Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I am a cosponsor of H.R. 674, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the imposition of 3 percent withholding on certain payments made to vendors by government entities. I supported passage of the bill in the House of Representatives on October 27 and again, with Senate amendments, on November 16. I was also a cosponsor of similar legislation (H.R. 275) in the 111th Congress. Although I was on the House floor and voting on November 16, my vote was not recorded for H.R. 674. I would like for the record to read that I should have been recorded as a ``yes'' vote.

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

Mr. Chair, I filed an amendment to the 2012 Department of the Interior appropriations bill that would provide a 25-mile buffer along Florida's coast to ensure that new oil and gas drilling would not take place above the Outer Continental Shelf within 25 miles of Florida's coast line.

After reviewing the Interior bill and current drilling policies in the Atlantic and the Gulf, I have decided to hold off offering the amendment on the floor for this particular bill, which covers only the next fiscal year. There is not an imminent threat of drilling near Florida's coast due to current restrictions on leasing and drilling.

That said, going forward, I look forward to working with my colleagues in the future to tap more of our own domestic energy resources while taking common sense steps to preserve Florida's tourism economy.

It is important to note, as the amendment is drafted, that directional drilling within 25 miles would still be allowed.

The amendment make no changes--zero, nada, zilch--to the Gulf moratorium that is in place, or the Department of the Interior's current lease plans in the Atlantic.

Tourism is Florida's number one industry. My amendment would ensure that beach tourism is not harmed. Obviously, neither you nor your constituents would prefer seeing a drilling platform in lieu of a sunrise.

Just as fuel is important to our economy, so. are our beaches. The amendment encourages the best possible stewardship of both, while protecting beach goers' line of sight, and preserving the scenic vistas that tourists come to Florida to enjoy.

Getting Florida's economy turned around is important. Our economy has already been harmed by the end of the Space Shuttle program. Agriculture, construction, and housing sectors continue to struggle.

Preserving a 25-mile buffer would send a message to visitors, nationwide and worldwide, that we are protecting the pristine nature of our shores that have traditionally drawn hundreds of thousands of visitors each year. It says to millions of tourists that we remain open for their tourism business now and into the future.

Preserving a 25-mile buffer would be an important step toward ensuring that tourism, a

bright and recovering sector of our economy, which brings an enormous amount of foreign dollars and tax revenue into the United States, continues to recover.

Again, this amendment would pertain only to drilling above the Outer Continental Shelf. Directional drilling within 25 miles would still be allowed.

I hope all of my colleagues would support this or a similar amendment in future legislation. This issue is ultimately important to every member of this House.

I look forward to you, and your constituents, visiting our wonderful beaches. They are some of the best in the world, and--with your help-- they will remain that way.

Offered by Mr. Posey

Amendment No. 73: At the end of the bill (before the short

title) add the following:

Offered By: Mr. Posey

Amendment No. 45: At the end of the bill (before the short

title) add the following:

Offered By: Mr. Posey

Amendment No. 46: At the end of the bill (before the short

title) add the following:

Mr. Speaker, today is a bittersweet day for Florida's Space Coast, for the space program, and for the Nation. As Atlantis touched down at 5:57 a.m. today, July 21, 2011, at Kennedy Space Center, another era of exploration closed.

Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral have been the center of America's human space flight program since its inception. Nearly every manned mission has launched from Florida's Space Coast. The Shuttle program is no different. Every Shuttle mission has been processed, assembled, and launched by the talented and dedicated men and women at Kennedy Space Center.

Just as Kennedy Space Center has been an important part of the Shuttle Program, the Shuttle Program has been an essential part of Florida's identity, so much so that it was featured on our State's quarter. From the rumble of the Shuttle lifting off, to the sonic boom felt as the Shuttle traverses Florida on its way to land at Kennedy after another accomplished mission, the Shuttle is a part of Central Florida's culture.

Space Coast residents have cheered the successes the Shuttle Program has seen in its 30 years of service to our Nation: ferrying astronauts, modules, components, and experiments to the International Space Station; launching and repairing numerous satellites including the Hubble; launching three interplanetary probes; and advancing scientific experimentation including microgravity research. After all, the citizens of the Space Coast working at Kennedy Space Center helped make these successes possible.

