Relating to the disapproval of the President's exercise of authority to increase the debt limit, as submitted under section 3101A of title 31, United States Code, on August 2, 2011.

Mr. Speaker, I think we have already set the parameters for this discussion. We can see by the throngs that are on the floor of the House how keenly important this is to the American people. The reason why I say that is because important discussions draw Members even away from their duties elsewhere. But we know that the reason why we are speaking to empty seats is, one, because the other body has resoundingly denounced and voted this particular provision down because we have reached a compromise, a respectable compromise that we realize we have to pay our bills.

But of course those who believe that they are not in the people's House, they can put this resolution on the floor because if they look to what the people want, 46 percent of the American people believe that jobs are more important than reducing the deficit. More than 65 percent believe we should be doing a jobs bill. We have the greatest poverty among children of all sectors in all areas of the country right now as I speak. And the new population of the impoverished are those recent college graduates. All of the stars in the eyes and excited parents who've paid large amounts of dollars to ensure that their young ones have an opportunity for a college education, there are no jobs.

Now, I don't concede to the fact that the only initiative that should come about should be from the government, but we are the umbrella on a rainy day. This is a small measure that the President has offered, a small, constructive measure, his jobs bill. It is balanced across the board. It provides relief for small businesses. It provides the jobs that they will create. It gives incentives to hire someone. It works with our larger companies as well. And, of course, it puts back to work what has been a devastating phenomenon in our communities, taking away firefighters, police and teachers. You're going to feel the pinch when your young children are in classes that are 50 and 60 persons. So this is realistic.

It also addresses the question of the 46.2 million Americans who are living in poverty. As I indicated, a disproportionate share of those are children.

So what we are doing today goes smack against what the people want, and this is the people's House. I am concerned that we are not only being redundant, but we're saying to the world: smack us as irresponsible. We have the money to pay our bills, but we want the word to go out: we are irresponsible. We're not paying any bills. We're not Greece, we're not Spain, we're not Italy. We are Americans, and we have the know-it-all and the commitment to be the greatest country.

I've never taken seriously the pundits about America's decline; but it is a decline if we get on the floor of the House and ignore the needs of our brothers and sisters, ignore the needs in the Northeast where there's been a devastating hurricane, ignore those in the Southwest where 1,400 homes have been burned to the ground in Texas. Who is going to help those folks besides their private insurance? They need the Federal Government, the rainy day umbrella on a rainy day or when a fire is there, the hose for the fire.

So I ask my colleagues to consider being realistic and rational. Vote this down. Put a jobs bill on the floor and do what the people want, create jobs now.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.J. Res. 77, a Resolution of Disapproval intended to prevent President Obama from raising the debt ceiling by $500 billion as he is authorized to do by the debt ceiling agreement reached last month. This resolution will obstruct the federal government from meeting their financial obligations; measures like this one have already failed in the Senate. This is a colossal waste of valuable legislative time. The message has been heard loud and clear, we must address the debt limit; however another message is being muffled--the need to focus on jobs. Here we are once again with another proposal before the House that appears to throw caution to the wind. This joint resolution is gambling on our financial future, if this amendment passes then we will fail to raise our nation's debt limit and will allow our nation to default.

We should have learned a valuable lesson from what happened the last time my colleagues on the other side of the aisle tried to suggest that we should allow our nation to default. The stock market reacted immediately and a well known credit company lowered our nation's credit rating. We need to maintain our creditworthiness to meet the needs of the very people we have been sent here to serve. I am disappointed that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are more interested in playing political games than creating jobs or improving the economy.

Attempting to prevent the President from raising the debt ceiling to pay for the needs of the country and functions of the government will only lead us to the brink of another crisis. This is a continued effort by my Republican friends to ransom the American economy in order to extort the American public.

Instead of working toward a bipartisan job creation bill, congressional Republicans are attempting to constrain the ability of Congress to deal effectively with America's economic, fiscal, and job creation troubles.

There has been a consistent theme this Congress of failing to bring forward measures that will create jobs. My Republicans colleagues have set the agenda. They seem focused on cutting programs that benefit the public and those in need, while making no concrete attempt to focus on job creation and economic recovery. This bill is wasting a tremendous amount of time when we should be focused on paying our nation's bills and resolving our differences.

