Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I would like to offer congratulations to the University of Louisiana at Lafayette College of Nursing and Allied Health Professions for its commitment to superior education and training. For the past 60 years, since the inception of the university's College of Nursing in 1951, its faculty and staff have been dedicated to educating and developing future healthcare employees of the highest caliber.

As a healthcare professional, I know the importance of a well-trained medical team. The faculty and staff of the UL Lafayette College of Nursing and Allied Health Professions work hard to provide their students with a first-rate education, making the college's graduates among the most coveted in the nation. Out-of-state hospitals seek UL Lafayette nursing graduates in hopes of gaining a staff member with superior skill and knowledge in the medical field.

The Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) at UL Lafayette is considered as one of the country's most prestigious healthcare degrees. UL Lafayette BSN graduates continually pass licensing exams at a higher rate than state and U.S. averages.

The college was named a 2005-2008 Center of Excellence in Nursing Education for Ongoing Faculty Development by the National League for Nursing. UL Lafayette's program is one of only four in the United States to earn this title. The college was also recognized by the Louisiana State Nurses Association and the Louisiana Nurses Foundation, earning the 2008 Nursing School of the Year Nightingale Award.

Since 1989, healthcare students have also had the opportunity to earn a Graduate Degree at UL Lafayette. In 1996, the university began offering a Nurse Practitioner program, allowing students to continue utilizing the superior faculty and staff resources of the College of Nursing even after they have received their baccalaureate degree.

I commend the UL Lafayette College of Nursing and Allied Health Professions for their dedication and desire to grow and improve the medical community. I am honored to represent these brilliant and hard- working healthcare professionals in Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to offer my sincere congratulations to Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) Thomas B. Thompson for his distinguished service to, and retirement from, the United States Attorney's Office.

Since 1984, AUSA Thompson has devoted his expertise to the United States Attorney's Office (USAO), serving in both the criminal and civil divisions of the USAO in the Western District of Louisiana. AUSA Thompson specializes in U.S. bankruptcy law, and has worked as senior litigation council and chief of the civil division of the USAO.

AUSA Thompson is a member of the Louisiana State Bar Association and is authorized to practice in certain federal courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States.

Before entering the United States Attorney's Office, from 1980 to 1984, AUSA Thompson worked for the late Honorable Richard J. Putnam, Senior District Judge, United States District Court, Western District of Louisiana.

AUSA Thompson earned his baccalaureate degree from McNeese State University and his Juris Doctorate from Louisiana State University. He also served his country in the United States Marine Corps from 1969 to 1975, receiving an Honorable Discharge. During his time with the Corps he was stationed in the Former Republic of Vietnam, obtaining the position of squad leader for two infantry companies.

AUSA Thompson has had a highly distinguished career, and I commend him for his service to our nation, not only on the battlefield, but also as an officer of justice. I am proud to be his representative in Congress and wish him well in his retirement.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to join the town of Port Barre in celebrating their 100th anniversary. Situated off of U.S. Highway 190 and a few miles away from Interstate 49, Port Barre is referred to as ``The Birthplace of Bayou Teche.''

Port Barre's history dates back to 1820 when Charles Barre purchased a large section of bayou land and used it for his business enterprises. Before the advent of railroads, steamboats provided transportation for travelers and many different types of goods. Port Barre provided its surrounding areas with a lifeline to these much needed resources. The business opportunities drew people to the area, and on June 7, 1911, Governor J. G. Sanders officially incorporated the town.

Port Barre not only brought goods and services into the area, but it has also historically been a trading region. Originally the area was used as a trading center for French colonists and Indians. The former trading post lands are still accessible to the community and visitors. Presently, the Bayou Teche RV Park allows locals and tourists to enjoy the landscape and learn the history of the site.

The town hosts a number of festivals that celebrate its Cajun heritage. The Lions Club Cracklin Festival and the Volunteer Fire Department's Pirogue and Canoe Races are two of the attractions that bring people to Port Barre to kick up their heels.

