Floor Statements

``No State shall, without the consent of the Congress, lay any imposts or duties on imports or exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing its inspection laws: and the net produce of all duties and imposts, laid by any State on imports or exports, shall be for the use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such laws shall be subject to the revision and controul of the Congress.

``No State shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops, or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another State, or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.''

I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and for scheduling this Special Order to honor the men and women who put their lives on the line every day, as we just heard from our colleague from Washington.

Last year in the United States of America, 119 law enforcement officers lost their lives in the line of duty; 119 lives snuffed out. It was not because they did anything wrong, but they were performing their duty to protect you and me so that every night when we go to sleep, we put our heads on our pillows and sleep soundly.

We take it for granted. There is something about it that we think is just natural. There is nothing natural about someone who goes out every day and consciously gives of themselves and puts their life on the line for someone else. Jesus said there is no greater love than this, than someone who would lay down his life for his brother. And law enforcement officers do that every day.

Yet sometimes when we get these incidents in America, we somehow forget that. We forget that they have husbands and wives and children and parents and sisters and brothers and friends, that they are people, too. They are citizens in our community, just like we are, and they go out every day to protect you and me and give us a quality of life that, as I say, we take for granted. So it is altogether fitting that we would take today and recognize them, salute them, recognize them, honor them, thank them for what they do for all of us.

I hope that we won't just do it for today. I hope we do it 365 days a year, because they are here for us 365 days a year.

So on behalf of my constituents in the First Congressional District of Alabama, I say to law enforcement officials in my district and throughout America: We thank you. We salute you. God bless you.

Mr. Speaker, in Mobile's Cooper Riverside Park, there stands a statue of Pierre Le Moyne d'Iberville, the French founder of Mobile, a statue which is identical to another statue located in Havana, Cuba.

This statue is just one example of the robust ties between the city of Mobile, located in my Congressional district, and Cuba. These ties go all the way back to Spanish colonization in the 18th century.

It is safe to say that I represent a district that stands to benefit from improved relationships with Cuba. In fact, the Port of Mobile is a straight shot to Cuba and could be an important economic hub, just as it was going back to the 18th century.

Under the right circumstances, I would gladly support lifting the trade embargo with Cuba and improving diplomatic relations. Unfortunately, now is not that time. The economic benefits should not come at the cost of enabling a ruthless regime that is unwilling to change.

Once again, the President seems to be more interested in a publicity stunt than in a substantive solution. The White House will tell you that this action is no different from previous efforts to improve relations with other

communist countries like Vietnam or China.

Here is the problem with that premise. In each of those cases, the President engaged with Congress in a serious conversation and debate about the best path forward. A plan was developed, serious concessions were agreed to, and each nation mutually benefited from these meaningful actions.

Unfortunately, in the case of Cuba, President Obama has again decided to cut Congress out of the process and act alone with no real plan to accomplish his stated goal. This approach is the wrong way for our government to operate, and it has once again resulted in a bad deal.

Columnist Charles Krauthammer put it best when he said:

Do you know how to achieve a breakthrough in tough

negotiations? Give everything away.

Mr. Speaker, I can't help but ask what reforms Cuba will make as a result of this deal. Let's not forget that this is the same Cuba, under the same regime, who during the cold war had nuclear missiles on their soil aimed at the United States of America.

This is the same Cuba that refuses to let the church operate freely. This is the same Cuba that worked with Venezuela and North Korea against the interests of the United States. This is the same Cuba that has been accused again and again of egregious human rights violations. Nothing has changed in those areas at all, and the Castro brothers are still in power.

Now, there is a path forward for improved diplomatic relations and ending the trade embargo. The Castro regime must go. Political activity must be legalized. Public commitments to free and fair elections must be made. An independent judiciary must be established. Rights to free speech and freedom of the press must be guaranteed.

