Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Benzel's Bakery of Altoona, PA. This year, Benzel's is celebrating its 100th year in business. In 1911, Adolph Benzel came to America with a recipe and a dream to make pretzels. The company started off as a one-man operation, everything done by hand. Today this family business is one of the top pretzel producers in the country. Benzel's employs 70 full time workers and makes 35 varieties of pretzels under the brand name Pennysticks Pretzels. The company gives back to the community. They have established a fund with the Central Pennsylvania Community Foundation in honor of Adolph Benzel. The company has also donated $150,000 for a renovation project at a local theatre. I extend my congratulations to Benzel's Bretzel Bakery and expect another hundred years from this great family business.

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to rise today to recognize the Borough of Hollidaysburg upon the 175th anniversary of its founding. I, along with close to 6,000 of my constituents am proud to call Hollidaysburg home and I am pleased to have the opportunity to call attention to the borough and its history in the House today.

Hollidaysburg, like so many other boroughs in Pennsylvania, has a rich history that stretches back before the founding of our nation to the French and Indian War. Hollidaysburg was first settled in the early 1700's by brothers Adam and William Holliday after their purchase of 1,000 acres of land along the Juniata River from the decendents of William Penn.

As with many small settlements of the time, the community forged from the wilderness by the Holliday family remained small throughout the Revolutionary War and the first few years of America's founding. However, as America began to expand and look west, the population began to grow as important transportation projects like the Huntingdon, Cambria, and Indiana Turnpike were completed.

In 1832, Hollidaysburg underwent a second population boom when the Pennsylvania Main Line Canal opened, giving merchants in the area a way to move their products to Philadelphia and other eastern markets. Two years later, the Allegheny Portage Railroad solidified Hollidaysburg as a center for trade by linking the canal to a railroad connecting Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. Later, at the dawn of the Twentieth Century, the Pennsylvania Railroad established a large switching yard at Hollidaysburg; further solidifying the borough's important role as a link in America's growing railroad infrastructure.

This rapid development in transportation around Hollidaysburg enabled the borough to officially charter itself in 1836. Within a few years, the population surged again, to a record number of 2,000 inhabitants by 1840. The borough's growth in such a short time enabled it to become the seat of Blair County and remains a center of commerce and local government to this day. I might add to that list, innovation since Hollidaysburg is the home of the renowned and ageless toy, the Slinky.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the borough of Hollidaysburg for 175 years of history, growth and success. Hollidaysburg continues to boast a vibrant community in a beautiful area of Pennsylvania and I invite the American people to help celebrate its anniversary by visiting the borough to experience all it has to offer first hand.

I claim time in support of the bill on behalf of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 1938, the North American-Made Energy Security Act.

As a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials, I appreciate the hard work of my colleague from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) and of my colleagues on the Energy and Commerce Committee to bring this bill forward, with whom our committees share jurisdiction.

This important legislation directs the President to expedite the consideration and approval of the construction and operation of the Keystone XL oil pipeline. This important project has been delayed for far too long, and as my colleague from Nebraska pointed out, it is one month away from its 3-year anniversary from its introduction. The time has come for the President to finally move forward and make a decision. This legislation doesn't force the President to make a ``yes'' or ``no'' decision, but it does require the President to issue a final order granting or denying the Presidential permit for the Keystone XL pipeline no later than November 1, 2011.

This $7 billion, 1,700-mile Keystone XL pipeline would link Canada's tar sands region with refineries in the Midwest and Texas. The economic impacts of the Keystone XL pipeline are immense, with estimates of 465,000 U.S. jobs stemming from the oil sands development by the year 2035.

All of my colleagues talk on the House floor about taking action to limit our dependence on oil from unstable areas of the world and from foreign governments hostile to the United States' interests. This is a project that will move us in that direction. Accomplishing that goal will also grow our economy in our partnering with our close friend and ally, Canada.

The United States has the largest network of energy pipelines of any nation in the world, and the pipelines remain the energy lifelines that power nearly all of our daily activities. The hallmark of America's pipeline network continues to be that it delivers extraordinary volumes of product reliably, safely, efficiently, and economically. Since 1986, the volume of energy products transported through pipelines has increased by one-third; yet the number of reportable incidents has decreased by 28 percent. Both government and industry have taken numerous steps to improve pipeline safety over the last 10 years. Safety advocates, environmentalists and the pipeline industry all agree that the Federal pipeline safety program is working.

Later this summer, the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee will bring a bill to the floor to reauthorize the Federal pipeline safety program. We will work with our colleagues from the Energy and Commerce Committee, as we bring our bill to the floor, to ensure that safety remains our top priority. That piece of legislation will ensure that pipelines, like the Keystone XL pipeline, will continue to be the safest and most efficient way to move petroleum products and natural gas.