Our community grieved deeply when, as President Ronald Reagan said, the Challenger astronauts ``slipped the surly bonds of this Earth,'' to ``touch the face of God,'' on January 28, 1986, and when the Shuttle Columbia failed to make it home on February 1, 2003. The entire Nation wept for the loss of these heroes, but the Space Coast mourned these brave men and women as family.

As we welcome Atlantis home for the last time, I would especially like to applaud all of our Shuttle workers from United Space Alliance and other contractors who did the work necessary to keep the Shuttles flying for 30 great years. It is their hard work and dedication that made these missions possible. Our heartfelt gratitude goes out to each and every one of them on this historic, but bittersweet day.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring to my colleagues' attention the celebration taking place in Osceola County, Florida, later this month. More specifically, on July 24, 2011, the Committee Desfile Puertorriqueno de Osceola, Inc., has chosen to dedicate the First Annual Puerto Rican Day Parade to commemorate the heroism of the U.S. Army's 65th Infantry Regiment, better known as ``The Borinqueneers.''

I rise today to join them in this recognition as we come together to celebrate the Borinqueneers, their commitment to the liberties of the United States, and their specific military achievements on the front line of the battlefield in advancing the values upon which this nation was founded.

On March 2, 1899, Congress authorized the establishment of the Army unit that became known as the ``The Borinqueneers,'' an all-volunteer Puerto Rican unit. This brave unit was called upon to serve in World War I, World War II, and the Korean War and fought valiantly under the motto ``Honor et Fidelitas,'' meaning Honor and Fidelity.

When ``The Borinqueneers'' were called to the front lines during the Korean War, General MacArthur said of the unit, ``The Puerto Ricans forming the ranks of the gallant 65th Infantry on the battlefields of Korea . . . are writing a brilliant record of achievement in battle and I am proud indeed to have them in this command. I wish that we might have more like them.''

The Borinqueneers consistently demonstrated exceptional and unyielding valor on the battlefield despite the hardships they endured. As a unit, they earned a Presidential Unit Citation, a Meritorious Unit Commendation and two Republic of Korea Unit Citations. Individuals within the regiment were also awarded Distinguished Service Crosses, Silver Stars and Bronze Stars.

I am honored to pay tribute to the service that ``The Borinqueneers'' have provided our nation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for this opportunity to pay tribute to these fine soldiers.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce an amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill that directs the Secretary of Defense to utilize to the fullest extent practicable the incredible resource that exists at the NASA Shuttle Logistics Depot, NSLD, in Central Florida.

The Department of Defense would be well served to make greater use of the facility's unique manufacturing capabilities and highly-skilled workforce for Department of Defense supply chain and repair needs. The loss of this facility and its workforce would not only be a blow to our nation's space program but represent a missed opportunity to serve U.S. national security interests.

The unique combination of technologically-advanced equipment used in the 300,000 sq. ft. NSLD facility for aerospace manufacturing, repair, and overhaul combined with the critical workforce is extremely capable of providing warfighter support for our military. Although the NSLD's operator, the United Space Alliance, USA, has procured a recent DLA contract, the work is not enough to maintain the NSLD.

This irreplaceable workforce will go elsewhere once the Shuttle Program comes to an end. The skills the NSLD facility and personnel offer are a direct match to those the DoD needs to reduce the risk of vanishing vendors and diminishing manufacturing sources in its supply chain. USA's performance-based logistics operations have maintained on- time delivery greater than 98 percent, and a customer acceptance rate of 99.99 percent.

USA has managed NASA assets of 250,000 unique part numbers valued at $1.5 billion per year. During the Shuttle Program, over 80 OEM hardware repair or manufacturing tasks--260 Orbiter Line Replaceable Units comprised of over 7,000 line items--were transitioned to and certified by USA at the NSLD. By Shuttle Program end, more than 80 percent of all completed Orbiter Line Replaceable Unit repairs were done at NSLD by USA resources.

This Amendment is directly tied to jobs. The final flight of the Space Shuttle Orbiter, scheduled for Friday, sets the stage for a mass exodus of highly skilled labor and specialized resources from Florida's Space Coast. This void will further strain our economy and dilute the workforce and capabilities needed to sustain the technologies required to achieve the diversification of Florida's economy.

