Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I find it would be irresponsible if I didn't mention this. It sounds like the lightbulb has come on for my colleague from Maryland. He now says that we should replace the sequester. I only wish that that lightbulb had come on when the House passed under Republican leadership--twice--legislation in the 112th Congress to replace the sequester with responsible spending cuts. So it looks like here we are again.

The recent admission by the IRS that it used its considerable authority and resources to target certain Americans because of their political affiliation should serve as an urgent warning to all Americans: the Federal Government is getting too large and has too much control. The simple truth is that when the government expands, personal liberty contracts.

I found it both stunning and revealing when the former adviser to President Obama, David Axelrod, said this:

Part of being President is there's so much beneath you that

you can't know because the government is so vast.

For a member of this President's inner circle to admit that the Federal Government is so massive that it is essentially not practical for the chief executive to hold it accountable or for the President to effectively manage it is simply stunning. It also begs the question, if it is no longer possible for the President of the United States to oversee all the Federal agencies assigned to him and to hold them accountable, then who is? Is anyone?

As if the IRS scandal wasn't bad enough, there are other troubling stories that have arisen in the last few weeks. The Associated Press has said that the administration monitored hundreds of private phone calls between reporters. Is this really freedom of the press? Then we find that talking points given to the administration to tell the American people what happened on that fateful night in Benghazi were twisted, cut, turned, and edited to the point that the truth wound up on the cutting room floor in the White House, or at the State Department, or at the CIA, or at the Department of Defense. Actually, we don't even really know. But we're going to find out.

But we do know one very troubling thing: the Federal Government, with the IRS leading the way, is about to become exponentially larger and more powerful because it's about to get into the health care business. ObamaCare will be fully implemented by next January. And, according to the Treasury Department's inspector general, the new health care law is the largest set of new tax law changes in 20 years.

The IRS will be hiring more bureaucrats to make sure Americans comply with these new laws and to oversee the flood of new personal information the Federal Government will be collecting on the American people. For example, under ObamaCare, the Federal Government will require insurance companies to report to the IRS the name, the address, the identification number, and type of policy purchased by every customer. And, if that weren't enough, the IRS will also require insurance companies to detail whether or not individuals purchased ``government-approved health care'' to ensure compliance with ObamaCare's individual mandate.

And, just yesterday, Lois Lerner, head of the IRS' Exempt Organizations Division, announced that she would be invoking the Fifth Amendment to protect herself from self-incrimination.

The truth is that our Federal Government is too big, too intrusive, and it's seeping into every aspect of our lives. It's taking away personal freedoms and collecting personal data. It has shown it can be manipulated to punish fellow Americans for their political beliefs, all at the expense of the American taxpayer.

And let me be clear: I'm not a no-regulation guy. We need commonsense regulations to ensure that our food is safe, our air and water are clean, our transportation system and infrastructure are sound, and that our financial transactions are secure, among other things. However, this administration has issued more than 10,000 regulations to date, including 106 major new regulations imposing $46 billion in additional costs that are being paid for by the American people. This means more rules, more bureaucrats, bigger government, and less freedom.

Most troubling to me is that we were founded as a constitutional Republic, governed by the rule of law. But there are those in Washington who think we should be a Nation governed by the law of rules, where the President and his bureaucratic agencies make up the rules. This represents a fundamental break from our history and traditions dating back to our Founding Fathers. Our Founders placed their trust in the American people to elect their representatives to make the laws necessary to allow Americans to prosper.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the American people to consider America's government is getting too big and too out of control.

As members of the House, we serve at the pleasure of those we represent. The tens of thousands of bureaucrats implementing the more than 10,000 new regulations are accountable to no one, let alone the American people.

Those that will be making health care decisions for the American people on the Independent Payment Advisory Board, IPAB, will never appear on a ballot. The American people will never be able to hire or fire those making medical decisions on their behalf. Is that fair? Is that democratic? Is that what America is all about?