In my district, the Texas 186, more than 190,000 people live below the poverty line. We must not, we cannot, at a time when the Census Bureau places the number of American living in poverty at the highest rate in over 50 years, cut vital social services. Not in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis and persistent unemployment, when so many rely on federal benefits to survive, like the Supplemental Nutrition Access Program, SNAP, that fed 3.9 million residents of Texas in April

2011, or the Women, Infant, and Children, WIC, Program that provides nutritious food to more than 990,000 mothers and children in my home state.

In 2010, there were 46.2 million Americans living in poverty nationwide. According to the 2010 Federal poverty threshold, determined by the US Census, a family of four is considered impoverished if they are living on less than $22,314 per year.

Children represent a disproportionate amount of the United States poor population. In 2008, there were 15.45 million impoverished children in the nation, 20.7% of America's youth. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that there are currently 5.6 million Texans living in poverty, 2.2 million of them children, and that 17.4% of households in the state struggle with food insecurity.

Attempts to prevent President Obama from raising the debt ceiling threaten our ability to keep paying for programs that benefit the least among us, and I for one, will not turn my back on the Americans who are the most in need of compassionate leadership and responsible governing.

Threatening an increase in the debt ceiling threatens our ability to pay for Medicare, which guarantees a healthy and secure retirement for Americans who have paid into it for their entire working lives. Protecting Medicare represents the basic values of fairness and respect for our seniors, including the 2.9 million Texans who received Medicare in 2010.

Yes, we must take steps to balance the budget and reduce the national debt, but not at the expense of vital social programs. It is unconscionable that in our nation of vast resources, my Republican colleagues would pass a budget that cuts funding for essential social programs. Poverty impacts far too many Americans and social safety nets provide these individuals with vital assistance.

Perhaps my friends on the other side of the aisle are content to conclude that life simply is not fair, equality is not accessible to everyone, and the less advantaged among us are condemned to remain as they are, but I do not accept that. That kind of complacency is not fitting for America.

Prior to the existence of the debt ceiling, Congress had to approve borrowing each time the federal government wished to borrow money in order to carry out its functions. With the onset of World War I, more flexibility was needed to expand the government's capability to borrow money expeditiously in order to meet the rapidly changing requirements of funding a major war in the modern era.

To address this need, the first debt ceiling was established in 1917, allowing the federal government to borrow money to meet its obligations without prior congressional approval, so long as in the aggregate, the amount borrowed did not eclipse a specified limit.

Since the debt limit was first put in place, Congress has increased it over 100 times; in fact, it was raised 10 times within the past decade, and last month, we were able to negotiate another compromise, and keep the country from default. I urge my colleagues not to undermine the agreement that was reached by attempting to block the President's ability to raise the debt ceiling.

Once again, the American economy hangs in the balance as the act of the President raising the debt ceiling becomes an irrelevant spending debate that is as unnecessary as it is perilous, as increasing the debt ceiling does not obligate the undertaking of any new spending by the federal government. Rather, raising the debt limit simply allows the government to pay existing legal obligations promised to debt holders that were already agreed to by Presidents and Congresses, both past and present.

This resolution is a petulant attempt to undermine President Obama. The bill itself says it is a joint resolution ``relating to the disapproval of the President's exercise of authority to increase the debt limit''. Exercise of authority. It does not say unlawful exercise of authority, or unconstitutional exercise of authority. The language of the bill itself makes it clear the President has the authority to raise the debt ceiling as indicated in the agreement reached on August 2.

Passing this resolution will not decrease spending; it will merely compromise our ability to pay for spending already authorized. This bill does nothing to reduce the deficit, or address the budget, it only risks our economic standing and ability to pay our nation's bills, while simultaneously hurtling the nation toward another debt ceiling crisis.