In addition to holding these unique cultural celebrations, Port Barre also boasts a successful economy. Backed by local businesses and farmers, the area still offers job opportunities and supports financial growth. I congratulate the citizens of Port Barre and am proud to be their representative in Congress.

I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding time to me.

Madam Speaker, it's been said that leadership is willing to make hard choices, fact-based choices to come up with solutions to solve problems and deliver results.

Now, we gathered here last Thursday in this Chamber to hear the President, with a much-touted plan beforehand that he was going to bring forth to the American people that was going to help solve the high unemployment in this country and get our economy back on a competitive basis. I can tell you, Madam Speaker, I sat there and I listened very intently, and I left this Chamber with great disappointment because it's not enough.

Furthermore, he is proposing taxes, new taxes, taxes on energy production, American energy production. Now, let's look at the facts of what happened.

Yes, we had an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and it was dealt with. It was a tragic situation, but it has been dealt with. The fact of the matter is we need American energy production to move this country forward. And now what we're seeing with the lifting of the moratorium is this continued de facto moratorium because of slow- walking of exploration plans and permits.

Now, what does this mean? If we brought back the permitting process to the same timeframe we had before--without sacrificing safety--bring it back into a reasonable amount of time, let's say 30 days to take care of these permits, in 1 year, the year 2012, 230,000 jobs would be created, new jobs, good, high-paying jobs. And not only that, a third of those jobs would be beyond the Gulf Coast States around this country, in California and Florida and in the central part of the country. This would add $34 billion to our GDP. And that's just getting things back to where they were. That's not even talking about expanding exploration in these shale formations or looking at the east and west coast where we can do more or Alaska. These energy jobs are good-paying jobs. And not only that, it would bring in, in 1 year, $12 billion more into the Treasury and reduce our bill on foreign oil by $15 billion. And that's just getting us back to where we were.

Now, I stood here and listened to the President. Instead, he offers taxes, $45 billion more in new taxes on independent oil and gas companies. That's going to hurt American energy production, it's going to kill American jobs, and it's going to do nothing to help solve our economy.

Furthermore, he chided us about the trade agreements. We have three trade agreements sitting there. They've been there for 3 years. They've been negotiated. They're ready to go. And he said Congress needs to pass them. Well, Mr. President, the answer is: Send them to Congress and we'll pass them. That's the process.

And beyond that, what is our trade policy? This country is losing credibility globally and it's losing its leverage because we have no trade strategy, a strategy that's going to promote American- manufactured goods, American farmers and their commodities so that we can sell these around the world to open markets. That will get our economy going.

If we want to solve our debt problem, yes, we've got to balance our budgets, yes, we've got to deal with the debt problem--we've taken some steps--but I saw nothing that the President offered. That's why I'm here supporting this resolution, to push this President to consider the steps that need to be taken to promote American competitiveness, private sector job growth. That's what we need in this economy.

Now, the President had the answer. He was standing here at this podium and he had the answer right up there on the wall of the House behind him. There is a plaque up there, and it's a quote from Daniel Webster. And that first sentence of the quote says, ``Let us develop the resources of our land.'' What's wrong with that, Mr. President?

For God's sake, we need American energy production, and it's simple. With the stroke of a pen, he could solve this permitting problem and at least get us back to where we were, create 230,000 jobs next year and add to our GDP growth. And this would be a start, a down payment to a comprehensive energy strategy for this country. This is a no-brainer.

We need natural gas as part of our transition strategy. His policy is going to lock out natural gas production in this country. Ninety-seven percent of it is done by small domestic companies here in the U.S., and these taxes will put many of these companies out of business.

Mr. President, read the plaque. Let's develop our natural resources. Let's do what we have to do. Let's promote a very aggressive, export- oriented trade policy.

