Providing for a conditional adjournment of the House of Representatives and a conditional recess or adjournment of the Senate.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in reluctant opposition to this measure. I do so with a keen awareness that it reflects a bipartisan agreement reached to avert a government shutdown, and I commend the President and congressional leadership for negotiating a deal that avoided the most extreme aspects of H.R. 1, the Republican continuing resolution passed by the House in February. I also commend Chairman Rogers and the Appropriations Committee majority staff for soliciting input from the minority as they finalized the details of this proposal.

But ultimately, I must judge this bill on its merits and not by the process that produced it. And I cannot in good conscience support a measure that will threaten our fragile economic recovery and undermine key investments in our future, while doing little to address our long- term fiscal challenges and requiring little in the way of shared sacrifice. It is simply not enough to observe that this bill could have been much worse.

As the Ranking Member of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, I have concerns about the cuts the bill would impose on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), but this is not the primary reason for my opposition. This area of the budget was spared the sort of drastic reductions the bill makes to investments in infrastructure, innovation and the health and well-being of the American people. I commend our Subcommittee Chairman, Robert Aderholt, for protecting the core operational functions of the Department--from Customs and Border Protection personnel to transportation security investments to the Coast Guard.

Chairman Aderholt was not operating without constraints, of course. Overall funding for DHS will drop by two percent from last year's funding level, and the majority's decision to increase the Disaster Relief Fund by $1 billion to cover a shortfall that has traditionally been met through emergency supplemental appropriations only exacerbates this reduced allocation. Unfortunately, state and local first responder grants received the brunt of this blow, taking a 25 percent reduction overall. Not only does this adversely impact the efforts of communities across the country to keep their people safe by preparing for natural disasters and terrorist attacks, but it does so at a time when state and local budgets are already contracting, making federal assistance all the more vital.

The bill also reverses course on a decision to fund the processing of asylum seekers and refugees out of general funds, rather than asking other immigrant petitioners to pay fees to fund a service they don't receive. A reduced allocation for the National Protection and Programs Directorate is likely to delay the critical effort to secure government cyberspace, and a cut to the flood hazard mapping program will make it difficult for FEMA to meet its legal obligation to update our nation's flood maps every five years.

The bill does avoid significant cuts to most of the core DHS components, including the Coast Guard, TSA, ICE, Secret Service, and Customs and Border Protection. Importantly, the bill maintains level funding for firefighter equipment and staffing grants, which are critical to mitigate the impacts of widespread local budget cuts to public safety personnel. And because of the dire fiscal straits that local fire chiefs are facing, the bill maintains flexibility Congress has given FEMA in recent years to waive certain restrictions on SAFER grants that are difficult for most fire departments to achieve right now.

Specifically, the bill waives the requirement that SAFER grants be used to increase the number of firefighters on staff, thus allowing these grants to be used to rehire laid off firefighters and to retain firefighters who face the prospect of being laid off. In discussions over these provisions, negotiators realized that allowing these grants to be used for retention was clearly one of the most important measures that should be maintained for fiscal year 2011 SAFER grants. Second, the bill waives local cost-share requirements, which vary from 10 percent of a firefighter's salary in the first year to 70 percent in the fourth year of the personnel grant. Third, the bill waives a provision in the SAFER authorizing statute prohibiting the grants from being used to supplant state or local funds. While I believe a more comprehensive set of waivers would have served the program well, in the judgment of the bill's negotiators, provisions allowing for the rehiring and retention of firefighters, the waiver of cost-share requirements, and the supplanting of local funds simply had to be maintained for the current fiscal year.

Unfortunately, these homeland security provisions offer little consolation when we turn to other areas of the bill. The strength and security of our country are about much more than how much we spend on weapons systems or how thoroughly we police the border. They are about the investments we make in our people--in our nation's ability to recover from the current economic downturn, compete in the global economy, and build a future of greater prosperity for our children and grandchildren. The bill before us risks pulling the rug out from under the current recovery and compromising our future competitiveness.

To be sure, it could have been worse. Some of the most reckless cuts included in H.R. 1--such as a 17 percent cut to Pell Grants, a $1.6 billion cut to NIH, and an $800 million cut to the National Science Foundation--have been avoided, while the measure contains modest increases for programs such as Head Start and homeless assistance grants. Most of the extreme, ideologically driven policy riders being pushed by my Republican colleagues have been dropped.