Instead of spending time on resolutions designed to cast the President in a negative light, it is time for this Congress to come together, and pass meaningful legislation that will benefit the American people. In his address to a joint session of Congress last Thursday, President Obama gave this body a great opportunity to achieve bipartisan, job creating legislation that will invest in small business, help families that have been struggling with chronic unemployment, assist veterans in finding jobs, and invest in our infrastructure.

It is time for a new sense of bipartisanship. It is time for Congress to work together to aggressively take on job creation. It is time to end these divisive tactics and compromise to encourage the rapid job growth the American people deserve. I urge my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans alike, to stand up and vote no on this partisan resolution; we can, and we must take this opportunity to declare our intent to do what is right, face what is hard, and achieve what is great.

Instead of attempting to embarrass the President, I urge my friends on both sides of the aisle to come together, and focus on passing legislation that will help the American people by improving the economy and creating jobs. Now is not the time for partisan malice, now is not the time for H.J. Res 77; now is the time for this Congress to do all it can to usher in a new age of American ingenuity and prosperity. H.J. Res. 77 is simply a way to engage in past battles, and I am voting against it in order to focus on the future.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, we should not even be considering this resolution. I repeat, we should not even be considering this resolution. We should be moving forward, not backwards. This resolution is a dangerous distraction from the unprecedented challenge before us.

Fourteen million Americans are looking for work. The Census Bureau reported just yesterday that the poverty rate is higher than it's been in 17 years, and median income in this country is at 1996 levels.

The President has proposed a jobs bill that one knowledgeable observer, Mark Zandi, estimates would create 1.9 million new jobs and add 2 percentage points to GDP growth next year. We need action to spur economic growth and job creation. That's what we should be considering today.

Instead, through this resolution, Republicans want to prolong the agony of the debt limit debate and take us back to the brink of default, which would be where we would be if you succeeded.

This bill can pass the House only if Members who voted ``yes'' in August on this issue decide in essence to vote ``no'' in September. ``Yes'' in August, ``no'' in September.

This Nation wants us to be guided by the needs of the Nation, not the internal politics of a caucus or a conference. We have seen the consequences of that kind of Republican brinkmanship. Standard & Poor's said, in downgrading our credit rating: ``It involved a level of brinkmanship greater than what we had expected earlier in the year.''

In August, consumer confidence dropped by the largest amount since the peak of the financial crisis in 2008, and the conference board noted a direct link between the fall and the debate over default. I think we need only to check 401(k) statements from August to remember the precipitous drop in the stock market.

Were this resolution to become law, all those who speak or vote for it have to understand that the U.S. would default on its obligations for the first time in our history. This would throw our economy back into deep recession, trigger $400 billion in immediate job-destroying cuts, and call into question our ability to pay earned Social Security and Medicare benefits.

Madam Speaker, we should not be considering this resolution today. We should be moving forward on the President's plan to jump-start our economy and create jobs for American workers.

The American Jobs Act will put more money in workers' pockets through a temporary tax cut, saving the average family $1,500. It would also keep over 6 million workers from losing their unemployment benefits while they continue searching for work and provide new employer incentives to help get them hired.

If we don't act on these issues, over a million people will lose their unemployment benefits in January and over 2 million in February. So we need to act. We need to look ahead, not just try to go backwards.

So I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this resolution so we don't waste one more minute on a renewal of Republican brinksmanship. Fourteen million Americans who are looking for a job and 43 million Americans who are living in poverty cannot afford to wait 1 minute longer.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds to say to the gentleman, working together won't work if you undo the work that we did together.

I now yield 5 minutes to the ranking member of the Financial Services Committee, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).

I yield 3 minutes to another member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Seattle, Washington (Mr. McDermott).

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I want to say to the gentleman from Louisiana, I listened intently, and I don't understand how he could have voted ``yes'' to raise the debt ceiling in August and now, in essence, he's going to vote ``no'' and bring this country back to the brink of chaos.

I now yield 3 minutes to the very distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts, a very active member of our committee, Mr. Neal.

I yield myself 30 seconds.

This resolution isn't about a new vision. It's really about blind rage. There may be a new crew in town; but if this were to pass, it would be a wrecking crew because, essentially, we would be back on the edge, once again, of default.

I now yield 2 minutes to the very distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson).

