Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for hosting this evening's hour, as we count down the tax increase that is going to occur in this country in 1,426 days unless this Congress acts, unless the Democratic majority acts to stop it.

I think it is important, you pointed out, that you are a small business owner. I was a small business owner. I know there are many small business owners in Congress. And I think it is important that the American people understand there are people serving in Congress that know what it is like to meet a payroll, to get up and unlock the doors every day and make sure that your business and the people that you employ have a job there.

It is extremely difficult to do when the tax burden goes up. And if we do not act, as I said in this Congress, the Democratic majority does not even have to act; it just has to run out the clock.

As you mentioned, what we will experience on January 1, 2011, is over a $200 billion tax increase. And that will occur over the next 3, 4 years as tax cuts that we put in place in 2001 and 2003, if they are not extended as you pointed out, that there was a deal made that we had to have them sunset. But we need to make sure that those tax cuts stay in place so that the millions of small business owners and families, hardworking families in this country, get to keep more of that money in their pockets, so that they can go out and spend it or save it for whatever the purposes that they have.

You have, I know, six kids. So you know what is coming down the road for you, and college tuition is going to be a lot of money. And for you to be able to save, as millions of hardworking Americans being able to save, that

money is extremely important. My daughter, we just had her at Penn State this weekend. She was accepted there. As we start to look at colleges, you start to realize the expense. It is not just tuition, but kids going away to school, and living expenses.

A family in this country of four that make 40, $50,000 a year, if we do not extend those tax cuts, they are going to get a tax increase of about $2,000. $2,000 is a lot of money to hardworking Americans. If you take that $2,000 and invest it in an account that is going to get you 5 percent, a modest 5 percent return, you do that over 10 years, that grows to $30,000. That is a significant nest egg of savings that you can spend on your children's education.

It is better that we leave it in the pockets of the American people than to bring it here in Washington and spend it on the array of things that do not make sense to the people back home. It is their money. They worked hard for it. And they should be able to keep most of it and not send it here to Washington.

What happened when we cut taxes in 2001 and 2003? Well, over the last 4 years alone, we have created 7.2 million jobs in this country. That is something that is very worthwhile.

The unemployment rate is down to 4.5 percent. That is well below what it was in 2005, and on average it is the lowest in four decades. This economy is moving forward. You mentioned that the national media did not cover something very well in the past. Well, this is one of those cases where the national media is not covering the strength of this economy.

4.5 percent unemployment is a good number. Creating 7.2 million jobs over the last 4 years is a good number. In December alone, 167,000 jobs were created, in December. We have not got the January numbers, but the estimate is it is going to be in that 150,000 job-creation range.

The 7.2 million jobs we have created, that is more jobs than the European Union and Japan combined created in the last couple of years.

And it is no mystery what happens when you cut taxes. And as you mentioned, I heard the same interview you heard on Meet the Press, or Tim Russert's show, I forget what it is called. John Edwards, the 2004 vice presidential candidate for the Democratic Party, said quite matter of factly and calmly that yes, we are going to have to raise taxes; yes, we are going to have to raise taxes to provide a universal health care that is really code for a Federal Government program that is going to take the decision-making process out of the American people's hands, and there is going to be some bureaucrat sitting in some cubicle in Washington deciding what medication you can take or can't take, what procedure you can have or can't have.

And I think that we have proven that when you put the forces to work in the marketplace, like we did on Medicare part D, that not only do you give people a choice, but with that choice comes competition and with competition comes the stabilizing and in some cases the decrease of prices. And that is the way we need to move forward, not with a huge tax increase which John Edwards, as I said, I think he had a Walter Mondale moment with Tim Russert saying, oh, sure we are going to increase the taxes. And you know, for a guy who is a multi-millionaire, who I see lives in a multi-million dollar home in North Carolina, it is certainly easy for him to say, well, sure we are going to increase. Now, he says they are going to do it on just the wealthiest. But I think we all know when you increase to get the kind of revenues that he is talking about to fund a huge government run program, it is going to trickle down and the people that are making 50 and $60,000 a year, people in my district, two-income earners, if they are teachers from the Altoona School District, two teachers that have been around 15, 20 years are making $100,000 or better now. And those are the people that are going to get hammered on these tax increases.

But back to the point I was making. It is no mystery what happens when you cut taxes. And don't listen to me. Don't listen to George Bush. Don't even listen to Ronald Reagan. Go back in history to when President Kennedy in the sixties when he cut taxes, cut the marginal income tax rate, it spurred the economy on. Revenues to the government increased. And again, that is what happened under Ron Reagan and that is what is happening today under George Bush. Cutting taxes is a positive thing. When you let people keep more money, they spend it. They spend it on what they want to spend it on, which helps to spur the economy on. So once again, don't listen to me, if you are a Democrat. Look at what Jack Kennedy did back in the sixties. I think that is the way we want to move this economy forward.

If the gentleman would yield. I have started to accumulate little stories of people in the ninth Congressional district of Pennsylvania that I represent, what has happened to them over the past several years with these tax cuts. Gregg Rothman, who owns or is partner in RSR Realty in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, which is the county seat, is Carlisle,

Pennsylvania, which is known to many where the War College is and where Jim Thorpe made his name at the Carlisle Indian school.

But Gregg Rothman, he became a partner with this firm in 1999. Because of the reductions in the capital gains tax, that has allowed many empty nesters to enter the housing market. It has increased sales and their business has grown tremendously. And, in fact, since 1999 when they went into business, or when he bought into the partnership, they had 20 realtors. Today they have 60, and that is an addition of 40 new jobs of people out in Cumberland County, in central Pennsylvania, working. Creating jobs is what these tax cuts enabled people like Gregg to do. He saw his highest volume of sales since entering the realty business just in the last couple of years.

Now I have got another story in my hometown in Everett, Pennsylvania. A couple of young guys started BC Stone several years ago. Travis Collins is the President of that company and he went to high school a couple of years behind me. What they have been able to do is create a tremendous business. In this little town of Everett, Pennsylvania they are selling stone granite tops, marble tops all across the State of Pennsylvania, all across the region, in the mid-Atlantic region. He has grown from 16 employees in 2001 to today he employs 70 people. And that is because this economy is growing. Not only are people building and buying new homes and remodeling them, which helps his business, but he is able to go and buy equipment, modernize what he is doing there and along the way, go from 16 employees to 70 employees in this town of about 2,000 people. And they are good paying jobs.

They have been successful enough that they have bought an old hotel, the Union Hotel in downtown Everett, and they are renovating it and going to revitalize it and they hope by 2008 they are going to open up this hotel and restaurant and employ 20 full-time employees. Adding on to the, from the 16 to the 70 and then this new business with 20, and that is all because of this, of the tax cuts we have put into place in early 2000, 2001, 2003 and extended them here a couple of years ago. That is what makes this economy, or helps to make this economy move forward, by letting people keep their own money, by letting entrepreneurs and small business owners and families decide how to spend their money, not the Federal Government.

And as you mentioned earlier, your background as a small business owner, your background as a person who has children, who has a family, you know the importance, and it is important for the American people to realize that if this Congress doesn't act in 1,426 days, a $200 billion tax increase is going to occur. And if anybody doubts it, you mentioned earlier, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Congressman Rangel from New York, said quite frequently and quite clearly that all those tax cuts were on the table. He didn't see any of them or many of them that were, that he thought were good or that they were tax cuts that he supported. And, in fact, I don't think he supported any of them, if I am not mistaken.

But further than that, the Democratic majority, when they came to Congress, one of the first things they did was to make it easier to raise taxes. They call it PAYGO, which sounds good but really it is TAXGO because what they are going to do is they will ratchet up spending. They will pay for their increase in spending by increased taxes. And so you have PAYGO or TAXGO is what it really should be called.

And then they decreased, or they made it easier to raise taxes by going from a three-fourths majority, which the Republicans put in place, because we wanted it to be difficult to raise taxes on the American people. But they changed it from three-fourths to a simple majority. Now, many of the incoming Members on the Democratic side I know ran on a conservative agenda. You know, I want to see how they are going to go back home and tell the people back there that we made it easier to raise taxes on you. They talk about, I know the Blue Dogs come down here and talk about fiscal responsibility and talk about cutting the budget or balancing the budget. But how are they going to do that if they are not willing to make the hard choices on what programs, not just to cut, more importantly to reform the entitlement programs. Reform doesn't necessarily mean cut. It means make them efficient. Make them produce or become more efficient. You get more out of your bang for your buck. You don't have to necessarily cut the programs. But so more and more people can get those programs more efficiently, instead of just raising taxes or slashing benefits.

At the end of the day, if you are going to increase spending, I believe this has been very clear by the Speaker and the leadership of the majority party, that they are going to increase spending and they are going to increase your taxes. Why else would you make it easier to pass a tax increase? And that is, again, one of the very, very first things they did when they came into the majority party here. So it is going to be interesting to watch how that plays out with the Blue Dogs and many of the incoming Members that they claim that they are going to be fiscally responsible, that they are going to be conservative, that they are not going to tap into their constituents' wallets and bring more money here to Washington instead of leave it home with them.

Absolutely. And you talked about the size of the U.S. economy. Those tax cuts that we put in place from 2001 and 2003 that helped this economy move forward, the reason it happened is because those tax cuts put $1.1 trillion in the pockets of the American taxpayer, $1.1 trillion. And a lot of that money went into savings, but most of that money went back into this economy directly, into whether it was paying for your child's college education, whether it was to buy a washer and dryer, buy a new car, buy a house, remodel your house. I mean, there are hundreds of thousands of ways that people put that money back into the economy. And we did that by cutting taxes on every American that pays taxes. Some folks in this country were even taken off paying taxes. We lowered the rates so that there were many people that didn't have to pay taxes. And once again, when you put money back into people's pockets, what happens is the economy grows.