Mr. Speaker, this need not be a partisan issue. The American people deserve an effective, efficient Federal Government--a government that works for them and not the other way around.

I fear that as the government continues to grow and Obamacare is fully implemented, the consequences of transferring so much power, national treasure, and control to the Federal Government will be felt widely, personally, and painfully.

In the meantime, it is the duty of this Congress to vigorously oversee the Federal agencies, and root out those political appointees and bureaucrats who've abused their positions and violated the trust of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to announce legislation I introduced that will designate the post office in Marietta, Ohio, as the Lance Corporal Joshua C. Taylor Memorial Post Office Building.

Lance Corporal Joshua Taylor is a true American hero who lost his life on March 18 in an explosion during a training exercise at the Hawthorne Army Depot in Nevada.

From an early age, Josh had dreamed of serving his country and becoming a marine. He entered the Marine Corps upon graduating from Marietta High School in 2010. After basic training, Josh was stationed in Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, and specialized in mortar weaponry. He honorably served tours of duty in Afghanistan and Kuwait.

In addition to being a dedicated marine, Josh was an exceptional individual. He will be remembered for his gentle spirit, unfailing love, and his love for his family.

Dedicating the Marietta Post Office for Josh Taylor serves as a small tribute to honor and remember the life of a remarkable young man and the sacrifice he made for America.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the fourth anniversary of the end of the civil war in Sri Lanka on May 18, 2009.

The last stages of the war were met with grave allegations of war crimes, including the Sri Lankan Government's treatment of Tamil civilians within no-fire zones--attacks that were a blatant violation of human rights.

As a result of the ensuing international outrage, Sri Lanka established a commission of inquiry to investigate the events of the 26-year civil war. However, this commission had no accountability and yielded little explanation for the families, the victims, or the international community.

We are left with the task of identifying what really happened during the last years of this terrible civil war and to hold accountable those who have committed war crimes. We also face the challenge of brokering peace in a country torn apart by civil war.

I urge the Government of Sri Lanka to demonstrate commitment towards reconciliation and promote human rights, particularly before hosting the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in November.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am, indeed, honored to join you and the rest of our colleagues here in sharing some thoughts on what the American people now should expect in the coming months and years from the administration's so-called historic achievement in health care reform. It's historic all right. This massive bill gives the government control over one-sixth of our economy and the authority to manipulate markets and to make individual health care decisions.

So how did President Obama convince the American people to buy into this scheme? He looked the American people right in the TV camera lens, and he promised two things. He pledged that this law would cut costs for American families, and he promised that it would make health care more affordable.

Now, I could stand up here and talk about all of the other economic dangers posed by the so-called Affordable Care Act, like the ever- mounting costs of implementation, the instability it causes in programs that seniors rely on, the fact that this bill contributes substantially to the insurmountable debt we are leaving to our children and our grandchildren, but that's not foremost in the minds of those individuals whom I represent along the Ohio River in eastern and southeastern Ohio.

As the American people continue to search for good-paying jobs, families in my district are trying to figure out how to stretch their paychecks to cover another trip to the grocery store or to buy clothes for their kids or to purchase another tank of gas for the car. Now we're seeing reports that indicate most families will have to factor health care premium increases into their budgets as well--all because of the Affordable Care Act's policies, mandates, taxes, and fees.

Now, does that sound affordable to anyone? It doesn't to me, and it doesn't to the people that I represent along the Ohio River.

I am proud to serve on the Energy and Commerce Committee, and I was recently given the opportunity to question Gary Cohen, the director of the office within HHS in charge of the implementation of the health care law. I asked him directly if premiums were going to go up or down for the American people. Remember, the President promised us lower costs. Mr. Cohen briefly toed the party line, saying, Absolutely, we'll see lower costs. But he went on largely throughout the questioning to repeatedly say, We'll simply have to wait and see.