It is now my privilege to yield 3 minutes to another active member of our committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

I yield the gentleman an additional minute.

It is now my privilege to yield 3 minutes to the very distinguished gentleman from New York, Charles Rangel.

(Mr. RANGEL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to another member of our committee, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly).

Does the gentleman from New York have any more speakers?

I yield myself 30 seconds.

I want to say to the gentleman from Texas I disagree with his position, but I respect it. I can understand that those who voted ``no'' will now vote ``yes.'' What is not understandable is that those on the Republican side who voted ``yes'' are now voting ``no.''

I yield 4 minutes to our distinguished whip, the gentleman from the proud State of Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

I yield myself the balance of my time.

Very briefly, in one sense this is a meaningless resolution. My guess is that opinion makers in this country and I think abroad will consider it not meaningful, that it's going through the motions.

But there is a real danger here, and that is what it says about the dynamics on the majority side. That's the worrisome thing. It isn't that we would slow things down. If this were to pass and become law, indeed, the ceiling would fall. We would go into default very soon.

And I guess what this resolution being allowed to be brought up says is that there's a feeling within majority ranks that we have to let some bring this up, and perhaps a lot who voted ``yes'' now in essence vote ``no'' in order to bring some kind of peaceful equilibrium within the ranks of the majority.

The problem is that we need to be able to reach across the aisle. Having set up a select committee, it says we need to worry less about the dynamics within our caucus or conference and more about reaching common ground.

That's why this exercise isn't meaningless. The danger is that it will become very meaningful and that we will become--this Congress-- essentially handicapped, if not imprisoned, by the inability of the majority on this side to step up to the plate and realize that in order to solve our problems there needs to be a balanced instead of imbalanced approach; that we have to look at revenues as well as spending cuts. That's the significance of this being brought up here.

I think all of us need to take another look before we essentially change our votes. And, essentially, it would mean ``signaling.'' It will be still more difficult than the present perilous path to make meaningful our effort to move ahead in this country to address the job needs in this country, and yes, to address the deficit, but mainly or essentially to get our economy growing again. If we don't send that right signal here today, and send the wrong signal, I'm afraid this vote will become too meaningful.

I strongly urge that people vote ``no.'' I strongly urge on the Republican side that those who stepped up to the plate last time, step up to the plate this time and not duck for what is essentially an internal political dynamic. The dynamics of this country in terms of jobs and job growth, those dynamics are too essential for partisan internal politics to reign supreme on this floor at this time.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution 392 and as the designee of the majority leader, I have a motion at the desk.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I also ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the subject of the bill under consideration.

I am pleased to offer this resolution of disapproval of the request from the President of the United States to borrow an additional one-half trillion dollars. Dealing with this national debt is one of the primary reasons why I ran for Congress. It is to stop the endless borrowing of Washington, D.C. on the backs of our children and our grandchildren. I am also pleased to offer it in the House as the demonstration of a commitment to ending the decades-old borrow-and- spend practices and mentality that runs rampant here in Washington.

Our national debt has reached its breaking point. The need to make serious decisions to get our spending under control has never been more urgent. We have all heard the words of Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. When asked what is the most direct threat to our Nation, his immediate and clear response was that our national debt is the greatest threat to our national security. The recent downgrade of our national credit rating by S&P further demonstrates the necessity of making significant structural changes to the way we spend money in Washington, D.C.

My focus here today, because we know the Senate has acted and this resolution did not pass the Senate--and is likely not to result in the borrowing of the President getting the additional half a trillion dollars of borrowing--but it's to send a message to the Nation that we need to act proactively in this Chamber and in both Chambers of this House. We need to recognize the national debt. And rather than deal with it in a crisis situation, we should be mindful of it in a proactive, strategic, open and honest manner so that we have good, sound policy responses to the issue that we face and finally tame this beast known as the national debt.

We have spent over $15 trillion of money we did not have. That national debt is growing at the rate of $58,000 per second. That's $55,000 owed by every man, child and woman in America. That level of borrowing, that level of spending is just not acceptable because it jeopardizes our Nation and, more importantly, jeopardizes our Nation for the generations yet to come.

