independent. host: now, when you say he would be ok with it, can you clarify that? caller: i think he would be ok with some of the smaller ideas but he would also at the same time he would want to do some of

cheney can go to an undisclosed location and shoot somebody in the face so we have all americans mr president i'm going to light up for the first time ever in order to help entice you into taking a well deserved smoke break yourself. come on sir. don't you wanna join me on a high speed rail to flavor. ok it appears never actually lit. back to you alone a. ok break thanks for your thoughtful analysis now aside from showing us they have absolutely no idea how to handle light or do you have a little bit of a point there that during stressful times everyone needs advice now and i'm not going to tell obama to pick smoking back up but i am dying to know what happen it's going to turn to next so let's let the investigation begin. now it's the twenty first century and times have changed in the past a student with a college degree was guaranteed a job with a good salary and benefits but nowadays that's not necessarily true thanks to tough economic times and a harsh unemployment rate so with all this in mind has the idea of college become a waste of time artie's never parts. the international

dick deguerin, nice to talk to you. thanks so much for joining us. we appreciate it. >> thank you. >> it is now 36 minutes past the hour. time to change directions and go over to mr. lonnie quinn for another check of the weather. lonnie. >> and i will get right to it, russ. here's what i've got for you. in terms of your weather headlines, it's all stacking up like this. we see a couple of different areas, i'm really keeping an eye on. first and foremost pushing into the northern plains. look at that. a little bit of snow for you. not a lot of snow, i'm talking maybe two to five inches. then i've got a low pressure system which is going to be pushing through the northeast. so some places like bangor, maine, augusta, maine, you could be picking up that 6 to 10 inch range. good-looking sky around texas. and for all the troubles that dallas has been going through with the super bowl preps, things look a lot better today. it's not warm and toasty but you don't have a blizzard on your hand. and make it a great day, everybody. >> thank you, lonnie. a lot of