But the bill still cuts nutrition assistance to Women, Infants and Children (WIC) by over $500 million, Community Health Centers by $600 million, and public housing programs by $700 million--leading to more hungry children, reduced access to health care, and fewer families with a roof over their heads at a time when many are still struggling to make ends meet. It cuts Career Education programs, Dislocated Worker Assistance programs, and a range of highway and infrastructure projects -- making it harder for out-of-work Americans to find jobs at a time when our economic recovery is still fragile. And it includes drastic cuts to high-speed rail ($2.9 billion), the EPA ($1.6 billion), energy efficiency and renewable energy research ($438 million), and other key investments in our long-term economic competitiveness. The federal budget is a statement of our priorities and values. These cuts will slow economic growth, as economists across the spectrum have warned, and cost hundreds of thousands of jobs. They will inflict pain on the most vulnerable and restrict opportunities for the middle class.

Make no mistake: in order to preserve our economy competitiveness in the future, we must also put our country back on a path toward fiscal balance. As a veteran of the balanced budget agreements of the 1990s, I take a backseat to no one in my conviction that we must rein in our current deficits and put our long-term obligations on a more sustainable trajectory. And while some may claim that this bill is a necessary first step on this path, this view ignores the fact that by threatening the recovery, this bill could perversely exacerbate our fiscal troubles, all the while failing to address the real budget crisis--the massive imbalance in projected revenues and government obligations in the long-term.

Addressing this much more vexing challenge will require making targeted reductions in spending, but it should phase these adjustments in at a pace that does not jeopardize the fragile economic recovery. I have supported a series of measures in recent months that included real cuts to programs I care about. I helped draft an omnibus bill last fall that would have cut over $20 billion below the President's request, and when that wasn't enough to satisfy my Republican colleagues, I helped draft a yearlong Continuing Resolution (CR) that would have cut nearly $40 billion below the request (and $10 billion below last year's enacted level). Senate Republicans blocked both measures, choosing instead to threaten a March government shutdown. In recent weeks I supported three short-term continuing resolutions to give leaders time to negotiate our way out of this mess. These bills cut another $12 billion off of last year's level.

But we will never balance the budget through cuts to domestic discretionary spending alone. What is needed is a comprehensive approach that includes reforms to entitlements and revenue, as well as targeted spending cuts--the kind of serious approach outlined by President Obama yesterday--instead of focusing myopically on just 12 percent of the budget, as the bill before us does. Twelve percent of the budget--programs that invest in our people and our future--is not 100 percent of the problem. A real budget solution requires shared sacrifice from all Americans, instead of seeking to balance the budget on the backs of lower- and middle-income Americans while cutting taxes for the wealthy.

And so I cannot in good conscience support a measure that would threaten our economic recovery and undermine our long-term competitiveness while doing next to nothing to address our long-term fiscal challenges. This bill may have been a necessary step to avert the irresponsible shutdown of the government, but that does not make it a step in the right direction. I urge my colleagues to oppose this measure.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 218, I call up the bill (H.R. 1473) making appropriations for the Department of Defense and the other departments and agencies of the Government for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1473, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I'm pleased to bring to the floor today H.R. 1473, the full year spending agreement for fiscal year 2011.

This final CR makes nearly $40 billion of real spending cuts compared to fiscal year 2010 levels while funding the government's critical services and programs and supporting our Nation's troops for the rest of this fiscal year.

After weeks of hard fought negotiations, all sides were able to come together in this final agreement to find common ground and take steps to help balance our budget.

This legislation is a bold move for Congress, one that points us in the right direction on Federal spending. Never before has any Congress made dramatic cuts such as these that are in this final bill.

The near $40 billion reduction in non-defense spending is tens of billions of dollars larger than any other cut in history and is the result of this new Republican majority's commitment to bring about real change in the way Washington spends the people's money.

My committee went line-by-line through agency budgets to execute the agreement reached by our Speaker crafting deep but responsible reductions in virtually all areas of government. Our bill targets wasteful and duplicative spending, makes strides to rein in out-of- control Federal bureaucracies, and will help bring our Nation one step closer to eliminating our job-crushing level of debt.

This led to the following cuts from the President's budget request: Agriculture accounts were reduced by 14 percent; Commerce, Justice, and Science reduced by 12 percent; Energy and Water reduced by 10 percent; Financial Services, General Government,

13 percent; Interior and Environment by 9 percent; Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, 8 percent; Legislative Branch, 11 percent cut; State and Foreign Operations, 15 percent cut; and Transportation and HUD, 19 percent cut.

