Recognizing the importance and significance of the 2010 Census and encouraging each community within the Indian Country to name an elder to be the first member of that community to answer the 2010 Census.

I thank Mr. Bilbray for yielding.

Madam Speaker, the census is one of the few, one of the very few truly constitutional functions that we are engaged in here in Congress. In fact, most of what Congress does today is unconstitutional according to the original intent. I am an original intent constitutionalist. I believe the Federal Government should only be doing 18 things that Article I, section 8 gives us the authority to do, but the census is certainly one of those. National defense, national security, taking care of our veterans and taking care of our folks in the armed services is, under the original intent of the Constitution, the major function of the Federal Government. And I am a very strong believer in that. I am a very strong believer in this government doing only those things that Article I, section 8 gives us the authority to do, and certainly taking the census is one of those.

Today we will be taking up a rule in the next series of votes, from what I understand, which is going to be a rule on a jobs bill. Well, jobs and the census certainly have a great correlation because the Census Bureau will be looking at who is unemployed in this country. In fact, that is what they do. Part of their job in the Census Bureau is to try to find out all of the demographic information. A lot of the things that the Census Bureau does, questions that they ask are none of the Census Bureau's or the Federal Government's business, frankly, but certainly I encourage people to fill out the census for the information that is actually required under the Constitution, and no more.

But, Madam Speaker, jobs are certainly important, and counting the jobless rate in this country is certainly an important function of knowing where we are. The States do this and the Federal Government takes all of that jobless information, and we are going to get a report just tomorrow about the new jobless rates.

Madam Speaker, just last week I was in one of my counties in Georgia in the 10th Congressional District and was talking to the county commission chairman, and in that discussion he was telling me 1 year ago the jobless rate in his county was over 14 percent.

I think it was 14.7, if I remember correctly. He said now the jobless rate in their county is down to a little over 10 percent. I said, That's great.

Is this because of the stimulus bill that we passed? Is this because new jobs were created in your county? And he said, No, we've had no new jobs in our county, none, absolutely zero. The reason that the unemployment rate is down in our county is because people have just stopped looking for jobs. They're discouraged. They're greatly discouraged. I think this is true all over this country. I think the fall in our jobless rate that we've seen recently, down from above 10 to just slightly below 10, is because people have gotten discouraged and they have just stopped looking.

We just passed an extender of unemployment benefits by voice vote. I'm not really happy that we've passed it by voice vote, but we did just last week. And, Madam Speaker, we are going to be taking up this jobs bill that we haven't even seen the text of, we have not even seen the bill. It is going to be brought to the floor of this House just like the stimulus bill was, without even having the opportunity to read these plans.

Madam Speaker, I believe that ``jobs'' by this new bill, from everything I can tell, should be an acronym. JOBS should be ``just one big slush fund,'' an acronym for ``just one big slush fund.''

Madam Speaker, I introduced my own JOBS Act. My JOBS Act is an acronym for ``jump-start our business sector.'' That's what we need to be doing; we need to be jump-starting our business sector by getting the tax burden and the regulatory burden off small business. Madam Speaker, small business is the economic engine that pulls along the train of prosperity in America, the small business. We are killing small business through the regulatory burden and the tax burden.

We're going to be taking up a health care bill very soon--we don't know when yet--ObamaCare. ObamaCare, Madam Speaker, is going to kill jobs in America. Let me say that again: ObamaCare is going to kill jobs in America. In fact, the bill that the House voted on, the President's own senior economic adviser said it will kill 5.5 million jobs, put 5.5 million Americans out of work if the House bill is put into law. The Senate bill, I haven't seen the data on it, but I'm sure those data are just the same. I'm not sure if it's 5.5 million or 5 million, but the recent proposal by the Obama administration is going to kill jobs, and creating more and more government spending is just creating more government jobs.

Madam Speaker, the American people need to decide, are we going to go down one route of socialism, total government control, total government takeover of everything in human endeavor, including health care, or are we going to go down the road of liberty and freedom? And I say liberty and freedom because I consider them to be a little different.