I have another story from my district. Smith Elliott Kearns & Company, it is a regional accounting firm located in my district in Franklin County, Pennsylvania, and they service clients throughout central Pennsylvania, western Maryland, and actually up and down the east coast. They have clients from New England to Florida. And they characterize their clients as mom and pop shops, small and mid-size companies. And they told me about one of the tax cuts we put into place, which was a section 179 deduction, which allows smaller companies to elect to expense up to $108,000 of equipment purchased in the year of the acquisition, and that that is phased out from 108,000 up to over $400,000 of equipment. They phase out the amount of money they are able to expense. But that has tremendous growth in this economy of people going out and buying equipment, whether it is a truck to do pickup and delivery or whether it is a piece of equipment that makes the company more efficient. And in 2009, at the end of 2009, beginning of 2010, those deductions will revert back to the amount before we passed the law of $25,000.

It is amazing how much money companies are saving and reinvesting in their companies to make them more efficient, to add jobs, create jobs. And when you buy that equipment, not only does it make your company more efficient but some other company has to produce it, and those companies have to put people back to work. So it is a snowball effect on our economy. And once again, it is something that the national media is just not covering it the way it should. I watch Lou Dobbs, and he is doom and gloom all the time about what is happening in our economy. All he sees is the negative side, and there is so much positive occurring in our country.

As I mentioned, this accounting firm has hundreds of clients that are using these tax cuts, using these ways to save themselves money, to reinvest in their company, to create jobs. And that is why it is so important for the American people to really pay attention to what is happening here in the United States Congress.

The Blue Dogs have been down on the floor. They haven't been down in a week or so, but they talk about the change, the American people want a change. And they may be right. The American people want a change. But there is nobody that I know of in the United States, in the Ninth Congressional District and across this country, that I have heard say they want a change to increase their taxes. I haven't heard it, except for maybe folks like George Soros and Bill Gates and, of course, John Edwards, who are multimillionaires and multibillionaires. They don't mind paying more taxes. But when you have that much money, there is certainly a lot less pain, or I should say there is no pain at all when you have that much money.

But if you are a hardworking American in Pennsylvania, in Kentucky, in Indiana, in Missouri that are out there every day getting up, trying to save money for your kids to go to school, trying to pay the bills, it is significant when the Federal Government reaches into your pocket. And as we talked about here earlier tonight, a family of four that earns $40,000 to $50,000, when these various tax cuts expire, people are going to get about a $2,000 tax increase. And that is significant for a family of four making that kind of money, and it is just wrong.

And we here in Congress have to make sure that we are making the

tough decisions on controlling spending. Controlling spending and continuing to see this economy grow because we are getting record levels of revenue flowing into the Federal Treasury because this economy is growing, because of the Gregg Rothmans of the world and the Travis Collinses and the people throughout this country, the small businessmen, the small entrepreneurs that are creating jobs, buying things, putting people to work so that this economy continues to flourish.

So as the sign says there, in 1,426 days, which means December 31 of 2010, this Congress and the next, all we have to do is run the clock out. Run the clock out, and the American people are going to get a huge tax increase.

And we need to make sure that we are here fighting. But we can't do it without the help of the American people. The American people have to be communicating to their representatives to keep those tax cuts in place because it is good for America, and the numbers bear out: 4.5 percent unemployment, 7.2 million jobs created over the last 4 years. These job gains are throughout our economy. Also, when you look at the different segments, the educational attainment groups in this country, all those groups have seen unemployment drop. Even for those without a high school diploma, we have seen their jobless rates drop by about three quarters of a percentage point just last year, and over the last 2 years a 1\1/2\ percent drop in the unemployment rate of people who don't have a high school diploma. That is significant.

And if you look at the want ads, I think in almost any newspaper in this country, you will see where people are advertising for jobs. It takes training. It takes some level of education to get these jobs, whether it is a truck driver, which is a pretty good paying job. Today it is a very good paying job. You have got to have the training. So the way to do it is, I believe, not to have some new vast government program, but to keep cutting taxes on people so that people who are in a job can get some training so that maybe they can get another job that pays more.

Right. And just to sum up, there are millions of Americans out there, hardworking Americans, that in the last election didn't vote to see their taxes increased. And I defy anybody in here to show me that their constituents, that the majority of their constituents, the vast majority of their constituents voted to have a tax increase.

It is going to be very interesting here in the coming months. We are going to have the budget come up here next month. It is going to be very interesting to see what our Democratic colleagues on the other side propose. The President has proposed a budget that is a budget that is controlling government spending. It is extending the tax cuts that we have put in place, and along the way we are going to move towards a balanced budget and even surpluses. But the only way we do it is not to increase taxes but to allow this economy to grow so that the revenues continue to flow into the Federal Government and that we control spending.

Control spending and reform entitlements. Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, we have got to look at reforming them. That doesn't mean cutting benefits. That doesn't mean necessarily increasing taxes. It means looking at ways to better provide those services so that we are not wasting as much money in the entitlement programs.

So as I said, I think it is going to be an interesting next couple of months. We are going to see what the Democrats propose as their plan. And as I mentioned earlier this evening, I think we are going to see the proposal of significant tax increases, which I think is going to make many Members on the other side of the aisle very uncomfortable if they have to vote for a tax increase. But if we don't act, if we run out the clock, in 1,426 days, January 1 of 2011, we are going to see one of the most massive tax increases in American history.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Rocco J. Soccio of Lewistown, Pennsylvania, who passed away Saturday, December 16, 2006, at the age of 71 years. This distinguished man is survived by a wife of almost 50 years, Barbara Kaley Soccio, whom he married in 1957 and had three children, Jan, John and Vincent.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague from Texas for taking control of the time. I have got a bad wheel, but I did not want to miss this. I think it is so important.

I want to start off by just echoing your sentiments about what happened here in the capital this week. I mean, a bunch of anarchists, they pushed forward on the Capitol Police, as you said, and the Capitol Hill Police let them come through and deface the United States Capitol.

And I heard that they were saying, that they were chanting it was their

right to. But they have no right to deface the United States Capitol. This belongs to all of the Americans. And nobody has a right to do what they had to. I really want to know, and I hope there is an investigation, there should be an investigation to find out why the Capitol Hill Police did not resist them, and you know the party that is in the majority needs to answer, needs to stand up and be held accountable, because they are in charge, they are the ones that are giving the instructions to the Capitol Hill Police.

I want to know if the majority party said, we do not want you to confront them; let them do whatever they want to do. Because it is outrageous. And all Americans that are watching tonight, I do not know how widely it has been reported. I have heard a few reports. But, you know, it should have made top news that a group of anarchists spray painted their symbols on the Capitol. I heard the report was that there was no incident. Well, there should have been an incident. There should have been an extreme incident of resistance by the Capitol Hill Police to not allow someone to deface what I consider, this is the crown of America, this is the people's House and nobody should ever be allowed to do that. So I am outraged by it.

Mr. Speaker, some of them have given their lives up to protect this building and Members of Congress. I agree with you, I cannot imagine that they did not get orders to stand down from the highest level.

Once again, the party in the majority runs this place. They need to be held accountable. They need to stand up and say what they did do, what they did not do. But in the future, if there are going to be, I am certain there will be, as there has been throughout our history, protests throughout the capital, and people have a right, absolutely have a right to protest, but they do not have a right to do it violently; they do not have a right to deface property that belongs to all of the taxpayers. So the questions need to be asked and we need to have answers from the majority party.

Back again to why, the main reason we are here tonight, is to talk about the 1,433 days from now, if the majority, the Democrats in Congress, do not act over the next 4 years, or 1,433 days, we are going to see an over-$200 billion tax increase on Americans, on the American family, on small businesses.

And that is going to significantly hurt this economy. And you just have to look at the facts. Over the last 4 years, 7.2 million jobs were created in this country because of those tax cuts. Just in December, 167,000 jobs were created. The unemployment rate at 4.5 percent, the lowest average it has been in five decades.

If we do not extend them, if we do not do what is responsible, then money, real dollars are going to come out of the American people's pocket. A family of four, making in the $40,000 range, they are going to see a tax increase of about $2,000.

Now, to some in this body, $2,000 may not seem like a lot of money, but it is to a hardworking American family. $2,000 is a nice down payment on a new car, $2,000 will buy you a new washer and a dryer. $2,000 helps you put your son or daughter or yourself through college or to get educated or trained on something.

So I hope that the American people that are watching tonight, whether you are Republican, you are a Democrat, there are lessons for us all through history, recent history, on why tax cuts work, why they are a good thing for the economy, why Americans should be allowed to keep their hard-earned dollars. You have to go back to the 1960s.

President Kennedy, he cut taxes. What did he see? The economy came on strong. Revenues to the Federal Government increased dramatically. We saw that in 1980. And today we are seeing it at record levels. As the gentleman from Oklahoma pointed out, there are a lot of things in this economy that are happening because of those tax cuts, and we need to make sure that they continue.

It is startling to me. Although, I watched and was obviously very keenly aware of what the Democrats were saying during the last campaign. And the first thing that they basically said, when you listen to the incoming chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, he basically told the American people that he did not see one of those tax cuts that really had merit and that everything was on the table. So the American people should not be surprised when they see these tax cuts.

And just 11 days ago was the first Democratic tax increase. They changed the rules of the House to make it a simple majority. When we put it in place as the majority party, it had to be three-fifths of votes to increase taxes. They made it a simple majority, because they knew how difficult it is going to be to get a majority in this House to raise taxes on the American people.

So, once again, if we don't stand up and fight, and I hope my Democratic colleagues who aren't here tonight, the Blue Dogs who come down and talk about fiscal responsibilities, if they don't join with us to fight these tax cuts, they are going to take part in this huge tax increase that is going to occur on the American people. So I appreciate the gentleman tonight hosting this hour.

Would the gentleman yield for a second?

