Supporting the goals and ideals of Tay-Sachs Awareness Month.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from California, my friend, for yielding me the time. I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this closed rule--once again, a closed rule--coming out of the Rules Committee and the process that brought this bill to the floor. My friends on the other side of the aisle for the first time in history shut down the appropriation process by placing extremely restrictive rules on every single appropriation bill that has come to the floor of the House this year. Chairman Obey set an arbitrary timeline to finish the fiscal year 2010 spending bills, which has forced the Democrat Rules Committee to limit every Republican and Democrat's chance to offer an amendment on the floor.

Why? For what reason? There are hundreds of good amendments which were offered by all of my colleagues which were rejected in this unprecedented fashion. Now that this House has finished all the appropriation bills, you would think that my friends on the other side of the aisle would allow for an appropriate time and an appropriate process for consideration of the conference reports, not just come to this House floor but for Members to be heard from and for us to go back to a process which this House was used to in its precedents for so many years.

But no. Last night the conference report was filed after 6 p.m., I believe 6:17, and the Rules Committee met at 7:15 to report out a rule for floor consideration. Our Democrat colleagues in the committee waived the House rule that requires a 3-day layover of conference reports and scheduled a bill on the floor first thing this morning. Additionally, just last week this House voted to adopt a motion to instruct that stated that the conference report, a bill that we are discussing on the floor here today, should be available online in a searchable format for at least 48 hours before it's voted on.

Well, Mr. Speaker, forget the 3-day rule. Forget the 48-hour motion to instruct; this House was given just less than 24 hours to review the conference report and its changes. I don't know when my Democrat colleagues will allow for the open, honest and ethical Congress that they once called for, but we're on the floor once again saying, We have met the deadline that Chairman Obey wanted. Can we get back to a normal process now, a normal process that is not good just for Republicans and not just for our Democratic Members but good for this House to follow?

Mr. Speaker, today we are discussing the Energy and Water appropriation conference report for fiscal year 2010. Today it is my intention to focus on the increase in spending over last year's level and destructive initiatives that the Democrat majority continues to pursue that have only killed jobs and led to record deficits. This administration and this Democratic Congress promised the American public jobs, economic growth, economic recovery, health care, a cleaner environment, better education and just a wonderful, wonderful life, all contained within their appropriation bills. And the list goes on and on with other promises.

Yet the only thing up to now that they really have accomplished is record deficits, record spending and record unemployment numbers all across America. The fiscal year 2010 Energy and Water appropriation conference report provides $33.5 billion in total funding, which is hundreds of millions of dollars above last year's level, and this is in addition to the $58.7 billion provided in fiscal year 2009 emergency funding just from a few months ago, mostly from the stimulus bill.

We have seen massive government spending. Now this bill does not represent any commitment to fiscal sustainability. More promises, more spending, more deficit, more record unemployment. Mr. Speaker, the Obama administration promised America, if Congress passed the stimulus bill, that unemployment would not go beyond 8 percent, that it would create and save millions of jobs. Here we are 8 months later with a record 9.7 unemployment rate, the highest in 26 years, and more than 2 million Americans have lost their jobs since the passage of the $1.2 trillion ``stimulus employment plan.''

This summer when discussing the stimulus, Vice President Biden said the Obama administration--and I quote--``misread how bad the economy was,'' even though as a candidate for President and Vice President both of them had been all over the country. They had seen firsthand exactly the circumstance this country was in.

The Obama administration got it wrong. They got it wrong when it came to the stimulus, and the American people know they got it wrong also. The American people can no longer afford this Democrat-controlled House, Senate and White House. We've got to start getting it right, not guessing and getting it wrong. Spending hundreds of millions of dollars more in addition to the $58 billion additional spending this year is not a way to fix the problem. In June of this year, my friends on the other side of the aisle passed a cap-and-trade bill that will raise prices on energy, goods, and services, and every single hardworking American across the country will pay that price.

In my home State of Texas, the average household can expect to pay more than $1,100 a year extra as a result of that legislation. Additionally, this legislation could ultimately kill over 1.38 million jobs that are in the manufacturing sector of this economy. That's 1.38 million more jobs.