And we need a willing partner to move forward with tax reform. We're getting half-hearted signals. This country needs fundamental tax reform. We want to do it on the House Ways and Means Committee. We're ready. We stand ready as willing partners, but yet we're getting signals--mixed signals. This administration has not shown a serious intent to move forward with fundamental tax reform that will unleash American ingenuity and entrepreneurship in this country.

And that's what I heard all through August when I was back home in my district when I talked to folks. They want to see an energy strategy. They want to see comprehensive tax reform that simplifies our Code and lowers rates and clears up some of the loopholes. They want to make sense out of this Tax Code. And they want to see us selling goods overseas, letting our ports expand.

He didn't even mention maritime infrastructure. We've got bills right now that would improve our maritime infrastructure without costing one penny more in deficit spending. Why aren't we acting on these things?

We're tired of rhetoric. We're tired of political talking points. And what we need is action. The American people have had enough. And I say let's get to work. Let's get this House moving on fundamental changes that will improve this economy and create private sector jobs.

Mr. Speaker, I want to offer condolences upon the passing of Dr. Roy K. Dokka, professor and researcher at Louisiana State University, who died unexpectedly on August 1, 2011. His contributions as an educator in LSU's College of Engineering were invaluable, and he will be dearly missed by his family, peers, and the community.

Dr. Dokka held the Fruehan Family Professorship in Engineering, and was responsible for groundbreaking research during his tenure at LSU. Instrumental in establishing LSU's Center for GeoInformatics (C4G), Dokka served as the center's first Executive Director.

Since 2001, researchers at C4G have been dedicated to studying the causes of coastal erosion in Louisiana and other important geographic relationships. Use of the Global Positioning System (GPS), along with geodetic leveling, enables C4G engineers to closely study these relationships, providing essential data in understanding many geographic problems our state faces.

Dokka's research contributions continued in 2002 when he spearheaded a cooperative with Louisiana Spatial Reference Center (LSRC) and the National Geodetic Survey-NOAA. Together, this alliance works on creating an advanced positioning system for Louisiana.

Dokka also worked with the state legislature to ensure the efficient usage and application of C4G's resources across Louisiana and provide them with the knowledge to better understand and prevent coastal erosion.

Thanks to the contributions of Dr. Dokka, LSU's C4G will continue to be a valuable asset for government, industry and higher education. The center's work is especially timely considering the opportunities available through GeoInformatics to provide critical information and roadway assessment.

LSU acknowledges the importance of the research activity taking place at C4G, and has expressed its intention to continue and grow the institution in the absence of its founding executive director.

Dr. Dokka left an admirable legacy in his profession, and will be remembered as a vital member of the engineering community and a distinguished citizen of the State of Louisiana.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to congratulate the Greater Lafayette Chamber of Commerce for being named National Chamber of the Year by the American Chamber of Commerce Executives.

This distinguished honor is awarded to chambers with superior member relations, operation management, and leadership within their community. The Greater Lafayette Chamber of Commerce has excelled in these areas over the past year. Panel members and former award recipients around the country determine which chambers are deemed most worthy to receive this title. I am very pleased our Greater Lafayette Chamber of Commerce was ranked as the best in the United States this year.

On August 4th, 2011, Lafayette's chamber was informed of this monumental accomplishment. This is the chamber's second national honor this year. Before receiving National Chamber of the Year, the Lafayette Chamber was given five stars by the United States Chamber of Commerce. Only one percent of chambers in the entire United States can claim this elite ranking.

The chamber's contributions to Lafayette and the surrounding areas continue to foster development and stability in the business arena. I thank them for their continued efforts to strengthen our community. The chamber is absolutely deserving of this esteemed award. On behalf of the people of South Louisiana, I offer my sincere congratulations.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the many contributors who hosted the Rand McNally Best of the Road competition's judges in Lafayette, Louisiana. Their combined efforts led to Lafayette being named the first ``Best for Food'' city in the United States. This recognition confirms what many of us already know--there is no place like Lafayette, Louisiana.