The Department of Defense is funded at $513 billion, which is a $5 billion increase over fiscal year 2010 to provide the necessary resources for our troops and the success of our Nation's military actions.

In this bill, Madam Speaker, we've defunded Obama administration czars--we said, ``Nyet''--ended unsuccessful education programs, advanced efforts to repeal ObamaCare, and reduced Congress's own budget. We've also put into place mandatory audits for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, banned taxpayer funding of abortion in Washington, D.C., and continued the global fight against terrorism.

In addition, with this legislation we have ended the stimulus spending spree and have taken the next step to cutting trillions of dollars in the years to come. We stood by our commitment to eliminate earmarks, terminated unnecessary and ineffective programs, and made real spending cuts that will help right our fiscal ship. And we will continue to hold the government to a standard of responsible, sustainable spending in the future.

Our goal is and has been to keep precious taxpayer dollars where they are needed most--in the hands of our small businesses and individuals so they can create jobs and grow our economy. I hope, Madam Speaker, that my colleagues will take the opportunity to support this historic bill and finally close the book on the fiscal year 2011 budget.

For those who have been saying in their career here in this body, ``I came here to cut spending and to bring down the size of the government,'' I say to them here's your chance. If you believe in cutting spending, you can vote for $40 billion of it today, the largest any Member of Congress has ever been able to vote for.

This is historic, a historic reduction in Federal spending after a 2- year spending spree that increased discretionary spending by 82 percent. This bill will reverse that rise and will start us back down toward responsible spending in the government.

Madam Speaker, before I close, I would like to take a moment and thank these hardworking individuals who have been toiling behind the scenes now on this bill for the last several months, with little fanfare, and they get no credit in public, that made this legislation possible. Our legislative counsels deserve our appreciation.

I want to say thanks to Ira Forstater, Tom Cassidy, Ryan Greenlaw, and their group of appropriations coordinators. I would like also to thank Janet Airis and the staff at the CBO. I also want to thank the floor staff, the parliamentarians, the Capitol Police, and all those support staff who have put in the extra hours to keep this institution running at its very best.

Finally, I want to offer a special thanks to the Appropriations Committee's fine staff on both sides of this aisle, those in our full committee, the subcommittee clerks, the subcommittee staffs in both majority and minority. They have been given impossible task after impossible task, facing untenable deadlines, gone for days and weeks working around the clock, and yet have miraculously produced all that we have asked of them and more.

I want to especially say a real thanks to the clerk of the committee, Bill Inglee; the deputy clerk, Will Smith; and all of the other staff that's worked on the majority side. And Mr. Dicks and his wonderful staff have been just magnanimous in their support and hard work. I want to say thank you to them as well.

I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Well, they have hardly slept in 3 months. And they worked around the clock, on weekends, at 4 o'clock in the morning you would find them still there. It's an amazing performance that they have contributed to this great body.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished Speaker of the House, the gentleman from Ohio, who toiled long and hard to bring us the largest spending cut in the history of the country, Speaker John Boehner.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the chairman of the Defense Subcommittee on Appropriations, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young).

I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia, Frank Wolf, who is chair of the Commerce, Justice, Science appropriations subcommittee.

I yield 2 minutes, Madam Speaker, to the distinguished chairman of the Energy and Water Subcommittee on Appropriations, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen).

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Appropriations, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt).

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Emerson), chairwoman of the Financial Services Subcommittee on Appropriations.

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Military Construction and VA Subcommittee on Appropriations, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the chairman of the Legislative Branch Subcommittee on Appropriations, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Crenshaw).

I yield 1 minute to a new member of our committee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Dent).

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to a new member of our committee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Austria).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to a new Member of this body, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Landry).

And I join you in that commitment. That's what we're planning to do. I just want this bill over with.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the chairman of the Interior Subcommittee on Appropriations, the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson).

Mr. Speaker, I submit the following.

Pursuant to section 8120 of Division A of H.R. 1473 as

passed the House on April 14, 2011, Chairman Rogers submits

the following explanatory statement:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1473, the FY2011 Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act.

American families in each and every one of our congressional districts are relying on Congress and the White House to avoid a government shutdown and agree on a budget that funds the government for the rest of the fiscal year. While this bill is far better than H.R. 1, the Republican's FY2011 continuing resolution that passed the House earlier this year, I am voting against H.R. 1473 because far too many people will be adversely impacted by the cuts it will make.