Cuba must renounce the policy of being a staging area against the United States. Political prisoners must be freed, and the Cuban citizens must be treated with respect and dignity and be provided with the basic freedoms we often take for granted here in the U.S.

Under those conditions and with a President willing to work with Congress, the embargo could be lifted and progress could truly begin.

Mr. Speaker, I find myself once again coming to this floor to implore President Obama to abandon his ill-conceived, independent executive action and, instead, come to the Capitol, work with this Congress, share ideas, and collaborate; and together, we can make a real, positive impact on behalf of the American people.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your leadership on this very important issue.

Mr. Speaker, I support this bill. In fact, just this morning I was reading your op-ed from USA Today in which you make a great point. This law cannot be fixed. It is beyond repair. No quick legislative fix can fix this law and make it work for the countless American families who have already been negatively impacted, including people in my district.

Last November, the American people spoke loud and clear. They want to see bold legislative action that pushes back against the failed policies of this President.

I support this bill, but I want to do more, and we must do more. I look forward to working with the chairman and leadership of this House to move forward with the full repeal of this law.

Mr. Speaker, I will insert into the Record the position statement favoring this bill from the National Federation of Independent Business, the voice of small business of America.

National Federation of

Independent Business,

Washington, DC, January 6, 2015.

Dear Representative: On behalf of the National Federation

of Independent Business (NFIB), the nation's leading small

business advocacy organization, I am writing in support of

H.R. 30, the Save American Workers Act of 2015. H.R. 30 will

be considered an NFIB Key Vote for the 114th Congress.

This legislation would replace the new 30-hour per week

full-time or full-time equivalent (FTE) employee definition

created by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

(ACA) with a 40-hour per week definition. The ACA defines

full-time employee for the purpose of the employer mandate as

an employee who works an average of 30-hours per week (130-

hours per month). The employer mandate is a requirement that

businesses with 100 or more full-time or FTE employees offer

qualified, ``affordable'' health insurance to 70 percent of

full-time employees or pay costly penalties beginning in

2015. In 2016, businesses with 50 or more full-time or FTE

employees must offer qualified, ``affordable'' health

insurance to 95 percent of full-time employees and their

dependents or pay costly penalties.

In early 2013, NFIB testified before the House Committee on

Small Business that the new definition is ``one of the most

dangerous parts in the law.'' The ACA marks the first time

that ``full-time'' is expressly defined in federal law. Prior

to the ACA's enactment, the determination was left up to the

employer.\1\ Similarly, the Fair Labor

Standards Act has long dictated that overtime pay starts

after 40-hours per week.\2\ Thus, employers and employees

have long understood ``full-time'' to be equivalent to 40-

hours per week.

The 30-hour full-time definition is already resulting in

less opportunities, fewer hours and lower incomes for

employees. Small businesses are already being forced to

shrink their workforce below and restricting workforce growth

above the 50 FTE employee threshold in preparation for the

costly mandate.

H.R. 30 would provide some immediate relief for small-

business owners and employees. The bill would reduce taxes on

employers by tens of billions of dollars. For employees, the

bill would prevent decreases in take home pay.

NFIB supports H.R. 30 and will consider it an NFIB Key Vote

for the 114th Congress. We look forward to working with you

to protect small business as the 114th Congress moves

forward.

Sincerely,

Amanda Austin,

Vice President,

Public Policy.

endnotes

1 http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/workhours/full-time.htm

2 http://www.dol.gov/whd/overtime_payt .htm

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask for a moment that my colleagues imagine a situation. Imagine a few years down the road that a Republican President announces he has instructed the Justice Department to no longer enforce the Clean Air Act, that he has told the Justice Department to no longer prosecute violations of the Clean Air Act.

My colleagues on the other side of the aisle would rise up with frustration and indignation. They would say the President has failed to faithfully execute the laws passed by Congress, as he has been constitutionally required to do, and they would be right to do so.

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what is happening in our country today. President Obama has chosen unilaterally not to enforce our Nation's longstanding immigration laws. He has made this decision without any consultation with Congress and entirely on his own.