The Best of the Road competition began this year in search of the best city in the country in five categories: ``Most Beautiful,'' ``Most Patriotic,'' ``Friendliest,'' ``Most Fun,'' and ``Best for Food.'' Over 600 towns applied for the awards, and thirty finalists were chosen. After visiting the finalists, the judges (consisting of 10 amateur travelers) selected the final 5 winners.

Judges Bonnie and James Parr visited Lafayette to experience the culture and cuisine. The Lafayette Convention and Visitors Commission, LCVC, created an itinerary showcasing not only Lafayette's unique culinary landscape, but also her rich Cajun history. Chef Patrick Mould served as the culinary host, guiding them through their entire experience. The Parrs dined at the following restaurants: Dwyer's, Blue Dog Cafe, Jolie's Bistro, Johnson's Boucaniere, Don's Seafood Hut, French Press, Pamplona Tapas Bar and Restaurant, Charley G's, Randol's, Accidental Chef Cooking, and Hub City Diner. They had lunch with City President Joey Durel, toured the Jean Lafitte Center and Vermilionville, volunteered at St. Joseph's Diner, and visited St. John's Cathedral.

According to Rand McNally's website, the judges ``learned the true taste of Cajun food to be `flavorful, not hot or spicy' and after a meal, the best dessert is `Cajun dancing.' ''

Because Lafayette was chosen as a winning city, it was featured in USA Today on Friday, July 22, 2011. Lafayette's ``Best for Food'' title will be displayed in the 2013 Rand McNally Atlas.

I am thrilled Lafayette, my hometown, has been honored in such a unique and fitting manner. The award is excellent publicity for our city and region. Once again, I congratulate City Parish President Joey Durel, all members of the LCVC who worked on this project, and the restaurants and chefs who provided such excellent food for the judges.

Mr. Speaker, I think there was a gross distortion of what's being proposed here. And again, the previous speaker just condemned the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's bill in the U.S. Senate. That's the only Democratic bill we've had. So it seems to me that there's a little bit of a fight going on on the other side of the aisle between their House Members and the Senate.

To my friend from New Jersey, this committee that's formed is a committee of active sitting Members of the House and Senate. So in order for anything to be recommended by this committee, it would require, in all likelihood, all of the Democrats to support it.

I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

It would be a simple majority.

That's right. That's what we need. We need that to force some movement.

Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of talk about the past and how we got here. The American people get it. We have debt, serious debt, a threat to our national security and a threat to our economic prosperity; and a default, putting the full faith and credit of the United States on the line, would make that worse.

This House has passed Cut, Cap, and Balance. We stood up to our responsibility and passed a bill. Now we have a second bill because it didn't get through the Senate. We have a second bill brought forward consistent with our principles. We're going to cut more than we're going to borrow. We're going to cap spending with real statutory caps, and we're going to ensure that there will be a vote on a balanced budget amendment in both Houses. That's what the American people want. They're demanding it. This is a solid first step to getting debt under control. We need to move forward now.

Let me be clear: this House must act now. The time is running out. The Senate must act on this bill, and the President must sign it. Let's uphold our responsibilities. We have a responsibility to the American people. Let's uphold our responsibility and do what's right for the country.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday we had a very vigorous debate about the unsustainable debt that our country is facing, and we passed a bill, the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill. That bill is really the only one that's been on the table, House or Senate, so far.

So we asked in the Senate, where's their proposal? We asked the White House, give us a proposal that the Congressional Budget Office can actually give us a score on, on how we're going to do this. We need legislative language to move forward on these things. We can't just base things on speeches, as has been said yesterday.

Mr. Speaker, I believe this country is at a very pivotal point in its history. There's no question about it. We're at a pivotal point. We can decide, is the United States going to lead in the 21st century as it did in the 20th century and in the 19th century, or will we be swallowed in a sea of red ink, high unemployment and very sluggish growth? That is the basic fundamental problem we're faced with today.