I am concerned by what appears to be a bias by some in this body to nontraditional sources of energy. To end our reliance on oil from overseas, we must develop the resources we have available in North America. That includes the oil sands in Canada and the Marcellus shale natural gas in my home State of Pennsylvania. We must ensure that the development of these resources is done responsibly and in an environmentally safe manner, but we cannot hold them back and show prejudice just because they are unconventional. We simply can't have it both ways. We can't grow our economy and reduce our dependence on foreign oil without developing the resources that are available right here in our own backyard.

So in closing, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1938, and I look forward to continuing to work on this important issue.

I reserve the balance of my time.

May I inquire as to how much time is remaining?

At this time I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).

I yield 4 minutes to the chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).

Will the gentleman yield?

Did I hear correctly that the gentleman is going to support the underlying legislation?

I thought so. But I guess I wasn't paying attention to the end. So it is great to hear.

Madam Chair, it's important that we pass this on a bipartisan basis because it does mean jobs for Americans, construction jobs, somewhere up around 20,000. It means steel that is going to be made in U.S. steel plants. So this is a bill that is not only going to create jobs, but it's going to help us break that dependence on foreign oil.

Again, I tip my hat to Mr. Terry from Nebraska for putting forth H.R. 1938, and I urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this pro-energy, pro-jobs bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The time for talk is over. The time for action has come. We are in a spending-driven debt crisis. Washington is spending money it doesn't have, and it's leaving the American people, our children and our grandchildren, with the tab. The national debt now stands at $14 trillion, which is equal to 95 percent of the economy of the United States.

In his first 2 years in office, President Obama has added more to our national debt than was added between 1776 and 1992, totaling close to $4 trillion in new debt in less than 36 months. We are now borrowing 40 cents on every dollar. I was a small business owner before I came to Congress, and if I borrowed 40 cents on every dollar, my business would have been out of business. American families know that if they're borrowing 40 cents on the dollar, it's not long before they're in crisis.

President Obama inherited an economy in distress. There's no denying that. However, practically every decision he has made and every policy he has pursued has made matters worse. Between a failed trillion-dollar stimulus and a trillion-dollar government takeover of health care, this administration has spent without restraint and without regard to our financial health.

If spending is the problem, then controlling Washington spending is the solution. My colleagues stand on the House floor and talk about increasing revenues by raising taxes, but history tells us a different story. We can raise revenues by lowering tax rates. President Kennedy did it in the sixties, President Reagan did it in the eighties, and even President Bush in 2000 when he lowered tax rates. What happened was not a decrease in revenues to the Federal Government but an increase. In fact, in 2000, after the 2001, '2 and '3 tax cuts, we had record revenues in the Federal Government.

Our problem is spending. That's why I joined my colleagues in voting to pass Cut, Cap, and Balance. My passing this legislation, the House stepped in and filled the vacuum of leadership left by the President of the United States in the debt limit negotiations. We acted to cut spending by over $110 billion, cap the growth of spending, and force Congress to balance its books through a constitutional balanced budget amendment.

No one wants the United States to default on its debt. The consequences would be dire, not only for our economy but for the world. However, we cannot continue down the path that has led us to this crisis. The House has acted. It's time for the President to step in and act as well.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I rise in strong support of H.R. 2018, the Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011.

As a member of the Water Subcommittee and cosponsor of this bill, I applaud Chairman Mica, Chairman Gibbs, and Ranking Member Rahall for bringing forward this important bipartisan legislation.

H.R. 2018 seeks to reverse the erosion of the States' authority and partnership with the Federal Government under the Clean Water Act. This well-established and effective partnership has come under increasing attack by the EPA under the Obama administration, and the EPA has progressively undermined the States' shared regulatory authority.

Our bill preserves the system of cooperative federalism established under the Clean Water Act, and in which the primary responsibilities for water pollution control are allocated to the States.

The bill restrict's EPA's ability to second-guess or delay a State's permitting in water quality certification decisions under the CWA once the EPA has already approved a State's program. We must put an end to the EPA's one-size-fits-all, and the economy stifling agenda.

This bill ensures a commonsense regulatory regime that protects our environment while at the same time protecting our Nation's farmers, miners, and other businesses critical to our economy.

This bill addresses one of the many areas in which the EPA has overstepped its authority and taken actions that are deeply hurtful to our economy.

In my State of Pennsylvania, the EPA has increased its interference with the Commonwealth to unprecedented levels, creating numerous delays and problems for the Commonwealth and our Department of Environmental Protection, with no scientific basis or environmental payoff.

I received copies of numerous letters from the Pennsylvania DEP Secretary Krancer to the EPA citing EPA's interference and unwillingness to collaborate with the State on the issues that they have led on for three decades.