Compared with the draconian cuts proposed under H.R. 1, H.R. 1473 provides additional funding for many programs that people in Hawaii and across this country rely on for support--including Head Start, community services, and public broadcasting. H.R. 1473 also invests in our economic future by supporting Race to the Top and funding key science and energy R&D programs.

This legislation is also a better bill than H.R. 1 because it doesn't include legislative riders that defund the Affordable Care Act or prohibit funding to Planned Parenthood. I fundamentally disagree with these riders on a substantive and procedural basis. Members of Congress should have the opportunity to debate and vote on these issues separately and deliberately on their own merit rather than have them be rammed through an appropriations measure.

But H.R. 1473 falls short in many respects. Many families in Hawaii and across the country are barely scraping by and will get little help from this legislation.

What is most alarming about this compromise bill is that it asks working- and middle-class Americans to bear the brunt of the budget cuts without asking the wealthiest Americans to do the same. Where is the shared sacrifice? Where is the aloha?

This continuing resolution takes a meat axe approach by slashing funding for so many programs that I can't even name all of them here. Cuts to community health centers? Check. Cuts to workforce training programs? Check. Cuts to law enforcement grant programs? Check. What about programs for low-income college students? Those programs are cut, too.

The bill also cuts Community Development Block Grant funding by $950 million from the enacted FY2010 level despite wide bipartisan support from counties in Hawaii and across the country. CDBG supports economic development, job creation, and facility needs for the most disadvantaged. The CDBG program has given thousands of Americans a much needed hand up when times were tough--a hand they wouldn't have received without sufficient levels of funding.

In fact, just a few weeks ago, representatives from Hawaii's counties were in town. Their message was simple: preserve CDBG funding.

Not only that, but they were also keen on preserving federal programs that are helping them to upgrade their emergency communications systems to comply with federal law. Instead, this bill terminates the Interoperable Emergency Communications Grants program and cuts $45 million from the Emergency Operations Center Grants program, both run by FEMA. Not only are we reducing resources our communities need, but we are making them less able to comply with the requirements that we at the federal level are forcing them to meet.

In addition to cutting funds that our communities depend on to help people, it also cuts funding for programs that help to keep our communities healthy and safe.

For example, we're reducing allocations for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund by almost $1 billion. These are two of the most important federal sources of funding for improving our wastewater and drinking water infrastructure. This cut reduces Hawaii's Clean Water State Revolving Fund by $4.4 million. Access to clean water should be one of our highest priorities, as it is one of the most basic needs of all of our people. Yet, we are making cuts to these programs, which provide federal funds that ensure clean, safe water for our communities.

Of course, these are two major federal programs. This legislation is even crueler when it comes to smaller federal programs--like the Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations program run by the Department of Agriculture, which is zeroed out in this bill. This program is one of the only federal programs available for flood prevention and watershed development programs in America's rural communities. Even though it is a relatively small program, it has a big impact in communities that receive funding--like those on the islands of Maui and Hawaii.

My colleagues may be aware that Hawaii recently received a Presidential Disaster Declaration to assist with rebuilding the communities that sustained damage in the recent tsunami. Certainly, providing assistance to communities affected by disasters should be a national priority. Unfortunately, this bill cuts Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant funding by 50 percent. Thanks to the Declaration we recently received, Hawaii's counties are eligible to apply for this funding, which can be used to help prevent damage in the event of the next natural disaster. This is the kind of forward-thinking investment in preparedness we should be prioritizing. Instead, we are cutting funding in half.

I am concerned about the economic impact that this bill will have on Hawaii and our nation. I am concerned about what it says about our priorities as a people. At the same time, I understand the pressures that President Obama and our Senate colleagues were under. America's families already have enough to worry about--they shouldn't have to be concerned that their government is going to shut down.

However, the negotiations over this important decision were hijacked--as this House has been--by an extreme, ideological minority. This faction has adopted an irresponsible ``my way or the highway'' negotiating position. They believe that because they have the majority in this chamber, that they can drown out the voices of those of us who want to work to ensure that our government works for our constituents and reflects the priorities of our communities.

I support the President and know that this is a deal he didn't want to have to make. As a member of the House, I want him to know that these extremists do not represent the full will of the American people--so I feel that it is my duty to vote against this deal.

I will continue to oppose legislation that weakens our economy when it is already fragile, increases the burden on our families when they are struggling, and fails to adequately invest in our nation's future success.

Our priority needs to be jobs. H.R. 1473 doesn't create jobs or help the middle class, which is why I must vote against this bill.