It's within our power in Congress to make policy decisions that will change this equation for the good or the bad for the American people. We have decisions to make, tough decisions. And it's time. It's time to make those decisions.

Now yesterday we debated the unsustainable debt problem that this country is facing, a situation that is going to swallow up savings for every single American, currently, $46,000 for every man, woman, and child in this country; and it's rising. And that doesn't count the unfunded liabilities.

So the debt is clearly a problem, and we have to set the country on a sustainable path with a credible plan to move us forward. But there's another side to the problem that's not being talked about enough, and it's the fact that we are not growing this economy. We are not growing private sector jobs. The previous speaker, my friend from Connecticut, talked about the plight of so many who are without jobs. We have to grow this economy if we're going to create jobs, and that means having a well-thought-out energy strategy for the United States. It means fundamental tax reform to put us on a very competitive footing, whether it's a small business or a large U.S. company, and it also means a very aggressive trade strategy for the United States.

Now I want to talk about trade for a minute because it really does not get enough discussion here in this body. I got some very encouraging news just last week from the World Trade Center of New Orleans, in my home State. It released some quarterly trade figures. In the first quarter of fiscal year 2011, exports from Louisiana manufacturers and farmers grew by almost 50 percent compared to the previous period last year. This is incredible news because Louisiana is rapidly transforming its economy into a global trading economy that helps our farmers, helps our manufacturers. We sell to the world. We create private sector jobs that pay better than the average jobs around the United States. One out of five jobs in Louisiana is related to international trade where we export. This is critical. If we're going to grow this country and grow private sector jobs, we need a trade strategy in place to do this, to help it, to open markets overseas for our farmers, our manufacturers, our small businesses.

We're seeing rapid growth in Asia and South America right now, all based on trade. Hundreds of trade agreements have been basically voted upon in these countries and implemented. Regional trade agreements. Here in the United States, it's been 4 years, and no activity. We have three pending agreements right now: Panama, Colombia, and South Korea. These will basically open markets in countries that are already having pretty much unfettered access into our market. These will create, by the President's own estimate, 250,000 jobs in this country. Those are direct jobs in the short term. That doesn't even speak to the number of jobs that will be created going forward. It is critically important that we move forward on this. There will be $13 billion in exports from these three agreements alone, exports. These are American companies, American farmers selling their goods overseas. This will stimulate growth in this economy and job creation. This is why we need to move forward on it.

But there are other important aspects to this. These three agreements were negotiated in good faith. And so just like the full faith and credit of the United States is on the line with regard to dealing with our debt problem, our credibility internationally is on the line as to whether we're going to be a leader in this world or we're just going to sit back and shrink and see high unemployment and sluggish job growth and lost opportunities for our children and grandchildren. That's what's at stake with this.

These three trade agreements need to be done now. The President could easily send these to Congress, and we can vote on them. That's what we need to do. That's a step forward to restore American competitiveness, to restore American credibility, and to restore American confidence. Come on, Mr. President, lead.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 66) approving the renewal of import restrictions contained in the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, as an original cosponsor of this joint resolution, I rise in strong support of H.J. Res. 66, which would continue the imposition of sanctions against the repressive regime in Burma for another year.

The purpose of imposing sanctions against Burma is to promote democracy and respect for human rights and improve living conditions for the Burmese people. Unfortunately, the ruling junta is still dedicated to working against, not toward, those objectives. For that reason I am in favor of continuing our practice of extending import sanctions against Burma for another year.

Burma's regime is one of the world's most repressive and continues to oppress democratic movements and humanitarianism. On November 7, 2010, the military junta, known, ironically, as the State Peace and Development Council, or SPDC, held an election for the first time in 20 years. However, while elections are usually considered a step towards democracy, in this case it was actually a step backwards. These elections were not transparent, inclusive, or credible.

Notably, Burma's leading pro-democracy party, the National League for Democracy, as well as others, was not allowed to participate in the elections. And by ensuring that most candidates were former high- ranking government and military officials, the election ``victory'' by the government-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party simply means that the military junta remained in control with the veneer of an election to simply justify itself.