Think for a moment about the precedent this action sets: that a President can alter longstanding law simply through an executive memo and his words, a President can simply say that he is not going to enforce the law. That would be frightening to all Americans, regardless of political belief.

Let's be clear what this action is not. It is not prosecutorial discretion.

No one doubts that the President has prosecutorial discretion. But this goes far beyond that power and enters into new territory that, frankly, has never before been touched.

I believe this issue was settled long ago, before our country was even founded. You see, in the 17th century in Britain, during this big fight between the King of England and Parliament, the King said that he had prerogative powers, the ability to override Parliament. And there were battles. There were wars in Britain about how this was going to be settled. And the Parliament determined, in consultation with the courts, that the King couldn't, on his own, do that, that he couldn't just simply say, I am going to dispense with the laws or suspend their operations for a period of time.

Our Founding Fathers knew this history well, and when they put together the Constitution of our country, in article II, they had that in their minds when they gave to the President the obligation--not the option--to faithfully execute the laws, all the laws of the United States, regardless of whether the President agrees with those laws or not.

I would say that this type of executive action is clearly not what the Founders had in mind when they drafted our Constitution. The main overriding goal of our forefathers was to prevent the executive from becoming too powerful, and they went to great efforts to ensure a strong system of checks and balances.

President Obama's executive action runs in the face of how our government was designed to operate. Let's also remember that earlier this year, President Obama said his policies--all of them--would be on the ballot in the mid-term elections. And the American people went to the polls and soundly rejected the President's policies. They made clear they were not supportive of more unilateral executive action. They wanted us to work together.

As a Congress, we warned the President not to go forward with this executive action.

Mr. Speaker, we need a solution to our Nation's immigration problem, but by using executive action, the President has made finding common ground far more difficult.

Mr. Speaker, I believe this House should rise above the actions of the President, and early next year, we should send the President real border security legislation, much like the border security legislation we passed in this House this past summer, yet the Senate wouldn't even take up.

This House should pass legislation to update and fix the worker visa program. This House should pass legislation to put in place E-Verify for all employers. This House should pass legislation to tighten internal security. Then, and only then, when we go through all of those pieces of legislation, should we even begin to discuss what we are going to do about the millions of people who are in this country illegally.

You see, Mr. Speaker, the more the President acts outside the bounds of his powers, the harder it becomes to actually achieve a solution. It leads me to wonder: Does President Obama actually want a long-term, lasting solution to immigration? His actions imply otherwise.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the President to rethink his approach to the immigration debate. I urge him to abandon this ill-conceived executive action and, instead, to come to the table and work with the Republicans and Democrats in the Congress and both Houses to find together the commonsense solutions that we need to find for these problems.

We are capable of doing that. That is how our Founders intended our government to operate, and anything other than that is a disservice to the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.

There is no greater responsibility of the Federal Government than to provide for our national defense. This bill does that.

I am particularly pleased this bill appropriately provides for our Nation's Navy, including full funding for three littoral combat ships, which is consistent with the Navy's request. I truly believe the LCS is a critical component of the future fleet.

I also want to join my colleagues in thanking Chairman McKeon for his dedicated service to our men and women in uniform and for your great leadership on the committee. We are losing a true advocate for a strong national defense, and I want you to know that your leadership will be sorely missed, but the rest of us who remain will do all we can to carry on in your tradition.

I urge my colleagues to continue a long tradition of bipartisan support for the NDAA, and I encourage a ``yes'' vote on this critical piece of legislation.

Mr. Speaker, there are some people you encounter in life who are just truly remarkable individuals. The first time I met Alice Lee from Monroe County, Alabama, I could tell she was one of them.

As a newly minted lawyer, I had to travel to Monroeville, Alabama, to work on a legal matter with a local lawyer by the name of Alice Lee. Ms. Lee was not just any lawyer though. As one of the few women who practiced law in Alabama before World War II, she was quite a dynamic figure.