Mr. Speaker, despite reservations about certain aspects of this appropriations bill, I will vote in favor of funding the federal government for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2011. The process over the past year, that has led us to this vote, has been filled with missed opportunities, disappointments, and extreme political posturing. This compromise agreement is a success for President Obama who prevented a government shutdown and defended America's seniors, students, working families, and the fragile economic recovery. Federal funding for Planned Parenthood and implementation of the Affordable Care Act, both under constant attack from Republicans, were prevented from being eliminated to the benefit of Americans in need of access to health care.

The Republican Tea Party crusade to eliminate $100 billion in 2011 from domestic discretionary spending and their threats to shutdown the federal government failed. At the end of the day, this compromise cuts $38.5 billion from the budget. Yet, will yield only $352 million in reduced federal outlays in 2011, according to the Congressional Budget Office, CBO. This is because much of the funding eliminated in H.R. 1473 was excess program funds that were never going to be spent anyway.

H.R. 1473 is a compromise between Democrats and Republicans. Many onerous, destructive cuts proposed by the Tea Party Republican House majority in H.R. 1 were eliminated from this compromise. Investments in job creation, health care reform implementation, voluntary family planning services, public broadcasting, international development assistance, and services for homeless veterans are all included in this bill. Despite Republican efforts to gut services for the unemployed, the sick, women, and the poorest of the poor around the world, many harmful cuts were avoided in this final bill.

Still, there are budget cuts and policy riders in this bill, which I strongly disagree with and have a long record of opposing. The cuts to the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, of $1.6 billion or 16 percent will diminish the ability of this agency to protect human health, pursue polluters, and address the grave challenges presented by global climate change. These cuts to EPA are wrongheaded and reflect a perspective that corporate profits are more important than regulating pollution and protecting human health. I find this objectionable, and I will work to continue to fund EPA's vital regulatory role in the 2012 Fiscal Year.

Deep cuts to community health centers are of great concern to me. The $503 million cut to the Women, Infants, and Children, WIC, program-- which provides nutritional assistance to young children and pregnant, postpartum and breast-feeding women--is a direct Republican attack on our society's most vulnerable. These are two examples of senseless, mean-spirited cuts that target low-income Americans.

Funding school vouchers in the District of Columbia is a policy I strongly oppose because it undermines public schools and diverts scarce resources away from public 4, education. Another rider which I strongly opposed prohibits the District of Columbia from using its own local tax revenue to provide legal health care services to women. This intrusion into the affairs of local government is an example of Republican hypocrisy as they impose their ideological agenda on struggling citizens.

There is no doubt that the federal government is facing a fiscal threat that must be addressed. Deficit reduction is a priority for the American people, for the financial markets, and for Congress. The House Republicans' hard line on spending masks their policies of increasing the deficit by hundreds of billions by cutting taxes for millionaires and billionaires, protecting the defense contractors from cuts to eliminate waste and abuse, and heaping generous tax breaks on oil companies and other special interests. By focusing all spending cuts on domestic discretionary programs which makes up only 12 percent of the federal budget the Republicans advance an ideological agenda, but do nothing to repair our nation's fiscal situation or strengthen the economy.

I will not celebrate the passage of this bill, but the process that lead us to this point should be instructive to the many sectors of our community that depend on the federal government as an equal partner. The consequence of last November's election victory by the Tea Party means every federal investment in education, health care access, services to the poor, the disabled, and the homeless is at risk of being eliminated. Federal support for job creating investments in community development, the arts, green technology, workforce training, and life-saving medical research are all at risk by this Tea Party majority that is determined to slash federal programs.

Since January the American people have witnessed the Tea Party Republican majority in Congress and the accompanying agenda. The passage of H.R. 1 should be indicative of how destructive their agenda would be to America if it were not for a Democratic majority in the U.S. Senate and the leadership of President Obama in the White House. Between now and November 2012 the American people need to decide what role they want the federal government to play in their lives. The future of America is being debated now, but it will be decided in the next election. I strongly urge my fellow citizens--especially those who believe government plays a valuable role in our society--to become fully engaged in the policy and political process.

The outcome of this year's appropriations process, H.R. 1473, is a compromise agreement. I support this agreement, but compromise does not mean I cede my values or priorities. In this political environment, I believe this compromise is the best deal possible to keep the federal government working, and I will not vote to shutdown the government.

Congress needs to pass H.R. 1473, fund the federal government for the remainder of 2011, and get serious about meeting the priorities of the American people, like creating jobs, preventing a fiscal crisis, and making America competitive in this global economy.