I don't know if this is accurate or not, but I have heard people talking that the CR is going to come to the floor and it is going to look like an omnibus bill. And you know, an omnibus is like a Christmas tree; they hang everything on it that they want to get through. But that is the rumors that are swirling around here, that it is not just going to be just a CR, it is going to be an omnibus. And that is going to be bad for spending, and they are not living up to their word.

Kind of like their definition of openness.

Openness and participatory, and transparency. And here we have passed several bills, and having gone through the committee nobody has seen them until they show up on the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to relate two stories that I came across concerning these tax cuts.

Jim Tracy from Shelbyville, Tennessee, who is the owner of a small insurance agency, he said because of the tax cuts, he was able to use the $7,200 that he would have otherwise spent on taxes, and he bought seven new computers for his business and he hired a fourth employee. That is just one of many.

There is another story here. Kenneth Leupp of Archbold Refuse Service in Archbold, Ohio, he says, ``The tax cuts, changes in depreciation schedules and increases in dollar amount we can expense off are very welcome changes. We have made purchases we wouldn't have made under the old laws. We've saved money on taxes, increased efficiency, lowered maintenance costs, and helped stimulate the economy.''

Those are just two of thousands and thousands of experiences out there because of these tax cuts. Our purpose here tonight, although I may be repeating myself, I know that people watching C-SPAN tune in and out, but I just want to remind them that in 1,443 days, it is the countdown to the Democratic tax increase. All they have to do is run the clock out. They don't even have to act on them.

So on January 1, 2011, there will be a $200 billion tax increase to the American people. The death tax will expire, capitol gains tax, tax on dividends will expire in January of 2009. A record number of Americans are invested in the stock market with mutual funds and retirement funds. The child tax credit will be cut in half over the next couple of years. The marriage penalty will be back in place, and low-income

taxpayers will go from a 10 percent tax bracket to a 15 percent tax bracket if we don't act.

The American people need to be aware of this. And in less than 4 years, if they don't communicate to their Members of Congress that they want to see these tax cuts extended, their voices need to be heard.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I rise today with great respect for the Delegates and the Resident Commissioner and all the people that they represent. But I strongly oppose both this rule and the underlying resolution.

The resolution we are considering today is, pure and simple, a power grab. There is no way I can support a resolution that dilutes the rights of the hardworking people of western and central Pennsylvania, and there is no reason they should support representatives that have their rights diluted.

The Democratic scheme tramples on the Constitution and the design of one man, one vote. Article I, section 2 of the Constitution clearly states the House ``shall be comprised of Members chosen by the people of the several States.'' It does not provide full voting privileges for Delegates representing non-State territories.

Plain and simple, this is representation without taxation. This proposal will allow the Democratic Delegates to raise the taxes on the American people, but then they will not have to pay them.

I strongly encourage all members of the Pennsylvania delegation to vote against this resolution and protect the rights of the hardworking people of Pennsylvania.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight, as I have for the past couple of weeks, to remind the American people that if this Congress does not act over the next 2, over the next 4 years, in just 1,440 days there will be a tax increase in this country. It is going to happen as I said over the next 4 years if the Democrats do not extend the tax cuts that the Republicans have put in place over the last several years.

It is going to amount to about $200 billion that the American people will pay more in taxes. And I appreciate my colleagues from the Blue Dog Democrat Coalition coming down to the House floor and talking about fiscal responsibility. They talk about the budget. But I hear very little about taxes and keeping taxes low on the American people.

And one of the Blue Dogs mentioned in his remarks that he believes in smaller and efficient government and that we have to make tough choices. And that is true. We have to make very tough choices. But it is not our money.

We need to make sure that one of the decisions is to not raise the taxes on the American people, because when we were here in the final hours of the Democrats' 100 hours, on that Friday morning, right after they finished the 100 hours, we were in session for all of about 45 minutes, from 10 to 11 a.m. and most Americans did not see that 45 minutes.

So that is why I think it is important that I come to the floor and remind the American people what this Congress is doing and what we have done in the last couple of weeks or the 100 hours that the Democrats ran their six bills. And I have a number, 1,440. That is again January 1, 2011, when our taxes will finally get up to that $200 billion tax increase if we do not act. All the Democrats have to do is run the clock out, they do not have to pass legislation, and those tax cuts that we put in place that have benefited this economy so greatly will expire.

There is another number that you can put up, and that is how many days since the Democrats' last tax increase. And it has been just 4 days. Now, little did I know and little did I think that it would take only 14 days of the Democrats being in the majority party in Congress, they worked for 13 years to win back the majority, and in 14 days the first tax increase passed this House and is going to move on to the Senate. I hope the Senate does not pass it.

Because that is a tax increase on the American people. Now, the Democrats say that it is the oil company, the big oil companies that are going to receive this increase in taxes. And that is true. The big oil companies will pay about $6.5 billion of taxes over the next several years. But the reality is, corporations and businesses do not pay taxes in this country; consumers pay it. The tax increase will be passed along. And it will be passed along in the form of higher energy costs.

We will pay more at the pump when we go to fill our cars up. Oil companies, they will have a competitive disadvantage. They will have to pay more when they go out to explore for oil. It will be the Venezuelan oil company, Citgo, or it will be the Iranian or some other foreign oil company that is going to be in a better position to be able to spend money to find oil, to sell it to the American economy, sell it to America, less expensive than our own domestic energy producers.

Ladies and gentlemen, I just think if you are watching tonight that is not the right thing to do, especially in this time of high energy costs. We have got to make it more cost efficient, give our companies a better footing to compete, not only in energy but in manufacturing. And raising taxes on business is the wrong thing to do.

And as I said, it has only taken the Democrats 14 days until this first tax increase has come down the road and has passed this House of Representatives. And that should not surprise anybody in America, because during the campaign, the new chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, the Representative from New York, he told the Bloomberg News that he cannot think of one tax cut passed under President Bush that merits renewal.

There is no question about it, he said, everything has to be on the table. And what we have seen already is a tax increase just 4 days ago. And as I said, I believe that is going to trickle down into the American public, and they will be paying that through higher energy costs, higher fuel costs.

As I said, it is important that I think the American people, if you are watching this evening, are reminded that you are getting exactly what the Democrats said during the election. They said that they would raise your taxes. Once again, I hear the Blue Dogs come down here night after night talking about fiscal responsibility. I do not hear them, though, talking about taxes, making sure they keep the taxes low on the American people.

I do not hear them talking about the biggest spending programs that our government has, and that is Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid. How are we going to improve and strengthen, reform those important programs important to the American citizens, important to our seniors in this country?

So those are things that I do not hear them talking about. I am very interested to see what the Blue Dog Democrats will propose when it comes to the budget. We will come into budget season here I believe in March. And I know that when the Republicans were in the majority, the Blue Dogs offered a budget every time. There was a Democrat budget, there was a Blue Dog budget, and there was the Republican budget. So I am very, very interested in seeing what the Blue Dogs propose if in fact they are even allowed to propose a budget, because I think it will be different than their elected leadership will put on this floor.

But back to the tax cuts and what it means to the American people. Over the last 4 years we have seen 7.2 million jobs created in this country from those tax cuts. Our economy is creating jobs month after month. Just in December 167,000 jobs were created in this country. The unemployment rate is down to 4.5 percent. It is the lowest average it has been in four decades. That is directly attributable to the tax cuts we have put in place over the last several years.

Now, if we do not extend them, if we do not do the responsible thing, the American taxpayers are going to be penalized for their hard work by us taking money out of their pockets. When you look at a family of four that earns over $40,000, if we allow the child tax credit and the marriage penalty to expire, they will pay about $2,000 more that will come out of their pockets.

That is money that they could use to save for college, to pay for health care insurance, to buy a new washer and dryer, or put a down payment on a new car. That is their money. They should be able to spend that money as they see fit. And the way to do that is to keep the tax rates low so that they can continue to determine how to use that money best.

Small business owners, same situation. If we allow some of these tax cuts to increase, our small businesses in this country will be hurt. And I hope the Democrats take a lesson from history. President Kennedy, back in 1960, did just that. He cut taxes. And when he cut taxes, revenues to the Federal Treasury rose as they have today.

Ronald Reagan did it in 1980. He had to fight a Democratic majority, but finally was able to cut taxes. And what happened was the economy grew, one of the greatest expansions of our economy in history, and revenues to the Federal

Government grew as well. That is the same thing we did in 2001 and 2003, cut taxes, the economy rebounded, it was coming out of a recession, coming out of the terrible attack of 9/11, and now our economy is growing very strong. And we do not want to turn that back.

I do not think the Americans, although they did vote in many part of this country for a change, they did not vote to change to slow this economy down. They did not vote to increase taxes. I know that none of my constituents is coming up to me and saying we voted for a change, increase our taxes. That is not what they voted for.

I think it is very important that we in Congress have a very clear voice talking about the need to maintain these tax cuts that as I said we put in place in 2001 and 2003.

I see I am joined tonight by my colleague from Kentucky, a former Army Ranger and a great Kentuckian and also a small business owner who has six kids. So he knows the effects of when you are running a small business how important it is to have a low tax rate so that you can invest back in your business, and also with six children the importance of having money to be able to raise your children and save for their college and make sure that they have a better tomorrow than we have today.

So with that I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Davis).

I would just remind the gentleman, it has only been 4 days since the Democrats raised taxes because of their repeal of section 199 for oil and gas which was enacted in 2004 to help manufacturing companies. It took them 13 years to win the majority, and in only 14 days they raised taxes.

What you are talking about in that article, this is what is going to happen. It is wrong for us to raise taxes, those tax increases that they put in place just 4 days ago, placed squarely on the domestic energy production which will encourage companies to move jobs overseas. When you raise taxes, when you raise the regulatory burden, that is what companies do, they want to go someplace where they can make a profit. And they are going to encourage the domestic energy industry, which employs 1.8 million Americans who have an average salary of $30 an hour with great benefits, this is going to cause these companies to look to go offshore to produce their product, in this case energy.