The American people have made it clear. They spoke loudly in November 2010, and we are listening. More borrowing won't solve the problem. In fact, it will dig the hole even deeper. Borrowing even more before we can enact significant spending cuts to begin dealing with the root problem is a foolish errand. We have a responsibility to future generations to take immediate action.

I will continue along the path of working on both sides of this Chamber to try to identify common ground to solve this crisis on the national debt. The continuing resolution last spring and the Budget Control Act, which requires this vote, are only the beginning.

This war on our national debt is going to go on for many years to come; but we need to take those first steps because with every journey it takes the first step to get us on the path too success. I know the battles ahead will not be popular, and there will be tremendous political pressure on all of us to continue to borrow and spend as usual, but we must stand up to that political pressure. We must honor our oath to do our duty and do our job in this Chamber, and that means standing up and changing the path of Washington, D.C. Making difficult decisions now is the only way we can win this war on what is a common enemy we all face, our national debt.

It is my hope this resolution continues to show the President how serious we are about this issue and at the same time that we are dealing with this issue we will focus on jobs, we will focus on the economy. We, in the United States Congress, have to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. We are competent men and women in this Chamber who love our great Nation.

We must come together on all fronts at all times, not only on the national debt but on our economy, on getting Americans back to work. And I think, with that bipartisan attitude, it will be amazing what we can accomplish in order to achieve all those goals, the national debt being one of the critical ones that we must face head on today.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mack).

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to my colleague from Tennessee (Mr. DesJarlais).

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana, Dr. Boustany.

I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to my colleague from Indiana (Mr. Stutzman).

I yield the gentleman an additional minute.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Huelskamp).

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

I have one additional speaker, and then I am prepared to close after that, I believe.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).

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

I truly appreciate the sentiments of my colleague from Michigan, and I truly appreciate the debate that we've had today on this resolution.

It is time that we come together. As a member of the freshman class that's come to Washington, DC, I can tell you it is not a group of radical extremists, but men and women who have left their families, who have left their businesses, and have come down here to Washington, DC to accomplish what needs to be accomplished, that is, to get the fiscal house of Washington in order; it is to have the ability and skill to deal with the economy and put people back to work.

We have the energy, we have the desire to reignite this country so that generations of our children and grandchildren will be able to enjoy the benefits that we have all benefited from. We come here sincerely to reach across the aisle to have an open and honest dialogue with each and every one of the Members of this House, and that is why this debate is such a positive thing, in my mind. Because we are now starting down the path of recognizing that the debt has to be dealt with once and for all, but at the same time we must work together to heal our country, to reignite our country's economy so that people can afford the American Dream that they so deserve and as each and every one of us has always benefited from.

So I come here this afternoon and offer this resolution to send a message to the President, to the world, to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that we cannot take our eye off the ball. We have to do all things. Because we are in a historic time when the issues we face can no longer be pushed down the road. It is now time to lead. It is now time to come together and act for this great Nation, the United States of America.

In this vote, I urge all my colleagues to support the passage of this resolution to send that message that we will deal with the debt, we will deal with the economy, we will deal with the jobs, and we will create an environment upon which the private sector will blossom again and people will benefit for generations to come.

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

Madam Speaker, I'd like to thank the gentleman from New York for yielding on such an important subject that we're talking about today.

I would like to make a couple of points in reference to what the gentleman from Massachusetts just made regarding the Republican Party. And I would say that the Republican Party did make mistakes at the beginning of this decade. I would say the Democrat Party has made some mistakes in the last several years. I think there's plenty of blame to go around for both parties in Washington.

But there's a new crew in town. There's 87 new Republicans that were elected last November from all across this country who have joined those in our party who are saying stop the spending. Stop the madness. We're working against ourselves, folks.

Madam Speaker, I would say that we wouldn't have to continue having this discussion if we would stop spending, stop borrowing, and then we would focus on the economy. It's going to take both sides to come together to fix the problem within our economy.

We're going to have to control our spending. We're going to have to help those Americans who are out there and those who are actually establishing jobs, those who are creating jobs. It's not the U.S. Government that is going to create the jobs for those who are unemployed.