She was an expert of the law and incredibly gracious to me. When she spoke on matters of the law, people listened. She continued to actively practice law until after her 100th Birthday, making her the oldest practicing attorney in Alabama history.

Outside of the courtroom, Alice Lee was very active in the United Methodist Church. In fact, she was the first female to lead the Alabama-West Florida Conference delegation to the church's general conference. She appropriately has an award named in her honor that is presented to other women who have shown a commitment to God and leadership.

As the years went by, on occasion I would stop by Monroeville to say hello to Ms. Lee and catch up. She was just the kind of person that you enjoyed being around.

Sadly, on November 17, Alice Lee died at the age of 103. No one will ever be able to fill her shoes as a true trailblazer and student of the law. Retired minister Thomas Lane Butts of Monroeville put it best when he said, ``Whenever there was a question in the community that no one could answer, the saying was, `Go ask Miss Alice. Her death is like the closing of a great library.' ''

Mr. Speaker, I know I join with countless others throughout Monroeville and the state of Alabama in sharing our condolences with the family of Alice Lee. She will be deeply missed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Columbia Southern University on the grand opening of their new Center for Continuing Education in Orange Beach, Alabama.

Established in 1993 by Dr. Robert Mayes, Columbia Southern University offers individuals with demanding schedules a way to achieve their dreams of higher education through online learning. By 2001, Columbia Southern was granted accreditation through the Distance Education and Training Council. Columbia Southern went on to become one of the first United States universities to offer a degree program in Vietnam. After Dr. Mayes' death in 2005, his son, Robert Mayes, Jr., was appointed President. Robert built on his father's success and continued to expand Columbia Southern's footprint.

Mr. Speaker, the new Columbia Southern Education Group Center for Continuing Education will include staff offices, meeting rooms and a large training area that can be partitioned off to accommodate a variety of training needs. The 10,600 square foot facility will also serve as the regional training center for the Alabama Fire College and Personnel Standards Commission.

I am proud of the work Columbia Southern does to promote higher learning, and I take pride in knowing they are located in the heart of the First Congressional District. I know I join with many others in saying congratulations on the new facility, and we look forward to continued growth and success.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember a loyal community servant, Grove Hill Mayor Levon Hicks. Sadly, Mayor Hicks passed away on November 14 after an extended illness.

He devoted his life to serving his family, his church, and his community. He was a dedicated member of Jackson Church of Christ for more than 50 years, serving as an elder and attending several mission trips over the years. He served two terms on the Grove Hill Town Council before becoming mayor. He also served around 40 years as a volunteer fireman and was an active member of the Lions Club. He worked tirelessly for the betterment of the Grove Hill community and enjoyed fishing, traveling, and the University of Alabama football.

Mr. Speaker, to Mayor Hicks' wife, Helen, and his children and grandchildren, we say thank you for sharing Levon with us. We will miss him greatly.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor two outstanding English professors for their innovative contributions toward promoting tourism through literature.

First, Professor Mary S. Palmer's short story ``Raisin' Cain'' recently won the Southeastern Literary Tourism Initiative Tourism Writing Contest Award.

Professor Palmer's story highlighted the family-friendly nature of Mobile's Mardi Gras and was published online at the Southeastern Literary Tourism Initiative's website. The story includes photos and tourism links at the end so readers can learn how to visit the real Mardi Gras parades and other nearby Mobile attractions included in the inspiring story.

I also want to recognize Dr. Sue Walker who currently teaches tourism writing to several of her English classes at the University of South Alabama in Mobile, Alabama.

Dr. Walker is using the examples of tourism writing from this initiative to challenge her students to compose original short works of literature that encourage their readers to visit the actual places included in the stories.

Mr. Speaker, on Alabama's Gulf Coast, we know just how important tourism is to our local economies. I proudly support any effort to encourage tourism in our region, and I especially applaud innovative methods in the classroom, like tourism writing. Professor Palmer and Dr. Walker have found a unique way to highlight the heritage and culture of South Alabama while providing an enriching experience for their students.