Mr. Speaker, some time this month the Democrat-controlled House wants to pass sweeping health care reform. Effectively, it will diminish the employer-based insurance market and forces 114 million Americans into a government-run program. This $1.2 trillion package raises taxes once again, raises taxes once again, raises taxes once again, which is what this Democratic-controlled Congress is about. Raise $1.2 trillion in taxes on individuals and small businesses that do not participate in the government plan and $800 billion, which the President talks about will be necessary to fund this massive government takeover and will result in 4.7 to 5.5 million more private-sector jobs being lost in America.

In July, the Congressional Budget Office director stated that the Democratic health care proposal ``significantly expands the Federal responsibility for health care costs.'' Mr. Speaker, I thought that the goal of health reform was to bring costs down for Americans, not to increase the cost, further America toward bankruptcy and to cost 4.7 to 5.5 million more enterprise system jobs. By the way, those are jobs that are not in Washington, D.C.

The American people know that you cannot spend what you don't have, and that's exactly what we are doing here today with the Democratic majority. Earlier this month, the Treasury Department released a statement reporting that the Federal budget deficit reached a record $1.378 trillion and that the national debt reached $11.8 trillion by the end of August. This means that since 2007, this Democratic Congress has increased the Federal deficit by $1.217 billion and increased the national debt by over $3 trillion. What a record.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I will continue to point out that our friends on the other side of the aisle should not tax and spend not only this country but also hardworking families into a further economic recession.

My Democratic colleagues need to get a handle on the out-of-control spending which they dogged us repeatedly about when we were in the majority at far lesser levels.

Rising unemployment and record deficits cannot be remedied with massive increases in spending by Uncle Sam. Huge energy and health care costs that raise taxes and kill jobs is not what our economy needs right now. Americans need a balance. They need to listen to what is happening in Washington only to see that Washington is the problem, not the answer. Americans are tightening their belts because they get it. Congress should be doing the same thing.

Mr. Speaker, we have talked today about the process. We have talked today about spending. And we have talked about the overall agenda of this

Democratic majority that is about taxing, it is about spending, it is about record unemployment, rather than working on the things that the American people, the people back home who sent us here to do our job, are working on.

I encourage a ``no'' vote on this rule.

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

Mr. Speaker, the thought process here in Washington is that we can solve all the problems that our country has, just trust Washington. I think now more than ever we are seeing at the end of this year that the leadership in Washington, D.C., the bills that are on this floor, the votes which we take virtually every single time, every single vote is about more taxes, more spending, more rules and regulations that are thrown to the American people with this package about how great this is for the American people.

Yet what happens is that Members of Congress, lots of them in our body on both sides, go back home and they listen to the American people. And they listen to the American people talk what I think is a lot of common sense: common sense about how to fix our health care, how to fix our spending, how to fix the unemployment, how to encourage manufacturing rather than deleting it.

Then they look up and see the political agenda of the Democratic Party, that in the three biggest political bills that represent the Democratic Party we will lose almost 10 million jobs in this country; and the political agenda of the Democratic Party, one which this body is barreling down that pathway to meet and match, has resulted in disaster for people back home.

So the Republican Party will continue to come to Washington and be faithful after listening, and we will go to our committees and we will throw our ideas on the floor and ask the committees to vote on them. We will continue to have Members come to the Rules Committee that seek time, permission to speak about ideas that will better the bills.

Yet we find that in these instances before the Rules Committee, it really doesn't matter. It doesn't matter not just for Republicans, but it really doesn't matter to a Democrat either. They will block the best ideas that come from the heartland.

Mr. Speaker, this is not a way to continue. We are once again coming to the floor, as I have done all year, and my colleagues David Dreier, Lincoln Diaz-Balart, and Virginia Foxx, as we explain the rules and explain the Rules Committee, explain what is happening: receiving a bill at 3 o'clock in the morning; getting a bill, as we did last night, 1 hour before the meeting; not even following the rules from a resolution we had just the week before about online availability of bills.

Mr. Speaker, no wonder the American people are up in arms and insisting that Members of Congress read the bill first; that every single Member of this body is given a chance every single time to say, I disagree with the direction that the Democratic leadership is taking us.