Shifting the energy industry and facilities overseas will make America more dependent on foreign oil, not less, as the Democrats claim. So the refining of fuels and, again, exploration is going to occur off the coast of America and not on the coast of America, driving jobs out of this country.

The higher taxes on the oil companies will hurt retirement security because as I have found out in some of the research we have done, 41 percent of the shares of oil and gas companies are in retirement accounts and pension funds. So when Democrats are helping to drive their profits down to make less money to drive them offshore, it is going to hurt those folks who are retired today. Again, 41 percent of the shares of oil and gas companies are owned by pension funds and retirement funds. Once again, this is a wrong-headed plan. It only took them 14 days.

I see the CPA from Texas joins us to remind me of that. It is only 4 days since the Democrats last raised taxes, and we see it is going to come. We talked the past couple of weeks about how they made it easier to raise taxes with the PAYGO rules going from three-fifths majority to a simple majority to raise taxes.

Now the Speaker and her party want to give the vote to the American Samoa here in Congress. They want Guam and the Virgin Islands, they are territories of the United States and wonderful people, but they don't pay taxes. They are going to allow them to vote, so these folks that don't pay taxes are going to have the ability to raise taxes on Americans.

American Samoa has a population of 60,000, which is 91 percent of the average congressional district. My district is 650,000. The delegate from the American Samoa is going to have the ability to vote to raise taxes.

The gentleman is correct. All Americans want to pay less at the gas pump and less for heating oil. As we have seen in the last month alone, prices have come down to about $50 to $52 a barrel.

But the answer is not to increase the cost on the oil and gas producers. The answer is to have more supply. The answer is for us to conserve more, to use it in more efficient ways. The answer is to come up with alternative fuels, which I hope to hear the President talk about that initiative tomorrow night.

But when you talk about the oil industry and you talk about dollars and cents, there is nobody better to talk about it than the gentleman from Texas, our resident CPA, who can keep us on the dollars and cents.

And with that I would like to yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Retired folks that have mutual funds.

And you look at another measurement when you look at investments and profitabilities. In 2004, a 10-year period ending in 2004 shows that the return on investment the refining marketing segment of the oil companies are in was 7.7 percent return on investment, which was well behind the 13.9 average of the S&P 500. So I think, as our friend from Texas was talking about, huge investments, huge investments. They are certainly making returns, and they are certainly making profits, but it is far behind what many of the other manufacturing and the other companies in the S&P 500 are making.

So this is a capital investment industry. We have got to encourage them to keep on going out and looking and looking and finding the reserves. But it is also important, I think, as you pointed out, coming from Kentucky, I come from Pennsylvania, the importance of that other natural resource we have from coal and how we utilize that to truly make us energy independent or move toward energy independence, not this wrong-headed tax increase.

And, again, I believe that it is just the first of many we are going to see, statements by the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee over the last several months, the rules that the Speaker and the Democrats put into place to make it easier to raise taxes, not harder, to make it easier. And I think the American people need to know that the Democrats, the majority in the Congress, are going to raise your taxes. And when it happens, as it happened 4 days ago, this was a targeted tax increase, they think, just to one industry, but it is going to flow down through the economy, and every American is going to feel it. But we are going to see tax increases. They are not going to control spending, they are going to continue to increase spending. And they said they are going to pay for it, and they are going to pay for it by taking away hard-earned dollars from Americans.

I was talking today, I went to see my accountant to prepare myself for tax season this year. And I wonder if the gentleman from Texas would comment on it. My accountant told me that just the sheer difficulty, the complexity, of keeping up with the Tax Code, he said to me that he thinks he produces a reasonably correct, he can't assure anybody that it is correct because it is so difficult. We passed the extenders last year, and he told me that the IRS has informed him he cannot file electronically until February 1. So he is going to have a backlog; he is trying to figure it out, but he doesn't get an extension from April 15 to May 15 because he doesn't file electronically.

So I think that the time has not only come to continue to keep tax rates low, but to change our Tax Code. He had on his wall, I am going to get a copy of it, 1913 was the first year that we had the income tax. It was three pages long, it was pretty simple, and basically it was a graduated flat tax. And, again, I am going to bring that in here next week and have it blown up to see how simple it was, and I think the time has come that we go to some different kind of tax.

But if the gentleman CPA from Texas would like to comment on that.

Beginning of February.

My accountant also told me that he believes this year the AMT that is starting to catch more and more people in the AMT to pay higher tax. He said he believes next year he will see for the first time dual income husband and wife that are teachers that are making in central Pennsylvania about 110, 120 combined income, he thinks for the first time they are going to be caught up in the AMT and they are going to pay several hundred to a thousand dollars or more in taxes.

Absolutely.

We seem to be wrapping up, so if the gentleman from Kentucky has any closing remarks.

I thank the gentleman for joining us tonight. The gentleman from Texas, if he has any closing remarks?

Too many.

Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman is absolutely correct. What we did here in 2001 and 2003 by reducing the tax rate on American people, it is going to expire in 1,440 days, unless this Congress acts.

You need to look at the numbers that the gentleman from Kentucky pointed out. Record revenues are flowing into the Federal Government. Since August of 2003, we have created 7.2 million jobs. In December alone, 167,000 jobs were created. The October and November numbers increased by 29,000 jobs. In 2006 alone, there was an increase of 1.8 million jobs. In the 2003 period to today, 7.2 million have been created. That is more jobs than the European Union and Japan combined have created.

Our economy has added jobs for 40 straight months, and I believe it is going to do that with an unemployment rate of 4.5 percent. That is well below the 5.1 percent rate of 2005, and below the average of the past 4 decades. So these tax cuts have worked.

We need to make sure that we act in this Congress and not run out the clock. The American people need to know that if this Congress does not act, if it just sits on the ball and runs out the clock, come 1,440 days, January 1, 2011, the American people will have seen a $200 billion tax increase, and that is not good for America.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to highlight an American success story, an inspirational Pennsylvanian and a great American, Joe Hardy, III. Joe Hardy is the embodiment of the idea that, as Winston Churchill said, ``We make a living by what we get and we make a life by what we give.'' This month marks Joe Hardy's 84th birthday and it is only right that his achievements in business and his contributions to society be celebrated in this, the people's House.

Joe Hardy is perhaps best known as the founder of 84 Lumber, the largest privately owned building materials supplier to professional contractors in America. But he is much more than this. He is a self- made man, a civic leader and a great philanthropist. He is the embodiment of the American Dream and his story continues to encourage those around him.

With 84 Lumber, Joe Hardy reached a level in business that thousands of smaller entrepreneurs aspire to reach for themselves. And like many Americans just starting out in the world of business, Joe Hardy did not inherit his success; he built it from the ground up. His is a true American success story, a story that is alive and well today.

When Joe Hardy graduated from the University of Pittsburgh with a degree in engineering he joined his family's jewelry company. He demonstrated his business acumen early, and quickly became the company's best salesman. But Joe Hardy wanted to make his own name in the business world, so in 1952, with his own savings and the help of some friends, he opened a cash-and-carry lumber yard for contractors in the town of Eighty-Four, Pennsylvania. In 1956 he changed his company's name from Green Hills Lumber to 84 Lumber and the rest, as they say, is history.

84 Lumber grew quickly, reaching $84 million in sales in 1971 and $1 billion in sales in 1996. As his company and his fortune grew, Joe Hardy began to give back to the communities that had given him the chance to succeed. In 1987, he bought the Nemacolin Resort in a bankruptcy sale and turned it into a major economic draw and tourist destination for Western Pennsylvania.

He brought a PGA tournament to the world class Nemacolin Resort that not only drew attention to the area, but raised money for worthy causes. The list of philanthropic achievements in this area is long, but a few examples stand out.

Over the past 15 years, Joe Hardy's 84 Lumber Golf Tournaments have raised over $1 million for the Westmoreland-Fayette Boy Scout Council. He organized a PGA Tour event from 2003 to 2006 that raised more than $6 million for local charities and $1.3 million for Hurricane Katrina relief. Additionally, through his long collaboration with Habitat for Humanity, Joe Hardy enabled the funding and construction of 50 homes along the hurricane ravaged Gulf Coast.

But his philanthropy does not end there. In 1990, Joe Hardy gave a grant to Washington and Jefferson College to start an Entrepreneurial Spirit Studies Program as well as a scholarship fund its participation. This celebrated program continues to train tomorrow's business leaders today.

In addition to philanthropy, Joe Hardy is also civically engaged. He continues to serve as a County Commissioner for Fayette County Pennsylvania and personally invested his own money into the revitalization of Uniontown, the hometown of General George C. Marshall.

The list of Joe Hardy's accomplishments is simply too long to cover here. However, to the people of Fayette County, the contributions he has made to their lives are evident everyday. Whether you walk down the streets of a revitalized Uniontown, enjoy a jump in business due to the Nemacolin Woodlands Resort, or build your new house with 84 Lumber products, Joe Hardy's impact is there.

I want to wish Joe Hardy a happy 84th birthday and thank him for all he has done throughout his life. With his achievements and outlook on life, I am sure we will see many more successes in the years ahead.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to talk about and make the American people aware that we have 1,446 days counting down to the tax increase to the American people which will occur on January 1, 2011, if the new majority, the Democrats in Congress, don't act to extend the tax cuts that the Republicans put in place in 2001 and 2003.

So in 1,446 days, we will see that tax increase. The Democrats don't have to act, all they have to do is run out the clock. Run out the clock, and we will see a $200 billion tax increase. It will be money taken out of American people's pockets between now and January 1, 2011, if they don't act.

Those tax cuts as I said were enacted in 2001 and 2003. And what we have seen is an expansion in our economy, a great expansion that continues to this day that has created over the last 4 years 7.2 million jobs. Just in the month of December, 167,000 jobs were created in this country. The unemployment rate is down to 4.6 percent. It is the lowest average we have seen in 4 decades, and that is directly attributable to the tax cuts that we passed in this Congress in 2001 and 2003.