The first example is regarding the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, or the NPDES, permits, which has been a problem with several States in addition to Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania DEP has had the primary authority over the NPDES permitting program since 1984, and the EPA has just recently started to interfere in the Pennsylvania program, specifically in mining-related permits.

The EPA has specifically increased their permit review of mining- related permits under a new guidance, which relies on unsettled science. This is causing long delays in the permitting process with no environmental benefit and is costing Pennsylvania jobs and economic benefits.

The Pennsylvania House of Representatives recently passed a resolution stating the EPA is overstepping DEP without any Federal legislative or regulatory changes to support this increased oversight. This resolution reasserts Pennsylvania's primary role over the NPDES permitting in the State.

The EPA has refused to work with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection on Chesapeake Bay issues to address several problems with the EPA's model that do not accurately reflect Pennsylvania's unique issues. A letter from Secretary Krancer to Lisa Jackson states, ``PA DEP and our municipality stakeholders have been frustrated with EPA's continued failure to acknowledge the challenge of Pennsylvania's unique municipal structure. Pennsylvania does not agree the TMDL development effort has been collaborative.''

Again, there was an EPA letter to the DEP citing DEP's concerns with the State's handling of wastewater for the Marcellus drilling, excessively overstepping the DEP, criticizing their approach, and demanding to direct Pennsylvania's sampling and monitoring programs. It seems the EPA is listening more to The New York Times than the State regulatory agencies that are actually regulating and monitoring the issues on the ground.

The EPA, along with other Federal agencies, continues to grab for more authority, overriding long-standing State policies and roles in regulating oil and gas exploration and environmental protection, in particular States such as Pennsylvania, with long- standing and respected programs.

The EPA needs to back off. Pennsylvania issues are completely different than Texas issues, and no one knows Pennsylvania or wants to protect Pennsylvania better than the State agencies working to protect it.

I strongly support H.R. 2018 and, again, congratulate Mr. Gibbs on a job well done on this legislation.

The General Assembly of Pennsylvania--House Resolution No. 87

a resolution

Urging the Environmental Protection Agency to stop its

unlawful application of the Guidance Memo relating to the

Federal Water Pollution Control Act, which is a substantive

change to the permitting procedure conferred on the states,

and restore the regulatory environment that existed prior to

the release of the Guidance Memo.

Whereas, Under section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution

Control Act (62 Stat. 1155, 33 U.S.C. Sec. 1342), National

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits are

typically issued by states for discharge of nondredged and

nonfill material; and

Whereas, Once the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

approves a state permitting program, the state has exclusive

authority to issue NPDES permits; and

Whereas, Through a 1991 Memorandum of Agreement executed

between the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the EPA, the

Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) was identified

as the lead agency with exclusive authority for administering

and granting NPDES permits for mining-related activities in

this Commonwealth; and

Whereas, In September 2010, the EPA informed the DEP that

it was altering the Commonwealth's administration of its

permitting program and would conduct its own additional

review of NPDES permits; and

Whereas, This abrupt change in the Commonwealth's

permitting process was not the result of any accompanying

Federal statutory or regulatory changes; and

Whereas, As a result of this change, the DEP is required to

provide the EPA's Region 3 field office with all pending

mining-related NPDES permit applications, whose activity will

either discharge into the Monongahela River or into any

designated total maximum daily load impaired stream for its

independent review; and

Whereas, The EPA's Region 3 field office is not

sufficiently staffed to perform these types of reviews in a

timely manner, causing indefinite delays in the permitting

process; and

Whereas, The EPA's objections to the issuance of these

permit applications vary, but generally are based on what the

Federal agency perceives are inconsistencies between the

applications and an interim final Guidance Memo that the EPA

released in April 2010, designed to provide a framework for

regional reviews of surface mining projects in Appalachia

based on conductivity levels it associated with adverse

impacts to streams; and

Whereas, Although the stated intent of the Guidance Memo is

to limit its applicability to surface mining projects only, a

number of the permits being delayed in this Commonwealth are

for activities other than this type of mining; and

Whereas, The Guidance Memo is based on flawed studies

with limited application and unconfirmed conclusions that

cannot be used to develop a predictive cause and effect

relationship between the EPA's established benchmark

threshold for conductivity levels and healthy streams in

this Commonwealth; and

Whereas, Despite the representation that the Guidance Memo

is an interim document, it nevertheless is applied by the EPA

in a binding manner in its current version, even though the

EPA continues to receive comments on it; and

Whereas, The EPA's application of the Guidance Memo

constitutes a substantive change in the basic application of

the permitting process; and

Whereas, By substituting the issuance of agency guidance

for formal rulemaking, the EPA circumvents the clear

requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (60 Stat.