Shortly following the elections, Aung San Suu Kyi--freedom fighter, Nobel Peace Prize recipient and Congressional Gold Medal winner, and general secretary of the NLD--was finally released after having been falsely detained for 15 of the past 21 years.

However, in a move highlighting how little things have changed in Burma, the junta recently warned Suu Kyi that ``there may be chaos and riots'' if she continues on her cross-country tour to meet with supporters. The government also chided Suu Kyi and the NLD for their political work and threatened that ``they should stop doing so to avert unnecessary consequences.'' On Suu Kyi's last tour in 2003, she was attacked by a pro-government mob that killed many of her followers and landed her under house arrest for the next 7 years.

In short, the recent election does not represent any kind of shift in domestic Burmese politics. In fact, the political situation in Burma and for the Burmese people has not changed at all.

The human rights situation is no better. The State Department human rights report on Burma, echoed by the March United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution, cites a laundry list of grave human rights violations that are simply appalling. According to the State Department, this repugnant regime, in which military officers wield the ultimate authority at every level of government, continues to use forced labor, denies participation in any democratic processes, and commits extrajudicial killings. The regime detains civic activists indefinitely and without charge, and it engages in harassment, abuse, and detention of human rights and pro-democracy activists. The regime is rumored to hold an estimated 2,100 political prisoners.

Ethnic violence inflicted by the army is also rife. There have been recent reports of renewed fighting in the northern Burmese province of Kachin between the government and ethnic minority villagers, resulting in reportedly up to 20,000 refugees. Not only have these people been driven from their homes and many killed, there have also been widespread reports of the rape of women and children.

What have we been doing on our end? I'm pleased that this Congress amplified our sanctions 3 years ago to eliminate trade in jewelry containing Burmese rubies and jadeite, even if the jewelry was made in, and exported from, a third country. The expansion was designed to bring about multilateral pressure on the regime through the United Nations and the World Trade Organization, similar to successful legislation on conflict diamonds. I urge similar campaigns against Burmese rubies and jadeite at the U.N. and WTO.

I must be clear that I generally view import sanctions with great skepticism. However, if there is a right way to impose sanctions, I think that these Burma sanctions are crafted to maximize the ability to effect change. For example, they require the administration to issue annual reports on Burma that include findings on whether U.S. national security, economic, and foreign policy interests are being served so that we can make an informed decision.

Perhaps the most critical aspect of the Burma sanctions program is that they require us to redirect our attention every summer to the question of whether these sanctions should be continued. Because they are not self-executing, we here in Congress must consider this issue and vote to continue them on an annual basis.

I continue to believe that our greatest hope for effecting real change in Burma is multilateralism. I am therefore disappointed that there has not been sufficient multilateral pressure against this regime.

I strongly urge the administration to put more pressure on our trading partners to place the leaders of this regime under targeted economic pressure that denies them access to personal wealth and sources of revenue.

I call on the United Nations, Burma's Southeast Asian neighbors in ASEAN, and the People's Republic of China to step up engagement considerably.

I support this resolution because it increases our chances to bring about this multilateral effort, to promote democracy and to end the longtime suffering of the Burmese people.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am now pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

I am in full agreement. We need to move and pass this, and I think we'll get it passed.

I must say to the gentleman from Washington, at least we have a trade bill on the floor. I hope there are many more to come. We're waiting for the President to send the three pending agreements to us so that we can move forward on these and embark on a very aggressive trade agenda.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me.

Our country is at a pivotal point in its history. Economists would call this an inflection point. But for those of us who are not economists, it's a critical time; it's a pivotal time. We have to decide, are we going to compete in the 21st century and see this country prosper and lead in the 21st century? Or will we sink in a sea of red ink? That's what it's come down to.