I believe that we have a great opportunity right now to again say, let's stop this sort of spending binge in Washington, D.C. We're passing on debt to our kids and our grandkids. This is an opportunity for us to come together, both parties, and say, let's forget about the sins of the past. Let's pay those bills. But let's not continue to spend the way that we're spending today.

From a debt of $79 million when the Revolutionary War ended, the United States has racked up a debt of nearly $14.6 trillion. It would take nearly everything that Americans produced in all of last year to pay off the existing national debt.

Right now I see two competing visions in Washington and across this country, Madam Speaker. The first vision is the ``business as usual'' vision. And we see a lot of that right here in Washington. It says we need to blindly increase our debt; and if people complain, call it investment instead of debt.

In May, President Obama called for a no-cuts-attached increase to the debt ceiling. He didn't give up his call for a blank check until his request had failed here in this House by an overwhelming and bipartisan vote of 97-318.

The second vision that I hear a lot about back in Indiana is the same vision and the same work that families do every year. You figure out how to live within your means. You have real cuts, not budgetary gimmicks. You don't fool yourself when you're sitting around the kitchen table trying to figure out the mess that you find yourself in. It's based on the truth.

Families sit down at the kitchen table and have the heart-to-heart talks about the situation that they're in. Two conclusions that they usually come to are, we have to cut spending, and we're going to have to figure out how to bring more dollars in. It accepts the challenge, Americans accept the challenge, knowing that these things are not easy.

We know that the ``business as usual'' vision, it's broken, and it will inevitably lead us to ruin and more ruin. This vote is a vote against that vision.

I come to the floor to support the second vision, the vision that Americans across this country support, a vision that is shared by the men and women of northeast Indiana. It is a vision of prudence, honest conversations, and optimism.

When we get pulled into these discussions because of the continual discussion about more spending, we cannot focus on the important part of getting people back to work and growing our economy. Government doesn't create jobs. Governors don't create jobs. Americans create jobs. I believe in the American people, and that hope is still a part of our vocabulary.

I believe that we're also changing the discussion here in Washington. Career politicians have had their day in Washington, and it's time to talk about cuts. And since we've talked about cuts, the sky has not fallen. Optimism is a part of what the American fabric is built upon. I believe that this Joint Deficit Committee needs to find common ground for actual cuts and that the Senate will pick up the job growth bill that we passed right here on the floor of the House of Representatives this Congress.

We all knew that this debt ceiling debate was never going to be our final battle in a struggle for balanced budgets and fiscal responsibility. It gives us the chance to continue to talk about it. And if we want to continue to raise the debt, if we want to continue to increase spending, we'll continue to talk about why we need to restrain Washington politicians.

I'm going to continue the dialogue. I believe it's crucial. It's an important part of saving this country's economic future for my kids, for our children and for our grandchildren across this country.

Government has, for too long, continued this business as usual and the status quo vision that I talked about earlier. Americans are going to have to pay back all of this debt. This may not be a tax increase, but inevitably and indirectly it is.

So, Madam Speaker, I come to the floor in support of this resolution because I believe that we need to all agree, Republicans and Democrats, that we're going to limit spending, we're going to stop borrowing.

We can pay our bills back. But at the same time we're going to focus on job creation, getting people back to work, as the gentleman from Louisiana mentioned, the energy jobs that were talked about. That was one of the things the President didn't discuss in his address the other night is he didn't talk about energy.

We are the leaders in the world on production. I come from a district of a lot of manufacturing; and I believe that if we would focus on energy, cut spending, we need to reform government. That's what's going to get people back to work. The economy's going to grow. We will still be number one in the world.

I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding time to me.

Madam Speaker, it's been said that leadership is willing to make hard choices, fact-based choices to come up with solutions to solve problems and deliver results.

Now, we gathered here last Thursday in this Chamber to hear the President, with a much-touted plan beforehand that he was going to bring forth to the American people that was going to help solve the high unemployment in this country and get our economy back on a competitive basis. I can tell you, Madam Speaker, I sat there and I listened very intently, and I left this Chamber with great disappointment because it's not enough.