237, 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.) for public notice and comments;

and

Whereas, This unnecessary extended review of NPDES permit

applications by the EPA has led to a significant backlog of

permits that could result in coal contracts being lost,

mining jobs being destroyed and this Commonwealth losing its

major source of affordable and reliable electric generation;

Therefore be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives of the

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania urge the Environmental

Protection Agency to stop its unlawful application of the

Guidance Memo relating to the Federal Water Pollution Control

Act, which is a substantive change to the permitting

procedure conferred on the states, and restore the regulatory

environment that existed prior to the release of the Guidance

Memo; be it further

Resolved, That the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania reassert

its rightful role as the sole agency with permitting

authority of mining-related National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System permits; and be it further

Resolved, That the Chief Clerk of the House of

Representatives transmit a copy of this resolution to the

Governor of Pennsylvania, the Environmental Protection Agency

Administrator and all members of the Pennsylvania

Congressional Delegation.

Mr. Chair, I would like to place in the record my understanding that the definition of ``covered business method patent,'' Section 18(d)(1) of H.R. 1249, the America Invents Act, is intended to be narrowly construed to target only those business method patents that are unique to the financial services industry in the sense that they are patents which only a financial services provider would use to furnish a financial product or service. The example that I have been given is a patent relating to electronic check scanning, which is the type of invention that only the financial services industry would utilize as a means of providing improved or more efficient banking services. In contrast, Section 18 would not encompass a patent that can be used in other industries, but which a financial services provider might also use. Lastly, it is also my understanding from discussions with the Committee that Section 18 is targeted only towards patents for non-technological inventions.

I thank the gentleman from Texas, and I rise in opposition to this amendment.

We on this side of the aisle do stand with small business; but this is an arbitrary amendment, sets up arbitrary mileage, dollar amounts that is not going to get at the heart of the problem. I agree with the ranking member that the big boys, one-size-fits-all doesn't always work. But we have to figure out a process and put it in place that is going to streamline the process for small business, not set up, as I said, arbitrary mileage and dollar amounts that are going to, I believe, hurt small business.

There will be small businesses that are outside that 60-mile area that can't come in and compete. And when you reduce competition, you drive up costs. We want to see competition. This amendment, there is no waiver in it to provisions or any consideration for special needs for the DOD, including urgency of mission or direct support to the warfighter.

It adds additional steps in the contracting process. It requires the DOD to devote additional time and resources to monitoring contracts, once again driving up costs and the complexity. In addition, contractors must devote additional time to comply with the requirements and expand resources on reporting compliance, driving costs further up on these costs.

This is not going to, again, help small businesses. I believe it's going to hurt them. The requirements work against established business practices and programs and will not garner additional benefits to small business, again, driving up costs, stopping small businesses that are 61 or 62 miles outside of that circle. Drives away competition and hurts those folks that could compete that are small businesses.

But I agree with what the ranking member said, and in principle with the gentleman from California. We have got to put processes in place that support small businesses. And I intend to work with the committee, with other members of the committee to try to figure out how we put those in place in a reasonable and sound way that drive costs down and allows our small businesses to participate in the process.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

I appreciate the gentlelady from Texas offering this amendment, and I want to restate what it attempts to do.

It will prohibit outsourcing of DOD functions until the Secretary of Defense conducts an outreach program to benefit women- and minority- owned small businesses. Well, in fact, it is a duplication of what is already in the law. It duplicates section 891 of the fiscal year 2011 National Defense Authorization Act which requires the establishment of an outreach program to firms near DOD installations. This act simply delays allowing for outsourcing to come back in and be part of the benefits that it provides to this Nation, reducing cost, streamlining the process.

So again, this is already in law. As I said, this is nothing more than a delay tactic to stop outsourcing. We need to use outsourcing where it makes sense, to utilize the benefits of reducing cost, which has the potential to help our small businesses, which I think we all support. Whether they are women-owned or minority-owned businesses, small businesses are important, and I think outsourcing does that.

In fact, in my district, Letterkenny Army Depot has public-private partnerships today through outsourcing with small businesses and large alike. The Heritage Foundation did a study commending what is going on at Letterkenny Army Depot utilizing DOD civilians as well as the private sector, coming together where it makes sense, where we can have a tremendously positive impact on the work that goes there. So there is a model out there, and outsourcing is important.

Again, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment because again, it already is established in last year's defense authorization bill exactly what the gentlelady from Texas wants to be established.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

I agree with the distinguished ranking member, and I believe that he supported last year in the National Defense Authorization Act section 891, which in fact does what the gentlelady from Texas wants to do.

So again, this is a delay tactic to put outsourcing back on the table, back in play, back in part of our toolbox.