I hope my colleagues in the House will invite their state's writers and teachers to take a look at what is going on in Mobile and consider ways to incorporate these types of college courses into their curriculum, and in turn, highlight their state's unique tourism attractions.

I will be honored to present Professor Palmer with the 2014 SELTI Tourism Fiction Award on October 15 at the Mobile Carnival Museum, and I am excited to highlight these types of innovative teaching methods.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to remember the life of my dear friend Judge Michael McMaken, a long-time district judge from Mobile County and a true servant leader.

Judge McMaken was born in Oklahoma in 1947. The son of an Army officer, he grew up on various Army posts around the world. He attended college at Purdue University in Indiana and later received his master of business administration and his law degree from my alma mater, the law school at the University of Alabama.

A true outdoorsman who enjoyed hunting, fishing, scuba diving, and almost any sport, Judge McMaken always wanted to live on Alabama's gulf coast. He got that chance when he moved to Mobile to serve as an assistant district attorney for then Mobile district attorney and now presiding circuit judge Charlie Graddick.

While working in the DA's office, he taught criminal justice at the University of South Alabama. He eventually went on to private practice until being encouraged by many people, including me, to run for district judge in 1986. After winning his first election, Judge McMaken would go on to serve as a district judge in Mobile County for 25 years.

He was instrumental in the creation of the Mobile County Drug Court, which helps give those struggling with drug addiction opportunities to beat their addiction and better themselves. That drug program became a model for other counties in Alabama and across the southeastern part of the United States.

Outside of the courtroom, Judge McMaken was a forceful advocate for civic responsibility. He was a founding member and first president of the board of directors for the Mobile Child Advocacy Center, which helps children who have been preyed upon by people who would do them harm. He also served as a president of the board of directors of Goodwill, Easter Seals, and AltaPointe Health Systems. He was actively involved with the Boy Scouts program in Alabama and a member of the Governor's Drug Advisory Council.

Judge McMaken retired from the bench in 2012 but remained very active in our community. In the late 1980s, around the same time he and his wife were expecting their first child, Judge McMaken was diagnosed with leukemia. He fought this dreadful disease for over 25 years, never relenting in his crusade for justice or his public service. He never let the disease beat him down. Sadly, on September 7, Judge McMaken finally succumbed to the disease.

Mike is survived by his loving wife, Kathy, and two wonderful children, Michelle and Bren, in addition to a number of cousins and many, many close friends.

Madam Speaker, I believe Mobile County Circuit Judge Ben Brooks said it best. He said, ``The older I get, the more I know how rare it is to meet someone like Mike.'' I couldn't agree more. What matters most is not what you take with you when you leave this world but, rather, what you leave behind. Judge McMaken left behind a legacy of compassion, justice, community service, and civic responsibility.

The city of Mobile, Mobile County, and the entire State of Alabama will be forever grateful for the life and the service of Judge McMaken and for his remarkable career throughout our community. We extend our greatest condolences to his family and friends.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman for yielding and for his continued leadership on this issue of grave importance to our Nation.

I support the chairman's amendment because I believe we must do everything we can to defeat this vile enemy known as ISIL. Time is of the essence here. With each passing day, ISIL continues to get stronger.

The President has finally asked for a very limited authorization, not of force, but for training and supplying. Based upon the information that I have received, I believe that arming and training Syrian rebels is an important first step.

Just a few weeks ago, I joined Chairman McKeon and a few other colleagues on a trip to the Middle East. While there, we met with numerous foreign leaders and defense officials. One thing became very clear: there is regional interest and support for defeating ISIL, but they are waiting on our leadership.

I believe arming and training the Syrian rebels to be a necessary step, but I do not believe it alone will be sufficient. Just this morning, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, expressed more action will likely be needed.