Again, if we don't extend them, which I believe is the responsible thing to do so we see this economy continue to grow, we are going to take money right out of the pockets of the American taxpayers.

Mr. Speaker, we will be debating tomorrow a tax increase. It has not taken longer than 20 days for the new Democratic majority to increase taxes. There will be a great debate here, and there are many in this country who think we should increase taxes on our oil companies. But it is the reduction in the tax on our oil companies that has allowed them to go out and look for new oil reserves to decrease our dependency. Yet the Democrats are, as I said, in less than 20 days, are going to put a bill on the floor that is going to increase taxes already on a segment of our economy. We will talk more about that later this evening.

If we don't extend those tax cuts that we put in place in 2001 and 2003, you are going to take money right out of the American taxpayers' pocket, anywhere from $2,000 to $4,000, right in that middle income of America. That is money that they can save to put away for their children's college. They can save to put a downpayment on a car, or buy a new washer and dryer. But the most important thing is if we take that money out of the American taxpayers' pockets, it will be some bureaucrat deciding how to spend that money, and not an American family.

We removed 10.6 million low-income Americans from paying taxes in this country all together. We need to make sure that those people stay in that position, that they are not paying taxes when they are low income. We lowered the tax rates on small businesses and employers, the critical employers in our Nation that create the jobs.

I hope that those on the other side of the aisle, the Democrats, will take a lesson from history from one of their own. Jack Kennedy, President Kennedy decreased taxes in the 1960s. What happened, there was increased revenue to the Federal Government. President Kennedy in the 1960s did the right thing. As I said, the revenues to the United States Government increased.

Ronald Reagan did that in the 1980s, and revenue increased to the Federal Government. Once again, history repeats itself. In 2001 and 2003, we cut taxes and what has happened is the levels of revenue the government has received are at greater levels than ever before in our history. That is what happens when you cut taxes.

By raising taxes, all we will do is stifle economic growth in this country. We will take money out of our small businesses; we will take money away from the American taxpayer. Once again, this economy will stop growing. It will stop creating the jobs it has created over the last several years.

I know I am joined here tonight by one of my colleagues who is a former small business owner and a former Army Ranger.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Davis).

I thank the gentleman. It is interesting to note, as we heard, that they are going to increase taxes in less than 20 days being in the majority. So it is going to be very interesting to see how many of our colleagues vote. I was interested to hear one of our new colleagues, Mr. Wilson, talk about change in America.

I don't disagree that the American people voted for change, but I don't believe that I heard anybody in my district that voted for me or against me, and I would be willing to wager that in Mr. Wilson's district in Ohio, a Southern conservative Ohio, that anybody there voted for a change to see our taxes go up.

I cannot wait to join with the Blue Dogs when I see what kind of budget they get an opportunity, if they get an opportunity to introduce a budget in this Congress. I know over the past 6 years that I have been in Congress the Blue Dogs have been able to introduce a budget. I voted for the Republican budget, but I think, and I hope we get an opportunity to vote for the Blue Dogs budget. If they get a chance in this new majority to offer one, I think their budget will be much more reasonable, much more fiscally responsible than the Democratic majority's budget. But once again, I don't believe the American people, at least any American I have spoken to, wants to see their taxes go up.

So once again, I would point out to those Americans that may be joining us here tonight, there are 1,446 days before there will be a $200 billion tax increase imposed on the American people. And all that has to happen is that the Democrats have to run out the clock, and we will see many of those tax increases that my friend from Kentucky mentioned tonight, the child tax credit and those types of tax cuts we put in place that really will affect middle-class America if we don't act.

I would yield to the gentleman from Kentucky if he has a further comment.

Well, that is absolutely as you mentioned. In Pennsylvania, in its coal fields, we need to unleash our companies in America, whether they are coal companies or companies developing biodiesel or ethanol or wind. And even our oil companies, we have to encourage them to go out there and to continue to look for new oil fields.

Tonight was a bit of a surprise, but very appropriate that we heard that the Rules Committee has put out a rule we will debate tomorrow for our very first tax increase under the new Democratic majority.

We are joined here tonight by Mr. Conaway, another colleague of ours, who happens to be not most importantly a CPA, which I think is important because he understands the language of business, understands the balance sheets and income statements which many people in this body I do not think understand, but also he comes from the gas and oil business in Texas.

So with that I would like to yield to Mr. Conaway.

I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky.

Well, I appreciate the gentleman's yielding back, and I don't think anybody should be surprised at what we are seeing. I put a quote up here by Representative Rangel from New York, who is now the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. Before the election he vowed to put all of President Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts on the chopping block.

Here we go, 20 days into it and this is the start of it. This is the start of what we will see over the next 2 years, which is an increase in taxes. And some of them they won't even have to enact. They will just expire.

But I wanted to ask a question to the gentleman from Texas who knows the oil and gas business much better than

I do. But, you know, basic economics, if you take away, if you actually disincentivize, put a disincentive to a company to go out and explore for oil, when we see that, the oil companies and the wildcatters and the small business entrepreneurs who are in the oil and gas business, not going out there and finding new sources of oil and gas, when we see the supplies go down that is going to cause prices to increase. And I wonder if the gentleman from Texas would comment on that.

It is good to have a CPA on board.

Somebody mentioned to me that we were cramming in 2 days of work into 5 days. So if people really, if Lou Dobbs is watching tonight then he ought to be talking about our work schedule here, what we are really doing, not just the fact that he was ranting and raving about us not working on Monday because of the national championship game. Let him come down here and see what we are really doing.

$4 million gone.

And we are seeing right now, I think the latest thing I read was the price of a barrel of oil was down to $51 a barrel of oil. Average gas prices going down. And some of that is a direct response to the supply people out there finding oil. It is also in response to some of the demand has cooled off. People are trying to use less.

And I think we mentioned earlier, Mr. Davis mentioned about pushing it off to other countries in the world. We are going to penalize our own domestic production, and those folks around the world that aren't necessarily our friends, Iran being one of them, they can bring up that crude out of Iran. And it is a scary situation what has happened. I know that the President of Iran was down in Venezuela. Iran has no refining capacity or not much to speak of, and Venezuela is one of the largest refiners. So what we are going to see, I believe, is Iran making a deal with Venezuela, that they will pump the crude in Iran, and another one of our enemies, Venezuela, will refine it for them. So this is a national security issue. It is not just about taxes. It is about making sure that our domestic producers are out there looking for oil and keeping our reliance, lowering our reliance on foreign oil sources.

You are absolutely right. This tax increase that is going to occur is going to have a ripple effect throughout the economy. There are those on the other side that think they are going to punish the oil companies. They are not. Plain and simple, it is going to punish manufacturing, it is going to punish people that are employed in this country, people that are paying taxes in this country.

But once again, we should not be surprised. Nobody in America should be surprised when we see, I was corrected, 14 days into this Democratic majority, when you have the new chairman of the Ways and Means, Mr. Rangel from New York, who said back in an interview before the election, back last spring, actually, that the tax cuts that President Bush put in place were beyond irresponsible, and he also said he cannot think of one of those tax cuts in the first term of President Bush that deserves merit.

Does that mean the R&D tax credit, which I think we successfully extended, does that mean that they will repeal that and repeal some of those R&D tax credits for alternative fuels? When you think, I see Geoffrey here, you told me he is 8 years old. If a family of four has their taxes increased, that is going to be about $2,100 a month.

Well, if you had that $2,100 a month, which you do today, and you took the $2,100 and invested it every year in the banks, so that Geoffrey, 8 years old, 10 years from now to go to college, he would have $30,000 in the bank. That's a great nest egg for your children to help put them through school so when they get out of school they don't have debt. You know, we talk about all these government programs, when, in reality, let the American people keep more of their hard-earned dollars so they can save that money for 8-year-old kids like Geoffrey so that he can go to college in the future.

I agree with you the American people didn't vote for a change of this economy. They didn't vote for a change to increase taxes. We are in deficit not because we tax too much; it is because we spend too much.

You know, our colleagues from the Blue Dog Democrats side, they are right when they talk about fiscal responsibility. They are right about controlling spending. I think their number one of their 12 points is to have a balanced budget except in time of war or in a time of recession. Well, that is what we had in early 2001, 2002. We are still at war. We are not in recession any more. But the way to solve this problem is to control spending.

As I said earlier, I am eager to see what the leadership of the Democrats allows the Blue Dogs to propose. I know that over the last 12 years, I think the Blue Dogs, every year, produced a budget that was voted on here on the House floor.

Once again, I am eager to see what the Democratic leadership allows the Blue Dogs to do, because I think they will propose a responsible budget more so than I think the Democratic leadership will. Again, we are going to wait and see what happens.

Once again, I don't believe that the American people want to see us increase taxes. If we don't act, if the Democrats don't act in the next 4 years, we are going to see a slow expiration and an increase in the taxes the American people pay to the tune of $200 billion by the first of 2011.

It is the equivalent, it is one thing if you own a business to have more sales; but what we do, you raise the price, and when you are in business and in trouble and in deficit, you can't just go out and say, oh, I am going to raise the price of the car, raise the cost of the washer or dryer. That usually doesn't work. Usually what happens when you raise the price, the market, the demand is not great enough, it will drive down your revenues.

What we are doing here is raising the price. It will drive down revenues, as it always does. As we said earlier, whether it is President Kennedy in 1960 or Ronald Reagan in 1980 or President Bush in the early 2000s, when you cut taxes it spurs the economy, and it creates more revenues.

We had lines.

Does the gentleman have closing remarks?

Mr. Speaker, I thank both of you gentleman for joining me, Mr. Davis and Mr. Conaway, for your thoughts tonight. You pointed out rightfully so that the government doesn't create jobs, the government doesn't create wealth, it is people out in America, working hard, day in and day out, saving their money, investing their money, sweating at a job, and it is just wrong for us here in Congress to take more of their money than we should.