Mr. Speaker, this past weekend I had an important milestone occur in my life. My oldest daughter, Aubrey, turned 18 years old. It seems like it was only yesterday that I held this small baby in the palm of my hand and now she is a grown mature woman about to start college and begin the next phase of her life.

I flew back to Florida last Saturday so that I could be with her on this very special day in her life. Turning 18 is important for every American. Because at 18 years old, under the law, you are now considered an adult and she was proud to register for the most important right--the right to vote for our elected leaders.

When my daughter was born in 1993 the Federal Government debt was $4.3 trillion. Just 18 years later, I will shortly be faced with a vote on whether to raise the debt limit to over $15 trillion. When I held my daughter as a baby, I never thought that our Nation would be in such financial distress and on its way to a major economic catastrophe.

Over the weekend, as I celebrated with my daughter, I thought even harder about what the United States will be like when she will be my age and what would her son or daughter, my grandchildren, think when they look back in the history books at this critical time in our Republic's history.

Last November, the citizens of the 22nd congressional district, and millions of Americans, voted for a new direction for our country. They sent a message to our elected representatives that we needed to end out-of-control government spending, reduce our national debt, and get our fiscal house in order.

The Democrat majority and President Obama over the last two years have produced deficits of $1.4 and $1.25 trillion, and the President has produced a budget for fiscal year 2012 which would add another $1.6 trillion. The American people know that the Federal Government is collecting $2.2 trillion and spending $3.7 trillion this year.

The American people know that forty cents of every dollar the Federal Government spends is borrowed, much of it from China. The American people also know our Nation is piling up new debt at the rate of $4 billion a day.

The Era of Big Government Spending is Over! In 100 days the debate in Washington has gone from a freeze in government spending to addressing cuts in spending.

As we are all aware, the 111th Congress was controlled by overwhelming Democrat majorities in the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. Yet even with these enormous majorities, Congress failed to pass a budget or any of the appropriations bills.

Members of the former majority party in the House of Representatives have now resorted to the political rhetoric that the Republican Party is trying to kill women, starve seniors, and the budget deal is the functional equivalent of bombing innocent civilians. They make these statements even after Majority Leader Reid and President Obama recognize that we need to cut Federal spending.

This type of political rhetoric is beneath us. We can disagree on the direction we are taking our nation, but let us have a debate on the facts and policies. The American people demand an adult conversation instead of childish name calling.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take a moment to briefly summarize my thoughts and votes during the negotiations for the budget for fiscal year 2011. I voted for the first short term Continuing Resolution in the 112th Congress in order to provide Speaker Boehner the necessary time to negotiate with an intransigent U.S. Senate and White House.

I voted against the second Continuing Resolution because I believed that we were continuing to kick a can down the road, and that the Obama administration and Members of the Democrat Party wanted to force the Federal Government into a shutdown in order to win political points. It seems their goal is the hope that by shutting down the Federal Government, the American people will perceive an inflexible Republican Party and return the Democrats to power in the next election.

I voted for the Department of Defense Appropriations bill, which contained another short term Continuing Resolution, in order to support my brothers and sisters in uniform. However, I made the leadership of the Republican Party aware that I believed using the military as a bargaining chip in the negotiations as a way to pass yet another continuing resolution was indefensible.

As the clock approached the time to shut down the Federal Government, an agreement was finally reached. In order to draft the bill and provide time for the American people to review the bill, the House considered, and I voted in favor of another Short Term Continuing Resolution. I always stated it was never my intention to shut down the Federal Government.

At the Army Airborne school in 1984 I had a black hat instructor say, ``If you set the bar low, you will jump low!'' Today, I will be voting against the negotiated agreement because I believe that we set the bar too low and it does not fulfill the promise I made to the constituents of the 22nd congressional district of Florida. While this bill is a step in the right direction, I am voting against the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2011, H.R. 1473 because it is important for elected leaders to stand by the pledges we make to the American people.

It takes five miles to turn an aircraft carrier. I am pleased, that finally, the Republican leadership has finally taken control of the helm and begun to turn the wheel. However, I believe we need to turn the wheel a little harder. At this moment in our Nation's history, when the facts are so clear and the political hyperbole is so hollow, my vote reflects that we need more to get our ship of state on the right course.

That is what my adult daughter Aubrey expects, that is what my teenage daughter, Austen expects, that is what my wife Angela expects and that is what every American expects.