mr. dreier: mr.peaker, last christmas day, as we all know, when a passenger boarded northwest airlines flight number 253 headed for the detroit metro airport, the issue of national security once again came to the forefront, to really the top of the agenda for everyone in our country. it's, of course, never far from our minds but recent high-profile plots have been thwarted. at fort hood and in detroit, we know the threat of americans remains and remains a very real threat to us. what was so shocking about the attempted attack on christmas day was not that al qaeda remains a threat, we all know this, but was the revelation that key information was available that could have prevented umar mutalub from boarding the flight in the first place. even the president has acknowledged the system failed us. if not for the perpetrator's failure to properly detonate the device and the heroic acts of his fellow passengers, this attempted attack would have become a horrible, horrible tragedy. it was not coordination

mr. dreier. mr. e who brings his great experience having served in the federal bureau of investigation, the gentleman from brighton, michigan, mr. rogers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for four minutes. mr. rogers: thank you to my friend from california and, mr. speaker, yesterday i think was a very, very important symptom for all of us to understand. when you -- and it's easy to get confused, by the way, in who the good guys are and who the bad guys are when you take the fight on the war on terror from a proactive intelligence approach to a law enforcement approach. things get pretty murky in a hurry, and everything slows down. and information exchanges slow down. and what we've done is what they tried to do in the middle of the night is sneak in a provision that would actually when you read the entire thing treat terrorists with a special carveout that not even white-collar criminals, organized crime members, extortionists as american citizens would get. that you

mr. dreier: mr. speaker, may i inquire of the gentleman from atwater how many speakers he has on his side? mr. cardoza: mr. speaker, i'm the last speaker on our side but the chairman may reserve the right to respond in the event he wants to answer the other side. mr. dreier: well, under floor management, i mean, there's only allowed -- i mean -- mr. cardoza: i can yield him my time. mr. dreier: so he'd be the closing speaker then? mr. cardoza: yes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i'm glad to yield to a member from the committee on select intelligence, the gentleman from florida. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for two minutes. >> i thank the ranking member for yielding. and i'd like to use my two minutes if the chairman of the full committee would respond to a question. would you respond? if i may enter into a colloquy with the chairman. if you believe what you just said, why are we striking section 506 from your manager's amendmen

mr. dreier: i saw you get to your feet. mr.e: i knew you wanted to hear my very brief answer on i appreciate your desire to discuss the process and i hope choose to do so. i just want to clarify -- mr. dreier: reclaim my time. we would simply take a chance to offer the amendment and my friend can vote against it, the bipartisan amendment that had from democrats andr59qr republi to make sure the small insurance companies will not wl jeopardized.t that's all we are asking for. i'm happy to further yield. ms. pingree: i want to have plenty of time for my colleagues who want to talk this issue. mq9 i thought there was plenty of time for the process in the rules committee. there was a lively conversation with some of my colleagues and your colleagues, bipartisan back and forth. i disagreed. i did not think that we needed to change this exemption about data inbÃthe rule, in this particular amendment. i department -- mr. dreier: reclaiming my time. i would say, i'm happy to yield. mr. lungren: i did change it. you changed the bill fr

mr. dreier: mr. speaker, recently the economist magazine had an article in which they said it's time for the president to get tough. and pointed to the point he needs to be serious about the trade issue. it congratulated him for not taking a step backward on -- towards protectionism. but the fact of the matter is by doing nothing we are taking a step backward. now, i'm glad to see that the secretary of commerce, mr. locke, today is launching an initiative that will encourage greater trade. it's wonderful to say that we need to focus on a small business 21st century export-oriented trade policy, but the fact is the only way that we can do that is if we pry open new markets for union and nonunion workers in the united states of america at companies like caterpillar, whirlpool and other companies. we can do that by doing what the president failed to do in his state of the union message after making a great statement about trade and that is, send up the agreementes that are pending, that have been signed

mr. dreier: thank you very much, mr. speaker. last wednesday night we all had a stirring address here in this chamber from the president which he proposed a three-year spending freeze. and we all applauded about the fact that the president was getting serious about the notion of federal spending in light that we have seen this 86% increase take place in the past year over spending the year before. the problem is this, we all were taught as children that actions speak louder than words. the first bill that is coming to this house since the president gave his state of the union message calling for the spending freeze is a measure which is denying an opportunity for our colleague from dallas, texas, mr. sessions, to propose a freeze in the level of spending. there are 17 amendments that have been made in order. the one amendment denied was the spending freeze amendment. so, mr. speaker, it's very important for us to note that it's easy to talk about the need for us to freeze spending, but when the first bill, the first bill that's c

mr. dreier: mr. speaker, i think all of our colleagues are aware of the fact that a week and a half ago, after a more than 3 1/2 year battle against ovarian cancer, effie radanovich, the wife of our california colleague, george, tragically passed away. i'd like to ask for a moment of silence. she was a wonderful, wonderful human being. i'd like to ask our colleagues to join in a moment of silence for effie radanovich and to extend our thoughts and prayers to george and their 11-year-old son king. the speaker o tempore: without objection, five-minute voting will continue. the unfinished business is the question on adoption of the amendment printed in part b of house report 111-413 by the gentleman from arizona, mr. flake, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number two printed in pb of house report 111-413, offered by mr. flake of arizona. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on adoption of the amendment. members will record their