I put up 1,446 days to remind the American people that they are going to receive a tax increase unless we act, and that is a little less than 4 years. I am so grateful that the gentleman from Texas is a CPA and got my numbers right, that it is not 20 days into this new Congress, it is only 14 days, and we are already starting to hear about the first tax increase that the American people will see coming out of this Congress.

Absolutely. Except for the Marianas Islands.

I thank both of you gentleman for joining me tonight.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the great contribution Coach Dick Hoak has made to professional athletics, the game of football, the Pittsburgh Steelers, and the people of western Pennsylvania.

Coach Dick Hoak recently announced his retirement from the Steelers' organization on January 1 of this year. As he ends an impressive career, Dick Hoak can look back on his 45 years of history as part of the Steelers' organization. This is an unprecedented run and a shining example of consistency in a business best known for its instability rather than longevity with one team.

The first 10 of Dick Hoak's 45-year tenure with the Steelers were not spent on the sidelines but, instead, on the playing field. Dick Hoak was drafted by the Steelers in 1961, after an impressive high school career in football, basketball, and baseball that included a WPIAL football championship, and a single-game scoring record of 39 points and playing 4 years for Joe Paterno's Penn State Nittany Lions, where he led the team to a Liberty Bowl victory and was named the MVP.

Throughout his playing career with the Steelers, Dick Hoak time and time again showed he was a talented athlete and a dedicated teammate. He led his team in rushing three times and today is the fifth ranked rusher in Steeler history, with 3,965 yards rushing. Dick Hoak also accumulated an impressive 146 receptions, 33 touchdowns, and a Pro Bowl appearance.

For many players, the culmination of such an impressive record would have been enough on which to end a career. However, Dick Hoak, his commitment to Pittsburgh and the Steelers would not end there. Only one year after retiring from the National Football League, Dick Hoak turned down an assistant coaching job at the University of Pittsburgh and rejoined the Steelers' organization, this time as an assistant coach under Hall of Fame Coach Chuck Noll. During this time, Coach Hoak coached the running backs, including the great Franco Harris, through four Super Bowl victories, a championship legacy he would later recapture under Coach Bill Cowher.

Under Dick Hoak's leadership as an assistant coach, the Steelers dominated the league in rushing yardage. Over the 15 seasons Dick Hoak coached for Bill Cowher alone, the Steelers rushed for over 30,000 yards and led the league in rushing three of those 15 seasons. His excellent coaching also added in no small part to the Steelers' Super Bowl win last year. The Super Bowl win not only capped Dick Hoak's career; it made Hoak one of three people in the Steelers' organization, and possibly the only coach in NFL history, to have six Super Bowl appearances and five Super Bowl rings with one NFL team.

Throughout his accomplished career in football, Dick Hoak never let Pennsylvania out of his thoughts. Of course, over his long career, Coach Hoak was offered positions away from his home State. However, his commitment to create a stable environment for his family, and his undying loyalty to his team and the owners of the Steelers, the Rooney family, kept him in Pennsylvania. He never left to accept an offensive coordinator's job with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers; he never left the Rooney family to coach the USFL's Pittsburgh Maulers. Coach Hoak put his family first and remained devoted, loyal, and committed to his team in western Pennsylvania.

Coach Hoak was born in Jeanette, Pennsylvania, and continues to live in nearby Greensburg in a house he has owned since his early days in coaching. His commitment to the Pittsburgh Steelers gave his family stability and western Pennsylvania a steady hand at the helm of a winning offense. Now that his storied career with the Steelers is behind him, Dick Hoak can look forward to another winning team: his family. I know his wife, Lynn, his children Kelly, Katie and Rich, and his seven grandchildren, including my nephews Michael, Jonathan, and Daniel Shuster, are happy to have more time with their Pap-Pap.

Dick Hoak represents the best attributes of sportsmanship, hard work, and commitment. Those are the values that translate from the football field to everyday life, and he embodied them with class. Not only that, Dick Hoak represents the American Dream. He is an American success story who shows if you work hard enough and remain dedicated to your goals, you can succeed beyond what you thought possible, into excellence and legend.

I am happy to say congratulations on a great career, and thank you for being there when we needed you, Coach Hoak.

Mr. Speaker, it is certainly an honor to be here on the House floor, and it is a great opportunity to follow the Blue Dogs tonight, that coalition on the Democratic side that are talking about fiscal responsibility, because that is what I want to also talk about tonight. It is an extremely important issue. It is a pocketbook issue. And one I didn't hear mentioned too frequently by my friends in the Blue Dog Coalition has to deal with taxes and what we are responsible for here in Washington, which is spending, and also making sure we are not reaching too deep in the pockets of the American people and spending their money.

Quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, I am very concerned that the American people are unaware of what is going to happen here in Congress in the next 4 years. There is a countdown. The countdown begins. It is 1,452 days, and we will see over that period of time the tax cuts that we put in place as a Republican majority, they will expire. So the American people, over the next 4 years, will see a $200 billion tax increase, money that will be taken out of their pockets.

The Democratic majority doesn't even have to act. They can just run out the clock. I am not sure the American people realize that, that if the Democrats don't act to extend these tax breaks, that they will see this $200 billion tax increase occur, as I said between today and January 1, 2011. As I said, I appreciate the Blue Dogs coming here and talking about fiscal responsibility, but unless they act and they join with the Republicans to see these extended, that is what the American people face.

What do these tax cuts mean? They mean that over the last 4 years we have seen 7.2 million jobs created in this country because of those tax cuts. Just in the month of December, 167,000 jobs were created in this country. The unemployment rate in this country is down to 4.5 percent. That is the lowest average it has been in four decades, and that is directly attributable to the tax cuts that we passed over the last 4, 5, or 6 years in this Congress. Again, if we don't extend them, if we don't do the responsible thing and let the American people keep more of their money, there will be dollars taken out of their pockets.

Now, what has happened with those tax cuts is that the American people have gotten to keep more of their hard-earned dollars. The American people, from Pennsylvania, to Arkansas, to California, to Arizona get to keep their money in their pockets and get to decide how that money is going to be spent. It is not going to be spent in Washington by bureaucrats. When you get $2,000 or $4,000 more in your pocket a year because of these tax cuts, you decide whether you will use it as a downpayment on a car, save the money for your children's college education, or buy a new washer and dryer or refrigerator for your home. These are the things the American people want to be able to purchase, and they can do it with these tax cuts.

As I said, I am very, very concerned that we are going to see this $200 billion tax increase if we don't move forward to expand that. We had four major tax relief packages since 2001. We cut taxes on the American taxpayer in every walk of life. Across the board, every American has benefited by this. We eliminated the marriage penalty tax. We stopped penalizing people in this country for being married. We should be encouraging that in America: marriage. We doubled the child tax credit from $500 to $1,000. If we don't act to extend that, that will be cut in half over the next 4 years.

We removed 10.6 million low-income Americans from paying taxes all together. People are not paying taxes because we lowered those tax rates. We lowered tax rates on our small businesses and employers.

I know every single district in this country has numerous small businesses. It is the backbone of the American economy. And we have cut taxes for those people in small business, and they have been able to take that money and reinvest it in their businesses and their employees. I know full well because before I came to Congress I didn't serve in the State legislature, I wasn't a trial attorney, I was a small business owner, and I worked to employ between 30 and 40 people. I know what it is like to meet a payroll, and I know what that burden is like to have to pay crushing taxes. I know what it is like to make sure my bills are being paid every month.

So as a small business owner, I know firsthand. As a family man, as a father of two children, and a daughter that will go to Penn State University next year, I know it is important to save for college. Every American wants to save money to help their children get educated. As I said, I think it is extremely important that we here in Congress act responsibly to keep those tax cuts in place and there is record revenue coming into Congress.

I hope that the Democrats will take a lesson from history, from one of their own, Jack Kennedy, in the 1960s. President Kennedy did the right thing. He cut taxes. What happened? Revenues increased to the government. What happened in 1980, when Ronald Reagan did the same thing? He cut taxes and revenues increased to the Federal Government. And we did that again in 2001 and 2003. And what happened? History has repeated itself. Revenues are at the highest levels that they have ever been to the Federal Government.

So once again, I am absolutely committed, and we are going to be coming to the House floor week after week talking to the American people, reminding them that if the Democrats do not act, do not aggressively pursue the extension of these taxes that the American people will be penalized.

And I think that here in this next hour I am going to be joined by many of my colleagues who want to stand up and talk about this. And the folks coming down to the floor, most of them, if not all of them, are former small business owners or still own small businesses and have families and raised families, so they can talk to the issues that we are here talking about tonight: what it means to get $2,000 more a year in your pocket, or $4,000 or $5,000, or have lower tax rates, if you are running a business.

I will now invite some of my colleagues up, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Davis). I yield to him.

I thank the gentleman from Tennessee and would just point out that, as the gentleman said, he is a father, and I understand that he was a hospital manager before he started his own business. So he knows firsthand what it is like to be out there meeting a payroll, facing the tax burden of this country. So I really appreciate not only that you are here in Congress and you bring a commonsense, a small business owner's perspective to the legislative process, but you are here tonight talking about these issues that are going to be vital to not only people in Tennessee and Pennsylvania but across this country. Every American is concerned about their tax bill.

It was interesting, the Blue Dogs were down here talking this evening earlier and they said America voted for a change. America did vote for a change, I believe. But I don't believe that I heard anybody in America, at least not in my congressional district in Pennsylvania, or across Pennsylvania, who said they wanted to vote for higher taxes. I am very concerned.

As you mentioned, they changed the rules. We had the rules in place where we had to have a three-fifths majority to pass tax increases. They have reduced that to a simple majority. That obviously means they need only 218 votes. The Blue Dogs were talking tonight there are between 40 and 50 members of the Blue Dogs. I hope they hang with us as we try to push the agenda to keep the American taxpayers, keep the American people with those tax cuts in place.