They don't know. That sounds oddly familiar to me. It reminds me of when the minority leader, the gentlewoman from California, tried to convince the American people that Congress needed to pass the Affordable Care Act in order to find out what was in it. We are now finding out what's in it, and it is a train wreck, as some have stated. Now, wouldn't the responsible thing have been to do the job correctly the first time?

Let me clarify a few things. Let me cite some numbers brought to light by our investigation.

Individual consumers in 90 percent of States will likely face premium increases. In my State of Ohio, men purchasing an individual policy would face increases ranging from 32 to 52 percent. Ohio employers purchasing small group market policies could see a projected premium increase of 28 percent. Nationwide, new businesses could see increases of 96 percent, while existing businesses would be burdened with 73 percent. And age and plan mandates forced on insurers could push premiums up as high as 413 percent in some cases.

Now, do these numbers support the pledge made by the President that Americans would see lower costs, or do

they highlight the dishonesty as a means of pushing a terrible law through Congress? Based on these facts, Mr. Speaker, it is hard to argue that the Affordable Health Care Act will ever become more affordable as long as that law is on the books.

Hard evidence to support the looming premium rate shock should scare the administration as much as it scares the American people, American families, businesses, and health care providers throughout the Nation, particularly along the river where people are still struggling to make ends meet from day to day.

I appreciate the time.

Absolutely.

Yeah, that was pretty much the case. I started to challenge him to a Monopoly game because that's funny money. That's a way of manipulating the numbers, and that's more of the dishonesty that's being perpetrated on the American people with this law.

Absolutely, I do.

Absolutely.

Every time we asked Mr. Cohen who are premiums going to go down for, he avoided the question. He couldn't tell us that premiums were going to go down for anyone.

We asked him, Are they going to go down for the young? Are they going to go down for the old? Are they going to go down for women? Are they going to go down for men? He had no answers. We'll have to wait and see. That's a far cry from the promise that the President made of lowering costs and making health care more affordable.

It is very tough going.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today, along with several of my pro-life colleagues, to bring attention to the ongoing trial of Kermit Gosnell, an abortionist from Philadelphia. Gosnell is accused of murdering, in the third degree, a woman who died during an abortion at his clinic, and first degree murder of four infants who survived abortions and were born alive, only to have their spinal cords severed by a pair of scissors.

In the words of the grand jury report:

Gosnell had a simple solution for unwanted babies: he

killed them. He didn't call it that. He called it ``ensuring

fetal demise.''

I'm horrified by the lack of respect this doctor has for human life, and I'm appalled by the minimal media coverage of the Gosnell trial. I'm hopeful that the disturbing images revealed by this trial will raise awareness of the gruesome practices of the abortion industry and help to prevent the tragic ending of human life that occurs every day at abortion clinics across this country.

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 on the subject of my Special Order.

Mr. Speaker, it's good to be in the people's House this afternoon to talk about a topic that is of utmost concern to the American people--energy. What does it mean for America? We all put gas in our cars, we all heat and cool our homes, businesses across this country power their manufacturing processes. So what does energy mean for today and for the future of our country?

I'm proud to be a member of the House Energy Action Team because we understand the critical role that domestic-energy production plays not only today, but in the future of our country. Let me give an example of why this is so important.

I remember one of the very first memorable events that occurred in March of 2011 in my first term. We were addressed here in this Chamber by the Prime Minister of Australia. And in her remarks she commented, she said: ``I remember being a young girl, sitting on the floor of my living room, watching Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin land on the Moon.'' She went on to talk about how America and Australia had stood side by side, how America had actually stood in front of and protected Australia during some of the darkest days of World War II in the Pacific.

At the end of her speech, she said, ``Back when I was a little girl and when I saw that Moon landing, I thought to myself, wow, those Americans can do anything.'' She wrapped up her comments by saying, ``Today, as Prime Minister of Australia, with a lot of experience under my belt, I still believe that Americans can do anything.''