Furthermore, he is proposing taxes, new taxes, taxes on energy production, American energy production. Now, let's look at the facts of what happened.

Yes, we had an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and it was dealt with. It was a tragic situation, but it has been dealt with. The fact of the matter is we need American energy production to move this country forward. And now what we're seeing with the lifting of the moratorium is this continued de facto moratorium because of slow- walking of exploration plans and permits.

Now, what does this mean? If we brought back the permitting process to the same timeframe we had before--without sacrificing safety--bring it back into a reasonable amount of time, let's say 30 days to take care of these permits, in 1 year, the year 2012, 230,000 jobs would be created, new jobs, good, high-paying jobs. And not only that, a third of those jobs would be beyond the Gulf Coast States around this country, in California and Florida and in the central part of the country. This would add $34 billion to our GDP. And that's just getting things back to where they were. That's not even talking about expanding exploration in these shale formations or looking at the east and west coast where we can do more or Alaska. These energy jobs are good-paying jobs. And not only that, it would bring in, in 1 year, $12 billion more into the Treasury and reduce our bill on foreign oil by $15 billion. And that's just getting us back to where we were.

Now, I stood here and listened to the President. Instead, he offers taxes, $45 billion more in new taxes on independent oil and gas companies. That's going to hurt American energy production, it's going to kill American jobs, and it's going to do nothing to help solve our economy.

Furthermore, he chided us about the trade agreements. We have three trade agreements sitting there. They've been there for 3 years. They've been negotiated. They're ready to go. And he said Congress needs to pass them. Well, Mr. President, the answer is: Send them to Congress and we'll pass them. That's the process.

And beyond that, what is our trade policy? This country is losing credibility globally and it's losing its leverage because we have no trade strategy, a strategy that's going to promote American- manufactured goods, American farmers and their commodities so that we can sell these around the world to open markets. That will get our economy going.

If we want to solve our debt problem, yes, we've got to balance our budgets, yes, we've got to deal with the debt problem--we've taken some steps--but I saw nothing that the President offered. That's why I'm here supporting this resolution, to push this President to consider the steps that need to be taken to promote American competitiveness, private sector job growth. That's what we need in this economy.

Now, the President had the answer. He was standing here at this podium and he had the answer right up there on the wall of the House behind him. There is a plaque up there, and it's a quote from Daniel Webster. And that first sentence of the quote says, ``Let us develop the resources of our land.'' What's wrong with that, Mr. President?

For God's sake, we need American energy production, and it's simple. With the stroke of a pen, he could solve this permitting problem and at least get us back to where we were, create 230,000 jobs next year and add to our GDP growth. And this would be a start, a down payment to a comprehensive energy strategy for this country. This is a no-brainer.

We need natural gas as part of our transition strategy. His policy is going to lock out natural gas production in this country. Ninety-seven percent of it is done by small domestic companies here in the U.S., and these taxes will put many of these companies out of business.

Mr. President, read the plaque. Let's develop our natural resources. Let's do what we have to do. Let's promote a very aggressive, export- oriented trade policy.

And we need a willing partner to move forward with tax reform. We're getting half-hearted signals. This country needs fundamental tax reform. We want to do it on the House Ways and Means Committee. We're ready. We stand ready as willing partners, but yet we're getting signals--mixed signals. This administration has not shown a serious intent to move forward with fundamental tax reform that will unleash American ingenuity and entrepreneurship in this country.

And that's what I heard all through August when I was back home in my district when I talked to folks. They want to see an energy strategy. They want to see comprehensive tax reform that simplifies our Code and lowers rates and clears up some of the loopholes. They want to make sense out of this Tax Code. And they want to see us selling goods overseas, letting our ports expand.

He didn't even mention maritime infrastructure. We've got bills right now that would improve our maritime infrastructure without costing one penny more in deficit spending. Why aren't we acting on these things?

We're tired of rhetoric. We're tired of political talking points. And what we need is action. The American people have had enough. And I say let's get to work. Let's get this House moving on fundamental changes that will improve this economy and create private sector jobs.