Again, Mr. Davis, thank you very much for coming down tonight.

Mr. Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield time to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Neugebauer), who again comes from a business background, somebody who has raised a family and brings a businessman's common sense here to the legislative process.

I thank the gentleman from Texas. And when you talk, I think a lot of folks here in Congress, I think, forget about the stories that you talk about, the plumber who starts out with a truck and all of a sudden he has enough business, he buys two trucks, then three trucks. And that is what small business in America has been doing over the last couple of decades. That is where most of the jobs are created in this country, in small business by that plumber or that person who has an idea that works hard and puts together a plan and goes to the bank and borrows some money. And I know when I first went into business back in 1990, I bought an existing business, borrowed a lot of money, went into debt, worked hard. And something that I learned in college in accounting is that cash and profits aren't the same thing. And a lot of people, I think they say, and I realized that lesson, I learned it in accounting, but it really didn't make an impact on me until my first year I had a profit in business and thought, oh my goodness. We had a great year. And then I realized that I had to pay this tax bill, but all my cash was tied up in my inventory and improving the physical plant and doing things to make business continue to grow. But I didn't have the cash. So I had to keep the debt up; had to figure out how to get that money to pay taxes. So it really puts a tremendous burden on small business when you have a high tax burden.

And, as you pointed out, American business, small business, is really the backbone of this country. So I appreciate the fact that you are another small business owner and that you, like myself, didn't serve in the legislature before, and you bring that perspective of a small business owner, of a business owner of someone that has been out there meeting payrolls and creating jobs in this economy.

It is now my pleasure to yield to another great Texan, Mr. Conaway, from Texas, who is the resident CPA in the House tonight. So I am sure we can learn a few lessons from him. So with that, Mr. Conaway, thank you.

But I would ask the gentleman at some point to talk about cash flow and the difference between profit and cash because that is an awakening process.

I want to thank the gentleman from Texas. I think you bring up a very good point on the spending side. As you know, as an accountant, anybody that has been in business, two sides to the income statements, there is revenues and costs.

Costs are important. You have to control your costs. You can't spend more than you bring in. Of course, we have done that over the last couple of years, because we are at war, we have seen a recession. But the revenue side is equally important, and there are two ways to do it in the Federal Government. We have found that you can increase taxes, which gives you increased revenue for a while, but eventually the economy turns down, and then revenues go down; or you can do as Jack Kennedy, President Kennedy, did in 1960, Ronald Reagan did in the 1980s and we did in the early 2000s, we cut taxes and revenues grew. There are record levels of revenue coming into the Federal Government.

Don't listen to Bill Shuster about how it works when you cut taxes. Look at the record, look at the history record, and you will see it is quite clear.

You mentioned the death tax, yes. The gentleman has another point to make.

That is a great point. It is great to have people like you in Congress to bring that common sense and know what it is like, and what really happens when prices go up and taxes go up and the response you get from people.

You also mentioned that January 1, 2011, the death tax expires. You also have the capital gains tax will expire January 1, 2009. The taxes on dividends will increase January 1, 2009. I think it is record numbers of American people that have investments in the stock market through their mutual funds. Over 60 percent of America has invested. Folks that are getting dividends from those investments are going to be taxed at higher rates.

We are going to again lose the child credit that will be cut in half over the next couple of years, the marriage tax, the penalty will be put back in place. Low-income taxpayers will go from that 10 percent tax bracket up to 15 percent tax bracket if we don't act.

Just to remind the American people that are watching tonight, it is 14,052 days in the countdown for the Democrat tax increase. They don't have to act. All they have to do is sit on the clock, run out the clock. When it runs out, we are going to see over the next 4 years a $200 billion tax increase.

Another thing you mentioned about job increases, I saw over the last 6 years, one of the sectors in the economy that saw one of the larger increases percentage-wise in jobs was the government, and over 4 percent increase in government jobs. You know, we see that in other sectors of our economy. We have seen many of them increase double digits, but that is one that was discouraging to me to see the Federal Government, when we were at these times when we were trying to cut spending. We need to cut some of that and curtail some of these government jobs.

That is like 20 million Americans, or something like that.

I thank the gentleman. The last point you make, we talked about it earlier, I think Mr. Davis brought it up, they decreased the number of Members of the House that had to vote in favor, three-fifths down to a simple majority. It seems pretty clear to me what they are doing.

Over the last 4 or 5 years, 6 years since I have been in Congress, I haven't seen a budget proposal by the other side that hasn't increased spending significantly, and there are some estimates that in these first 100 hours the proposals that they are putting forth over the next several years are something to the effect of an $800 billion increase in spending.

Again I think it is quite clear what the Democrats intend to do. We need to stay together as Republicans and join together with the Blue Dogs to fight that.

I thank the gentleman. It is discouraging to see the Blue Dogs here tonight. I think most of them, if not every single one of them, voted for that program. They were talking about fiscal responsibility tonight; they have no idea how much it is going to cost. It is going to be a big cost. They all know that.

But it is my pleasure to yield to the gentleman from Georgia, Dr. Phil Gingrey, who I know is an old pro at these Special Orders and does a great job. It is something that I think a lot of Americans, myself included, as I was growing up, we tried to put this group together as we talked. We wanted small business people, people from the business background, to be on the floor.

When you introduce a guy, Dr. Phil Gingrey, and say he is a physician, a lot of Americans like myself in my younger days didn't realize a physician is a small business owner. He is a man or a woman who is running a practice. You call them patients, but they are customers. But it is a practice, and it is a business.

You have to meet a bottom line, and you have to do what many do, the plumber, the car dealer or the computer business operator, you are meeting that bottom line and making sure it is profitable.

I thank the gentleman. And as you pointed out, the PAYGO rules, the decrease from a three-fifths majority to a simple majority to pass tax increases, that should make every American sit up and say, my goodness, the Democrats do plan on raising taxes. But if they still aren't sure about it, I have got just a couple of quotes here.

The incoming chairman of the Ways and Means Committee told Bloomberg News that he cannot think of one of the tax cuts passed under President George Bush that merits renewal. He also told the Congressional Daily when he was asked whether he considered tax increases across the income spectrum, and his quote was, ``No question about it.'' He said, ``Everything has to be on the table.'' ``Everything'' would mean repealing the 10 percent low income tax bracket, the child tax credit I talked about, the marriage penalty, all of which was passed in 2001 and, of course, the death tax. And my good friend from Texas knows full well what it is going to do to a lot of business owners on Main Street. We are not talking about Wall Street, we are talking about Main Street America and in the farms of the Midwest.

So with that, I yield to my good friend from Texas.

I would like to recognize the gentleman from Tennessee.

I thank the gentleman from Tennessee.

Our time is running out, but I want to just talk about a real world experience. There is a family, Mr. and Mrs. Smith living in my hometown of Hollidaysburg or maybe even Youngstown, Ohio, or a small town in Florida or California; that person, Mr. and Mrs. Smith making $40,000 combined income, if these tax cuts are allowed to expire, they are going to pay about $2,100 more in taxes a year. And there are some people in this country who may think that $2,100 isn't a lot of money; but for that family struggling in Youngstown, Ohio, $2,100 a year, if you put $2,100 in the bank every year, at 5 percent interest return on that $2,100 and you invested it every year for 10 years, that turns into over $30,000. That is a good nest egg for that family to put their son or daughter through college or pay a good chunk of that if you are going to a great State school. So these things are serious, they are real life, and I just want to thank all the Members who came down here tonight who come from, whether it is a home care business, as Mr. Davis, or CPA or Mr. Neugebauer being a builder and a developer, myself running an automobile dealership, people just like us all across America that have to be concerned about what is going to happen here in the next 2 years. And all Americans need to understand that they have to talk to their Members of Congress and put the pressure on them to make sure that these tax cuts stay in place so that the American people can keep more of their hardearned dollars in their pockets and they can spend it as they see fit and not send it here to Washington, D.C. to be spent by faceless, nameless bureaucrats in many of these agencies.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a true giant in the transportation community and a dedicated servant of the citizens of Pennsylvania, Larry King. After more than 30 years of service, Mr. King will be retiring from Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDot) later this month. While Larry's retirement is certainly well deserved and will provide him with more time to spend with his wife Betty and their family, all of Pennsylvania will feel the impact of his departure.

Larry joined PennDot in 1969 and has served in a variety of positions with a special focus on planning and programming. In 1991, Mr. King was appointed to serve as Deputy Secretary of Planning. In that role, he was responsible for overseeing the statewide planning process, maintaining the Commonwealth's 12 year plan and the management the state's highway and bridge program which consist of a yearly budget of roughly $1.25 billion. Additionally, Larry was charged with the difficult task of ensuring that projects moved forward in a timely and cost efficient manner.

In his time at PennDot, Larry has been a tremendous resource for members of the Pennsylvania Congressional delegation. He never hesitated to share his expertise with Members or our staff. When Congress took up the historic Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), it was Larry's counsel that Members sought in their effort to ensure that Pennsylvania received its fair share of highway and transit funding. I think we all can agree that Pennsylvania certainly benefitted from his counsel. Larry not only possesses an intimate knowledge of the federal process, he also holds a true passion for improving transportation within the Commonwealth. Indeed, I remain convinced that there is not a road in Pennsylvania on which Larry King has not traveled.

For more than 30 years, Larry has remained dedicated to serving the citizens of Pennsylvania and the Commonwealth has benefitted exponentially from his service. The numerous projects that have moved forward under his watchful eye will greatly benefit not only Pennsylvanians, but all who travel through the Commonwealth. While we all wish Larry all the best in his retirement, we must also let him know how much he will be missed. Thank you, Larry, for your many years of service and your friendship.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Altoona Curve Baseball Club of Altoona, Pennsylvania, for winning the Minor League Baseball's 2006 John H. Johnson President's Trophy. This award, given annually since 1974, is the highest honor given by Minor League Baseball each year to one of their 176 member clubs for being the top franchise in the league. This award is Minor League Baseball's equivalent of college football's Heisman Trophy. The President's Trophy was presented to the Altoona Curve on December 7, at Minor League Baseball's annual awards banquet.