Again, I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the Republic of Azerbaijan in celebration of the 93rd anniversary of Republic Day on May 28th. Later this year, Azerbaijan will also celebrate the 20th anniversary of its freedom from the Soviet Union and the start of diplomatic relations with the United States.

Located in a geopolitically dynamic region between Europe and Asia and sandwiched between Russia and Iran, Azerbaijan is a secular county with a predominantly Muslim population that has also been home for more than a millennia for vibrant Christian and Jewish communities.

Azerbaijan has opened Caspian energy resources to development by U.S. companies and has emerged as a key player for global energy security. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline project is the most successful project contributing to the development of the South Caucuses region and has become the main artery delivering Caspian Sea hydrocarbons to the U.S. and our partners in Europe. Notably, in 2009 Azerbaijan provided nearly one quarter of all crude oil supplies to Israel and is considered a leading potential natural gas provider for the U.S. supported Nabucco pipeline.

On the security front, immediately after 9/11 Azerbaijan was among the first to offer strong support and assistance to the United States. Azerbaijan participated in operations in Kosovo and Iraq and is actively engaged in Afghanistan, having recently doubled its military presence there. Azerbaijan has extended important over-flight clearances for U.S. and NATO flights to support ISAF and has regularly provided landing and refueling operations at its airports for U.S. and NATO forces. Also, Azerbaijan, as highlighted by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, plays an important role in the Northern Distribution Network, a supply route to Afghanistan by making available its ground and Caspian naval transportation facilities. Moreover, Azerbaijan provides vital support for U.S. nonproliferation efforts.

Again, as the Co-Chairman of the Congressional Azerbaijan Caucus, it is my distinct pleasure to honor the Republic of Azerbaijan in celebration of the 93rd anniversary of Republic Day and to recognize the valuable bilateral relationship between the United States and Azerbaijan. I also encourage my colleagues who are interested in supporting Azerbaijan to join me as a member of Congressional Azerbaijan Caucus, a bipartisan group of nearly 40 Members of Congress working to help foster the growing partnership between the United States and Azerbaijan and to advance U.S. interests in this pivotal region.

Mr. Speaker, it is with sadness that I come to the floor to report the passing of a member of America's Greatest Generation. Michael Cap of Hollidaysburg, Pennsylvania passed away on Wednesday afternoon at the Hollidaysburg Veterans Home. He was 101 years old.

I met Michael Cap only a few weeks ago, on April 20th, to present him with replacements for medals he was awarded for his service in the Army during World War II.

Mr. Cap served in Company F, 306th Infantry, 77th Infantry Division of the United States Army during the campaign in the Philippines. During his tour in the Pacific Theater, Mr. Cap was wounded in action twice including a wound he suffered after receiving shrapnel in his heart during the invasion of Leyte Island. For his bravery and honorable service during the war, Mr. Cap received 10 medals, which had been lost or misplaced over time after the war.

It was my honor to have had the opportunity to replace these medals and on April 20, I joined Mr. Cap and members of his family at the Hollidaysburg Veterans Home to present him with the following medal and awards:

The Purple Heart with 1 bronze oak leaf cluster; the Bronze Star; the World War II Victory Medal; the American Campaign Medal; the Asiatic- Pacific Campaign Medal with 3 bronze service stars with arrowhead; the Philippine Liberation Ribbon with 1 bronze service star; the Good Conduct Medal; the Combat Infantryman Badge--1st Award; the Expert Infantryman Badge; and the Honorable Service WWII Lapel Button.

Mr. Speaker, with Michael Cap's passing, one more veteran of World War II has left us. It seems with each passing day, we are losing a generation that defined American courage.

Michael Cap's generation fought to end the threat of totalitarianism and came home to build the American Dream in peace. Their example set the tone for future generations of soldiers, including the men and women now serving in uniform in the United States armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Let us not forget Michael Cap and those like him who stood up in the face of evil and totalitarianism and defeated it. America owes him and all our veterans a great debt.

I thank the gentleman from Louisiana for yielding and thank the gentleman for traveling with us on our codel, which was a bipartisan codel made of up six Members--2 Democrats, 4 Republicans-- and we traveled to, obviously as the gentleman from Louisiana said, to Afghanistan. It was, I think, an eye-opening experience for all of us getting to see and hear firsthand from not only our military leaders but also soldiers who were in the field and traveling out to Herat Province and be able to go to a village and talk to the village elders, the people that 18 months ago in this village it was controlled by the Taliban. Today, with the help of the U.S. Special Forces, the Taliban is gone and the people of this community, the people of this village and region are setting up their own police force.