Our enemy should not just be degraded or contained. Our enemy must be defeated.

In order to accomplish that objective, more action will be needed, including overt help from Sunni Muslims in the region and air attacks from the United States.

It is also important to note the safeguards Chairman McKeon has written into this amendment. This amendment requires that each fighter be thoroughly vetted by the Department of Defense and that regular progress reports be provided to Congress.

I firmly believe that a new Authorization for the Use of Military Force is needed to specifically address ISIL and new action in Syria. The current AUMFs from 2001 and 2002 are simply not applicable to this conflict, and I hope the President will recognize the article I, section 8 powers of this Congress, which are exclusive, and ask us for a new AUMF. That is why this resolution explicitly states that it does not give President Obama authority to send new U.S. forces into combat in Syria.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight an important occasion, National Constitution Week. The important designation was made official by President Dwight Eisenhower on August 2, 1956 at the urging of the National Society of the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR).

Constitution Week is celebrated every year during the week of September 17-23. The week-long celebration commemorates America's most important and oldest living document. It has grown and evolved slightly over the years, but the Constitution has always been a symbol of freedom for the United States, as well as people around the world.

I am especially proud of the work done by the Ecor Rouge Chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution in Baldwin County, Alabama, to bring attention to our nation's most important governing document during Constitution Week.

Constitution Week not only celebrates this iconic document, but also encourages citizens to take the time to read and learn about the document and reflect on what values it embodies as a primary symbol of freedom and patriotism. This week encourages reflection and celebrates our founding document which means so much to the history of the United States.

As the Daughters of the American Revolution have stated, the purpose of this celebration is to emphasize citizens' responsibilities for protecting and defending the Constitution, inform people that the Constitution is the basis for America's great heritage, and encourage the study of the historical events which led to the framing of the Constitution in September 1787.

Mr. Speaker, we are, and have been from our birth, a nation that guarantees our citizens' very basic rights. And our government, as its very core function, is supposed to keep these rights secure. Our government does not create its own powers. Our government only gets its powers from the citizens' consent. That is why our Constitution is so important.

So on this Constitution Week, I encourage all Americans to take time to read our nation's Constitution and refresh our minds to the legacy of the document on which our nation's government is rooted.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember a great Alabamian and a proud Mobilian, Mr. David Stephen Conrad, or just ``D'' as he was known to his family.

Mr. Conrad was born in Boston, Massachusetts on August 30, 1939, but he called Mobile home for the last 49 years. He graduated from the University of Alabama and Cumberland School of Law in Birmingham, Alabama. He passed away on September 3, 2014.

Mr. Speaker, David loved the law and took great pleasure in his profession. He co-founded the firm of Conrad & Hammond, which is known today as Conrad, Barlar, and McCulloch. He was well-known throughout the legal community as a lawyer possessing the difficult balance of class, respect, and courtesy, while always being the strongest advocate possible for his clients. He was always willing to assist and mentor his fellow lawyers, providing counsel on personal and professional matters wherever requested.

He was an active member of his personal and professional communities. He served as past Vice President and board member for the Alzheimer's Association, past member of the Board of Directors of the Springhill Avenue Temple, past member of the Board of Directors of the Mobile Jewish Welfare Association, past Secretary and Vice President of the Mobile Bar Association, past member of the Board of Directors of the Alabama Trial Lawyers Association, member of the Alabama and Mobile Bar Associations, past Regional Board Member for the Southern District of the Commercial Law League of America, past member of the Board of Directors of the Mobile Medical Endowment Fund, past member of the Board of Directors of the Gulf Coast Conservation Association, past member of Ducks Unlimited, and past officer of the Board of Directors for Mobile Big Game Fishing Association.

David Conrad always tried to see and find the best in every human. He approached every obstacle he faced with an unwavering positive attitude, the quintessential ``eternal optimist.'' He loved his wife, children, and grandchildren deeply. He always enjoyed spending time with his family at their family house known as ``Camp David.''