The presentation of the John H. Johnson President's Trophy marks the third occasion that the Altoona Curve Baseball Club has received one of Minor League Baseball's most important awards. In the last two years, the Altoona Curve has also received the Larry MacPhail Promotional Trophy, as well as Baseball America's Bob Freitas Award. The Curve Club is just the 11th franchise to have received all 3 awards, and is also the first team to receive these awards in just 3 year's time.

The Altoona Curve's commitment to the communities of central and western Pennsylvania has been impressive from day one. In the short 8 years since their establishment in 1999, The Altoona Curve has certainly become a significant and positive part of our region's identity. Living up to their slogan as ``Everybody's Hometown Team'', the Altoona Curve's accomplishments will surely make them a great part of the memories of the three million fans who have cheered for them at the Blair County Ballpark. Next year, the Altoona Curve will open their season on April 12, 2007, to do what they do best--play ball.

Mr. Speaker, as the new co-chairman of the Azerbaijan Caucus, it is a privilege to join with my good friend, the gentleman from Texas and fellow co-chairman Solomon Ortiz, to welcome to Washington, DC, the first lady of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Mrs. Mehriban Aliyeva.

We welcome Mrs. Aliyeva as a member of the Azerbaijan parliament-- Milli Majlis--and as chairperson of the United States-Azerbaijan Inter- Parliamentary Working Group.

This week, Mrs. Aliyeva and a delegation of parliamentarians from Azerbaijan are meeting with Members of Congress and administration offices to further reinforce understanding of Azerbaijan and encourage dialogue between Congress and the Milli Majlis.

Members of the parliamentary delegation include: Gultakin Haciyeva, New Azerbaijan Party; Ganira Pashayeva, Independent; Evda Abramov, Independent; Malahat Hasanova, New Azerbaijan Party; and Ali Huseynov, New Azerbaijan Party. Also part of the delegation is Deputy Foreign Minister Hafiz Pashayev, a former abassador from the Republic of Azerbaijan to the United States.

We thank our distinguished colleagues for their visit and encourage continued support of the Inter-Parliamentary Working Group and coordination with the Republic of Azerbaijan, one of our important strategic allies.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Clint Bolte of Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, who has been named ``2006 Citizen of the Year'' by the Borough Council and the Waters Award Committee. This distinguished award is given annually, in memory of the late Donald ``Mike'' Waters, to the person who most exemplifies the efforts and achievements in community service once performed by Waters throughout his lifetime.

The ``Citizen of the Year'' award was presented to Clint, a local businessman and principal of C. Clint Bolte and Associates, by Mr. Waters' widow, Jenny, and son, Don. They remarked that Clint has ``carried on Waters' tradition of community service,'' just as Clint and Mr. Waters did while co-chairing a community spring cleanup campaign together some years ago.

While accepting the honor on September 18, 2006, Clint said that the award was ``very much a surprise,'' and that he was incredibly grateful for the recognition. Clint also remarked that the late ``Mike'' Waters was ``very much an individual of extraordinary faith who loved his family and was passionate about his community.''

Clint Bolte, himself, has contributed endlessly to the betterment of the Chambersburg community, and Franklin County as a whole. Clint has worked through organizations such as the Chambersburg Club, the Rotary Foundation, the United Way, and the YMCA. To cite each individual accomplishment and contribution that Clint has been a part of would be nearly impossible. His involvement in the community over the years has been immeasurable. Jenny Waters may have put it best, speaking about Clint Bolte, saying that he has selflessly dedicated himself to the Chambersburg community ``just like `Mike' did.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Ms. Virginia M. Day of Altoona, Pennsylvania, who will receive the 2006 John Riley

Human Relations Service Award on October 25, 2006. This distinguished honor is awarded annually by the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission ``to the person who has performed outstanding and meritorious service to [the] community through personal efforts by enhancing the dignity and worth of its citizens.'' This award is given in memory of the late Big John Riley, who dedicated his time and efforts for the advancement of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission.

Just as Big John Riley gave to the community during his time, Virginia Day too works tirelessly, in various capacities. As the Manager of Evergreen Manors, since 1983, Virginia has been working hard for companies like Improved Dwellings for Altoona, Inc. She has also been involved with organizations such as the YMCA, the Altoona Housing Authority, the City of Altoona with Community Education and Training Agency, and ENCORE court advocates for youth. Through her efforts, Virginia has helped improve the lives of the citizens of the Altoona community.

To cite each individual accomplishment and contribution that Virginia has been a part of would be nearly impossible. Her involvement in the community over the years has been immeasurable and certainly in the spirit of the late Big John Riley. Miss Virginia Day has selflessly dedicated herself to the Altoona area, and we are all very grateful for her effort toward positive enrichment of the community, as she has certainly deserved this distinguished honor.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Rogers for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this legislation, in particular the FEMA reforms. It was a tremendous effort by many, and I want to extend my personal thanks to Chairman Rogers, Chairman Don Young, Chairman Davis, Chairman King and Chairman Reichert. This was truly a collaborative effort, and I think we have some important reforms for FEMA here today.

FEMA was once one of the most well-respected organizations in the Federal Government, but Hurricane Katrina demonstrated how badly FEMA declined in just 3 years at DHS.

I had the privilege to serve on the Katrina Committee that did the investigation and we laid out five principles for reforming FEMA: The President has to be involved in big disasters; there must be a clear chain of command; preparedness must be put back into FEMA; FEMA's capabilities must be restored and enhanced; and, finally, we need an all-hazard approach to disasters.

While I believe that pulling FEMA out of DHS is the best way to embrace these principles, I recognize that it is not the only way. These principles served as a foundation for the compromise we consider today.

This bill fixes and improves FEMA. With the leadership, authority and resources necessary to respond effectively to the next disaster. FEMA can once again be a model Federal agency. The American people deserve nothing less.

Before I close, I would like to thank the Emergency Management Subcommittee staff who worked very long hours on this important legislation: Dan Matthews, Jennifer Hall and Hugh Carroll, and also Liz Megginson from the full committee. They did a great job, and I want to thank them.

Mr. Speaker. I rise today to support this legislation.

Prior to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was one of the most well respected organizations in the Federal government. Hurricane Katrina illustrated how badly FEMA had declined in less than three short years.

I want to thank Chairman Young for his leadership and his oversight efforts over the years to ensure that FEMA would remain a model Federal agency. Through his leadership on this bill, I believe FEMA will not only return to its former status, but out perform the FEMA we used to know.

I had the honor of serving on the House Katrina Committee under Chairman Davis. He deserves tremendous credit for leading the investigation. He made a commitment to follow the facts wherever they took us, and he uncovered a surprising record of actions and neglect that undermined our Nation's disaster preparedness. Without his leadership, we would not be here today.

There have been a lot of complaints that the House has not consolidated jurisdiction over the DHS into one committee. Today, I can tell you that it is a good thing that jurisdiction over DHS does not reside with one committee.

This bill balances the need to prepare for a terrorist attack with all of the other hazards we face. The Transportation Committee has decades of experience with emergency management. The Homeland Security Committee brings real expertise on terrorism matters. Between these two committees, we came up with a good product.

I would like to thank Chairman King and Chairman Reichert. This comprehensive reform could not have been possible without their support, vast knowledge of preparedness issues, and strong desire for reform.

After the Katrina Committee Investigation, we laid out 5 principles for reforming FEMA.

First, Presidential involvement and professional disaster advice are essential.

Second, effective response requires a clear chain of command.

Third, the four elements of emergency management need to be closely integrated and managed, particularly preparedness and response functions.

Fourth, FEMA's essential response capabilities must be restored and enhanced.

And fifth, the tension between the nation's all-hazards emergency management system and terrorism preparedness must be resolved.

While my personal opinion is that pulling FEMA out of DHS is the best way to embrace these principles, I recognize that it is not the only way. These five principles served as a foundation for this compromise, which helped us achieve comprehensive reform.

This legislation elevates the Administrator to the Deputy Secretary level and provides that the Administrator will report directly to the Secretary. It directs the Administrator to serve as the principal advisor to the President, the Homeland Security Council, and the Secretary of Homeland Security for all matters relating to emergency management and permits the President to designate the Administrator as a member of the Cabinet in the event of natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters. Additionally, the Administrator is given explicit responsibility for managing all disasters.

Furthermore, I am proud that this bill clarifies the chain of command during the Federal response to natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters by providing that the Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO) is in charge. The bill also prohibits the Principal Federal Official (PFO) from directing or replacing the incident command structure at an incident and limits the PFO's authority over Federal and State officials, including the FCO.

Additionally, this legislation returns all grants, training, and preparedness programs to FEMA, restoring the nexus between emergency preparedness and response. These grants and programs include the emergency management performance grant program, fire grants, terrorism preparedness grants, the radiological emergency preparedness program, the chemical stockpile emergency preparedness program, and the metropolitan medical response system.

This bill increases FEMA's response capabilities through a variety of tools. Through this legislation FEMA will establish robust Regional Offices, Regional Advisory Councils, and multi-agency Regional Strike Teams to ensure effective coordination and integration of regional preparedness, protection, response, mitigation, and recovery activities with State, local, and tribal governments, emergency response providers, emergency managers, and other stakeholders. Additionally, the Administrator is provided a number of tools for rebuilding FEMA's professional and reserve workforces through the use of a strategic human capital plan, recruitment and retention bonuses, and professional development and education.

Finally, this bill establishes an all hazard national preparedness goal and system for bringing direction, professional expertise, and accountability to federal, state, and local preparedness activities.

This bill puts FEMA back together again and gives FEMA the tools and authority to do its job. With the leadership, authority, and resources necessary to respond effectively to the next disaster, FEMA can once again be a model agency within the Federal Government.