The village elder committed to us that he would never allow the Taliban to come back and how much he appreciated the support of U.S. Special Forces and their training and the fact that they were living with them in the community, 30 of our Special Forces in two different compounds, again offering training and guidance to these folks that live out in a very, very rural part of Afghanistan and actually 50 to 60 miles from the Iranian border. And they're doing good work. So we saw those kinds of positive developments.

Of course, we all know what happened at the end of this weekend. Our Special Forces were able to go in and kill Osama bin Laden and bring justice to him, and America's grateful for their efforts.

As my colleague said, we were also able to participate in two ceremonies. One was a ramp ceremony of one of our fallen heroes. They actually put the coffin on the plane to bring it back to Dover Air Force Base to meet its final destination, and then also a ceremony to honor the nine fallen Americans that were killed by an Afghan pilot, somebody they had been working with for 9 months, somebody they trusted, who came in during a meeting last week, and brought in a weapon and killed nine people. They were not all military. There were eight people that serve in our military and one civilian, a civilian contractor, A retired lieutenant colonel. So there were also officers and enlisted people, and all of them gave the ultimate sacrifice serving for us in Afghanistan, and it was also the largest loss of life for the U.S. Air Force since the Khobar Towers were bombed by Osama bin Laden some 12 or 13 years ago.

Tonight, we are joining here--and I think we are going to be joined by others that were on the trip--to talk about these individuals and honor these individuals.

With that, the first person that we want to honor is Major Jeffrey O. Ausborn. He was in the NATO Air Training Command in Afghanistan. Major Ausborn was born in August 1969 in Hokes Bluff, Alabama. His military career began on August 9, 1991, after being commissioned as a second lieutenant from the Troy State University Reserve Officer Training Corps. After completing basic communications officer training at Keesler Air Force Base, he remained as an instructor for nearly 4 years, and in 1996, Major Ausborn was selected for undergraduate pilot training and proceeded to Columbus Air Force Base where, as a pilot trainee, he went on to earn the coveted wings of silver.

Major Ausborn went on to fly the C-130, eventually completing two flying tours in the mighty Herk. In 2001, he joined the air education and training command as an instructor pilot. Major Ausborn spent 9 years of that command transitioning through the T-37, the T-6, and T-1 aircraft at Laughlin and Randolph Air Force Bases.

In November of 2010, Major Ausborn joined the NATO Air Training Command in Afghanistan as a C-27 evaluator pilot and the chief of current operations with the 538th Air Expeditionary Advisory Squadron. His awards include the Bronze Star Medal, the Meritorious Service Medal, and the Aerial Achievement Medal.

Major Ausborn is survived by his wife, Suzanna; daughters, Emily and Shelby; son, Eric; and stepchildren, Summer and Mitchell.

Our hearts and prayers go out to that family, for their loved one who gave the ultimate sacrifice. It is with that tonight that we remember Major Jeffrey O. Ausborn.

I yield to my colleague from Wisconsin.

I thank the gentleman, and I appreciate the gentleman talking about the meeting with other parliamentarians in some of the other countries that we visited, from the Czech Republic to Azerbaijan to Georgia. And one of the things all three of those countries have in common is they are really great allies of the United States of America. All of those countries contribute forces not only to Afghanistan but to Iraq.

Currently, they either have troops there or have troops just returning. And you look at a country like Azerbaijan, which lies in a rough neighborhood between Iran to the south and Russia to the north; Georgia sits on the Russian border and has had problems with Russia; but when those countries send their troops to fight shoulder to shoulder with the Americans, they have no caveats, which means that their troops are allowed to do whatever the Americans, whatever the NATO forces need them to do, whether it's combat, whether it's Special Forces, whether it's supporting the NATO troops and the American troops in some other way. So it's really important that we, as Americans, know these countries and support what they do for us.

When people think and they hear that Georgia was to provide 900 troops to the effort in Afghanistan just recently, a lot of people would say, Well, that's not a very big force. But when you look that it's a country of about 4.5 million people, that would be the equivalent of the United States contributing 80,000 to 90,000 troops to the effort. So it's really a big contribution, and we owe a debt of gratitude to those countries that do that around the world.

As my colleagues have been talking about, we're honoring those nine that were killed last week in Afghanistan. And of the nine, as I said earlier, eight were in the U.S. Air Force, but one was a civilian, a contractor. That person was Lieutenant Colonel (Ret.) James McLaughlin, or as he was commonly known as ``Jimmy Mac,'' was one of the nine.

James Aloysius McLaughlin, Jr. was born on June 16, 1955. He graduated from Drexel University with a bachelor of science degree and earned a master's degree in business administration from the University of Phoenix. Jim retired from the U.S. Army as a lieutenant colonel in 2007 after service in Iraq.