When you stop and think about the Moon landing--and I know you're going to say, Well, what does that have to do with energy? I'm getting to that. President Kennedy gave us a vision of putting a man on the Moon in 10 years. We didn't make it in 10 years. We made it in less than 10 years. The reason that we did was that every fabric of our society bought into the idea--academic institutions, the scientific community. Industries cropped up overnight. Millions of jobs were created. Young people lined up to get into academic programs in which they could major in degrees that would prepare them for careers in space exploration.

At the end of the day--actually, we're not at the end of the day-- we're still benefiting from the innovation and the technological advance that came out of that era. It was a time when America's imagination was captivated by what many thought was impossible and by what the rest of the world didn't really think we could do. You look at what has happened since we started that journey--at all of the technological innovations that have occurred: cell phones, flat-screen TVs, GPS, even arthroscopic surgery. We had to learn to perform medical procedures on space travelers in a way that was noninvasive, and medical experts began to think about ``how do we do that in outer space?'' So we learned how to dream, and that goal to put a man on the Moon captivated America's imagination.

I want you to think for a second about what would happen if America once again embarked on a journey of that magnitude. I believe a journey to become energy independent and secure in America is just such a journey that we could embark on. A vision of energy independence and security would not only captivate the imagination of the American people but it would put America back to work at a time when our economy is in such desperate need of private-sector economic growth. Imagine what would happen if we had a national energy vision that sounded something like this:

We're going to go after the vast volumes of oil and natural gas that we have. In many experts' opinions, we've got more of it than anyone else has in the world. We're going to expand our nuclear footprint because nuclear energy is one of the safest, most reliable forms of energy on the planet. We brought that to the world, and we know how to do it. We're going to continue to mine coal, and we're going to learn how to use it environmentally soundly because we've got enough coal to fuel our energy needs for generations yet to come.

We're even going to embrace alternative forms of energy--biofuels, wind and solar. Now, they're not going to meet our heavy lifting energy needs for the foreseeable future, but there is a role that they play in our overall energy profile. We're going to back that up with action with the regulatory community and tell the regulators at the EPA and the Department of the Interior and at the Army Corps of Engineers: effective today, you start being partners in progress with America's energy industries. Rather than being the department of ``no,'' learn how to find a way forward. If a particular project or if a particular technology presents concerns, then let's address those concerns, but ``no'' should not be the final answer.

We've learned through the lessons of putting a man on the Moon that, when Americans are allowed to dream, when they're allowed to innovate, when they're allowed to compete, there is nothing that we can't solve.

Why is energy independence and security so important? First of all, it's important because of national security. Right now, today, we are beholden to some countries that don't like us very much for our energy resources. Why do we want to continue to do that when we have the resources right here at home to be able to solve that problem?

In order to captivate the imagination of the American people, we've got to help the American people understand why this is so important to them. We talk about energy in terms of very important projects like the Keystone XL pipeline of which the President, himself, said that the environmental concerns were overexaggerated, so let's get the project approved.

Yet we talk about it in technical terms--pipelines, hydraulic fracturing, oil rigs, nuclear reactors, uranium enrichment. What does all of that mean to American taxpayers--to working Americans who are just struggling day in and day out to make ends meet?

Here is what it means:

Take a manufacturing process, the manufacturing of cereal, Pop- Tarts--you name it, whatever our children consume today. When domestic energy costs are reduced, those manufacturing costs to produce those goods are also reduced. When the price of diesel fuel goes down and when the cost of the transportation to transport those goods from the manufacturers to the

grocery stores goes down, those savings are passed on in the costs of the products to the consumers. When working mothers and single moms and single dads who are trying to make ends meet--who are trying to figure out how they're going to put kids through college, how they're going to buy the next pair of tennis shoes--are balancing the checkbooks and when they see that their energy costs to heat and to cool their homes are going down and that they're paying less to fill up their cars to go back and forth to work, that translates into economic confidence to do the kinds of things that we were able to do during that remarkable period of putting a man on the Moon.