We need to read the bills. We need to take the ideas from people in the heartland, through their Representatives in committees and up in the Rules Committee, and make these in order and follow a process that the American people, if they were sitting in, would say, Why not take more time? Why not understand the bill? Why not cut spending? Why not make some commonsense directional issues happen in this Congress? This leadership, these bills continue to follow a process that the American people are questioning.

We will continue coming to the floor and politely, on behalf of people back home, say that we would hope that we would go back to regular processes instead of setting a new record every time for closed rules. I think it's important. I think it's important.

We will keep coming to the floor, and we will dutifully keep speaking up, and we will make sure that we are properly representing those people who are talking about better process, better direction, and doing the things that will work.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding the time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 788 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 788.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 788 provides for consideration of the conference report for H.R. 3183, the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act for 2010. The rule is a standard conference report rule. It waives all points of order against the conference report and against the consideration and provides that the conference report shall be considered as read. However, I want to point out that although the rule waives all points of order, the conference report does not violate either clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The resolution provides for 1 hour of general debate controlled by the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. Speaker, I first want to thank Chairman Obey as well as Mr. Pastor for their work to bring this conference report before the House today.

When we think of the long-term health of our country, the Energy and Water appropriations bill is one of the most important bills that we consider. The conference report before us today will keep communities safe from flooding, invest in clean energy and renewable technologies, fight nuclear proliferation, and create jobs through infrastructure development.

Without this bill, millions of homes would be exposed to devastating floods, clean energy research that will power the next generation of money-making technologies will stop, nuclear weapons proliferation would pick up again, and the pace of job creation in the clean energy sector would slow to a crawl or even stop altogether. These are the reasons why today's conference report is so important.

In the field of energy, the conference report fulfills Congress's promise to chart a new path for a national energy policy. The conference agreement provides $27 billion for the Department of Energy to help fund clean energy development and perform basic scientific research. It devotes millions of dollars to solar energy development, advanced vehicle technologies, energy-efficient buildings, and biofuels that can be grown right here at home.

When we make our own fuel, Mr. Speaker, we create domestic jobs and also take steps toward becoming energy independent. We recognized this fact in the Energy and Commerce Committee when we wrote the American Clean Energy and Security Act, which is why I'm pleased to see these provisions part of today's conference report.

This appropriations bill also funds a number of applied research grants at the Department of Energy for potentially high-reward activities like fusion energy, high-energy physics, and biological research. Future generations will look back at these investments and thank us for having the foresight to recognize that one generation's long-term research is future generations' short-term gain.

Many of my colleagues would be satisfied to know that the conference report also devotes resources to fossil fuel-based energy that can provide a boost to our energy independence efforts in relatively short order. In it, $672 million is provided for research and development into things like carbon capture and sequestration, natural gas recovery, and unconventional petroleum research activities. This research will benefit independent petroleum producers and can also help make our country more energy independent for the short term.

Also to that end, the conference report takes a responsible approach toward nuclear energy by investing in fuel cycle research and development. By providing more than $700 million for nuclear energy, the conferees made the pragmatic calculation that nuclear will be part of our energy mix in the short term. But no matter how electricity is generated, one challenge we face is delivering it effectively to its destination. For this reason, the conference report provides more than $100 million to modernize and secure our national electricity grid. By almost tripling the amount of funding for grid-connected energy storage and cybersecurity, the conferees have recognized how closely our energy policy is tied to our national security.

The energy portion of this conference report is only half the story though, Mr. Speaker. For my district and for people living in floodplains across the country, this energy and water conference report is a major victory. Funding for the Army Corps of Engineers is increased over both 2009 levels and over the President's request for a total of $5.4 billion. For my constituents, this funding can be a matter of life and death. My district is where the Sacramento and American Rivers converge. As a result, Sacramento is the most at-risk city for major flooding in the United States. More than 440,000 people, 110,000 structures, the capitol of the State of California and up to $58 billion are at risk from flooding in my district alone. Nearly $90 million of vital funding in this conference report will reinforce levees along the American and Sacramento Rivers to keep these national assets safe and dry.