Madam Speaker, let me define liberty for you. This is my definition. I don't think you will find it in the dictionary, but I think it's very appropriate. Liberty is freedom bridled by morality. Liberty is freedom bridled by morality. America needs to decide, are we going to be a free people or are we going to be controlled by the Federal Government? Are doctors and patients going to make their health care decisions, or will it be some government bureaucrat in Washington?

Just yesterday, the President had a press conference where he said he wanted doctors and patients to make that decision, but his proposal will not do that. His proposal will make a government bureaucrat here in Washington, D.C. tell doctors and patients what kind of care they can get.

Madam Speaker, I am a medical doctor; I'm a family practitioner. I have fought for my patients for years as part of my practice, being concerned about their economic well-being. That's what family doctors do. I try to find the best quality care at the lowest price for my patients. That is an integral part of family medicine. But what we are heading towards with this government takeover of health care is going to destroy family medicine and destroy that basic premise of what we do as family doctors.

This jobs bill is going to be nothing more than one big slush fund. ``Jobs'' by the new bills that we've seen, at least in the Senate bill--and I think we're going to have something that is very close to that once we see the legislative language--is not going to be anything but one big slush fund, this political payback, and it's going to create jobs in the Federal Government.

Now, jobs have been created, certainly, by the failed stimulus package we passed a little over 1 year ago, but let's look back 1 year later at some of the spending low lights of that failed stimulus bill: $67,726 was used by a casino outside Green Bay, Wisconsin. They used a Federal grant to send their employees to learn how to handle confrontations with their customers. This is not constitutional. But once they went there, it was clear to the instructors of this seminar that the casino staff already knew how to handle confrontations with their customers.

We've allocated, in Massachusetts, $4 million in Federal stimulus dollars to build a 2.66-mile bike trail that connected the Manhan Bike Trail to the North Hampton and Norwottuck Trails. This would give those folks riding down that bike trail greater access to Taco Bell. I'm sure Taco Bell is very appreciative of the taxpayers' largess.

Millions of dollars were sent to Democratic operatives. Two firms run by Mark Penn, current Secretary of State Clinton's former Presidential campaign pollster, were awarded $5.9 million in taxpayer funds from the stimulus bills. I could go on and on and on.

We built bike racks in Georgetown with stimulus dollars that were put in place in neighborhoods where the average house value here in Georgetown was over $1 million. I mean, come on. The American public needs to stand up and say ``no'' to this outrageous takeover of their liberty and their freedom.

Madam Speaker, a CEO of a steel-making corporation recently said, Companies large and small are saying, I'm not going to do anything until these things, health care and climate legislation, go away or are resolved. That is what's happening, Madam Speaker, in this country. Small businesses, and large, are scared. The American public is frightened.

When I did my very first town hall meeting last August in Evans, Georgia, talking about the Pelosi health care bill, I thanked the people for coming and expressing their concern about health care. When I did, after discussing the bill, I thanked the people for coming and showing their concern about health care. The second gentleman that got up in the question and answer period said, Dr. Broun, I would like to disagree with you about something. I said, Sure, what is it? And he said, I want to disagree with you because I'm not concerned about health care; I'm scared and I'm angry. And a scared and angry American public is a power to be reckoned with. He got a tremendous round of applause. I applauded him also. And he is exactly right.

The American people need to stand up and say ``no'' to ObamaCare. Let's trash these bills that are on the floor for consideration now and let's start all over again and find something that makes sense. Let's have a jobs bill that makes sense and that really creates jobs.

The Republicans are accused by Democratic colleagues and by the President of being a ``party of no.'' Well, we are the ``party of k-n- o-w.'' We do know how to create a strong economy, and that's by getting the tax burden and regulatory burden off the small businesses in America and off the individuals, leaving dollars in their pockets so that they can expand their business and create more jobs and where consumers have more money so that they can expend it on goods and services here in America.