Today, we've got a lot of naysayers out there who simply don't understand how important this is, this idea of energy independence and security to the American people, and they're trying to frighten the American people.

Hydraulic fracturing, my goodness. We've been doing hydraulic fracturing in America for over 60 years, over a million such operations. A former EPA administrator, herself, acknowledged there has not been a single incident in which hydraulic fracturing has contaminated the water table. Yet the EPA is working hard to try and insert itself into a process that many, many States are already doing and are already doing very well. Take, for example, the State of Ohio where I come from. Literally, my district sits on top of the Marcellus and the Utica shales, one of the world's largest reservoirs of oil and natural gas.

The State of Ohio has been regulating the oil and gas industry since 1965. We're among those States that have done a lot of hydraulic fracturing, and yet again there is not one proven instance where that process has contaminated drinking water, yet you've got those that sit on the sidelines and try to frighten homeowners, try to frighten those people that live in Appalachian Ohio that their water is going to be contaminated. It's not. It's a proven process.

And just over the last 5 years, we've developed technology called horizontal hydraulic fracturing, where we can go down a mile and then go out horizontally another mile, sometimes more, and have much more of that vital resource of oil and natural gas flowing to the surface, resources that are going to move America one step closer to energy independence and security.

Mr. Speaker, we've got an opportunity to put America back in charge of our economic destiny and an energy vision that is a real all-of-the- above energy vision for this country. It's what America needs.

At this time, I'd like to yield time to my colleague from South Carolina (Mr. Duncan).

I thank my colleague from South Carolina, and at this time I yield to our chairman from Texas (Mr. Smith).

Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time we have remaining?

Madam Speaker, at this time I would like to yield to my colleague from Virginia (Mr. Griffith).

I thank my colleague. I yield some time now to our colleague from Texas (Mr. Farenthold).

I thank the gentleman. At this time, we'll go to my colleague from Arkansas (Mr. Griffin).

I thank my friend.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire about how much time we have remaining.

I would like to now yield to my colleague from Texas (Mr. Olson).

I yield now to my colleague from California (Mr. Valadao).

Mr. Speaker, we saw yet another sickening act of terror yesterday in Boston. It was a grim reminder that there is evil in the world. There are those with dark hearts and twisted ideologies bent on killing Americans because of who we are and the values we hold dear.

Early reports indicate the bombs were packed with metal ball bearings to inflict maximum carnage on the innocent. One of the innocent was an 8-year-old boy found dead among the smoke, confusion, and blood. Eight years old.

As we track down the killer or killers, let us pray for the victims and their families, and let us resolve to never take the freedoms we enjoy as Americans for granted, never take the service of those who protect our freedoms for granted, never forget those who've made the ultimate sacrifice, and never underestimate the lengths to which America's enemies will go to do us harm.

But, Mr. Speaker, our enemies should never, ever underestimate America's resolve to hold accountable those responsible for this deadly attack.

Mr. Speaker, we all want to prevent gun violence, but anything we do must start by respecting the Second Amendment.

Sadly, a Member of this House ignored that constitutional right last week. She claimed that banning certain kinds of gun magazines would somehow stop killers from killing. She actually said that if Congress would ban gun magazines, they will simply disappear as they're used up. Of course, that's not true. You see, gun magazines are reloadable, much like a stapler.

Mr. Speaker, I hope I can be an asset to my colleagues who may not know how guns work. As a gun owner and an Air Force veteran myself, I've actually exercised my Second Amendment rights. Perhaps those of us who understand the subject matter should lead the effort to stop gun violence.

My colleague's poor understanding of guns will lead to poor policy. Here's some reading material to help bring her up to speed. It's called the Second Amendment. It says, ``The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.''

Mr. Speaker, this week marks an anniversary that doesn't warrant celebration. Three years ago, President Obama's takeover of health care was signed into law.