For all of Sacramento, this means safer homes, more secure schools, better protected community centers and a higher quality of life. According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, Federal levees currently provide a 6-to-1 return on flood damages prevented when compared to initial building costs.

But the flood protection funding in this conference agreement is more than just dollars and cents, Mr. Speaker. When I go home and walk along the Sacramento River, and when I look at the houses and schools and parks that sit behind the levees, I'm reminded how vital the Energy and Water bill is. In many parts of the country, it can mean the difference between a thriving city and a disaster area. Flood protection is a regional undertaking though. Floodwaters do not stop and start based on congressional district boundaries. That is why I am pleased that the conference report contains more than $60 million to improve the ability of Folsom Dam to protect my constituents who live below it. This money will also help the Joint Federal Project to provide greater efficiency in managing flood storage in Folsom Reservoir.

Around the whole country, from Sacramento to the Mississippi River Delta, from rural Ohio to the Bronx River Basin, this conference agreement protects our communities by investing in our aging infrastructure. And when we rebuild our infrastructure, we rebuild our economy. The infrastructure funding in this conference report before us today will continue this pattern of creating jobs while investing in public

safety. For that reason, I strongly support the rule and the underlying conference report, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, again, I want to thank Mr. Obey and the Appropriations Committee for their hard work on this conference agreement.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to remind my colleague on the other side of the aisle that we're not debating the American Clean Energy and Security Act or the health care reform bill. We are dealing today with the conference report for Energy and Water Development.

And I must say that this is a bill, a conference report, that has strong bipartisan support. As far as job creation, this is about infrastructure, spending on public safety projects that will save jobs across America. As I said before, it's a smart investment, the type of smart investment the American people want this Congress to be making at this difficult point in our history.

Our Nation's levees are crumbling, and we're putting public health at risk because of things like that. This is the time to invest in infrastructure like this.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

The rule before us today is a fair rule that is aligned with the customary practice of the House for rules governing debate on conference reports.

After numerous hearings and constructive negotiations with the Senate, the Appropriations Committee has crafted an important and balanced bill. It invests in new technologies, scientific research, and conservation efforts that are critical to the long-term health of our economy and our planet.

Most importantly for my district, this legislation increases funding for the Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation. Every dollar is crucial for my constituents in Sacramento as we work to improve our water infrastructure, as I know it is to all my colleagues in the House with similar bills.

I want to thank Chairman Obey and Chairman Pastor for recognizing how critical this funding is to all of us. We rely upon it to fortify our levees, raise our dams, and keep our communities safe and dry.

This bill also looks to the future by investing in the development of a new smart grid to ensure electricity delivery and energy reliability. And it makes a strong commitment to renewable energy and scientific research.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for recognizing me.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 692, which recognizes this September 2009 as Tay-Sachs Disease Awareness Month. I'm proud to cosponsor this resolution, and I commend my friend from Ohio, Senator Sherrod Brown, for spearheading a companion resolution in the Senate.

Tay-Sachs disease is a progressive neurological disorder for which there is no known treatment or cure. The most common form affects infants who appear healthy at birth and seem to develop normally at first, but at around 6 months the symptoms of the disease begin to appear. The baby gradually begins to regress, losing the ability to crawl, turn over, sit, or reach out. Eventually, as paralysis sets in, the child becomes blind, deaf, and unable to swallow. Tragically, few infants born with Tay-Sachs live past the age of 5.

This terrible disease appears most often in families with no prior history because the Tay-Sachs gene can be carried through many generations without being expressed. However, when two carriers of the gene become parents, there is a one-in-four chance that any child they will have will be born with the disease.

While about 1.5 million Americans are carriers of the Tay-Sachs gene, certain populations are much more at risk. About 1 in every 30 American Jews and 1 in 50 Irish Americans is a carrier. French Canadians, Louisiana Cajuns, and Pennsylvania Dutch are also high-risk populations.

It is easy to reduce this terrible disease like Tay-Sachs to statistics, but there is a human story behind statistics that we must not overlook. My wife's son, Joey Deon, was born a happy, healthy baby. There was no warning he would be afflicted by this terrible disease, but at the age of 1, he began to show symptoms.