Aside from being a great asset to the Department of Defense, greater utilization of this important asset will keep the facility functioning as we look to NASA's next mission. This workforce would have been sustained as NASA transitioned to the Constellation Program, that is before it was vitiated. The retirement of the Shuttle Program presents an excellent opportunity for the Department of Defense, the Defense Logistics Agency specifically, to take advantage of the highly skilled workforce as they process and refurbish equipment returning from theater in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is an opportunity which can preserve a national asset, preserve jobs, and assist the Department of Defense in cycling through the equipment returning from combat.

And so, Mr. Speaker, I am submitting this amendment to encourage DoD to make better use of this rich resource so that it does not winnow away.

Offered By: Mr. Posey

Amendment No. 100: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Madam Speaker, Congressman Webster and I were walking past the rear of the Chamber, and we looked at each other kind of funny after some former comments and thought we were walking by a set for comedy hour.

I mean, I think I really heard somebody allude to the fact that we need more government regulation and for sure we need more taxes on the oil companies, those evil oil companies, and the answer to all of our problems is to tax them more--as if the Members of this body and the public are stupid enough to think that at the end of the year, those big oil companies are just going to write a check for an extra zillion dollars.

Let's say we tax those evil oil companies another dollar a gallon. They're not going to write the check. We know what's going to happen: They're going to raise the price a dollar a gallon, or, given the corporate greed we sometimes see, round it off to 2 bucks a gallon.

Corporations don't pay taxes. Corporations collect taxes. They collect taxes from consumers who ultimately pay the tax. You add a tax to a product, and the consumer is going to pay more.

I wish we would, as the gentleman from Texas said, quit trying to play ``Pin the Tail on the Donkey.'' We know corporations don't pay taxes. Consumers pay taxes; corporations just collect it.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 839, the HAMP Termination Act.

As you know, this bill would terminate the failed Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), while still protecting assistance for homeowners who were already extended an offer to participate in the program. If passed, it would save taxpayers $1.4 billion.

HAMP was established under the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) and was aimed at helping homeowners modify their loans. The Administration rolled out HAMP with the goal of assisting three to four million homeowners, yet the program has fallen far short of that goal, assisting only 500,000 borrowers and at a cost much higher than anticipated. In fact, this program is hurting more homeowners than it is helping. Many trial modifications ultimately end up being cancelled--putting borrowers in a worse financial position than they were before they applied for HAMP assistance. Too many found HAMP to be less than helpful, and ended up owing back payments, interest, and fees in one lump sum once their modification request is rejected.

Numerous government watchdogs--including the Government Accountability Office, the Special Inspector General for TARP, and the Congressional Oversight Panel--are all on record labeling HAMP as ineffective. Unfortunately, as I've witnessed in Financial Services Committee hearings and on the House floor, the Administration has been unwilling to accept these objective analyses and terminate the program, instead choosing to throw good money after bad.

I believe when we see valuable tax dollars being spent on a flawed program we must terminate those programs. A dollar saved here is one less dollar borrowed and put on the tab of future generations.

Washington is on an unsustainable path. Out-of-control government spending has caused a massive increase in borrowing and the national debt is now a record $14 trillion. Facing a $1.5 trillion deficit for the third year in a row, the time is past due for Washington to make tough decisions so that our nation's financial future will be secure. All across America, families are doing more with less, and it is time for Washington to do likewise. Fiscally responsible Americans know the budgetary challenges we face and are supportive of the steps we are taking to stop the waste.

Mr. Chair and my colleagues, I ask that you join me in support of H.R. 839, the HAMP Termination Act. Together, let's stand with the American people and get Washington's spending spree under control.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate the life and service of Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.) Chester L. Rice for his distinguished service to the U.S. Army and his nation.

LTC Rice honorably served his country for twenty-one years from 1955 to 1976.

Chester served as a member of my Service Academy Nominating Committee since 2009. He also served as a member of Congressman Weldon's Service Academy Nominating Committee from 1997 to 2008. I applaud his commitment to our youth, military and the future of our Armed Services.

On May 15, 2001, Chester was awarded the TROACC Award from the Cape Canaveral Chapter of the Retired Officers Association for his leadership and dedicated work as Vice President and President of TROACC. Under his direction, the Chapter was twice selected as the TROA Chapter of the Year and the chapter magazine, the Intercom, was twice selected as the best in its category.