This mountain of stacked paper represents the 20,000 pages of new regulations in President Obama's new health care law. Each regulation represents another shackle on America's small businesses--our job creators. But don't take my word for it. Just ask the folks at two of Ohio's home health care employers, Interim Health Care in Bridgeport, who employs 300 hardworking Ohioans, or Comfort Keepers in East Liverpool, who employs another 230. Both companies tell me that President Obama's takeover of health care is causing them to seriously reconsider the ability to expand and hire more employees. In fact, they may not survive.

These are just two companies in eastern Ohio. What about the thousands of small businesses across America?

President Obama's health care law is a government red tape tower that's raising health care costs, limiting access to health care, and it's hurting job creation at a time when we need real economic growth.

Mr. Speaker, it was just over a week ago that we learned that the White House is being closed to public tours.

Now the President attempts to justify this decision saying it's a Secret Service decision. I find this disturbingly ironic, coming from a President whose own Web site says that it is his mission to ``open up the House to as many people as possible,'' that he is accepting without objection the decision to prevent the American people from accessing the White House, their house, the people's house.

Even during some of the darkest days of America's history, our 16th President, Abraham Lincoln, championed the policy of true open doors to the White House and governmental transparency. Contrast that with President Obama who is acquiescing to the exact opposite, closing the White House doors to the public.

If the President is unable to help the Secret Service manage an 8.2 percent budget cut and still keep the people's house open, then the American people are entitled to some answers from their Chief Executive.

Mr. Speaker, President Obama needs to be truthful with the American people about his sequester. First and foremost, President Obama proposed the sequester.

There's no denying that President Obama's sequester will have devastating effects on Ohio, America's military, and our national security. That's why House Republicans acted twice in 2012 to avoid this situation. But, unfortunately, President Obama chose politics over results. He chose to make campaign speeches rather than work with the Republican-controlled House and Democrat-controlled Senate to find commonsense solutions that would end Washington's spending addiction and bring America's debt under control. This is yet another prime example of President Obama's failure to lead, and it needs to change.

Right now, President Obama's sequester is less than 60 hours away, and he's looking to blame somebody else to distract from his failure to lead. House Republicans stand ready to work with the President on commonsense solutions that work for the American people. President Obama simply needs to come to the table.

Mr. Speaker, just over 100 days ago, four Americans were murdered in cold blood during coordinated terrorist attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. These attacks were premeditated acts of war on America and the American way of life, committed by terrorists with ties to al Qaeda.

This week, the Obama administration released a report as to exactly what happened surrounding these terrorist attacks. This report confirmed what we already knew: there was no protest outside the consulate on September 11. It also cites systemic failures in Embassy security, putting in danger the lives of every person at the compound in Benghazi.

This report is an important step towards stopping another attack on America and American initiates overseas. But one thing remains clear: serious mistakes were made by senior officials here in Washington. Those mistakes cost American lives. There must be accountability.

I thank you for yielding.

As a fledgling new Member of Congress in January of 2011, I realized right away that I had an awful lot to learn. And so many of our Ohio delegation reached out to me and gave me an arm around the shoulder, a nudge on the arm saying, Hey, we can work these things out; just hang in there. I've gotten to know each of our five departing Members from the Ohio delegation in their own unique way.

I remember very early on leading up to the 2010 election coming to Washington to meet with some folks, and it was the first time that I met with Jean Schmidt. Jean graciously invited me into her office. We sat down. We talked about issues that are important to the people of her district. Her district borders my district, and we have a lot of common interests about that. We sat for an hour or more, and she gave me great insight into the kind of work that I would be doing, and I'm so appreciative of that.

After coming to Washington and beginning to sit on the Foreign Affairs Committee, I sat right next to Jean. I saw her passion for fiscal issues, spending, issues around the sanctity of human life, around human rights. I saw how she went about the business of not only representing the people of her district, but representing the values that Americans stand for. To Congresswoman Schmidt, I just want to say: Jean, it has been a pleasure working with you. I agree that we haven't seen the last of you. I've enjoyed spending our days at the Bible study on Thursday mornings, and I wish you the very best in your future endeavors. I look forward to seeing you often.