We know how to solve the health care financing problem we have in America where health care and drugs are too expensive. We can lower the cost of health care, not raise it as the ObamaCare bills all do. We know how to create jobs. We know how to get this economy back on track. We know how to lower the cost of health care if our ideas are just heard. But the leadership here in this House, the leadership in the Senate and the administration

have turned a deaf ear towards commonsense, market-based solutions.

And I ask, Madam Speaker, for the American people to stand up and say ``no'' to socialism and say ``yes'' to freedom and liberty.

I hope the American people will contact their Congressman and their Senators and say ``no'' to ObamaCare, ``no'' to this jobs bill, ``no'' to more socialism and more government control of their lives, and say ``yes'' to freedom and liberty.

Will the gentleman yield?

I just wanted to answer your question.

Yes, I absolutely support this. Counting the census is a constitutional duty. It's extremely important. Our Founding Fathers knew how important it was to know who people were, where they were, et cetera. So I do support the bill very strongly.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1086) recognizing the importance and significance of the 2010 Census and encouraging each community within the Indian Country to name an elder to be the first member of that community to answer the 2010 Census.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous materials thereon.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Today I rise in strong support of House Resolution 1086, a resolution that recognizes the importance and significance of the 2010 census and encourages each community within Indian Country to name an elder to be the first member of that community to answer the 2010 census.

I would like to thank the majority leader, Steny Hoyer; Chairman Ed Towns; and Ranking Member Darrell Issa for their support of this resolution that was introduced on February 22, 2010. I also want to recognize all committee staff and my personal staff for their hard work on this. I also would like to take the time to thank my colleagues in the House of Representatives for their bipartisan support, because it is a bipartisan bill that is good for all of us.

This resolution serves to raise the awareness of the importance of the 2010 census count and urges Indian Country to name an elder to be the first person to complete the 2010 census from each tribe. That shows respect and dignity for that elder. An accurate census count is very important because the data gathered will determine the allocations and the distributions of millions of dollars to State, local, and tribal governments.

Census data can help tribal leaders understand what their community needs are. Many tribal communities use census information to attract new businesses and plan for growth in the future. In fact, many tribes and tribal organizations use census data to plan

new facilities and programs for their communities and making their quality of life a lot better.

The 2010 census will be used as a future basis for the 1,400 funding programs under the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance; 245 of these programs use census data for distribution of funds through grants, loans, direct payments, and government grant payments. An accurate count is essential to everyone, especially in Indian Country.

In the year 2000 census, 4.3 million people, or 1.5 percent of the total United States population, stated that they were American Indians or Alaska Natives. Census data will help shape the future of our youth and sends a proud message to those individuals who can be identified.

In 2007, the American Community Survey reported that 40 percent of American Indian and Alaska Native population was under the age of 25. And in these tough economic times, Indian Country needs an accurate census count more than ever. That is why I am proud to work with the tribe from my area in California, along with Congressman Jerry Lewis, that has the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, led by my good friend Chairman James Ramos.

Next week, San Manuel Chairman Ramos will name Pauline Murrillo to be the first elder to complete the 2010 census form to be counted in their tribe. This is a short form with 10 questions. This is what it looks like. What San Manuel is doing is creative and innovative. Elders are looked upon as trusted leaders in most Native American communities. They are in the best position to help carry the message of the importance of an accurate 2010 census count. And also to bring pride and respect within each of the tribes.

By law, the Census Bureau cannot share respondents' answers with anyone, including tribal housing authorities, other Federal agencies, or law enforcement entities. However, there is still mistrust in the census in many tribes. The census needs our help, and this resolution drives home the message that we need to encourage tribal elders as partners in this challenge. With only 10 questions in the 2010 census questionnaire, it is one of the shortest questionnaires in history and it takes 10 minutes to complete for the average household.

The majority of households will receive the form by mail starting on March 15. However, special procedures will be used on many Indian reservations and in Alaska Native villages where homes do not have city-style addresses with a number and street name. In these areas, members of the community working with the census will visit homes to help fill out the form and take an accurate count. Distrust in the census will hurt the count especially, so these special procedures are arranged for the very hard-to-count tribal areas. That is why the U.S. Census created a special tool kit to help deliver the message and complete an accurate count in Indian Country. With the help of tribal elders, the 2010 census can be a great success.