I think we need to move forward with a bold plan. We haven't seen anything from the President. He hasn't put anything on the table. We're coming forward with a plan that's credible. It lays out a path, a credible path to get us back to fiscal sanity. $46,000 for every man, woman, and child is what the debt stands at today, and that does not include the unfunded liabilities going to the future, which takes us well north of that figure. We have a lot of work to do. It's time for this Congress to get serious about its responsibility, its responsibility to bring fiscal sanity and fiscal balance back.

We have a spending problem. There is clearly a spending problem. But if you look at the two fundamental problems facing the country, it's our unsustainable debt, but it's also the lack of economic growth to create private sector jobs. Now if we take the path that our friends want to take, they're going to raise taxes. They're going to raise taxes across the board. And what you're going to see is a worsening economic situation. We're not going to see the kind of job growth--in fact, we very well could go back into a recession with that type of plan.

Our plan puts us on a sustainable path. Coupled with tax reform, coupled with an energy strategy which we have, and moving forward with an aggressive export-oriented trade policy, you will see a competitive America; you will see job growth in this country. But we have got to get spending under control.

And today is the day we can cast that vote. Today is the day we can decide we're going to restore American competitiveness, we're going to restore American credibility, and we're going to restore American confidence.

Mr. Speaker, over 14 years in private practice in medicine, I had the great privilege to treat many, many Medicare patients, thousands of Medicare patients. I did open heart surgery, complex open heart surgery, lung cancer surgery, in times of great need, great difficulty for these seniors who had paid many years of their payroll taxes into the Medicare program with the hope and the recognition that this program would be there for them, for their health care needs in their later years.

And I'll tell you, in the '90s, when I was in the midst, at the peak of my practice, it was not unusual, and in fact quite often patients would come into the emergency room with a very difficult situation, without a primary care physician because they had not had previous health problems. And then what would happen is we would have to do emergency heart surgery on them, and once they got through all of this and got through the hospital stay, we could not find a primary care physician to take them on, to treat their everyday problems with hypertension, high blood pressure, diabetes, gout and things of that nature.

I would get on the phone time and time again and I would call family doctors and internal medicine physicians and plead with them, Why can't you take this one more patient into your practice? And it's because the reimbursement situation for Medicare was so bad even back then in the nineties that if a physician took on too many Medicare patients, they couldn't meet their costs. That situation has gotten much worse today, in 2011.

I could tell you that I have grave concerns about the future of the Medicare program and what's going to happen. And I'm not speaking as a Member of Congress, I'm speaking as a physician, as somebody who cared for many, many patients, who valued that doctor-patient relationship. This situation whereby families who have a loved one on Medicare cannot find a primary care doctor, this is a very serious situation today and getting worse by the week.

The bottom line is Medicare is in trouble. I saw this as a doctor, and I see it now as a Member of Congress.

Just a couple of facts. Over 10,000 baby boomers are reaching retirement age every day, leaving fewer workers to support them. We have an aging population. This is putting tremendous cost pressure on this Medicare program. In fact, the Medicare program, according to the Medicare actuaries, the trust fund that provides the money for the

hospital program, is going to be out of money by 2024, and now, in fact, starting last year, more money was being paid out than taken in to support this program. The Medicare actuary predicts that without changes to the current law, something that was basically not looked at when the health care law was passed, in fact, it was assumed that these certain cuts to physicians would occur in the law. In fact, what we know is that without any changes to the law, physician reimbursements will fall from 80 percent of private rates to 57 percent of private rates in 2012.

What does that mean? That means that the situation for physician practices will get even worse, whereby they can't even meet the costs of their practice. Therefore, they're going to continue to limit their exposure to taking on new Medicare patients. That means access problems. That means Medicare patients cannot get access to physicians.

We need real solutions to this. We need fact-based solutions. We need answers to the problem and not political rhetoric. So far, that's all we've seen, largely coming from the other side and from the White House on this. In fact, we're on a path to see the bankruptcy of this Medicare program if we don't act.