His mother, like many parents of children with Tay-Sachs, was the first to notice that something was wrong. She sat through many tests and the awful day they were told that Joey had Tay-Sachs. She was forced to watch a once active healthy, happy baby slowly lose sight, hearing, and muscle control.

Joey passed away in his sleep 1 month before his fifth birthday. We were thankful he died peacefully in his sleep shortly after his mother held him and fed him for the last time. Not all deaths from Tay-Sachs are peaceful. Some can be quite long and agonizing.

Mr. Speaker, a simple blood test can identify carriers of Tay-Sachs genes before they have children, but very few people, including those in high-risk populations, are aware of the availability of this test. This critical and relatively inexpensive test can identify carrier couples before the tragedy occurs. It is a test that my own health insurance, incredibly, did not cover, and I had to pay for myself. But it's a test that primary care physicians should be aware of and discuss with high-risk populations.

Raising awareness of this terrible disease is important, but it is critical that we also put words into actions. Millions of Americans suffering from rare diseases like Tay-Sachs, and more common diseases like cancer, stand to benefit from an expanded Federal commitment to stem cell research. We must also continue to increase funding for the National Institutes of Health. Federal support for cutting-edge biomedical research will make treatments and cures for diseases like Tay-Sachs a reality.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues today to support House Resolution 692 and Tay-Sachs Disease Awareness Month.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 692) supporting the goals and ideals of Tay- Sachs Awareness Month, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material in the Record.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 692, supporting the goals and ideals of Tay-Sachs Awareness Month. Tay-Sachs disease is a very rare genetic disorder that leads to the destruction of nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord. The disease is prevalent in Ashkenazi Jews, French Canadians, Louisianan Cajuns, and Irish Americans. One in 250 Americans are carriers of the disease. If both parents are carriers, there's a one in four chance that a child born will suffer from Tay-Sachs.

This is a terrible and unforgiving disease that strikes so early in life the victims don't have much of a chance. As young as 6 months old, children start presenting symptoms. They stop developing and start losing motor and mental skills, ultimately leading to paralysis and death. There's no treatment that can stop the progression of this disease. There's no cure. Because of this, Tay-Sachs is always fatal. Most children do not survive past the age of 4.

Prevention is the only remedy, and that can be accomplished through education and information. A simple blood test can indicate if a person is a carrier. With this knowledge, parents can be better prepared and aware of the chances that they have a child with this terrible disease.

The resolution before us today supports heightened awareness about and increased research on this disease. I'd like to thank my colleague, Representative Arcuri, for his work in raising this important issue. I urge my colleagues to pass this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the sponsor of this legislation, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Arcuri).

Mr. Speaker, I, too, have no additional speakers, so I would yield back the balance of my time and ask for passage.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

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

I rise today in support of House Resolution 692, recognizing September as Tay-Sachs Awareness Month. Tay-Sachs disease affects the lives of almost 1.5 million Americans who are carriers of the disease.

Infants are the most vulnerable to this disease. They appear to develop normally for the first few months of life, but then, as nerve cells become distended with fatty material, a relentless deterioration of mental and physical abilities occurs. These helpless children then become blind, deaf, and unable to swallow. Muscles begin to atrophy. Paralysis sets in. Even with the best of care, children with Tay-Sachs disease usually die by the age of 4 from recurring infections.

A much rarer form of the disorder occurs in patients in their twenties and early thirties and is characterized by an unsteady gait and progressive neurological deterioration.

Unfortunately, the incidence of Tay-Sachs is particularly high among people of Eastern European and Ashkenazi Jewish descent. Patients and carriers of Tay-Sachs disease can be identified by a simple blood test. Parents of high-risk populations are encouraged to have their children screened for this gene.

Presently, there is no treatment for Tay-Sachs disease, but I would like to recognize the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Strokes for their efforts to reduce the burden of this neurological disease. NINDS is part of the National Institutes of Health and conducts research on Tay-Sachs disease in laboratories at the NIH and also supports additional research through grants to major medical institutions across the country.

I encourage all of my colleagues to vote in favor of this resolution, Mr. Speaker, and reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, we have no further speakers, and so I'm prepared to yield back the balance of our time.