I encourage all Members to go back to their districts and work with the tribes in their areas, as I have, to ensure an accurate count for every community. I urge my colleagues to support greater census awareness in Indian Country and vote in favor of H. Res. 1086.

I reserve the balance of my time.

First of all, I would like to thank the gentleman from San Diego (Mr. Bilbray) for his support of this. I know that he has always been supportive of Native Americans, not only now but in the past as well; so I appreciate that.

I also appreciate the gentleman from Georgia and his comments. I think he was supporting this legislation somewhere along the line as he was talking about jobs.

I also believe that it's important, and I know that President Obama has that as part of his top priority in creating jobs and dealing with the jobs in this country because he knows very well that the unemployment is now roughly around 10 percent, and he wants to make sure that he gets it up.

We know that unemployment will affect the census. I share in that sense that the gentleman from Georgia was supporting it because it's very important that we do an accurate count and that we count everyone because that will determine the amount of jobs that we have and the kinds of jobs to be created in our areas.

As I stated before, Madam Speaker, I would like to thank Chairman Towns, Ranking Member Issa, and of course I want to thank again Mr. Bilbray for his hard work and support, as well as the staff and others who have worked on this bill.

As we all know, an accurate count is vital to the importance of the American tribal communities and every other community. In my community, not too long ago we started a census count. We did it at Arrowhead Medical Center. We went there, and we began to try to tell the people in our communities the importance of having an accurate count, the importance of making sure that we count each and every one, and that everyone participates in it; and also clarifying the law, clarifying the law that the information will not be used against any individual, but every individual must be counted within our communities.

What does it mean to our States, our counties, our cities? What does it mean to businesses in the area? It's important that we do an accurate count because that's the only way that we can determine how many dollars are going to come back into our communities. We won't know unless we do an accurate count.

The State of California won't be able to determine their budget if they don't do an accurate count. Based on the amount of dollars in that immediate area, they can then determine how much money is going to be coming back to the State of California, or any other State. Or a county official in an area can determine, when they look at their budget and try to determine what goes on, they can only do it if they have an accurate count. And city officials within the area can only determine what needs to go on in terms of, all right, What is my budget going to look like? What kind of services do I need to provide at the local level? How does it impact transportation? How does it impact education? How does it impact public safety? How does it impact public health?

And then local businesses in the area: we know that you need a strong marketing plan and you need to know where businesses want to relocate. It happens through the census.

So an accurate count is very important. If you're a businessperson and you want to start a business in the area, it's important that you have an accurate count because you know where you want to be located; you know the demographics of the area; you know the income of the area. If it's a doctor, then the doctor will know how many patients he is going to have and how much profit he is going to make. It's not about profit. It's about the service and quality of health care. I only made that statement, but it's important because we'll be able to determine that. So an accurate count in the area becomes very important. It also tells us how to market the area. How do we market the immediate area in terms of what goes on?

In Indian Country, it becomes very important to a lot of us when we look at many of our tribes in our areas and at the undercount that has been there. Many of our tribes and others have not been able to determine the kind of services they need within the reservations. This will determine the transportation, the housing in the area, the health in the area, and the kind of educational facilities. Most of all, it will be respect to an elder because this is about identifying the elders within each of the tribes and allowing them to be counted. It's important that we count each and every one of the individuals and that we allow for the kind of respect that should be there, not only in this census but in others. If we look back at 1990 and 2000, we did an inaccurate count. There were many people who weren't counted.

I believe the census is making every effort in trying to reach out to our communities by marketing, by hiring individuals, by working in the communities, and by identifying those individuals. That kind of partnership and collaboration becomes very important to all of us if we want to make sure that we do an accurate count.

This bill is very important, not only to Native Americans now but in the future, when a child can then look up to future generations and say, It was my elder who was the first one to be counted, the true Americans in this country, and they should be the ones who should be counted first. This gives us an opportunity to approach them and to make sure that they are counted.

I yield.

I thank the gentleman from Georgia for his support.

Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Madam Speaker, on September 17, 2009 I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall vote 710, concerning H.R. 3221. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``no.''

On September 23, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall vote 732, a motion to adjourn. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``no.''

On September 30, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall vote 744, concerning H.R. 1771, the Chesapeake Bay Science, Education and Ecosystem Enhancement Act. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On November 7, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall vote 880, concerning H. Res. 877, expressing support for Chinese activists. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On December 16, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall vote 980, concerning H. Res. 973. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On January 27, 2010, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall vote 25, concerning H. Res. 1020. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On February 22, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall vote 49, regarding H.R. 4425. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On February 22, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall vote 50, regarding H.R. 4238. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On February 23, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 53, concerning H. Res, 1059. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On March 4, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 85, concerning H. Res. 1086. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On March 21, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 168, concerning H. Res. 1099. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On March 21, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 169, concerning H. Res. 1119. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On March 23, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 172, concerning H. Res. 1205. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On April 14, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 199, concerning H. Res, 1236. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On May 13, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 271, concerning H. Res. 1338. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On May 13, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 272, concerning H. Res. 1337. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On May 20, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 290, concerning H.R. 5128. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On May 24, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 292, concerning H.R. 1017. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On May 27, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 306, concerning an adjournment of the House of Representatives. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On May 27, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 313, regarding H.R. 5136. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On June 16, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 366, regarding H. Res. 1422. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On July 22, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 464, concerning H.R. 5341. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

On September 23, I inadvertently failed to cast a recorded vote on rollcall 535, concerning H. Res. 1640. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``aye.''

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, the Constitution of the United States mandates on the Federal Government the responsibility of holding a census every decade. It is an essential part of our constitutional obligation, and actually a building block for our representative form of government. It also has evolved into a process to be able to assess how Federal funds and programs should be distributed.

The integrity of the census is so important that over the decades methods have been proposed how to improve and to secure the census numbers. Today we are actually talking about one aspect of the effort to improve the validity of these numbers and the integrity of the numbers, and that is to do an outreach to the communities of the Native Alaskans and American Indians. These are communities that tend to be more isolated than the general population and tend to be more suspicious of any government action, especially the Federal Government. And, frankly, the way the Federal Government has treated these two groups historically, I think we all say that a lot of the skepticism of the American Indian and Native Alaskans is well founded.

But this program is well based in a proposal to use the traditional respect for elders, the high regard and status of elders in the American Indian and Alaskan Native community really as a building block to build the understanding that this process is not just important to the Federal Government, it is not just important to the general population, but it is essential to those individuals who reside on Indian reservations and in Alaska.

This proposal is actually a great way to be able to bring this message that the census is for you, too, even if you are on a reservation. I think it is a very good way of doing it.

I have to say there are many things that the Federal Government does where we mean well, but we don't take the time to understand the individuals that we are trying to serve. We don't take the time or make the effort to understand that the Federal Government too often asks for one size fits all as somehow the perfect answer. This program customizes an approach to reflect those traditional customs and the heritage of our Native American and Native Alaskan populations.

I think that the integrity of the census is something that we don't talk enough about except when we have scandals and problems of groups and people being involved with it that basically are questionable at the time and pull a pale over the entire census process. This process is one I think where we will be able to look back and say there was a bipartisan effort not to try to manipulate the numbers or the process, but to allow the numbers to be true and well founded. I strongly support this concept.

Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).

Madam Speaker, I would like to close by thanking my colleague from California. I want to thank him for a lot of reasons, but it was nice that you proposed a 2-page bill, not a 2,000-page bill. It was nice that you gave us over a week to be able to review it rather than a few hours. And it is darn nice to see that we can have a bipartisan effort and get something passed in this Congress that doesn't cost $1 trillion. So thank you very much for taking a leadership role on this thing. Maybe we can get the leadership on both sides to recognize that maybe this is the process we ought to follow more often.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, on rollcall Nos. 85 and 86, H. Res. 1086, H. Res. 1111, I missed these votes to attend a bill signing with the President at the White House. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''