His civilian career included program manager, product marketing manager, and applications engineer manager with LEMO USA. Jim's most recent service was as a contractor with L3 Communications, MPRI Division, supporting the NATO Training Command mission in Kabul, Afghanistan. During that time, he was a senior mentor to both the Ministry of Defense and the Afghan Air Force. Jim held military and civilian ratings in both rotary and fixed wing aircraft. One of his passions was his ham radio, and he held a current amateur radio license. He had a network of fellow ham radio operators throughout the United States and the world.

James McLaughlin is survived by his wife, Sandra, and their three children, Adam, Eve and James, all of Santa Rosa, California.

All Americans should keep their families in our thoughts and our prayers and we give, again, a thank you not only to James McLaughlin for giving the ultimate sacrifice, but for his family that had to suffer this great, great loss.

I thank the gentleman from Louisiana for securing this hour for us to be able to talk about our experience in Afghanistan and, most importantly, for us to be able to talk about and honor the nine people who were killed in Afghanistan last week. As I mentioned earlier, it was the largest loss of life in the U.S. Air Force since the Khobar Towers.

As my colleague, Mr. Runyan, talked about the somber and powerful experience that we had there at this memorial service, at the ceremony, it was really something to be there. We got there at the last minute, and I think we all were very, very grateful to be able to participate in the ceremony.

Again, nine people were slain. We have already talked about the one that was not a military person but a contractor. He served in the military, but then came back to serve in Afghanistan as a contractor and tried to help develop and train the Afghan Air Force.

Another one of those members that gave the ultimate sacrifice is Lieutenant Colonel Frank D. Bryant, Jr. Lieutenant Bryant was born on August 13, 1973, from Knoxville, Tennessee.

His military career began when he entered the U.S. Air Force Academy in the summer of 1991. After graduating from the U.S. Air Force Academy in 1995 with a bachelor's degree in general engineering, Lieutenant Bryant was assigned at the Columbus Air Force Base initially as a student pilot and then as a T-37 instructor pilot. Lieutenant Colonel Bryant's next aircraft was an F-16.

In the F-16, he completed tours in Korea, Shaw Air Force Base, an exchange pilot with the UAE, and Luke Air Force Base. His last assignment was a CJCS Afghanistan-Pakistan Hand assigned to the 438th Air Expeditionary Wing in Kabul, Afghanistan.

During his career, Lieutenant Bryant earned the Bronze Star, the Purple Heart, Air Force Combat Action Medal, Defense Meritorious Service Medal, Air Medal with one oakleaf cluster, Air Force Commendation Medal with one oakleaf cluster, Air Force Achievement Medal, Joint Meritorious Unit Award, Air Force Outstanding Unit with Valor Device and two oakleaf clusters, Combat Readiness Medal, National Defense Medal, Global War of Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Korean Defense Service Medal, Afghan Campaign Medal, NATO Medal, Air Force Overseas Ribbon, Air Force Expeditionary Service Ribbon with gold border with one oakleaf cluster, and the Air Force Longevity Service with three oakleaf clusters, and, finally, the Air Force Training Ribbon. Somebody who served long and, obviously by all those medals, did a fabulous job serving the United States of America.

Lieutenant Bryant is survived by his wife, Janice; his son, Sean; his father, Frank D. Bryant, Sr.; and his mother, Patricia Bryant. We owe a deep debt of gratitude to his family and also to Colonel Bryant, for their service to this country, and of course for the ultimate sacrifice that Colonel Bryant gave for his Nation. I would encourage all Americans to remember Colonel Bryant and his family in their thoughts and their prayers.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Yesterday, President Obama had an opportunity to put forth a serious budget proposal, but instead, again, he called for higher taxes and trillions of dollars in spending we just can't afford.

The President offered nothing but lip service to serious spending cuts and real reform. We can't tax our way to prosperity or ignore the unsustainable future of Medicare and Medicaid. The President's plan fails to recognize that Washington has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. This is a time that demands leadership, and the President answered with a plan to nowhere.

Today, the House is debating a serious budget that will address our dangerous debt and deficit while strengthening Medicare and Medicaid. The President missed another opportunity to engage in this debate in a meaningful way. He chose, instead, to deliver a campaign speech, filled with class warfare and scare tactics, hoping the American people wouldn't know any better.

He was wrong.

Mr. Chairman, before I came to Congress, for 12 years, I was in business, and there were two things I learned in business: One, if you spend more than you take in, you're headed towards financial ruin. Second, if the government continues to take away more and more from small businesses, they won't create jobs; they will eliminate jobs. This budget deals with those two fundamental issues.

The American people are demanding real change and an honest budget with no gimmicks, and that is what Chairman Ryan has produced. This week, the House is going to deliver for future generations by putting our government on a path to fiscal responsibility and prosperity.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mr. Roger Kirwin of Everett for being named Bedford County's Historian of the Year for 2011 by the Bedford County Historical Society.