LTC Rice served as Chairman of the TROACC Student Affairs Committee and is credited for improvements to the program, which recognizes outstanding cadets from the Junior ROTC Programs in eleven Brevard County High Schools and from the ROTC Panther Battalion at the Florida Institute of Technology. The excellent support that TROACC provided to these Junior and Senior ROTC programs is a direct result of the leadership and dedicated work of LTC Rice.

Born in Lawrenceville, Virginia on Nov. 28, 1933, he attended high school in Derry Township, Pennsylvania and was President of his high school class all four years. All his classmates loved him.

His awards and decorations include the Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star Medal and the Army Commendation Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster.

Chester is survived by his wife, Helen and brother, Donald Rice. He was preceded in death by his brothers, Harry Rice and Robert Rice, Jr. and his sister, Dolores Henderson. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends.

I am honored to rise and call attention to the service that Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.) Chester L. Rice has provided our nation. I am proud to have known him and to see his commitment to the cause of liberty and freedom.

I thank the gentleman from Texas for recognizing me.

I didn't plan to speak today. But I was in my office and I was listening to your explanation of this abhorrent and out of control administrative rules process, where people who are not elected and are not accountable make up the rules as they go along however they may want them to. We have had a number of cases that have injured my constituents, or at least caused them a lot of sleepless nights already.

As you may know, sir, earlier this year the Securities and Exchange Commission exposed their intent now to examine the entities that they regulate not just based on their conformance with securities law, but on their environmental stewardship. Now, these are the same people that couldn't put Bernard Madoff away when they were given an open and shut case 10 years before Madoff basically turned himself in. This is the same agency that hasn't disciplined anybody. Nobody's been reprimanded. Nobody's had their wrist slapped. Nobody's had a day off yet. They can't do the job they are supposed to do now, but they're going to start regulating companies for their environmental stewardship based upon rules that they promulgated. And you're correct that's the wrong thing to do.

Most recently, and near and dear to my heart because it affects so many people in my State, is the new rule the IRS has proposed to deal with banks and foreign deposits. You know, for over 90 years this country has encouraged foreign investors to put their money in our banks. It makes good sense. We have their money, we can loan it out, it creates jobs for Americans. It's a win-win situation. It's a win for them, it's a win for us.

Now, the IRS has decided that they're going to promulgate a rule that says the banks must notify the governments of every foreign depositor regarding how much money they have in our banks. Now, what's the benefit to the United States for that? There is no benefit to the United States. They don't owe taxes in the United States. What's the liability to the United States for that? The liability is that $200 billion to $400 billion will leave American banks and go back into foreign banks.

Now, can you imagine if you were unfortunate enough to be governed by Hugo Chavez, Ahmadinejad, or Castro what would happen if they found out that you had assets in the United States of America? You would not only lose your assets; you might lose your life. But more importantly, this wrong-headed rule would cause a dramatic de-stimulus effect on our economy when you look at a stimulus bill of $800 billion that basically didn't perform like it was supposed to.

It doesn't make much sense to write a rule that would take $200 billion to $400 billion, up to as much as 50 percent of what our stimulus bill was, out of our economy. The IRS tried to do this about 10 years ago. Over 100 Members of Congress stepped up and said this is a lousy idea, and it needs to be defeated. So my plea today, sir, is that we can have at least 100 Members of this Congress that will again stand up and say this was a bad idea 10 years ago, it's a bad idea now. Let's kill this rule and don't let it happen.

I thank the gentleman again. You know, many people, even elected people aren't really familiar with what exactly an administrative rule is. We talk about these administrative rules as rules, and people wonder what they are. I used to explain to people that in Florida, where I first got interested in the administrative rule process, all the laws on the books passed by their elected State officials were in four law books this big. They were shocked by that.

They said, well, what about the commercials where we see the attorney in front of all the books advertising for Dewey, Cheatem and Howe? What are all those? Aren't those our State's laws? Yeah, that's last year's edition and the edition before that, and the interpretations of them. But all those rules are in those four books. They are shocked at that.

They said, well, we thought there were a lot more laws than that. I would say, well, there are a lot more laws than that, but those are all the laws that were made by people you elect. The administrative rules are laws which are made by unelected people that you don't vote for. And usually, they could fill up half the room. They would probably fill out a quarter of this room. So that's what most people don't understand, the relatively few laws that are passed by people they elect, and the plethora of rules that are passed by people they don't elect.