To Steve Austria, Steve is another one that reached out. As a 26\1/ 2\-year

veteran of the Air Force, Wright-Paterson Air Force Base--it is important to the State of Ohio, that is true--but it's important to the Air Force and it's important to our Nation. And I've appreciated the work that Steve has done there. Steve might not realize this, but he trained many of the staff that I have today. I'm very pleased with the staff that I have here in Washington. Many of those that serve with me today serving the Sixth District of Ohio came through Steve Austria's office where they learned and where they saw the value of hard work in Steve Austria. I appreciate so much what Steve has done for our delegation.

To Dennis Kucinich, I had seen Dennis many times on television prior to being elected myself. I have seen the interviews. Dennis was a known leader and political figure in the State of Ohio. People told me early on that you don't have to agree with everything that Dennis says, but one thing you will find out about Dennis is that he loves the people that he represents and he represents them well. You can learn a lot from Dennis Kucinich about constituent services.

In the days since I've been here, one thing I've learned about Dennis as well is that he is always a gentleman. No matter what the issue, no matter what the crisis of the moment might be, Dennis would remain calm and would remain poised in the conversations that we've had, even though not necessarily agreeing on the issues, but certainly raising very valid points and doing so in a manner that befits the office. I want to thank Dennis for that.

To Congresswoman Betty Sutton, I did not get a chance to work with Betty that often. We traveled back and forth on the same flights every now and then to Ohio. We served on the Natural Resources Committee together, but not on the same subcommittee. So I did not get a chance to spend an awful lot of time with Betty. But like so many of the other comments that you've heard, she represented her district well. She did it in a very professional manner. I want to thank her for her many years of service.

Steve LaTourette, what can you really say about Steve LaTourette? I never once went to Steve and asked him a question and he said, Hey, can you come back and see me later? I don't have time. He was always willing to stop what he was doing and say, What can I do to help? What do you need to talk about? No matter what the issue, you could always count on Steve LaTourette being a voice of reason. I had, from time to time throughout my Air Force career, those rare leaders who could see beneath the fog and the friction of the battle to see clearly what the issues were. Steve LaTourette possesses that ability. He took me under his wing. He shared with me his wealth of knowledge about the legislative process, helped guide me through some really difficult issues here on the floor. He's so very well respected. One thing I admire most about Steve is it's so obvious that he is so respected by both sides of the aisle. That's a lesson that I think many of us could learn and take home. I can assure you that Steve LaTourette is going to be missed.

I wish all of our departing Members from Ohio Godspeed, many blessings, and I've enjoyed serving with each and every one of you.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 604 I was unavoidably detained and therefore was unable to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, this motion is nothing more than a distraction from the underlying legislation that we're considering today, and the journey that we began in January of 2011 to cut government spending, to create jobs and, today, to stop the administration's war on the coal industry.

We, all of us in this Chamber, sat here a little over a year ago, and we heard an address by the Prime Minister of Australia. She started her speech off by saying, you know, I remember being a young girl, sitting on the floor of my living room watching as Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed on the Moon.

She went on to talk about that era of innovation in America, what that meant and how that inspired the rest of the world. Do we need to be reminded that it was the coal industry that fueled America's innovative engine and powered America's innovative wheels during that period of innovation? I don't think so. Today's underlying legislation, it's about the thousands of jobs that have already been cut from the coal industry, the thousands more that are in jeopardy to be cut from the coal industry.

It's about the millions of Americans and America's businesses that are paying skyrocketing prices, 23 million Americans underemployed, and yet we've got an administration that wants to attack the very reliable energy source that would fuel a resurgence in manufacturing and put America back to work.

Ladies and gentlemen, I implore to you, defeat this motion to recommit. Vote on the final passage of this legislation today. Let's get America back to work and stop the administration's war on coal.

I yield back the balance of my time.