Now let's take a step back and look at what happened in the health care bill. This health care bill, which passed without Republican support, cut over $500 billion from this Medicare program to expand coverage into a new entitlement, an extension of the Medicaid program. We're digging a deeper hole for ourselves without a way to pay for this. And now the plan calls for immediate 17 percent cuts in benefits for our current seniors. Current seniors, not people who are going to go on to Medicare in the future. Seniors who depend on this important program today.

Another thing that's in this bill, and it's not well-known, is a new bureaucratic entity that was created. There were many that were created in the health care bill, but there's one that really bothers me as a physician. It's called the Independent Payment Advisory Board. Okay. It sounds kind of innocuous, but what does it do? It's a 15-person board arbitrarily chosen that will make life-and-death decisions about what things will be paid for under the Medicare program.

Now, what is the recourse in all this? This is an arbitrary decision- making body, and you cannot dispute what this body is going to do. In fact, for Congress to override it, it would take three-fifths of the Senate to override it. This is going to damage the doctor-patient relationship. It's bad for Medicare patients.

I could tell you that Republicans have an idea about how we're going to fix this. I can't get into it now, and I'll do it in a subsequent speech.

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate Maritime International, a company from South Louisiana, for being named winner of the 2011 Lantern Award, District 4. The Lantern Award is presented by Louisiana Economic Development to salute manufacturers from across the state for their outstanding contributions to the Louisiana economy and to their communities.

Maritime International is owned by David Leblanc, John Deats and Donald Nassar and provides full service marine engineering and manufacturing. It serves many different clients including the U.S. Navy, oil companies, government agencies and port authorities. Maritime's goal is to offer clients effective and economical solutions for their mooring and berthing needs. Five engineering and sales offices are located in the U.S., China, the U.K., UAE and France.

Maritime makes an effort to purchase items from Louisiana vendors and is very involved in the local community. The company provides support to community events and charitable needs including Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure, St. Jude, UNICEF and many more. Maritime International has steadily grown and innovated since beginning in 1996 and is continuing to do so with new expansion jobs underway.

It goes without saying that Maritime International is very deserving of the honor of being given the 2011 Lantern Award. The staff at Maritime International is innovative and effective in what they do. I wholeheartedly thank Maritime International for their service to Louisiana, and I congratulate the company on this award.

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate Max Brake Controllers, a company from Cameron Parish, Louisiana, for being named winner of the 2011 Lantern Award, District 3. The Lantern Award is presented by Louisiana Economic Development to salute manufacturers from across the state for their outstanding contributions to the Louisiana economy and to their communities.

Thomas McDaniel, his wife Debbie and company employees created Max Brake Controllers several years ago. McDaniel is also the owner of Mac's Classic Muscle Cars, a supplier of Max Brakes. Because of his experience in this field, McDaniel was able to play a key role in creating the Max Brake technology. Max Brake Company uses Louisiana parts as much as possible, with about half of the components bought locally including brass stock, electrical parts and hardware from local companies.

Max Brake Controllers uses a braking system for trucks and big rigs to carry large loads. An electrical display presents hydraulic vehicle brake pressure and helps to control electric trailer brakes. The brake pressure is monitored by a pressure sensor in the vehicle master cylinder.

McDaniel is a member of the Cameron Parish Police Jury. He is also an avid supporter of South Cameron High School and a member of the Volunteer Fire Department, Recreation Department and Water District.

It goes without saying that Max Brake Controllers is very deserving of the honor of being given the 2011 Lantern Award. McDaniel and the other staff at Max Brake Controllers are innovative and effective in what they do, and I am honored to serve as their member of Congress. I wholeheartedly thank Max Brake Controllers for their service to the Cameron Parish and the state of Louisiana, and I congratulate the company on this award.

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to cast my vote on rollcall 376. Had I cast my vote, I would have voted ``yea'' for rollcall 376. I am proud to support the intelligence community, as well as local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies in their efforts to protect our homeland and combat global terrorism.