I remember it's one of the reasons I ran for the State legislature. I had promised my wife when I got off the city council I'd never run for office again as long as I lived. She made me promise her. That changed, and one of the reasons was I was upset by the runaway proliferation of rules in that State, which seemed like they were making rules willy- nilly that were causing an inconvenience for every business and putting jobs in danger.

So I got elected and, Judge, you know, the first bill I passed made it a third-degree misdemeanor for a bureaucrat to promulgate a rule that wasn't authorized by statute. Of course, people thought I was crazy. A lot of the media made fun of me, and I was the brunt of a lot of jokes.

The Governor at the time had a hit squad go after that bill, and when I had it come up in committee they went around and met every member and said, Kill this bill. But it still got out of committee. So they referred it to six more committees, and we weren't able to advance that.

I struggled with trying to change the way the administrative laws are promulgated and come up with a system

for about 4 years, to no avail. Representative Simler, Representative Pruitt were doing the same thing, and it just seemed like we were getting nowhere. And then in the 4th year, the Governor that had previously seemed so disgruntled with my legislation gave his final State of the State address wearing one of these belts like they wear at Walmart or Home Depot or Lowe's so you don't hurt yourself, and he was holding all the rules that applied to a cook shack that he wanted to build on Chemonie Plantation. And he said, We have got to do something about this out-of-control rules process.

And he gave every member of the House and every State senator at the time a copy of a book by Philip Howard called, ``The Death of Common Sense.'' It is a great book that I implore people to read. It is very short and it is an easy read. It talks about how the rules process has worked to harm society.

You know, Mother Teresa at one time wanted to have a house for the homeless in New York City. She located the perfect spot, got the contractors ready, was ready to open the doors, but the building department said, No, you can't do that here. She said, Why? Because that building does not have enough restrooms. So we have to continue to let the people sleep on the sidewalks and use the street for a restroom because of the rigid, monolithic interpretation of the laws and the rules.

So, as a result, finally, of his personal experience, the Governor said, We need to change rules, the rules procedure, and we did. And you know, we changed the way rules are vetted. There's a joint administrative procedure committee which reviews every rule to make sure there's specific statutory authority to write that rule.

The new process wasn't in order very long before one of the State agencies determined that any land with a new type of fern or fauna on it should be considered a wetland and couldn't be used for any development. Fortunately, it impacted a very large landowner down there who challenged the rule through an investigative court, an administrative rule through an administrative judge. The administrative judge ruled in favor of the bureaucrats, saying the legislature could not possibly have meant exactly what they said. That was the crux of their 38-page decision.

So the next year we passed House Bill 107, which basically said we mean unequivocally exactly what we said, and from a rules perspective the State has lived happily ever after.

Now, Washington is more dysfunctional than I anticipated that it would be when I got here, and one of the worst dysfunctions is the administrative procedures or the administrative rules process here. It's shocking that it's a very old process built on a flimsy foundation. There have been numerous attempts to fix it. None of them have been really successful, and I think, as you and I have discussed before, we need to have total reform. We need to start with a clean sheet of paper, and we need to make the agencies accountable for the rules they write, and they need to be specifically statutorily authorized to do those things.

And so I hope that our colleagues will join with us as we move forward trying to seek an accountability and an efficiency in our government that is greatly lacking right now but is within our grasp.

I thank my friend across the aisle for the time. I thought the across-the-board cuts were not supposed to apply to national security. I thought we were going to make cuts like the folks back home make cuts. If a family back home gives an across-the-board 5 percent cut and they apply it, they are in deep trouble.

They might be able to cut back on their entertainment. They might be able to not go out to eat an extra night. They may be able to cut back on their water or their electric usage. But if they pay their mortgage company 5 percent less than is due for the security over their head, they are out on the street; and they end up in bigger problems than they started. So I think that's why we need to make these cuts surgically in our budget.

Let's take NASA, for example. The committee already cut over $300 million from the NASA budget. The Weiner amendment cut $300 million more almost. Why would anyone want to yield the ultimate military high ground, which is space, to countries who in the very best of times are not friendly to us? Space is the free world's Golan Heights. I implore my colleagues to help defeat this very, very well-intended, but misguided, amendment. Thank you very much.