Mr. Kirwin is commended for his efforts in preserving, protecting, and documenting the history and heritage of Bedford County and its people.

The Historian of the Year Committee selected Roger in recognition of his contributions to the historical programs at Old Bedford Village. Throughout his term as Executive Director he enhanced many of the already existing programs and added many new programs to the Village's calendar.

Roger has helped provide resources for educational programs for use by local schools. He also routinely takes educational materials to schools in the county to make presentations on various topics of interest in the county. Roger has often provided programs for senior citizens, civil groups, and organizations such as the Rotary Club, Lions, churches and Scouts.

These events have always been exceptional and well-received by locals and the many tourists who come to participate. Not only did he plan these events, but he has been a part of the many re-enactments and programs.

Roger's visits to the schools and youth organizations of Bedford County to educate young people on county history are greatly appreciated.

Mr. Kirwin's enthusiasm for the history and heritage of Bedford County is admirable and I commend him for his efforts.

Mr. Chairman, as you know the EAS program was established to ensure that smaller communities across the country, including those in my congressional district, retain a link to the national air transportation system. I also understand that we have a severely constrained Federal budget, and I agree with the chairman that we must do more with less and we need to ensure that Federal programs actually make sense.

As a member of the committee, I look forward to working with the chairman to get this long overdue FAA bill to the President's desk for signature, and I look forward to working with the chairman to make the needed changes to the EAS program.

I would now yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson).

I agree with the gentleman.

I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Berg).

I thank the gentleman from North Dakota.

I yield 30 seconds to the gentlelady from South Dakota (Mrs. Noem).

I thank the gentlelady from South Dakota.

I look forward to working with the chairman, the gentlelady from South Dakota, and the gentlemen from Pennsylvania and North Dakota as the bill moves forward on EAS.

I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment. This amendment is composed of two parts, both of which deal with making improvements to the process of issuing Federal Aviation Administration regulations.

The amendment is an effort to improve rulemaking at the FAA by requiring the agency to meet fundamental rulemaking principles.

Directing the FAA to meet these standards will ensure that regulations protect the critical importance of aviation safety while also considering issues of economic competitiveness.

The first part, the ``one size does not fit all'' part of the amendment, requires the FAA to recognize that the United States aviation industry is composed of a variety of different segments with different operating characteristics.

Therefore, before proposing or issuing a regulation, the FAA Administrator must analyze the different industry segments and tailor any regulations to the characteristics of separate segments. The definition of industry segments is left to the administrator.

The FAA Administrator, Randy Babbitt, has pointed out that a ``one size fits all'' approach does not work. In 2009, Administrator Babbitt said, ``In rulemaking, not only does one size not fit all, but it's unsafe to think it can.''

This amendment attempts to fulfill that objective.

The second part fulfills President Obama's goals of regulatory reform. The second part ensures that the proposed regulations are not overly burdensome or cumbersome by requiring the FAA to conduct rulemakings in accordance with certain principles. First, a reasoned cost and benefit analysis, second, an assessment of the impact on the economy, and third, extremely important that the regulation is based on the best available science and technical information.

Let me be clear that my intent is not to single out or gut any particular regulation or proposed regulation. This amendment does not define industry segments. We allow the FAA Administrator to interpret and appropriately define what industry segments are.

It does not require that the cost benefits analysis be the reason for a rule, a reasoned analysis.

Additionally, the amendment is not retroactive.

Finally, I understand that there may be concerns that the language could apply to ongoing rulemakings. That's not my intent for this amendment to apply to ongoing rulemaking, such as those regarding pilot flight and duty time.

The Transportation Committee has worked hard to address the important

safety concerns in a bipartisan manner. And if there are concerns with the language, we certainly want to make sure we clear that up.

I reserve the balance of my time.

May I inquire how much time I have remaining?

I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Well, I appreciate the gentleman's comments, and that is my intent. In fact, the Executive order, which does have some of this already in it, cannot have judicial review. So this will strengthen the position for people who have judicial review to be able to enforce it. Again, currently, the Executive order doesn't have it in it. So I believe this is going to strengthen it.

I want safety. Randy Babbitt, who is now the FAA administrator and former president of the ALPA, the Air Line Pilot's Association, has said one size fits all doesn't fit all.

So, again, I think this is going to strengthen the position as we move forward with these rulings. So I would urge the gentleman, if there is something we can do to clear this up a little bit, I am happy to listen to him.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I appreciate the gentleman.

That is my intent is to strengthen this. Again, I think this does strengthen the law because it will give it judicial review. So at this point I am not willing to withdraw the amendment.

Again, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I believe we are going to strengthen the rulemaking process and make the skies and aviation travel even safer than it is today.

I yield back the balance of my time.