David is survived by his wife, Norma, his son, Jeff (Chris) Conrad of Mobile, his daughters, Wendy (Neal) Aronson of Atlanta, Georgia, and Jill (Christopher) Hufnagel of Grand Rapids, Michigan. He is also survived by his 7 grandchildren: Matthew, Will, and Ellie Aronson; Stephen and Sydney Conrad; and Owen and Henry Hufnagel.

Mr. Speaker, I want to add my name to the chorus of individuals who were personally touched by David Conrad. I pray that his family and friends will find peace during this difficult time, but that they will find comfort in remembering the good times and great memories they shared with David.

Mr. Speaker, I have been in this House now for 6 months, and I regrettably rise today to express my frustration, and I know the frustration of thousands of people in my district in southwest Alabama and, I believe, people all over the United States of America.

People are tired of the stagnation coming from Washington. Just look at the disapproval rating of this Congress and the disapproval rating of our President.

The people of this country want to see action, action on growing our economy, action on cutting spending, action on health care, action on immigration, action on the crisis at the VA, action on foreign policy and all the problems we see around the world that involve our interests. They want to see action.

Just earlier this week, I was at the White House for a bill-signing ceremony of the Workforce Investment Act, or the SKILLS Act, as we called it here in the House.

The SKILLS Act was a great example of Democrats and Republicans in this House and the Senate coming together behind a common goal of improving our Nation's workforce training programs, which is so important at this time in our recovering economy.

During the bill-signing ceremony, the President implored us to send more bipartisan job-creating bills his way. The problem is the President doesn't need to lecture this House on that. The President needs to look no further than the majority leader in the Senate, the gentleman from Nevada.

In the House, we have passed nearly 300 bills that are sitting in the Senate, waiting for action--at least 40 of those bills are job-creating bills. We have continued in this House to do the people's work, making our way through seven of the appropriations bills that we are required by the Constitution to pass to fund the government. The Senate has not completed a single one.

Now, some may say the issue is that Republican Senators have demanded to have amendments considered. I don't think that is too much to ask. Here in the House, we have considered at least 180 minority amendments to appropriations bills alone, 180.

One of my colleagues in the House from the other side of the aisle was quoted in an article as saying that she wanted ``to thank the Republicans for their generosity. I am just grateful for the bipartisanship here.''

That is not the same message coming out of the do-nothing Senate. One Democratic Senator was quoted as saying that he has ``a hard time getting on the train in the morning.'' Former Senate leaders Tom Daschle and Trent Lott have said the Senate ``has degenerated into a polarized mess.''

Now, this probably shouldn't come as much of a surprise because, yet again this year, the Senate failed to even pass a budget.

I was just elected this past December. Prior to that, I was in the Alabama State Senate, and in our State, the State of Alabama, as in most States, our legislature is required to pass a budget and appropriations bills every year on time, and they have to be balanced.

So every year, the Alabama Legislature passes budgets with appropriations in them on time, and they are balanced. The United States Congress can't do that, the greatest debating body ever known to the world, the United States Senate can't do that?

I can't imagine what the people in my district would think if they saw the inaction coming from the United States Senate, but they see the results of it, and it troubles them greatly.

We have heard this song and dance before, and most of us now know how it is going to end. At some point--sooner, rather than later--the House will be forced to consider a continuing resolution to prevent a government shutdown.

The Senate can prevent this by following the House in regular order, doing the people's work, making the hard decisions, and advancing individual appropriations bills, as we have done in the House.

That is how government is supposed to work, and that is the only way we are going to be able to make serious reforms to spending programs.

I have come to this body a number of times to offer amendments to pending bills that would have cut spending, and I am going to keep pushing for these types of strategic spending reductions, but when the Senate refuses to do its part, it makes this process impossible.

The Senate's inaction is going to force those in the House to make an unfair choice, and I ask them to act differently for the people of this country, so we can get things done.